In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

What was his point, anyway? That 74192s aren't in current production?

I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

So...you hate the contest haters all on account of "phase noise?"

Not at all!

The effect was mentioned to demonstrate the impact of phase-noisy oscillators
in HF ham rigs. Those same hams might find the bands a lot less noisy with
different equipment, allowing contesters and noncontesters alike to enjoy the
same band.

Where was all that talk about "phase noise" over a decade ago?

Hint: Cellular telephony had not the impact on electronics design
a decade and a half ago. "Phase noise" wasn't talked about much
back then. Some MUST have their buzzwords to sound "grown-up"
in hum raddio... :-)

There were contests a decade ago and farther back. Those that
don't have much to communicate can always have "contests" to
prove they are "somebody" through point scores. :-)

Especially good point scores through the efforts of "reducing
phase noise." :-)


Not everyone likes sports, either. Particularly when the roads are clogged
with
people going to and from the stadiums, TV programs are preempted for sports
coverage, etc.

So...all the citizenry must learn and test for morse code in order to
"enjoy sports?" :-)

My reply makes about as much sense as Jimmie's...:-)

Were the recent Olympics all about "contests for the simple reason that they
are contests, organized by contestant-wannabes so that they can Win and show
off that they are "better" than the non-contestants"?

Perhaps we should inform the IOC.

Let the IOC work out their present problems.

NOBODY has yet to petition the IOC for "radiosport." :-)


Len can enter any amateur radio contest he wants to.

Why should I?

Are your "roads so clogged with traffic" that you need to engage in
"radiosport" to enjoy yourself? :-)

All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here? Are you finally starting to see that
your vapid arguments for the code test retention are that weak?

His choice of home location may be more suited to listening to cbers on the
nearby freeway than to working the rest of the USA, however.

Tsk. Bringing out the old bigoted remarks about CB, ey? :-)

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind. Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area. Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then. If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

So...you think vacuum tubes will be with you always? :-)

If he doesn't have enough, I'll give 'em to him. If I die first, I'll
will them to him.

Thank you, Dave!

In fact, I've been reducing my tube and parts stock because I have far more
than enough. It would be wonderful if I could live long enough to wear them
all out!

So...what marvelous improvements in the state of the art have you
conjured up with all those vacuum tubes?

I've heard that hams are supposed to keep up with the state of the
radio art...that was in the Amateur's Code way back (before the FCC
existed) and stuffed in to the 97.1 definitions by the FCC.

The fact remains, however, that a lot of solidstate electronic devices
(including ham gear) were made with custom parts which can be difficult or
impossible to find, or even identify.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Excuses, excuses. :-)

I can look in one of several distributor and retailer catalogs and get
tens of thousands of solid-state parts which can be bought for
very low cost. Look in Digi-Key's paper or on-line catalog...almost
overwhelming that quantity...and quality.

Problem is, you will NOT find many of the "traditional ham parts"
that were once on the market back in the 40s. You CAN get some
old style parts in niche resellers such as Ocean State Electronics
(specializing in sales to hobbyists...not all of whom are hams).

End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

Riiiiight. Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...
or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

The designer-manufacturers of electronics and radios "didn't" use
house numbers back in the 40s and 50s? It only happened when
solid-state era arrived? Tsk. Untrue.

TUBES need to be replaced because their operating life is short
compared to solid-state devices. That's why they were mounted in
sockets...so consumers (like hams) could remove them and "test
them in tube testers" such as what used to be in supermarkets
and drug stores. :-)

Of course this is driven by a whole bunch of factors, ranging from increased
reliability (if it doersn't break you don't need to be able to fix it) to
length of production (the R-390A was manufactured for at least 30 years by a
number of companies, including a few made under a contract awarded to Helena
Rubenstein), to the fact that newer electronics are often not designed to be
fixable, and are meant for a limited design life - if it fails, you just get
a new one.

Oh ho! Sound the Alarum, start the Hue and Cry, FACTUAL ERROR!

Helena Rubenstein (or whatever the cosmetic company was) NEVER
MADE any R-390s. According to legendary story, they thought to
expand their business horizon by going for a contract bid to the DoD
on building those (DoD owned all the plans and data, would supply
them). Once the executives saw what was involved and that they
were WAY out of their league trying to make those, they went out
and bought someone else's R-390s and stuck on their nameplate
identification in order to avoid contract fraud and other problems.
The cosmetics company didn't make any profit on that venture and
never tried it again.

