In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

(Quitefine) wrote in message ...
In article , Leo
writes:

BTW, if we keep this up, you might be in danger of buggering up your
reputation with - ahem - some of the regulars here as a difficult guy
to converse with.... :) :) :)

There is no difficulty
in conversing with Len.

All anyone must do is agree
with everything he writes,
and he becomes a pussycat.

Disagree with him, and the
difficulties begin.

Jim, I've disagreed with Len without difficulty. I said that I liked
KH2D, even though I disagree with his position on the code testing
issue. Jim's a pretty decent guy.

Go to his website and read about the war. Very insightful (or should
it be inciteful?).

http://www.kh2d.net/

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

By the way, since your Lordship doesn't understand it, I'm NOT
itching to get that mighty Nobel-quality amateur license...I'm just
trying to argue for the elimination of the morse code test for any
radio operator license.

Why?

If you have no interest in
becoming a radio amateur,
why do you attempt to
change the rules?

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.


You just never know when you
might need one,

If so, why have any tests at all? Or
why have tests beyond the absolute
minimum possible?

and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Morse Code has had a role
in some emergency communications
recently. These are well documented
by people who participated.

However, to claim that every
radio amateur must be tested on Morse
Code because there might someday be
a need to use it in an emergency is quite
a stretch of credibility.

It is clear that Len's interest goes far beyond
eliminating the Morse Code test.\

To quote a wise one:

"It is not the Morse, but the hatred"

On 07 Sep 2004 19:19:33 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:

On 04 Sep 2004 02:41:02 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 03 Sep 2004 05:40:43 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 02 Sep 2004 04:18:56 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 01 Sep 2004 20:09:31 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:


The RAC proposal to IC was based on an Internet survey which was open
to all licensed Canadian amateurs (not just RAC members).

The ARRL proposal seems to have been developed autonomously by the
Directors, with little (if any) input from the Amateur community. No
wonder everyone was surprised when it was filed!

That's the thing...the entrenched "we know what's best for you
(members) and everyone else" attitude. Many don't agree with that
and haven't joined even if they can afford the small annual dues.

The league got away with that for decades before the Internet went
public in 1991. They did all the interfacing with the FCC, most of
the lobbying, then promoted themselves as the Big Brother of all
U.S. hams. They managed to convince a hard core of Believers
who are outraged and ready to fight anyone who says the least
little negative thing about the league. [witness some of its Believers
in here]

I have!

I hope you meant that as "witnessing" not as a Believer...?

I have indeed witnessed such behaviour amongst the true Desciples
themselves - I do not, however, count myself amongst their ranks.

ITo me, it's a hobby, not a religion - one does not need to believe
all of the doctrine, or any of it for that matter, to join in. Just
follow the law, and go for it!

That sounds eminently reasonable...except some do not follow
such opinions. :-)

Amen again! :)


I'm in favour of it - and my comments to that effect have been filed
with IC, as of today.

Good on you!

I have to agree with Hans Brakob in that our northern neighbor in
Norse America is doing the right thing for their future.
Modernization
is long overdue. [excuse me...NORTH America...;-) ]

heh.....that brought back memories of Leif The Lucky from grade
school!

Norsemen were the first European discoverers of North America.

Yup - long before Columbus got lost and thought this was India!

He should have bought that Garwin GPS handheld when he had
the chance... :-)

.....or stopped using his sextant as a telescope :)

Settled in what is now Canada (New Foundland) for a while.

Dunno why they left...maybe they objected to speaking French?

...they probably left because they couldn't find jobs :)

(the unemployment rate in Newfie is a whopping 20% or so - WAY above
the national average of just over 7%!)

A definite NOT GOOD situation there. My sympathies with the
workers not working.

Mine too. Been there a few times myself (isn't Telecom grand!) -
nothing worse than no job when you want to work!

Been there, done that, courtesy of the "job security" in aerospace.

Fortunately, there were lots of aerospace companies in southern
California. Haven't been in many "employment insurance" lines,
but once is enough.

Amen.

As an aside, the enmity between Lockheed Aircraft and the state
of California (state winning) resulted in a HUGE shopping center
in Burbank built on what had been their main production complex.
(Lockheed moved out, sold all their holdings). The electronics part
of the aerospace industry here migrated towards south and
northwest. Some of those going south emulated Silicon Valley
and began semiconductor production...fairly sizeable quantities too.


ARRL is 90 years old and they have not had much turnover at Hq.
That leads to "cronyism" in Hq and a resultant status-quo thinking
which has contributed to their lack of getting new membership.
St. Hiram hisself remained president since day one until he got too
old to show up at the office. Dave Sumner is "executive president"
and isn't votable out of office.

While there is a BoD at the ARRL, the publications arm takes its
direction direct from Hq staff. That leads to a concentration of
who-runs-what to the Newington group despite all the self-promotion
of "democratic principle" BoD "discussions." That publishing arm
is a mighty strong venue for getting readers to think the way the
Hq advisers say they should. Not that many publications left for
radio amateurs down here.

and just one here except for the bi-monthly RAC nagazine.......the
other options are QST and CQ.

Nothing from the RSGB? :-)

Never seen a single RSGB publication on the newsstands so far! The
Brits do seem to have a monopoly on the electronics hobby magazines,
though, since the last North American one went belly up years ago.

Good construction plans, though pretty difficult to build without
wearing out the NTE substitution manual finding equivalents to all of
the European semiconductors......


Concentration of information dissemination is a very sharp two-
edged sword. The bad edge is that minimalization of venues
is a wonderful gift for those who would wish to dictate the proper
way to think and act. Those who publish periodicals control
everything in those publications. Everything.

Absolutely - a fact that is exploited in dictatorial countries - the
state controls the press.....the only news is what the state wants the
people to hear.

For the prposs of this group, the state seems to be CT :)



Especially up here! :) Some cities, like Winnipeg, have parking
meters with elecreical outletsbuilt in, to plug the engine block
heater into. The outlet is energized only while the meter is active -
money runs out, outlet goes off, and engine begins to rapidly chill
down to ambient temp - which in Winnipeg in February go as low as -50
degrees F or so. The bottom line: pay the meter, or your car ain't
lokely to start when you get back to it!

:-( I have put such cold-weather thoughts out of my mind a long time
ago, moving to the sunbelt in late 1956. Northern Illinois temps aren't
as cold as farther north but they were cold enough.

