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

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Whatever you say. You can imagine getting within 10 Hz of the
correct frequency with the '50s designs all you want...but that
won't make it happen.

What?? Where, exactly, has anybody claimed 10Hz frequency resolution
with '50s analog radios?

As you will say later, those "analog" radios have INFINITE resolution. :-)

Note the avoidance of answering the question ;-)

Creative PLL and DDS subsystems of today, designed by others,
make it possible for anyone to select 10 Hz increments on any
HF band (30,000 frequencies within 300 KHz) with crystal-
controlled accuracy.

Analog VFOs are continuously variable. Making it possible for anyone
to select an *infinite* number of "increments" within a 300Hz
bandwidth much less your coarse 300 Khz wide example.

Heh heh heh...your bafflegab won't win blind man's bluff, Kellie,
deal yourself a better hand... :-)

Note the avoidance of the facts. ;-)

Feel free to try to state you can return to that "infinite possible"
setting within a few PPM...all without any old crystal calibrator and
dependent on that "coarse" analog dial. :-)

Note that the importance of this feature is not explained ;-)

And they do it
without generating any phase noise or other forms of crud synthesizers
toss out.

Kellie, define "phase noise" insofar as amateur radio operation is
concerned. You, for the limits of your technical knowledge, should
call that "incidental FM" which is what the industry term "phase
noise" refers. :-)

Then you should examine exactly how low that terrible phase noise
is. You can use the term "dbc" referring to the number of decibels
below the "carrier" (center frequency reference, not a modulated
carrier per se). The "crud" (as you term it) is quite far down in
relative power and certainly won't affect morse code reception of an
on-off keyed station's carrier.

"Phase noise" is a somewhat new buzzword in industry due to the
importance of keeping it low for QAM signals (Quadrature [phase]
Amplitude Modulation, a combination of PM and AM). The cell
phone engineers will know of that importance on keeping the BER
(Bit Error Rate) as low as possible. The amount of work in the last
decade on cellular telephony techniques has been enormous
worldwide. It's only natural that industry advertisements, from sub-
system components to full systems, emphasize a low "phase noise."

As far as on-off keyed radiotelegraphy, your mention of "phase noise"
as being "crud" in synthesizer frequency control is akin to making
a big case for gold-plated music system speaker wires. :-)

Once again, you've demonstrated that you know very little about problems
with much of the amateur radio equipment produced within the past couple
of decades. Noticeable phase noise appears not only in the receiver
output section of many transceivers but in the transmitted signals as
well. 1980's top of the line Kenwood TS-930's were rife with the phase
noise products and synthesizer spurs. A quick spin of the main tuning
dial with no antenna connected would result in a rapid p-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t
sound from such spurs. R.L. Drake's TR-7 had much less phase noise.
Rigs such as Ten-Tec's Omni VI series, using a crystal mixed front end
had almost no measureable phase noise.

The main importance of phase noise in amateur HF reception is that it
causes the apparent noise floor to rise when a strong signal or
signals is close to the desired signal frequency. If you are trying to
receive a -130 dBm signal and a strong signal a few kHz away mixing
with a noisy synthesized LO causes your receiver's noise floor to rise
to -120 dbm, you're out of luck.

And the amateur HF bands are often full of strong local signals
adjacent to the weak ones we want to work.

The folks in Newington whom you frequently enjoy insulting might put you
on the road to being informed:

http://www.arrl.org/files/infoserv/tech/bestrig.txt

under "Q. What do you mean by receiver 'cleanliness'"?

You may continue your education by looking at the following pdf file
under section 1.2.2:

http://www.qth.com/inrad/managing-interference-ch1.pdf

One of the Polish fellows has published some excellent information.
The phase noise issue is touched upon in the last few paragraphs:

http://www.gmdx.org.uk/dxtest/qx9racze.pdf

All good stuff. Note how well a certain kit transceiver performs...

I rather prefer what I've been exposed to since 1963 on frequency
control methods...

Stuck in the past. ;-)

beginning with those "cruddy" synthesizers
(without "real" frequencies, only the "synthetic" variety)...and
quartz crystal oscillator accuracy and stability to the 10 PPB
region.

Perhaps it is time to update your database, Leonard.