Of course there are exceptions, like Ten Tec's policy of board-swapping. And
there are specialists who can bring almost anything electronic back to life.

You should open up a business with a name like "Lazarus Inc." or
whatever. Do it with tubes. You can memorize all the plans and
schematics, cut the paperwork enormously.

One of the design parameters of all my homebrew projects is that the result
must be serviceable with parts and tools on hand. Nothing is built with "one
of a kind" or rare parts, and nothing is pushed hard. Result is that I've had
very few problems.

Hnarf! :-)

He can have enough to see him through his lifetime.
Does that suit your definition of "always"?

I hope to outlive my supply...

Remember Jim Fixx... :-)

Of course...you can "recycle" them...somewhat after their useful
life...and "impress all who visit your shack."

??

A recycled component is still in its useful life, because I'm getting use out
of it. Nothing in the Type 7 is "after its useful life".

Wonderful. But...Kluge City stil looks the same with "remodeling"
from other kluge parts.

And when a tube finally fails, its base is often useful as a connector or
plug-in coil form. Other defective components sometimes yield useful parts,
too. Nothing goes to waste at N2EY.

Keep a hammer and anvil handy...flatten all those tin and aluminum
cans to use for chassis.

"Plug-in coil forms?" You have coils that burn out?

Don't you ever try to impress folks who visit your shack, Len?

What impresses folks most is that I can recall schematics and other info from
memory.

Wow! Like "so few" are able to do that? :-)

You know, take 'em in to view the R-70?

When it was new, the only one "taken in to see the R-70" was Al
Walston, W6MJN, when he was over to my house. We talked
over the design, features, etc., looked at the rather large schematic
supplied with the Manual, usual stuff. Wasn't to "show off."

He bought it for CASH, Dave ;-) Somehow, that is supposed to be significant.

I recycled some money. :-)

I find it interesting, though, that Len does not tell us of *his* homebrew
radio projects.

HAR! Not in THIS newsgroup full of PCTA extras! :-)

Frankly, I would have thought that he designed and built his
own receivers, rather than buying a ready-built imported unit like the R70.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A person doesn't need any knowledge or skill in radio-electronics to buy or
use
one of those.

Riiiiight...why "everyone knows all about" RIT and AGC time-constants
and stuff like that there...just ask any civilian customer at Best Buy
or Circuit City...they all KNOW everything about HF radio! :-)

"Common knowledge" in consumer electronics, right? :-)

And while we're on the subject, how about these specs for a new receiver:

MDS -135dBm
AM Sensitivity -110dBm
Blocking Dynamic Range 5Khz 119dB, 20Khz 119dB
3rd Order dynamic Range 5Khz 87.7dB, 20Khz 95dB
Image rejection 152dB
IF Rejection 106dB

No, it's not the Southgate Type 7.

"Sounds just like his 'high school friend'..." :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
Where was all that talk about "phase noise" over a decade ago?

Hint: Cellular telephony had not the impact on electronics design
a decade and a half ago. "Phase noise" wasn't talked about much
back then. Some MUST have their buzzwords to sound "grown-up"
in hum raddio... :-)

Hint: It must appear that way to a fellow who spent his time reading
only about cellular telephony. The term "phase noise" was commonly
discussed "back then" as regards synthesized HF transceivers. Many of
we grownups where discussing it two decades back.

There were contests a decade ago and farther back. Those that
don't have much to communicate can always have "contests" to
prove they are "somebody" through point scores. :-)

That you see no value in competitive endeavers doesn't really effect
those of us who do. How are you effected by amateur radio contests?

Especially good point scores through the efforts of "reducing
phase noise." :-)

I guess it is the little smiley which really makes you sound like a
person uninformed on the issue. How is it possible for you to have been
a PROFESSIONAL in radio, a PROFESSIONAL in the design of synthesizer
circuits and to have been unaware of the problem of phase noise with
such circuits?


All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?


More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish. My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

Residences mean many things to many owners. My living here includes
amateur radio, guitars, computers, astronomy, reading, writing,
photography, videography. I have neighbors who do none of those things.
Their residences are for what they enjoy doing in their manner of
living.