If I want freezing temperatures on equipment, I just go down to the lab
and pop the door to the Tenney chamber, adjust the dials, and viola,
"instant polar temperatures!" :-)

Much easier up here in the winter - open any outside door.... :)

Where I am (Toronto), the weather is pretty much the same as Northern
Illinois. There's much worse places to be........



I have one of the AADE kits - installed on an old Realistic DX-150B.
Works perfectly - a stable and accurate digital readout. Easy to
interface to the set too! Considering that the dial calibration was
pretty crappy on that set, and resisted every effort to tweak the
adjustments to fix that adequately, the freq readout masi it a
(relatively) useful piece of equipment again.

The kids DX with it sometimes, even still,,,,,,,

Electronic etymology dept.: AADE isn't the first such application
of a microprocessor adapted as a frequency counter. Those go back
about 8 years to the UK and a non-ham electronic hobbyist,
according to an Internet search. AADE is the big maker-seller now
and does a very credible job at a very affordable price for frequency
accuracy. Easy to order for most of the post-WW2 antiques. :-)

It's also a credit to Microchip Inc. and their extremely affordable
microcontroller line (dozens of models) of "PIC" ICs. Microchip gives
away their development software and all a hobbyist has to do is buy
the simple development hardware. The rest is up to the hobbyist
who has to learn a different "code," that of assembler instructions and
putting them in the proper order to accomplish a function.

A big and growing electronic hobby is robotics. Fun thing and gets
down deep to electronics guts. [I'm not into that but some of their
ideas are interesting and useful] Microchip is vying with Atmel on
micros there. Both makers also were used in "radio clocks" a few
years ago, once a thing only for hobbyists until the off-shore
consumer market producers (more than 30 brands now) put $20 and
$30 [US] radio clocks on the store shelves. Microcontrollers do all
the "heavy" work of filtering (via DSP), decoding of WWVB one-
minute data, arithmetic and date-keeping. Most are very low-power,
run on a couple dry cells for over a year.

Months back I heard one ham cussing up a storm on how radio
clocks aren't "real radio!" Operate on 60 KHz, not "real radio
frequencies," don't use "real radio circuits" and, worse, "don't use
real code at 20 WPM, just some #$%^@@!! (hack, ptui) data at
one bit per second!" :-) He was working up a real case of mouth
frothing on the subject before he got sidetracked to another anger-
venting discussion.

Heh - I recall that......


USA still doesn't have any LF ham bands, yet other countries do.
ARRL apparently doesn't want to get involved in computer code,
only morse code. Their foray into PC-compatible circuit analysis
went DEFUNCT when "Radio Designer" selling was stopped. Tsk.
[they couldn't call it a SPICE program which it was, but then they
use different names for circuits and things that the rest of the
electronics industry uses...SPICE core is absolutely free for
anyone to use]

I have a copy of the ARRL Radio Designer program - not bad, and pretty
easy to use. It's unfortunate that they didn't keep that up!

Nowadays, they publish deeply technical articles that illustrate how
to replace a #47 bulb with an LED :)



I still use my old Heathkit SB-400 SSB tube transmitter on the air -
with the antenna tuner, it's a handful to tune up, compared to the
newer rigs. But, if I actually manage to raise someone with it, it's
a minor miracle, and I feel much more a part of the process than if I
simply turned the tuning knob on a more modern unit. Plus, I bought
it DOA and completely overhauled it back to life - as a result, I'm
very familiar with the inner workings of the thing.

My own personal contribution to the past, I suppose.....that, or I'm
too cheap to buy a new rig - or both :)

There's nostalgia and then there's nostalgia. :-)

Heh!

Ben Tongue, co-founder of the Blonder-Tongue CATV company,
found a niche hobby in (of all things) "crystal sets." In his
pages on the Blonder-Tongue website he's done SPICE analysis
on various ways to hook up that awfully complicated, non-active-
device crystal receiver. :-)

Didn't know that - I'll have a look on the B-T site!



heh heh heh...I'm waiting for one of my "fan club" to make more
trashmouth about that... :-)

Won't be long now, I'll bet! :)

Didn't take them but a short time over our holiday weekend. :-)

I was gone but the "fans" were busy, busy, busy making me into
some radioactive Antichrist. :-)

Well, this wouldn't be the same old familiar place if they didn't! :)



Heh. This reminds me of the story of Micro Henry, who took Millie Amp
for a ride on his Mega Cycle - ah, the good old college days.....

Old story, really, I think it goes back as far as WW2 days.

I believe that - my experience with it only goes back to 1975!

A beat-up mimeographed copy was circulating around the
Fort Monmouth Signal School back in 1952. Might have been
a draft version from even earlier times. :-)

No xerography machines back then. U.S. military made
copies by first "cutting stencils" for mimeographing. Paper
was acidic and didn't last more than 30 years or so before
crumbling in open air. More better was the paper roll from
teleprinters with use-once flimsy carbon paper. Paper tape
lasted longest of all, could repro exactly via a p-tape reading
teleprinter.

Yup - I remember using one of the old Gestetner spirit duplicating
machines back in public school. It worked, but wasn't
pretty.....mimeographs were much better!


Now we can get quality paper cheap, use inkjet printers
connected to computers and turn out camera-ready copy from
one of several WYSIWYG text editors...even spell-checked if
someone bothered to switch that in. :-)

There's all sorts of audio range recorders, from open-reel mag
tape to limited-time all-digital electronic memo-pad things. VHS
videotape has been adapted to recording multi-megabytes of
data, even archiving of PC files.

....and DAT tape, which seems to have become infinitely more popular as
a data storage medium than its intended use for recording audio!


But...some radio amateurs insist and insist and insist that ALL
new radio amateurs MUST learn morse code to get that license.
Otherwise they "aren't real amateurs."
:-)

Time marches on, however - and mandatory Morse will go with it. Morse
has been with us for a long, long time - but its time has come.

I'd bet that 20 years from now, people will still be using Morse on
the bands. Not because the want to be 'real hams' - but because they
are interested in it as a communications protocol. Or a curiosity.





73, Leo

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

I find that intriguing coming from a man who feels compelled to make
numerous posts, spanning the better part of a decade, to a newsgroup
dealing with an endeavor in which he has no part.