To at least 1980s levels ;-)

USING modern equipment is NOT involving development or
anything else.

This gives us cause to wonder.....

What amateur radio equipment has Len developed?

What amateur radio equipment has Len actually used, and in what
environments? (The contest environment is quite different from the
"quiet band" environment)

How many contest points/countries/states/contacts has Len made with
amateur radio equipment he developed/designed/built/paid for himself?

What articles on amateur radio receiver performance issues such as
dynamic range (third order IMD, BDR, etc.), phase noise, etc., has he
authored? Or even actually read and understood?

The world wonders....;-)

Try not to run off at the mouth/keyboard so
hastily.

Try taking your own advice ;-)

Try not to nit-pick like nits over minor phrases in
postings so that you have an "excuse" to cuss and snarl at
NCTAs.

What minor phrases? Len claimed that frequency synthesizer rigs were
necessary for the "subdivisions" of 1968. Numerous positngs by
different authors, all of whom actually had to deal with those
"subdivisions" have proved that to be utterly false and without basis.
Len, of course, never had to deal with them at all because he's never
been a radio amateur and never operated an amateur radio station. (By
FCC definition, operating requires a license).

It makes you look like nursie's cousin. :-)

NOT USING modern equipment but attempting to spout off like you have
some knowledge of what is being discussed is making you look like
N0IMD's antenna advisor.

Not using, not owning, not building, not developing......

Of course, to the knowledgeable reader, Len's postings simply reveal
how truly ignorant he is of amateur radio in many ways. That's not a
crime, of course, but it does get boring.

His posts also reveal how resistant is he is to new ideas and
information, when presented to him from certain sources he deems
inferior.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

Tsk, Jimmie be posting to me, yet doesn't get who he be making
a reply to... :-) [see later]


Note the avoidance of answering the question ;-)

Note the avoidance of the facts. ;-)

Note that the importance of this feature is not explained ;-)

Stuck in the past. ;-)

Tsk. Jimmie looking in mirror again when writing, reflecting his own
"renowned historian" claim and musing on stacks and stacks of old
periodicals.

This gives us cause to wonder.....

What amateur radio equipment has Len developed?

What amateur radio equipment has Len actually used, and in what
environments? (The contest environment is quite different from the
"quiet band" environment)

How many contest points/countries/states/contacts has Len made with
amateur radio equipment he developed/designed/built/paid for himself?

What articles on amateur radio receiver performance issues such as
dynamic range (third order IMD, BDR, etc.), phase noise, etc., has he
authored? Or even actually read and understood?

The world wonders....;-)

"The world" isn't "wondering" at all. Neither Jimmie nor Davie have
developed any marketable ham transceivers.

[if they did, they should fire their marketing consultants for creating
invisibility of product]

Try not to run off at the mouth/keyboard so
hastily.

Try taking your own advice ;-)

Always do.

Try not to nit-pick like nits over minor phrases in
postings so that you have an "excuse" to cuss and snarl at
NCTAs.

What minor phrases? Len claimed that frequency synthesizer rigs were
necessary for the "subdivisions" of 1968.

Tsk. I didn't refer to 1968 per se.

Numerous positngs by
different authors, all of whom actually had to deal with those
"subdivisions" have proved that to be utterly false and without basis.

"Authors?" Who in here, besides myself, can claim many bylines
and a staff position at a ham magazine? Not Jimmie. Not Davie.

Len, of course, never had to deal with them at all because he's never
been a radio amateur and never operated an amateur radio station. (By
FCC definition, operating requires a license).

Pity that. All that while as a professional and never becoming a
licensed amateur! Horrors!


Of course, to the knowledgeable reader, Len's postings simply reveal
how truly ignorant he is of amateur radio in many ways. That's not a
crime, of course, but it does get boring.

Poor baby. Bored are you? Tsk, tsk.

Jimmie needs a hobby activity or to get out and see more things.

Jimmie ought to understand that radio amateurs didn't invent radio
nor did they develop all the circuits and systems in modern ready-
built radios. Tsk.

His posts also reveal how resistant is he is to new ideas and
information, when presented to him from certain sources he deems
inferior.

Tsk. Still on that inferiority complex are you?