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area. Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then. If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

I currently live in the midst of a goodly sized radio station. I didn't
need to apply for a broadcasting license. I have no business on the
site and it wouldn't matter anyway. This county has very few
restrictions or zoning laws.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

....but one man, Don Wallace W6AM bought that 25 acre Press Wireless
site, complete with rhombics and the large building which formerly
housed the station. He used it primarily for DXing and contests.


End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

Riiiiight. Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...
or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

There are, in fact, numerous sources for such parts.



Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

No license was or is required to build a receiver. In fact, no license
was or is required to build an amateur radio transmitter. You'll need
one if you want to hook it to an antenna and transmit though.

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A pity that you had nothing useable on hand.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:
In article , Dave Heil

writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Anyone can discuss here. I have seen no postings where somebody has told Len to
"shut up", even though he has told others to "shut the hell up".

Credibility is another issue.

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?

I don't think Len understands.

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

To each his own. But from descriptions and mapquest, it appears that Len's
choice was a particularly poor one for HF radio operations.

My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Some of us notice.

Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

Avocations are part of living. Amateur radio is part of my life, and part of
the definition of "home" to me. Others may differ, of course.

Residences mean many things to many owners. My living here includes
amateur radio, guitars, computers, astronomy, reading, writing,
photography, videography. I have neighbors who do none of those things.
Their residences are for what they enjoy doing in their manner of
living.

What a concept!

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area.

But it wasn't Len's radio station. He didn't own it, build it, or pay for it.
He and over 700 others ran it. Was their *job*.

Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then.

Yes, it was.

Amateur radio stations are important, too.

If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

It sounds like what Len is saying is that we hams should not be allowed to have
our stations in our homes. He has made similar remarks before. I think if it
were up to Len, most of us hams would be forced off the air by a variety of
forces.

How does Len feel about anti-antenna ordinances?

I currently live in the midst of a goodly sized radio station. I didn't
need to apply for a broadcasting license. I have no business on the
site and it wouldn't matter anyway. This county has very few
restrictions or zoning laws.

I've lived "on" a radio station since 1967.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

But did Len *own* it, or was he simply a resident?

I used to live on, and own, part of the Erie Canal, too.

...but one man, Don Wallace W6AM bought that 25 acre Press Wireless
site, complete with rhombics and the large building which formerly
housed the station. He used it primarily for DXing and contests.

Yup. Do you know where KH6IJ used to live?

End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old
R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

It's true.

Riiiiight.

Yes, it is.

Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...

Easy. Get one from a hangar queen. Lots of them out there. Not inexpensive but
anyone who deals with '390s knows that.

or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

Wrong again, Len.

The modular construction of the R-390A permits a lot of repair to be done by
module-swapping. PTOs for those receivers are not hard to find, and most
versions can be rebuilt and recalibrated in the typical basement workshop with
a few tools and parts.

There are, in fact, numerous sources for such parts.

Yep. Also lots of information and even "professional quality" instruction
videos on how to restore them. In fact, the internet has made them *more*
available. Check out

http://www.r390A.com

for one such source, and links to many others.

btw, the R390A was produced by a number of manufacturers from 1954 to at least
1984. Although many were destroyed (because the govt.either didn't know or
didn't care about what they were worth), many survive as either working
receivers or parts sources.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

Did you do that at work or as a "hobby" project?

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Description? Pictures? Performance?

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

And how many HF receivers have you designed and built as a "hobby" in the
intervening ~40 years?

No license was or is required to build a receiver. In fact, no license
was or is required to build an amateur radio transmitter. You'll need
one if you want to hook it to an antenna and transmit though.

You also need one in order to sell a transmitter.

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A pity that you had nothing useable on hand.

When I asked Len for help in designing an HF station, all he could offer was to
point me to the Digi-Key catalog. That explained a lot, actually, because it
told me that Len doesn't really know how to do home design and construction of
radios. Nor how to be creative in the use of available components rather than
just what's in the catalogs.

That's not a put-down, just a fact. While Len talks a lot of theory, and what
he did as a "professional" way back when, home construction of HF receivers,
transmitters and transceivers just isn't his thing. Look at his articles in
'ham radio' - none of them are radio construction articles.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Lennie's typo notwithstanding, you didn't.