Dave K8MN

In article , Leo
writes:


ARRL is 90 years old and they have not had much turnover at Hq.
That leads to "cronyism" in Hq and a resultant status-quo thinking
which has contributed to their lack of getting new membership.
St. Hiram hisself remained president since day one until he got too
old to show up at the office. Dave Sumner is "executive president"
and isn't votable out of office.

While there is a BoD at the ARRL, the publications arm takes its
direction direct from Hq staff. That leads to a concentration of
who-runs-what to the Newington group despite all the self-promotion
of "democratic principle" BoD "discussions." That publishing arm
is a mighty strong venue for getting readers to think the way the
Hq advisers say they should. Not that many publications left for
radio amateurs down here.

and just one here except for the bi-monthly RAC nagazine.......the
other options are QST and CQ.

Nothing from the RSGB? :-)

Never seen a single RSGB publication on the newsstands so far! The
Brits do seem to have a monopoly on the electronics hobby magazines,
though, since the last North American one went belly up years ago.

Electronics hobbyists, as a general group, have shied away from
"ham radio" in terms of monthly periodicals. That started roughly
three decades ago as hobbyists found lots more fun things to do
pushing electrons around.

Other than a certain membership magazine on this side of the globe
there is only CQ for hams. Popular Communications isn't just for
hams (and many hate that). There's still the off-shoots from Radio
Craft and Radio Electronics News (as they were once called) but
Popular Electronics and company rather restrict themselves to
little electronics projects. Reminiscent of the "Tuna Tin 2" and the
"Herring Aid" kind of thing.

Oddly enough, model aircraft flying has continued unabated and
almost totally embraced radio-control for both pleasure and
competition. Those old model magazines are still around plus a
couple concentrating on R/C. AMA membership is still as many
as in the ARRL but has never been pretentious about what the
model flyers do. AMA has finished its Hq with museum in Ohio.

Good construction plans, though pretty difficult to build without
wearing out the NTE substitution manual finding equivalents to all of
the European semiconductors......

That's getting to be a nuisance for the electronics industry as well.

Semi makers had reached impasse after impasse in the non-PC
field of electronics plus the off-shore semiconductor industry doing
big dents in specialty ICs. For example National Semiconductor
sold off its entire line of digital ICs to Fairchild. Motorola semi
split off into ON and Freescale (rather strange logo names?) but kept
a tiny part of their old product group. Intersil cut about a third of
their products. ST and Philips have long lists of discontinued part
numbers. Lansdale is in business of acquiring rights to and all
masks for certain legacy ICs, is keeping solvent. Lots and lots
of industry realignment in product lines. "Silicon foundaries" are
doing good making specialty semi products in big lots for OEMs,
all with house numbers.

Some on-line vendors are offering legacy devices as competitive
prices. Jameco is one. Jameco's products are sold to electronics
hobbyists, i.e. non-hams for the most part. They and JDR in the
San Francisco Bay area have been hanging in for a quarter century
doing that. Other on-line vendors that were once "ham radio"
product oriented have all added on non-ham electronics parts, just
to stay in business from my estimation.

J.W.Miller was once a source for all sorts of good "radio" parts that
had coil windings. IF cans to "shortwave coil sets" to slug-tuned
coils and blank forms. All of those left the Miller line-up (J.W.Miller
is a long-time Los Angeles company). Demand for those old "radio
parts" just evaporated and Miller had to change its line before it was
time.

Concentration of information dissemination is a very sharp two-
edged sword. The bad edge is that minimalization of venues
is a wonderful gift for those who would wish to dictate the proper
way to think and act. Those who publish periodicals control
everything in those publications. Everything.

Absolutely - a fact that is exploited in dictatorial countries - the
state controls the press.....the only news is what the state wants the
people to hear.

For the prposs of this group, the state seems to be CT :)

Heh!


Where I am (Toronto), the weather is pretty much the same as Northern
Illinois. There's much worse places to be........

Agreed. :-)


USA still doesn't have any LF ham bands, yet other countries do.
ARRL apparently doesn't want to get involved in computer code,
only morse code. Their foray into PC-compatible circuit analysis
went DEFUNCT when "Radio Designer" selling was stopped. Tsk.
[they couldn't call it a SPICE program which it was, but then they
use different names for circuits and things that the rest of the
electronics industry uses...SPICE core is absolutely free for
anyone to use]

I have a copy of the ARRL Radio Designer program - not bad, and pretty
easy to use. It's unfortunate that they didn't keep that up!

Considering their contacts with long-time members, it's a wonder
they didn't get someone to use the SPICE core routines (free, no
copyright) and make their own "screen wrapper" routines. That's
how ALL of the commercial SPICE programs got started.

Roy Lewallen did a wonderful job taking the NEC core and wrapping
it with good I/O, display routines, then selling it as a package
called EZNEC (or whatever derivatives he has now). Roy is a long-
time ham, also an industry veteran (of Tektronix). NEC or Numerical
Electromagnetic Code was devised in Monterey, CA, by the USN
and, as a government work, isn't copyrightable.

Nowadays, they publish deeply technical articles that illustrate how
to replace a #47 bulb with an LED :)

Heh. Maybe in the early 1980s (late 1970s?) I chanced on a CQ
"construction article" (at best a half page as I remember it) on how
to make an electric cigarette lighter for the shack...use a 12 VAC
transformer and an auto ligher and socket in a handy box. Very
"technical." :-)

QEX, still a bimonthly, was augmented by Communications
Quarterly a few years ago. CommQuart got started on left-overs
from CQ buying Ham Radio magazine and all its rights. About the
only North American ham radio specialty technical publication is
QEX now but I will predict it will eventually go downhill like
CommQuart did a few years after the CQ purchase.


Ben Tongue, co-founder of the Blonder-Tongue CATV company,
found a niche hobby in (of all things) "crystal sets." In his
pages on the Blonder-Tongue website he's done SPICE analysis
on various ways to hook up that awfully complicated, non-active-
device crystal receiver. :-)

Didn't know that - I'll have a look on the B-T site!

There's a logo name for ya...Blonder-Tongue! :-)

B-T got started in the mid-1950s with a premiere item that was
a UHF converter for existing VHF TV sets. Did right well at it.
B-T saw the "community cable TV" scene coming early and went
into that, made their big money in it. Cable TV equipment is a
specialty field but there's a LOT of it installed out there. All the
"pole equipment" has to withstand terrible environmental stuff yet
last and last.