Don't worry. You keep shouting and denigrating your inferiors and
all will respect you in the morning. :-)

Avery Fineman wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...


What amateur radio equipment has Len developed?

What amateur radio equipment has Len actually used, and in what
environments? (The contest environment is quite different from the
"quiet band" environment)

How many contest points/countries/states/contacts has Len made with
amateur radio equipment he developed/designed/built/paid for himself?

What articles on amateur radio receiver performance issues such as
dynamic range (third order IMD, BDR, etc.), phase noise, etc., has he
authored? Or even actually read and understood?

The world wonders....;-)

"The world" isn't "wondering" at all. Neither Jimmie nor Davie have
developed any marketable ham transceivers.

No, I've developed the same number of marketable ham transceivers you
have, Leonard--none. Then again, I was aware of the synthesizer phase
noise and spurs. You weren't. You attempted to spoon feed us crap.


What minor phrases? Len claimed that frequency synthesizer rigs were
necessary for the "subdivisions" of 1968.

Tsk. I didn't refer to 1968 per se.

Weren't you the guy who wrote something of nit-picking? When did you
think those subbands came into existence?

Numerous positngs by
different authors, all of whom actually had to deal with those
"subdivisions" have proved that to be utterly false and without basis.

"Authors?" Who in here, besides myself, can claim many bylines
and a staff position at a ham magazine? Not Jimmie. Not Davie.

Authors. You know, who writes something. I've had a number of bylines
in amateur radio magazines. Be careful, you'll end up looking like
Brian Burke in his A-1 Op Club gaffe.

Len, of course, never had to deal with them at all because he's never
been a radio amateur and never operated an amateur radio station. (By
FCC definition, operating requires a license).

Pity that. All that while as a professional and never becoming a
licensed amateur! Horrors!

Do us a favor and note that this newsgroup is rec.radio.amateur.policy.
I'm not impressed with your frequent touting of your past professional
status. Many radio amateurs are current or past professionals in
communications or electronics. Tooting your horn about your past work
and attempting to use it as a substitute for an amateur license in an
amateur radio newsgroup isn't likely to win you any points among hams.

Of course, to the knowledgeable reader, Len's postings simply reveal
how truly ignorant he is of amateur radio in many ways. That's not a
crime, of course, but it does get boring.

Poor baby. Bored are you? Tsk, tsk.

Jimmie needs a hobby activity or to get out and see more things.

Oh! Didn't you know? Jim's a licensed amateur radio operator. Maybe
you could take up amateur radio.

Jimmie ought to understand that radio amateurs didn't invent radio
nor did they develop all the circuits and systems in modern ready-
built radios. Tsk.

I'm guessing that Jim and everyone else here was already aware of that
factoid. Jim likely realizes that you didn't invent radio or all of the
circuits and systems in modern ready-built radios. That makes you even.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:


No, I've developed the same number of marketable ham transceivers you
have, Leonard--none. Then again, I was aware of the synthesizer phase
noise and spurs. You weren't. You attempted to spoon feed us crap.

I "wasn't aware?" :-)

Wow, Marconi Jr., you best run to GE and have them cancel out
a bunch of RCA archives with my name on it. They were very
much concerned with spurious output (noise is a spurious output).
Real technical papers, published and all that after being checked
by staff folks.

What "crap" did you get in your feeding spoon tonight?

Did it give you terrible heartburn to having an NCTA demonstrate
some inside knowledge of frequency control? I'll bet it did.

There's all kinds of antacids on the shelf. Avail yourself of them.


Weren't you the guy who wrote something of nit-picking? When did you
think those subbands came into existence?

The first ones were in 1934...birth of the FCC. :-)


Authors. You know, who writes something. I've had a number of bylines
in amateur radio magazines.

Wow. Yeah! Ham Radio Horizons...aimed for the beginner in
radio.

Go for it! Famous Author Davie! You ought to publish a book.

Be careful, you'll end up looking like Brian Burke in his A-1 Op Club gaffe.

...or any other NCTA you want to destroy. :-)


Do us a favor and note that this newsgroup is rec.radio.amateur.policy.
I'm not impressed with your frequent touting of your past professional
status.

Awww. We don't impress you? How sad.

Many radio amateurs are current or past professionals in
communications or electronics.