Just one of Lennie's SOP's (Situationally Obnoxious Posting). Keeps
reciting the same unfounded, baseless rant over and over again.

What Lennie HAS been told is that perhaps if he got an Amateur Radio
license and PARTICIPATED in Amateur Radio, he would actually understand it and
be able to discuss it from an INFORMED position.

Anyone can discuss here. I have seen no postings where somebody has told Len
to
"shut up", even though he has told others to "shut the hell up".

It's that "anger" thing he keeps accusing me and others of. "Shut the
hell up" is a very angry, antagonistic way of trying to brow-beat another.

Credibility is another issue.

Again...perhasp if he could actually discuss matters from an informed,
experienced positon...As it stands, he has zero-point-zero minutes of practical
Amateur Radio experience.

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?

I don't think Len understands.

How can he?

He and Brain have thier respective heads up each others backsides so far
that neither can see a thing, and what they can hear is muffled and distorted.

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

Ahhhhhh! But he CAN report to us on the VHF navaids from LAX! Oh joy!

Of course any of us with more than a month or two's experience in Amateur
Radio can attest to the fact that respectable signals can be radiated from and
received by antennas that no one can see.

Having once resided in SoCal antenna controlled neighborhoods myself I can
attest to the fact that a wire around the eaves and fed by a decent roller
tuner and worked against a good ground can work pretty well.

To each his own. But from descriptions and mapquest, it appears that Len's
choice was a particularly poor one for HF radio operations.

My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Some of us notice.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

Did you do that at work or as a "hobby" project?

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with what RF devices our lives
can't do without that he allegedly had a hand in creating.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Description? Pictures? Performance?

None.

Just like his Padawamn Learner's T5 logs.

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

And how many HF receivers have you designed and built as a "hobby" in the
intervening ~40 years?

None. Last time he dared to venture a discussion on any kind of direct
participation in radio as a hobby, he had a(n) (alleged) ricebox lineup
including an ICOM R-70.

When I asked Len for help in designing an HF station, all he could offer was
to
point me to the Digi-Key catalog. That explained a lot, actually, because it
told me that Len doesn't really know how to do home design and construction
of
radios. Nor how to be creative in the use of available components rather than
just what's in the catalogs.

That's not a put-down, just a fact. While Len talks a lot of theory, and what
he did as a "professional" way back when, home construction of HF receivers,
transmitters and transceivers just isn't his thing. Look at his articles in
'ham radio' - none of them are radio construction articles.

Lennie's "contribution" to radio was getting coffee for and staying out of
the way of the REAL radio professionals as they did REAL engineering and design
work.

73

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Lennie's typo notwithstanding, you didn't.

Why is Jim in the dark on this one?

The other three horsemen of the apocolypse support it.

He supports it by his silence. Schindler.

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Lennie's typo notwithstanding, you didn't.

I didn't think so....

Just one of Lennie's SOP's (Situationally Obnoxious Posting). Keeps
reciting the same unfounded, baseless rant over and over again.

Perhaps he *feels* that he's been told he can't post here without a license.
However, his enormous volume of output belies that feeling...

What Lennie HAS been told is that perhaps if he got an Amateur Radio
license and PARTICIPATED in Amateur Radio, he would actually understand it
and be able to discuss it from an INFORMED position.

Perhaps. But not likely to ever happen.

Anyone can discuss here. I have seen no postings where somebody has told
Len to
"shut up", even though he has told others to "shut the hell up".

It's that "anger" thing he keeps accusing me and others of. "Shut the
hell up" is a very angry, antagonistic way of trying to brow-beat another.

Perhaps it was intended to incite a similar response from K8MN...

Credibility is another issue.

Again...perhasp if he could actually discuss matters from an informed,
experienced positon...As it stands, he has zero-point-zero minutes of
practical Amateur Radio experience.

Perhaps.

The most pertinent question is:

Why is Len so interested in the requirements for a ham license, since:

A) He obviously doesn't want a license
B) He isn't involved in manufacturing equipment or other products for hams
C) He's not really involved in amateur radio in any way other than verbose
newsgroup postings and FCC comments.

So why is he so interested? It's as if I, a non-golfer, made a crusade out of
getting the greens fees for nonmembers at Pebble Beach reduced...