But...cable TV "isn't 'real' ham radio" since it is above the
precious HF spectrum, can't "work DX" or have QSL cards. :-)

However, their spectrum occupancy is better than two decades
wide with terrible intermodulation problems (from all those
channels carried at once) and it must be reliable 24/7...the
stations and cable providers are and customers depend on that.


heh heh heh...I'm waiting for one of my "fan club" to make more
trashmouth about that... :-)

Won't be long now, I'll bet! :)

Didn't take them but a short time over our holiday weekend. :-)

I was gone but the "fans" were busy, busy, busy making me into
some radioactive Antichrist. :-)

Well, this wouldn't be the same old familiar place if they didn't! :)

I suppose so. :-)

It wouldn't be so bad in here if the PCTA extras weren't so die-hard.
None of them resemble Bruce Willis. :-)


No xerography machines back then. U.S. military made
copies by first "cutting stencils" for mimeographing. Paper
was acidic and didn't last more than 30 years or so before
crumbling in open air. More better was the paper roll from
teleprinters with use-once flimsy carbon paper. Paper tape
lasted longest of all, could repro exactly via a p-tape reading
teleprinter.

Yup - I remember using one of the old Gestetner spirit duplicating
machines back in public school. It worked, but wasn't
pretty.....mimeographs were much better!

The origin of the old military phrase "cut orders" (for somebody to
do something) derives from those mimeograph stencils...using
manual typewriters with the carbon ribbon temporarily removed
or lifted. The typewriter type ends literally cut into the stencil.

Started in before WW2 times. It worked. When there was no
xerography yet, it was best for small repro jobs rather than getting
over to an offset press.

But...some radio amateurs insist and insist and insist that ALL
new radio amateurs MUST learn morse code to get that license.
Otherwise they "aren't real amateurs."
:-)

Time marches on, however - and mandatory Morse will go with it. Morse
has been with us for a long, long time - but its time has come.

What you mean by "us," kimosabe? :-)

The whole reason I brought up my military experience at ADA was
that military radio did NOT use morse for any fixed-point to fixed-
point traffic...from 1948 onwards. In 1955 the monthly message
traffic at ADA was about 220,000 or roughly 7300 every 24-hour
period, 2400 every 8-hour shift. And that was for only the third
largest station in the Army Command and Administrative Network
(ACAN). Washington Army Radio (WAR...appropriate callsign)
did one and a quarter million messages per month!

There's just NO way that manual morsemanship could handle
that sort of traffic without way too many soldiers devoted to
nothing but morse. For 24-hour duty there would be at least
three shifts working. Machinery would be needed to relay all
those morse things efficiently on a 24/7 basis. Inefficient.

Prior to my military assignment at ADA, I'd bought into the myth
that "real radiomen" would be good at radiotelegraphy. Got a
rude shock with sudden immersion into reality of the day a half
century ago. Was NOT used! Teleprinter was king then. I did
some rapid realignment of thinking, threw out lots of old myths,
applied myself. Teleprinter WORKED. Very well, too.

I'd bet that 20 years from now, people will still be using Morse on
the bands. Not because the want to be 'real hams' - but because they
are interested in it as a communications protocol. Or a curiosity.

I have nothing against that. Lots of folks are into recreating old
times...such as re-enacting our Civil War or (shudder) our old
Revolutionary War. :-)

I'm against the requirement that radio hobbyists MUST learn
morsemanship - at any rate - in order to be authorized an amateur
radio license. That's nonsense.

I sure won't buy into the absurd idea that anyone "must do the
tests that olde-tymers took" to somehow "prove themselves and
their dedication to ham radio." Nonsense. Self-glorification by
the olde-tymers with a large dose of self-righteousness.

The very best stagecoaches are made today, either in southern
California or Arizona (depending on which guild/craft one talks to
in the movie industry). Reliable, long-lasting, made with the best
materials, driven by seasoned drivers/handlers. Looks good in
the western moom pitchas. But, not a single working stagecoach
line in the country going city to city today. Been a long time since
that was fact. Licensed public transport drivers do NOT need to
demonstrate stagecoach or horse handling now. :-)

As far as I'm concerned with USA radio laws, the U.S. amateur
radio service below 30 MHz has always been called 'ARS' ...for
Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service. De facto if not de jure.

It's way past time for that nonsense morsemanship test
requirement to go.

My best wishes to the Radio Amateurs of Canada for modernization
of their own rules and regulations!

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

By the way, since your Lordship doesn't understand it, I'm NOT
itching to get that mighty Nobel-quality amateur license...I'm just
trying to argue for the elimination of the morse code test for any
radio operator license.

Why?

If you have no interest in
becoming a radio amateur,
why do you attempt to
change the rules?

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything? Some people say that cellular
telephones have no significant role in emergency communications, yet
about every footage of hurricane action film depicted an official with
a cellular telephone.

Tsk. All must agree
with the
renowned historian.
Not doing
so is heresy.

Heresy is not allowed
in the
Church of St. Hiram.

You just never know when you
might need one,

If so, why have any tests at all?

Because we already have a radio service without tests which can be
used for emergency communications.

Or
why have tests beyond the absolute
minimum possible?

Indeed.

and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Morse Code has had a role
in some emergency communications
recently. These are well documented
by people who participated.

Do tell.

All Americans can
see that
on the evening
news?

We cannot. Lots of
radios to
be seen, civil
government and
National Guard
radios and news
network radios.

Ham radio radios
can only be
seen in action at
ARRL website.

However, to claim that every
radio amateur must be tested on Morse
Code because there might someday be
a need to use it in an emergency is quite
a stretch of credibility.

An incredible stretch.

Not an
elastomer in
existance
with that
much
stretch.

Only in
Newington.

It is clear that Len's interest goes far
beyond
eliminating the Morse Code test.\

He wants to eliminate the morse code test.

Rev. Jim thinks that is
heresy.

No one must speak ill of
the
dead. Morse code is as
good
as dead.

To quote a wise one:

"It is not the Morse, but the hatred"

I'm not familiar with that wise one. Who is it?

Dave Sumner? Jim
Haynie?

Art Bell? Ralph
Vartabedian?

He will never reveal
his sources.

He will never reveal
himself.