So? You demand "showing papers" at train stations too?

That black leather overcoat is in style, I suppose. The jack
boots aren't...

Tooting your horn about your past work
and attempting to use it as a substitute for an amateur license in an
amateur radio newsgroup isn't likely to win you any points among hams.

Tsk. This is a "points count?"

Poor Davie...still stuck on enforced licensing just to advocate some
freeding into getting into licensing. Tsk.

Who says the PCTA abrogate the First Amendment? Nearly all...


Oh! Didn't you know? Jim's a licensed amateur radio operator. Maybe
you could take up amateur radio.

Toss out the code test and I'll think about it.

Maybe you could take up "civil discourse," Davie?

Then you wouldn't look like second cousin to nursie yell-yell.


I'm guessing that Jim and everyone else here was already aware of that
factoid. Jim likely realizes that you didn't invent radio or all of the
circuits and systems in modern ready-built radios. That makes you even.

No problem. You sure as hell didn't invent much. :-)

Didn't St. Hiram invent radio? And then form a religious order around
it? :-)

Why did you grab all the A-1 sauce? :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

No, I've developed the same number of marketable ham transceivers you
have, Leonard--none. Then again, I was aware of the synthesizer phase
noise and spurs. You weren't. You attempted to spoon feed us crap.

I "wasn't aware?" :-)

Well, if you were aware, what was the reason you posted erroneous
information?

Wow, Marconi Jr., you best run to GE and have them cancel out
a bunch of RCA archives with my name on it. They were very
much concerned with spurious output (noise is a spurious output).
Real technical papers, published and all that after being checked
by staff folks.

What did you recently tell us about synthesizer phase noise, Mr.
Marconi's uncle? If you keep repeating it, GE may black out your name
on all the RCA archives without a request from me.

What "crap" did you get in your feeding spoon tonight?

You didn't post it "tonight". It was posted several days ago. Would
you like a good googling?

Did it give you terrible heartburn to having an NCTA demonstrate
some inside knowledge of frequency control? I'll bet it did.

I never believed that morse code testing was necessary for "inside"
knowledge of frequency control. However, you made a number of factual
errors. Ever get around to looking at any of the material for which I
posted urls?

There's all kinds of antacids on the shelf. Avail yourself of them.

I'm not the person in a dilemma over having posted the factual errors.
You know where the shelf is, I take it?

Weren't you the guy who wrote something of nit-picking? When did you
think those subbands came into existence?

The first ones were in 1934...birth of the FCC. :-)

Yeah " :-) "

Beats having to eat your words, doesn't it?

Authors. You know, who writes something. I've had a number of bylines
in amateur radio magazines.

Wow. Yeah! Ham Radio Horizons...aimed for the beginner in
radio.

Are you denigrating beginners in radio? those who write for them?
Are you forgetting CQ?

Go for it! Famous Author Davie! You ought to publish a book.

I am preparing to publish a book. Would you like to place an order for
an advance copy, Former Famous Author Lennie?

Be careful, you'll end up looking like Brian Burke in his A-1 Op Club gaffe.

...or any other NCTA you want to destroy. :-)

I dunno, Len, does setting the record straight on something destroy you
or "William"?

Do us a favor and note that this newsgroup is rec.radio.amateur.policy.
I'm not impressed with your frequent touting of your past professional
status.

Awww. We don't impress you? How sad.

No, not sad, just factual. When did you become plural?

Many radio amateurs are current or past professionals in
communications or electronics.

So? You demand "showing papers" at train stations too?

You equate the statment of a fact with a demand to show papers? That
doesn't make sense.

That black leather overcoat is in style, I suppose. The jack
boots aren't...

This must be the point at which you realize that you've lost an
argument.

Tooting your horn about your past work
and attempting to use it as a substitute for an amateur license in an
amateur radio newsgroup isn't likely to win you any points among hams.

Tsk. This is a "points count?"

Don't you know? You are the fellow who often writes of "message
points".

Poor Davie...still stuck on enforced licensing just to advocate some
freeding into getting into licensing. Tsk.

Huh?

Who says the PCTA abrogate the First Amendment? Nearly all...