You've discussed. You just have no experience in amateur radio, no
stake in amateur radio and no credibility in amateur radio. You needn't
have an amateur radio license at all. Does that clear things up for you?

I don't think Len understands.

How can he?

He and Brain have thier respective heads up each others backsides so far
that neither can see a thing, and what they can hear is muffled and
distorted.

Why so nasty, Steve?

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

Ahhhhhh! But he CAN report to us on the VHF navaids from LAX! Oh joy!

Some people are into that...

Of course any of us with more than a month or two's experience in
Amateur
Radio can attest to the fact that respectable signals can be radiated from
and received by antennas that no one can see.

Well, almost no one...

Having once resided in SoCal antenna controlled neighborhoods myself I
can
attest to the fact that a wire around the eaves and fed by a decent roller
tuner and worked against a good ground can work pretty well.

Not the issue, really.

To each his own. But from descriptions and mapquest, it appears that Len's
choice was a particularly poor one for HF radio operations.

My Cincinnati home was
somewhat motivated by a desire for a good radio location. My present
home was selected in large part by a desire for a great radio location
with few neighbors. In addition, I have dark skies, a view to die for
and quiet which city and suburban dwellers don't even notice they don't
have.

Some of us notice.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

Did you do that at work or as a "hobby" project?

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with what RF devices our lives
can't do without that he allegedly had a hand in creating.

Again, not the issue.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Description? Pictures? Performance?

None.

Just like his Padawamn Learner's T5 logs.

Then why get in a tizzy over it?

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

And how many HF receivers have you designed and built as a "hobby" in the
intervening ~40 years?

None. Last time he dared to venture a discussion on any kind of direct
participation in radio as a hobby, he had a(n) (alleged) ricebox lineup
including an ICOM R-70.

Well, there you have it.

When I asked Len for help in designing an HF station, all he could offer was
to
point me to the Digi-Key catalog. That explained a lot, actually, because it
told me that Len doesn't really know how to do home design and construction
of
radios. Nor how to be creative in the use of available components rather
than
just what's in the catalogs.

That's not a put-down, just a fact. While Len talks a lot of theory, and
what
he did as a "professional" way back when, home construction of HF receivers,
transmitters and transceivers just isn't his thing. Look at his articles in
'ham radio' - none of them are radio construction articles.

Lennie's "contribution" to radio was getting coffee for and staying out
of
the way of the REAL radio professionals as they did REAL engineering and
design work.

How do you know that, Steve?

Besides - it's not the issue.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/7/2004 6:33 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

Ahhhhhh! But he CAN report to us on the VHF navaids from LAX! Oh joy!

Some people are into that...

After thinking about it, it makes sense....The ATIS and AWOS systems
repeat the same thing over and over and over...Kinda like Lennie's posts.

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with what RF devices our
lives
can't do without that he allegedly had a hand in creating.

Again, not the issue.

Sure it is, Jim!

Lennie has insisted that his "professional" career was far more productive
and useful than anything Amateurs do. I want to know WHAT it was he thinks he
did that is so useful? What is in my home or what do I use on a daily basis
that has HIS direct participation in that I can't do without?

Lennie's "contribution" to radio was getting coffee for and staying out
of
the way of the REAL radio professionals as they did REAL engineering and
design work.

How do you know that, Steve?

From the opinions of someone who knew him and worked in the same facility
as he.

Besides - it's not the issue.

It is as long as Lennie keeps trying to throw his "professional" weight
around. He claims he's a hotshot, but I know of at least one other TRUE
professional says otherwise.

73

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/7/2004 6:33 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/5/2004 6:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind.

Great. It looks like you've got your wish.

Ahhhhhh! But he CAN report to us on the VHF navaids from LAX! Oh joy!

Some people are into that...

After thinking about it, it makes sense....The ATIS and AWOS systems
repeat the same thing over and over and over...Kinda like Lennie's posts.

True!

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with what RF devices our
lives
can't do without that he allegedly had a hand in creating.

Again, not the issue.

Sure it is, Jim!

No, it isn't.

Suppose some nonham "had a hand in creating" the cell phone, or the
802.11G modem, or the RF ID tag reader used on containers, trucks and
railcars, or a host of other things. Does that *technical* achievement
somehow make him/her the most qualified person to set the rules and
regs in *amateur* radio?

