In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"William" wrote ...

Wow. Warms the heart to see such humanity on the group.

Apparently you've never been on the end of a personal attack from Leonard.
I have. He deserves a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his way.

I'm sure you think so. You have a terrible ego problem in that
you need to have agreement from everyone that your viewpoint
is the only possible "correct" one. It isn't, and you don't like
certain folks who won't kiss your [expletive deleted].

You managed a personal attack on me some time back via a
web page with my allege "photo" on there. Beat the gunnery
nurse by months.

I've been up-front in public in all these arguments. I didn't try
to sneak behind any backs to defame another like you or the
gunnery nurse did.

It would certainly be
an improvement over what we've seen here from you in the past.

Arn, ever see what Steve posts?

Sure. They are usually in response to a first strike from Leonard.

Wayyyyy incorrect, inspector clueless.

Want proof? Go to Google. Start looking. It will take days.

But, if past is prologue, you will see only what you WANT to see.

What's
your point?

BTW, we put our Amateur Radio gear on-line for the first time in the
Mobile
Incident Command Center the other day.

But 9/11 was more than 2.5 years ago.

We've had plenty of comms ability since then, but put the gear in the MICP
as a means of improvement. Improvement of comms systems is a good thing,
right William?

Work on your SSB equipment some more. You couldn't reach Iowa.

First contact was via CW with a
station in Iowa.

Was it Iowa that you needed to contact? I'm trying to think what an
East Coast military installation might need with Iowa? Looking for
obsolete Collins parts?

Conditions for SSB were just not up to par.

For a contact with Iowa? Did you try a band higher? Did you try a
band lower? Again, what was the reason Iowa was needed for a contact?

We tested the gear on ALL bands (and both modes). And Iowa was the place we
happened to contact first. If I need to contact FEMA via HF in another
state (including IOWA) I think I have proven that it can be done by this
test. And that, after all, was the purpose to begin with.

But, you couldn't make there and had to resort to CW.

We just love
having all those tools in our communications kit.

Wow. Me too.

We also tested our state of the art sat-phone/VTCs and wireless VOIP
network. They worked flawlessly -- what wonderful pieces of gear. We
are
now completely wireless (including phone lines) so we can go wherever
needed.

So you really didn't need to contact Iowa with amateur radio. I was
wondering about that.

Sure we did. The Ham gear is for redundancy. That's why we have it. A
test of it's HF capability was important. Test complete, test successful.

But, you said you only got Iowa by CW. Only one mode.

21st Century comms at its best -- which means a mixture of the old
and new together to give us the strongest redundancy possible.

Strong redundancy equals GAO audits. They don't like redundancy even
if it means survivability. They'd rather have the money spent on food
stamps and WIC.

Strong redundancy equals uninterrupted communications in an emergency. The
GAO cares not as long as we spend the money appropriately. Since the
purchases were pre-approved, I guess we already did that.

Riiight...you got it through the bureaocracy. :-)

Is the General Accounting Office (GAO) staffed with radio experts?

LHA / WMD