If you're still posting, your First Amendment rights are intact. What
you seem to desire is your rights to post but suppression of my right to
disagree with you, to correct you or to issue catcalls at your sillier
ideas.

Oh! Didn't you know? Jim's a licensed amateur radio operator. Maybe
you could take up amateur radio.

Toss out the code test and I'll think about it.

I thought you told us that you had no interest in obtaining such a
license.

Maybe you could take up "civil discourse," Davie?

Are you the course instructor (or the coarse instructor)?

Then you wouldn't look like second cousin to nursie yell-yell.

What! Has the course (coarse) begun already. Wait a minute--I want to
make notes.

I'm guessing that Jim and everyone else here was already aware of that
factoid. Jim likely realizes that you didn't invent radio or all of the
circuits and systems in modern ready-built radios. That makes you even.

No problem. You sure as hell didn't invent much. :-)

Wow! Now the THREE of us are even.

Didn't St. Hiram invent radio? And then form a religious order around
it? :-)

Hang on--I want to make sure this part gets into my notes on the civil
discourse (discoarse) session.

Why did you grab all the A-1 sauce? :-)

Is this the discourse (discoarse) class or a cooking class? :-) :-)

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Avery Fineman (in a desperate attempt to get through spam filters) wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

What amateur radio equipment has Len developed?

Answer: None that he will admit to.

What amateur radio equipment has Len actually used, and in what
environments? (The contest environment is quite different from the
"quiet band" environment)

Answer: None that he will admit to.

How many contest points/countries/states/contacts has Len made with
amateur radio equipment he developed/designed/built/paid for himself?

Answer: None

What articles on amateur radio receiver performance issues such as
dynamic range (third order IMD, BDR, etc.), phase noise, etc., has he
authored? Or even actually read and understood?

Answer: None

The world wonders....;-)

"The world" isn't "wondering" at all.

Yes it is! ;-)

Neither Jimmie nor Davie have
developed any marketable ham transceivers.

Who are "Jimmie and Davie"?

Perhaps Len meant "Jim, N2EY" and "Dave, K8MN". If so, then his use of
feminized diminutives for our names proves (paraphrasing Brian, N0IMD): "he
doesn't have the guts to spell our names right".

I have designed, built, and operated at three amateur radio HF transceivers.
First one was about 25 years ago. Before that, I was doing the same with
separate receivers and transmitters.

No, I've developed the same number of marketable ham transceivers you
have, Leonard--none.

Why is it at all important that something be "marketable"? One of the joys of
home construction is *not* having to meet someone else's idea of "what the
market wants".

Then again, I was aware of the synthesizer phase
noise and spurs. You weren't. You attempted to spoon feed us crap.

What minor phrases? Len claimed that frequency synthesizer rigs were
necessary for the "subdivisions" of 1968.

Tsk. I didn't refer to 1968 per se.

Weren't you the guy who wrote something of nit-picking? When did you
think those subbands came into existence?

Subbands-by-license-class came into existence in US ham radio in 1951, with the
creation of the Novice. Len wasn't a ham then.

The current system of General/Advanced/Extra subbands-by-license-class came
into existence in US ham radio in 1968, after several years of discussion. Len
wasn't a ham then. I was, K8MN was.

Len wrote here in January 2000 that he was going for Extra right out of the
box. He wasn't a ham then. Nor now.

Numerous positngs by
different authors, all of whom actually had to deal with those
"subdivisions" have proved that to be utterly false and without basis.

"Authors?" Who in here, besides myself, can claim many bylines
and a staff position at a ham magazine?

Living in the past....

Did Len have a nice office at the magazine? Did he like living in New
Hampshire? Whatever became of that magazine? - I can't find it on the
newsstands...

I do have quite a few old copies of it, but Len's name isn;t in any of them.

Not Jimmie. Not Davie.

Doesn't have the guts to spell...

Authors. You know, who writes something. I've had a number of bylines
in amateur radio magazines. Be careful, you'll end up looking like
Brian Burke in his A-1 Op Club gaffe.

I've had articles published in amateur magazines. A lot more recently than Len,
too ;-)

But as you say, Dave, an author is someone who writes. I am the author of this
post; therefore, I am an author. So are you.

The point is the same: Numerous authors here have proved Len's assertions about
subbands and synthesizers to be completely without basis in fact.