Lennie has insisted that his "professional" career was far more productive
and useful than anything Amateurs do.

Where did he do that?

What I have seen is numerous verbose listings of his employers, and
projects he was part of. That's all.

I want to know WHAT it was he thinks he
did that is so useful? What is in my home or what do I use on a daily basis
that has HIS direct participation in that I can't do without?

Don't hold yer breath!

Lennie's "contribution" to radio was getting coffee for and staying out
of
the way of the REAL radio professionals as they did REAL engineering and
design work.

How do you know that, Steve?

From the opinions of someone who knew him and worked in the same facility
as he.

OK - let's say, just for the point of discussion, that your source is
right on the money.

That only covers one time period at one facility. Len tells us he has
worked a lot of places over a long period of time. One
less-than-stellar job does not a career ruin.

Besides - it's not the issue.

It is as long as Lennie keeps trying to throw his "professional" weight
around.

No, it isn't.

He claims he's a hotshot, but I know of at least one other TRUE
professional says otherwise.

OK, fine. But again, that's not the issue at all. Here's why:

There's a certain argument that begins with the arguer citing his
accomplishments in non-amateur radio and electronics. Then these
accomplishments supposedly qualify the arguer as being more qualified
to set policy than others - including hams who have much more *amateur
radio* experience. The argument is put forward even when the arguer's
experience has little or nothing to do with what hams actually do in
amateur radio.

In Len's case we have an extreme example:

He's never had an amateur radio license
Never worked as any sort of licensed radio operator in any other radio
service
Never been involved in radio regulatory matters other than writing
voluminous comments to FCC,
Never manufactured or designed any equipment for hams
Hasn't written an article or done a visible project in amateur radio
circles for more than 22 years

And by his numerous mistakes in his postings here, doesn't really know
that much about what hams actually do on the radio in the first place.
(Note his continuing non-understanding of why phase noise is an issue
for HF hams).

Yet he tries to tell us that his professional background somehow makes
him more qualified than to determine *amateur radio* policy than any
of us hams.

It would be like me, a male non-golfer, saying that I know best how
the LPGA should be run. Or that the folks who run the cruise ships
should determine policy for sailboats.

The entire argument is faulty. It's not an issue of whether Len is/was
a "hotshot" but rather how valid his arguments are. The rest is
diversion and bafflegab.

It would be like me, a male non-golfer, saying that I know best how
the LPGA should be run. Or that the folks who run the cruise ships
should determine policy for sailboats.

The central issue is whether his proposed changes would help or hurt
the ARS. I say they would hurt the ARS.


73 de Jim, N2EY

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:
In article , Dave Heil

writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Jim, that is a pervasive theme in RRAP, the "requirement" of having an
amateur radio license to discuss things -radio- related.

If you missed it, then you must must be necrotic. If you support it,
then you do so by your silence, as you do so many other topics on
RRAP. Schindler.

So you're either for it or agin it. Support Kelly, Heil, and Robeson?

You decide.

Time to get off of the fence.

Best of Luck.

William wrote:

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:
In article , Dave Heil

writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here?

Where did I say that?

Jim, that is a pervasive theme in RRAP, the "requirement" of having an
amateur radio license to discuss things -radio- related.

One of your continuing problems is that of telling the difference
between what you think has been written and what has actually been
written.
Firstly, this isn't a "radio-related" newsgroup. It is an "amateur
radio-related" newsgroup. Len discusses and discusses. Mostly, his
windbag routine consists of insulting radio amateurs and the ARRL.
Sometimes he includes personal historical data having nothing to do with
amateur radio. Very little of what he posts has a thing to do with any
current or past amateur radio policy matter.

If you missed it, then you must must be necrotic. If you support it,
then you do so by your silence, as you do so many other topics on
RRAP. Schindler.

I note your silence on gay marriage. By your silence, you must support
it. You've been awfully silent on the matter of Scott Pederson. It
could be said that you must support him.

So you're either for it or agin it. Support Kelly, Heil, and Robeson?

....or he couldn't care less.

Time to get off of the fence.

I'd strongly suggest that you do so--especially if you're sitting on top
of one of the posts.

Dave K8MN