James P. Miccolis
hides in
cowardice, afraid of
reality,
has to use anonymity.

He is hiding only from
himself.

Not from readers here.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

I find that intriguing coming from a man who feels compelled to make
numerous posts, spanning the better part of a decade, to a newsgroup
dealing with an endeavor in which he has no part.

Dave K8MN

You say he has no part, yet he has contributed to the amateur
literature, and he has commented on amateur matters to the FCC. There
are probably amateurs (the kind with a license) who have made fewer
contributions than has Len. How strange that you say he has no part.

William wrote:

(Quitefine) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

Awwww, cut it out, "William"! My sides hurt from laughing.

Dave K8MN

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

I find that intriguing coming from a man who feels compelled to make
numerous posts, spanning the better part of a decade, to a newsgroup
dealing with an endeavor in which he has no part.

Dave K8MN

You say he has no part, yet he has contributed to the amateur
literature,

Literature? I'll concede that Leonard authored some articles for a
commericial venture in the form of an amateur radio magazine. That
didn't make him a radio amateur.

and he has commented on amateur matters to the FCC.

By your logic, comments to the Commission on broadcast station ownership
make one involved in broadcasting. Len's comments didn't make him a
radio amateur.

There
are probably amateurs (the kind with a license) who have made fewer
contributions than has Len.

Is something one does for money a contribution? Is something which
results in a negative action a contribution? Is something which results
in no action a contribution?

How strange that you say he has no part.

Len has no amateur radio license. Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs. Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.
I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

Dave K8MN

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: Dave Heil
Date: 9/9/2004 11:29 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

William wrote:

You say he has no part, yet he has contributed to the amateur
literature,

Literature? I'll concede that Leonard authored some articles for a
commericial venture in the form of an amateur radio magazine. That
didn't make him a radio amateur.

Let's be a bit more precise, Dave.

We can concede that Lennie's name appeared as having authored those
articles.

We have no evidence that it WAS his work.

His conduct in this forum as evidence leads me to believe that the
originality of the articles is dubious, at best. Conversations with people who
knew him tend to cement that opinion.

and he has commented on amateur matters to the FCC.

By your logic, comments to the Commission on broadcast station ownership
make one involved in broadcasting. Len's comments didn't make him a
radio amateur.

Lennie's "comments" are the same stuff over and over.

The military and maritime services don't use Morse anymore, so Amateurs
shouldn't either.

Not one bit of understanding about what he's commenting on. Still can't
separate the "AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE" from anything else. He left the Army
during the Eisenhower administration and with it his last "exposure" to ANY HF
radio operating...save for maybe CB...

And what "points" he can't make repeating that over and over he "makes" by
attacking the other writers...Of course when someone suggest HE'S less than
adequately informed on matters, he can't stop wailing about it for years...

There
are probably amateurs (the kind with a license) who have made fewer
contributions than has Len.

Is something one does for money a contribution? Is something which
results in a negative action a contribution? Is something which results
in no action a contribution?

Better yet...

Find me ONE article in any OTHER Amateur periodical that cites Lennie's
"work" as theoretical basework for some project.

How strange that you say he has no part.

Len has no amateur radio license. Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs. Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.
I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

He could have been a contender.

Since he won't enter the race, he won't even be a runner up.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/8/2004 6:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

Nope. Those are your exact words, and you have had months to retract it.

Instead, you defend it.

That's because I believe it. AND I am willing to sign my name to it.

If you had been any part of it you'd understand.

You are a person of no convictions, Brain.

It really is THAT simple.

YOU, on the otherhand, have also had "months" to provide some evidence that
backs up your "unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms" faux
pas, and YEARS to provide some documentation that your alleged Somalia
"operation" was legitimate.

Still a big fat ZERO on either account.

But then you've conditioned us to expect just that...

Still sucks to be you. Still not getting it right.

Oh well......

Some civil discourse...

You're simply incapable of it.

Of course I am being civil.

You act stupidly, I point it out. That is not "uncivil".

You don't like it, but you keep doing it.

If I were being uncivil, I'd use profanity and speak in baby babble.

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len has no amateur radio license. Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs. Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.
I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

Davie boy is NOT a regulator of amateur radio.

Davie boy is NOT keeping within bounds of the subject thread.

Davie boy still puts on the ASS rental uniform and makes like
a bad imitation of Otto Preminger's character in "Stalag 17."

Davie boy...I am fully qualified, by long experience and training
to "operate" radio equipment. I'm just not AUTHORIZED to emit
RF within U.S. amateur radio bands as a civilian.

You have self-established "definitions" which are incorrect outside
of amateurism. To use your definitions in your own quaint way of
defining things, I couldn't even check out radios on a bench in a
clean room. :-) You imply (incorrectly) that I could not, ever,
"operate" any radio in any HF place...which is not truth according
to U.S. radio regulations.

Amateur radio operators are NOT authorized to emit RF outside of
amateur radio bands...unless they have a valid commercial radio
operator's license.

Some amateurs, like Davie boy, seem to think they are authorized
to emit all sorts of feces-surrogate remarks on the Internet. :-)

Tsk.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

I find that intriguing coming from a man who feels compelled to make
numerous posts, spanning the better part of a decade, to a newsgroup
dealing with an endeavor in which he has no part.

Dave K8MN

You say he has no part, yet he has contributed to the amateur
literature,

Literature? I'll concede that Leonard authored some articles for a
commericial venture in the form of an amateur radio magazine. That
didn't make him a radio amateur.

Yet he has played a part. Didn't you say he plays no part?

and he has commented on amateur matters to the FCC.

By your logic, comments to the Commission on broadcast station ownership
make one involved in broadcasting. Len's comments didn't make him a
radio amateur.

Broadcast stations have a responsibility to the community.

People with radio receivers play a part.

People who make comments WRT a broadcasts stations activities play a part.

Regulators of broadcast stations play a part.

There
are probably amateurs (the kind with a license) who have made fewer
contributions than has Len.

Is something one does for money a contribution? Is something which
results in a negative action a contribution? Is something which results
in no action a contribution?

You're so full of ???'s today. You'll have to ask the FCC.

How strange that you say he has no part.

Len has no amateur radio license.

Neither does that Powell kid.

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.

Are you a regulator of amateur radio?

Am I to understand that only regulators of amateur radio "play a part?"