Len, of course, never had to deal with them at all because he's never
been a radio amateur and never operated an amateur radio station. (By
FCC definition, operating requires a license).

Pity that. All that while as a professional and never becoming a
licensed amateur! Horrors!

"Not that there's anyhting wrong with that"

Do us a favor and note that this newsgroup is rec.radio.amateur.policy.
I'm not impressed with your frequent touting of your past professional
status. Many radio amateurs are current or past professionals in
communications or electronics. Tooting your horn about your past work
and attempting to use it as a substitute for an amateur license in an
amateur radio newsgroup isn't likely to win you any points among hams.

The plain simple fact remains that Len has not had to deal with
subbands-by-license-class in amateur radio. Or any other amateur-radio issues.
His observations are those of a spectator only, not a participant.

Of course, to the knowledgeable reader, Len's postings simply reveal
how truly ignorant he is of amateur radio in many ways. That's not a
crime, of course, but it does get boring.

Poor baby. Bored are you? Tsk, tsk.

Jimmie needs a hobby activity or to get out and see more things.

Oh! Didn't you know? Jim's a licensed amateur radio operator. Maybe
you could take up amateur radio.

I have several non-work activities and responsibilites and I get out quite a
bit.

Jimmie ought to understand that radio amateurs didn't invent radio
nor did they develop all the circuits and systems in modern ready-
built radios. Tsk.

I'm guessing that Jim and everyone else here was already aware of that
factoid.

I realized that long ago.

Jim likely realizes that you didn't invent radio or all of the
circuits and systems in modern ready-built radios. That makes you even.

Actually, I don't think Len invented *any* of the circuits or systems now used
in "modern ready-built radios". Not any radios I know of, anyway.

"Not that there's anything wrong with that"

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:


Who are "Jimmie and Davie"?

Perhaps Len meant "Jim, N2EY" and "Dave, K8MN". If so, then his use of
feminized diminutives for our names proves (paraphrasing Brian, N0IMD): "he
doesn't have the guts to spell our names right".

Tsk. I'm only copying the style of some PCTA extras in here.

Notably your mutual buddy, gunnery nurse yell-yell.

Isn't it time you slapped his wrist with wet noodles again?

I have designed, built, and operated at three amateur radio HF transceivers.
First one was about 25 years ago. Before that, I was doing the same with
separate receivers and transmitters.

Right. JAMES was the designer of the mighty K2. Hi hi.


Len wrote here in January 2000 that he was going for Extra right out of the
box. He wasn't a ham then. Nor now.

Tsk. I didn't lie down on the floor of the Church of St. Hiram and
Take Vows For Life while forming a code key with my body. :-)

If you want to take me to task, ask about my anti-gravity invention.
It's not done yet! Something is still holding me down...


Living in the past....

Tsk. Jimmie used the mantra "the past is prologue" often before...

Did Len have a nice office at the magazine? Did he like living in New
Hampshire? Whatever became of that magazine? - I can't find it on the
newsstands...

Like most of the "staff" of HR, we worked wherever we lived.

New Hampshire is lovely in the fall. In the winter it can be muy cold
as Alf Wilson, W6NIF, complained to me on the phone several
times. Alf took over on the sudden death of Jim Fisk, ex-W1HR,
founding partner and chief editor of HR. He and his wife moved
back to southern California after the second cold winter there.

Ham Radio magazine and Ham Radio Horizons, as well as the
Ham Radio Bookstore, were all part of Communications Technology
Incorporated. It was sold to CQ Communications in 1990 after HR
had a 22-year publishing history as an independent amteur radio
technical periodical.

A three-CD electronic reprint of all 22 years' contents are available
mail-order from CQ or ARRL and across the counter at HRO outlets
for US$150.

I do have quite a few old copies of it, but Len's name isn;t in any of them.

Tsk. Jimmie doesn't have enough copies. :-)

Recycle some dollars and get your own copies right on the computer
screen. [you DO have a CD-compatible drive in that computer, don't
you, master of high-tech?]


But as you say, Dave, an author is someone who writes. I am the author of
this post; therefore, I am an author. So are you.

Tsk. You post. Posts hold fences. You make fences to keep out
independent thought, limit those within to YOUR type of thinking.