I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

Dave K8MN

I find you strange.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

(Quitefine) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

Awwww, cut it out, "William"! My sides hurt from laughing.

Dave K8MN

Might be all that bad branch water working on your kidneys.

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/10/2004 5:33 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/8/2004 6:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

Nope. Those are your exact words, and you have had months to retract it.

Instead, you defend it.

That's because I believe it. AND I am willing to sign my name to it.

Well there you go. And quit whining whenever I bring it up.

I am not whining, Brain.

I am defending my convictions.

You wouldn't know about that.

If you had been any part of it you'd understand.

You are a person of no convictions, Brain.

It really is THAT simple.

You cannot be that simple.

YOU, on the otherhand, have also had "months" to provide some evidence
that
backs up your "unlicensed services play a major role in emergency comms"
faux
pas,

I saw cell phones used by emergency pers on the television all last
week. I suspect that I'll see them in use again this week.

A cellphone is not an "unlicensed" device. The end user does not have a
license, however the provider of the service sure does and could not operate
the system without one.

Ask the FCC.

The thread in which you made your pronouncement on "unlicensed devices"
specificallly asked you about Part 15 and Part 95 issues. You said, yes,
those.

I really don't want to spend a lot of time wading through all those posts
to find it, Brain, but if it means one more opportunity to plant a flag in your
ear after having again disproven even more of your silly assertions, then I
will.

Steve, K4YZ

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators. You just never know when you
might need one, and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Brian, there's no use trying to argue with "Quitefine," an unconvincing
screen surrogate of James P. Miccolis. :-)

He is stuck in the morsemanship rut and not even a Land Rover can
yank him out.

Let him admire the code keys on display at the AWA and let him
live in the past pioneers' time, which he did not.

I find that intriguing coming from a man who feels compelled to make
numerous posts, spanning the better part of a decade, to a newsgroup
dealing with an endeavor in which he has no part.

You say he has no part, yet he has contributed to the amateur
literature,

Literature? I'll concede that Leonard authored some articles for a
commericial venture in the form of an amateur radio magazine. That
didn't make him a radio amateur.

Yet he has played a part. Didn't you say he plays no part?

Len plays no part in amateur radio. Your illustration shows him playing
a role in the writing game.

and he has commented on amateur matters to the FCC.

By your logic, comments to the Commission on broadcast station ownership
make one involved in broadcasting. Len's comments didn't make him a
radio amateur.

Broadcast stations have a responsibility to the community.

People with radio receivers play a part.

People who make comments WRT a broadcasts stations activities play a part.

Regulators of broadcast stations play a part.

Oh, you've left so many out of the list of those playing a vital role in
broadcasting, "William". There are the battery sellers, those who
provide electrical power to your home, telephone and cellular company
employees who enable "talk radio" to work, thousands and thousands of
musicians (living and dead), all the Chinese laborers who produce the
crappy radio equipment sold in the millions of units, the folks at Radio
Shack and Wal-Mart who sell us those Chinese radios. Yes, young
"William" all of these play a vital role in broadcasting. Lord
almighty, you are such a Jeter!

There
are probably amateurs (the kind with a license) who have made fewer
contributions than has Len.

Is something one does for money a contribution? Is something which
results in a negative action a contribution? Is something which results
in no action a contribution?

You're so full of ???'s today. You'll have to ask the FCC.

I don't think so. The FCC isn't likely to have the answers. You're
awfully big on asking questions. Why don't you take a stab at answering
some of them?

How strange that you say he has no part.

Len has no amateur radio license.

Neither does that Powell kid.

That "Powell kid"? Do you mean the chairman of the FCC--the one who
receives a salary for overseeing the regulation of communications in the
United States? Len H. receives no such salary and has no such power.
Is that clear enough? Powell regulates. Anderson does not. Powell
receives a hefty salary to regulate. Anderson does not.

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.

Are you a regulator of amateur radio?

I'll bet you've seen this befo No, I'm not a regulator but I am an
active participant in amateur radio.

Am I to understand that only regulators of amateur radio "play a part?"

You might understand that. It would likely be incorrect. Those who are
participants play an even bigger part that regulators.

I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

I find you strange.

But then, you seem to find it tough to tell the difference. You seem to
think Leonard H. Anderson is normal.

Len plays no part in amateur radio despite your convoluted attempts at
reason.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len has no amateur radio license. Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs. Len is not a regulator of amateur radio.
I don't find that strange at all. I find it fitting.

Davie boy is NOT a regulator of amateur radio.

No, Davie boy is a long time actual participant. Lennie boy is neither
a regulator nor a participant. He is to amateur radio what a weed
whacker is to sky diving.

Davie boy is NOT keeping within bounds of the subject thread.

Lennie boy hasn't done that in the years I've read his extensive output.

Davie boy still puts on the ASS rental uniform and makes like
a bad imitation of Otto Preminger's character in "Stalag 17."

I've been promoted? To think, when you told me to shut up, I was only a
feldwebel.

Davie boy...I am fully qualified, by long experience and training
to "operate" radio equipment.

So you've told us on countless occasions. Of course, that would seem to
be a mode dependent statement.

I'm just not AUTHORIZED to emit
RF within U.S. amateur radio bands as a civilian.

That's funny, I thought I said that. I'll not that you are not in the
military so "as a civilian" would be the only way for you to emit RF in
the ham bands. Ah, but you can't do that.

You have self-established "definitions" which are incorrect outside
of amateurism.

"Amateurism"? What, pray tell, is that? The only definition I'm
concerned with, Lennie boy, is the one which prevents you from taking to
the air under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

To use your definitions in your own quaint way of
defining things, I couldn't even check out radios on a bench in a
clean room. :-)

....not transmitters with an antenna attached under Part 97, you
couldn't.
My "quaint way" says that you aren't a ham. It really is that simple.


You imply (incorrectly) that I could not, ever,
"operate" any radio in any HF place...which is not truth according
to U.S. radio regulations.

I implied no such thing, Lennie boy. I wrote quite precisely what I
meant to convey. I couldn't care less about where you operate HF as a
non-radio amateur which, after all, is what you are.

Amateur radio operators are NOT authorized to emit RF outside of
amateur radio bands...unless they have a valid commercial radio
operator's license.

Do you think that comes as a surprise to those of us who are radio
amateurs? Is it your feeling that we'd feel hurt by such a statement?

Some amateurs, like Davie boy, seem to think they are authorized
to emit all sorts of feces-surrogate remarks on the Internet. :-)

If you're the feces-surrogate, I'm authorized. :-) :-)

Tsk.

Double Tsk.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

Dave K8MN

There's the amateur spirit.

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: Dave Heil
Date: 9/10/2004 11:48 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Davie boy...I am fully qualified, by long experience and training
to "operate" radio equipment.

So you've told us on countless occasions. Of course, that would seem to
be a mode dependent statement.

I'm just not AUTHORIZED to emit
RF within U.S. amateur radio bands as a civilian.

That's funny, I thought I said that. I'll not that you are not in the
military so "as a civilian" would be the only way for you to emit RF in
the ham bands. Ah, but you can't do that.

Nor is Lennie AUTHORIZED to emit RF within any OTHER band, except within
the limits of the STATION LICENSE of the person or entity who retains his
services, and then ONLY when acting under the auspices of that license.

So sayeth the FCC.

You have self-established "definitions" which are incorrect outside
of amateurism.

"Amateurism"? What, pray tell, is that? The only definition I'm
concerned with, Lennie boy, is the one which prevents you from taking to
the air under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

I am wondering about those "self-established "definitions"" too.

Seems to me that all of the licensed persons here (with the exception of
Vippy) pretty much understand all of the "definitions". The one who is
confused and keeps trying to re-write any "definitions" is the guy without the
license and without any practical experience in AMATEUR Radio.

To use your definitions in your own quaint way of
defining things, I couldn't even check out radios on a bench in a
clean room.

...not transmitters with an antenna attached under Part 97, you
couldn't.
My "quaint way" says that you aren't a ham. It really is that simple.

You imply (incorrectly) that I could not, ever,
"operate" any radio in any HF place...which is not truth according
to U.S. radio regulations.

You MAY operate an HF radio on 11 meters without further licensure or
exam. You may also do so under Part 15 in certain bands.

You may only operate a maritime radio that has a proper FCC station
license, and with the permission of the owner or Captain. (assuming you are on
a US-flagged vessel.)

I implied no such thing, Lennie boy. I wrote quite precisely what I
meant to convey. I couldn't care less about where you operate HF as a
non-radio amateur which, after all, is what you are.

Seems Lennie's a "non" in a LOT of things.

Amateur radio operators are NOT authorized to emit RF outside of
amateur radio bands...unless they have a valid commercial radio
operator's license.

Do you think that comes as a surprise to those of us who are radio
amateurs? Is it your feeling that we'd feel hurt by such a statement?

Why does Lennie seem to think that uttering all sorts of obscure
"revelations" about radio regulations presents him as "enlightened"...???

With the aforementioned exceptions not withstanding, Lennie is not
authorized to emit RF ANYwhere where the Stars and Stripes flies.

It really is THAT simple.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(William) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control
operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

Dave K8MN

There's the amateur spirit.

Another good example of olde-tyme hamme thinking. :-)

Might be a "spirit" that comes out of a bottle...

Actually, I've already done that "operator" thing with a fully-licensed,
all-papers-open-for-inspection-for-any-A.S.S.-offizier as the "control
op." :-)

Poor Dave. He's run out of valid replies and has to use the "I've-
been-licensed-forty-one-years-and-you've-not!" ploy. As an amateur.
shrug

Tsk. I was first licensed as a "first" radio operator 48 years ago...
actually 48 1/2 years to get into his uber-nit-pickyness. :-)

Three years before that I started in operating high-power HF
transmitters without any license whatsoever, without any Signal
School training on HF transmitters, without any training whatsoever
in or about morse code. :-)

Tsk. It gets worse for Dave. I've actually operated transmitters as
a civilian without once having to show or log my "first" license. All
perfectly legal, too. No need for most Department of Defense
contractors. [DoD isn't ruled by FCC or any "Riley"]

Dave ought to take up nursie's veiled threats of "using his professional
license to call the authorities to 'pick me up.'" This time on emitting
RF without having a valid amateur radio license!

Or, he might take to veiled threats against my wife (like nursie did)
or sign his name "Dave and the Boys" at the end of a posting. :-)

Or, he could become an anonymousie lurking in the baseboards
of newsgroups, afraid of the daylight, jumping out to bite at grown-
ups. Nah. Davie das uber-oberst thinks too much of himself to do
that...

I wonder what the Canadians think about all this "show-your-papers!"
demanding? :-)

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

There's the amateur spirit.

Neither regulation nor etiquette mandate that I entertain a churl.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

There's the amateur spirit.

Neither regulation nor etiquette mandate that I entertain a churl.

Dave K8MN

Just think of it; you might be able to turn Len from the Dark Side.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

(Quitefine) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

Awwww, cut it out, "William"! My sides hurt from laughing.

Dave K8MN


Maybe it's bad branch water affecting your kidneys.

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/11/2004 10:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: Dave Heil
Date: 9/10/2004 11:48 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Nor is Lennie AUTHORIZED to emit RF within any OTHER band, except
within
the limits of the STATION LICENSE of the person or entity who retains his
services, and then ONLY when acting under the auspices of that license.

So sayeth the FCC.

What sayeth Part 15?

I believe I have repeatedly stated "...Part 15 and Part 95 operation
notwithstanding" as it pertains to Lennie's "HF" operating, Brain.

And Lennie STILL can't operate any radio station on HF without an FCC
issued station license, Part 15 and Part 95 notwithstanding...

BTW, Brain, Your Mentor spent some amount of time bragging about how he
could/would get on "HF" per Part 15 within the Amateur Bands, however has yet
to do it. Wonder what's keeping him...?!?!

Wonder how long it takes a professional radio engineer to slap together
enough 2n2222's to emit Part 15 level RF ...???

Sheeeesh.

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(William) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control
operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

There's the amateur spirit.

Neither regulation nor etiquette mandate that I entertain a churl.

Dave K8MN

Just think of it; you might be able to turn Len from the Dark Side.

Heh heh, the Darth Vader of RRAP "turning someone from the
dark side?!?"

Hi hi.

Ackshully, "Darth" Heil manages to entertain himself mightily.

That would make him his own "churl." :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
William wrote:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

Awwww, cut it out, "William"! My sides hurt from laughing.

Dave K8MN


Maybe it's bad branch water affecting your kidneys.