The point is the same: Numerous authors here have proved Len's assertions
about subbands and synthesizers to be completely without basis in fact.

Tsk. That's not a post. Your judgement is a post hole.


The plain simple fact remains that Len has not had to deal with
subbands-by-license-class in amateur radio. Or any other amateur-radio
issues. His observations are those of a spectator only, not a participant.

Tsk. Jimmie want to dismiss the FCC because the FCC does not
require any commissioner or staff to hold amateur radio licenses?


I have several non-work activities and responsibilites and I get out quite a
bit.

Good for you. Whatever they are, I'm sure they are superior to
anything any NCTA does, did, or is considering. :-)


Actually, I don't think Len invented *any* of the circuits or systems now used
in "modern ready-built radios". Not any radios I know of, anyway.

Tsk. Recycling old parts circa-1990 and using vacuum tubes is
hardly "invention." :-)

But, Jimmies qualification is the phrase "Not any radios I know of,
anyway." That imperious declaration infers he is judge, jury, and
supreme court of all "radio" that is meaningful anywhere, anytime.
:-)

"Not that there's anything wrong with that"

Tsk. That's the ONLY way in this newsgroup where attempted
domination in all things amateur is done by PCTA extras.

Pass the A-1 sauce and the sherpa...

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Who are "Jimmie and Davie"?

Perhaps Len meant "Jim, N2EY" and "Dave, K8MN". If so, then his use of
feminized diminutives for our names proves (paraphrasing Brian, N0IMD): "he
doesn't have the guts to spell our names right".

Tsk. I'm only copying the style of some PCTA extras in here.

Notably your mutual buddy, gunnery nurse yell-yell.

Isn't it time you slapped his wrist with wet noodles again?

Is this part of the civil discoarse lesson?

I have designed, built, and operated at three amateur radio HF transceivers.
First one was about 25 years ago. Before that, I was doing the same with
separate receivers and transmitters.

Right. JAMES was the designer of the mighty K2. Hi hi.

Len wrote here in January 2000 that he was going for Extra right out of the
box. He wasn't a ham then. Nor now.

Tsk. I didn't lie down on the floor of the Church of St. Hiram and
Take Vows For Life while forming a code key with my body. :-)

So no one can take your word on a thing unless you've done something
like that? :-) I'll try to remember that.


But as you say, Dave, an author is someone who writes. I am the author of
this post; therefore, I am an author. So are you.

Tsk. You post. Posts hold fences. You make fences to keep out
independent thought, limit those within to YOUR type of thinking.

Hang on, Len. I want to get all of this part of your civil discoarse
lesson for my notes.

The point is the same: Numerous authors here have proved Len's assertions
about subbands and synthesizers to be completely without basis in fact.

Tsk. That's not a post. Your judgement is a post hole.

I take it that you really can't defend your earlier statements. The end
result is that you're reduced to answering with the nonsense above.

The plain simple fact remains that Len has not had to deal with
subbands-by-license-class in amateur radio. Or any other amateur-radio
issues. His observations are those of a spectator only, not a participant.

Tsk. Jimmie want to dismiss the FCC because the FCC does not
require any commissioner or staff to hold amateur radio licenses?

There are some things you just don't get no matter how many times the
explanation is provided for you: The FCC staff gets paid to regulate
and administer amateur radio in the U.S. They aren't spectators. We
are participants. We're not spectators. You are neither a regulator
nor a participant. Have you grasped the concept?

Actually, I don't think Len invented *any* of the circuits or systems now used
in "modern ready-built radios". Not any radios I know of, anyway.

Tsk. Recycling old parts circa-1990 and using vacuum tubes is
hardly "invention." :-)

You walk a few steps and then you trip. It was written that YOU didn't
invent any of the circuits or systems used in "modern ready-built"
radios.
He didn't claim that he invented the recycling of parts and vacuum
tubes.
You really need to pay attention.

But, Jimmies qualification is the phrase "Not any radios I know of,
anyway." That imperious declaration infers he is judge, jury, and
supreme court of all "radio" that is meaningful anywhere, anytime.
:-)

I really have no trouble accepting that you believe that is what Jim's
phrase meant.

Dave K8MN