Think of it as a "do or die-uretic" he regularly uses... :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

By the way, since your Lordship doesn't understand it, I'm NOT
itching to get that mighty Nobel-quality amateur license...I'm just
trying to argue for the elimination of the morse code test for any
radio operator license.

Why?

If you have no interest in
becoming a radio amateur,
why do you attempt to
change the rules?

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

No.

However, logical consistency
requires that if someone is
going to claim make the
emergency radio operator
argument, then they must also
agree that amateur radio plays
a significant role in emergency
communications.

Of course, we have noted that
logical consistency is not one of
Len's strong points.


Some people say that cellular
telephones have no significant role in emergency communications,

Those people are mistaken.

yet
about every footage of hurricane action film depicted an official with
a cellular telephone.

Of course.

Some people say that amateur radio
has no significant role in emergency
communications, because of cellilar phones.

They are mistaken, too.

The valid point is that cellular phones
cannot
be absolutely relied upon for emergency
communications.

You just never know when you
might need one,

If so, why have any tests at all?

Because we already have a radio service without tests which can be
used for emergency communications.

What radio service is that?

How well does it function in emergencies?

and Morse Code just isn't needed to be an effective
emergency radio operator.

Morse Code has had a role
in some emergency communications
recently. These are well documented
by people who participated.

Do tell.

Even today.

However, to claim that every
radio amateur must be tested on Morse
Code because there might someday be
a need to use it in an emergency is quite
a stretch of credibility.

An incredible stretch.

Most incredible, to be quite accurate.

It is clear that Len's interest goes far
beyond
eliminating the Morse Code test.\

He wants to eliminate the morse code test.

And much more.

To quote a wise one:

"It is not the Morse, but the hatred"

I'm not familiar with that wise one. Who is it?

Blackguard Vox Deus

He/she has demonstrated
wisdom here.

Repeatedly.

In article ,
(William) writes:

There is no difficulty
in conversing with Len.

All anyone must do is agree
with everything he writes,
and he becomes a pussycat.

Disagree with him, and the
difficulties begin.

I've disagreed with Len without difficulty. I said that I liked
KH2D, even though I disagree with his position on the code testing
issue. Jim's a pretty decent guy.

The exception which proves the rule.

The vast majority who dare to disagree
with Len have had different experiences.

Try disagreeing with Len about the Morse
Code test issue, and see how he behaves.




Go to his website and read about the war.

Is that an order?

Very insightful (or should
it be inciteful?).

http://www.kh2d.net/

Which war?

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

I am fully qualified, by long experience and training
to "operate" radio equipment.

The FCC does not think so.



I'm just not AUTHORIZED to emit
RF within U.S. amateur radio bands as a civilian.

You are neither qualified nor authorized to
operate an amateur radio station.

Your opinion on the issue does not matter.
Our opinion on the issue does not matter.
FCC's opinion on the issue does matter.

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Len may not operate radio equipment
under Part 97 of the FCC regs.

Len may operate -amateur- radio equipment while you are the control operator.

Like hell he will with me as the control op.

There's the amateur spirit.

Neither regulation nor etiquette mandate that I entertain a churl.

Just think of it; you might be able to turn Len from the Dark Side.

I don't think of Len as someone from the dark side. I think of him as a
flake.

Dave K8MN

Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/12/2004 6:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: (William)
Date: 9/11/2004 10:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
From: Dave Heil
Date: 9/10/2004 11:48 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Nor is Lennie AUTHORIZED to emit RF within any OTHER band, except
within
the limits of the STATION LICENSE of the person or entity who retains
his
services, and then ONLY when acting under the auspices of that license.

So sayeth the FCC.

What sayeth Part 15?

I believe I have repeatedly stated "...Part 15 and Part 95 operation
notwithstanding" as it pertains to Lennie's "HF" operating, Brain.

You may beleive that, but I don't. I guess you forgot to repeat it
this time.

There ya go with typos again after having "chastised" me on several
occassions for doing the same thing.

More of that "NCTA Double Standard" stuff.

I DO believe it. I have said it. You may ask around the NG.

Your "mentor" insists that typos are evidence of anger and rage. What are
you in an angry rage about, Brain?

And Lennie STILL can't operate any radio station on HF without an FCC
issued station license, Part 15 and Part 95 notwithstanding...

Really?

Really. It's clearly stated on the back of his GROL. It's clearly stated
on the back of EVERY GROL ticket for that matter. Again, feel free to ask
around.

No station license or grant from the FCC...No "operating".

BTW, Brain, Your Mentor spent some amount of time bragging about how
he
could/would get on "HF" per Part 15 within the Amateur Bands, however has
yet
to do it. Wonder what's keeping him...?!?!

How would you know? Do you think a 6-land station would make a DX
spot?

Does he have to?

All he has to do is say "I will be on 14.xxxMhz at xxxx Zulu in the xx
mode" in this forum.

I am sure we'd be all ears, including several "regulars" of this forum who
would actually be close enough to hear him.
\ Wonder how long it takes a professional radio engineer to slap
together
enough 2n2222's to emit Part 15 level RF ...???

Ask Jim. He even knows how long it would take Bruce to ace the Extra
written w/o studying.

We're not talking about Bruce or Jim.

Sheeeesh.

Steve, K4YZ

Sheeeesh indeed.

You're looking idiotic again, Brain. Work your way out of it....

Steve, K4YZ

William wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote:

(Quitefine) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(William) writes:

(Quitefine) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Every American should have an interest in increasing the number of
potential emergency radio operators.

A valid point.

However, Len does not
agree that amateur radio plays
any significant role in emergency
communications.

Must Len agree with everything?

Awwww, cut it out, "William"! My sides hurt from laughing.

Dave K8MN

Maybe it's bad branch water affecting your kidneys.

Ever since I used the term "branch water" you seem to have had a
fascination with it.

Back to your query though: "Must Len agree with everything?"
I find it very, very funny.

We know for certain that the things he does not agree with are described
by him as "jack-booted, ober uberst, feldwebel, J-38, snarly
backgrounds, Revolutionary War, battlefields littered with, Archaic
Radiotelegraphy, Church of St. Hiram, Gunnery Nurse, Murine" and the
like.

Len's a real peach of a guy. Who wouldn't want to have him as a pal or
a neighbor?

Dave K8MN