(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: "KØHB"
Date: 10/24/2004 9:58 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

"Brian Kelly" wrote


A big airliner is a big airliner, they all tote/toted tons of JP4/5
then and now, doesn't matter if it's being flown by an AAL 767 piloted
by a 15,000 hr. column jock or a hijacked 767 piloted by a sand roach.
They all burn equally well inside hi-rise buildings. If the building
comes down because it's core structure wasn't sufficiently
heat-resistant then in fairness who really did screw the moose?

"Over to you Hans".


You're right, Brian. It wasn't the fault of the religious freedom
fighters that the WTC towers are rubble. It's the fault of the
designers.

What the hell was I thinking!

Brian, we gotta go with Hans on this!

One has to assume that a professional pilot would have, realising his
error, made every effort to avoid the Towers. The camel fornicators jammed on
the power and aimed straight for the buildings...That's a heck of a lot more
kinetic energy than a glancing blow or just clipping it with a wing (a loss of
the aircraft, to be sure, but a lot less likely to have caused the Towers to
fall...)

There are three major airports within a few miles from lower
Manhattan, Newark, JFK and Laguardia. Most aircraft accidents occur
during landings and takeoffs and include both pilot error and
equipment failures and sometimes both. With the balls to the wall
looking for altitude. The guy who hit the Empire State Building was
executing extreme evasive maneuvers with a high-performance military
A/C which was far more agile than any jet airliner but he hit it
anyway and almost dead center at that. As you well know there have
been situations in which airliners have become completely
uncontrollable, e.g., 737 rudder lockups. You're a pilot too, connect
the dots.

The issue "under discussion" here is whether one of the towers might
not have come down if it's designers had used their heads when they
picked a wayward 707 as the model for a A/C collision with a tower and
factored in the fact that 707's carry huge amounts of JP. Which they
apparently didn't do. That's *all* there is to my "agenda". But as
usual around here the "technical experts" . . yadda, yadda . . .

73

Steve, K4YZ

w3rv

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:


One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.


Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.


Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.


I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to see?


Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.


Well, except to some who wish to turn this newsgroup into
a quasi-private Chat Room involving their own desires and
preferences..and to have them damn all others for not thinking
and feeling as they do. [yourself excluded]


That's a pretty good summation of what *you* want from this newsgroup, Len.
After all, you're the one telling other people to "shut the hell up"..

I've thought that Lenover21 wanted to be the moderator in here. He
claims otherwise.


Tsk. Nice troll cast, but inaccurate.

Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.



1912 was the year of the first U.S. radio regulating agency. That's
about the only "relation" to the subject of the Titanic and a very
tenuous one...if at all. :-)


For the bleeding-heart imaginary sailors aboard, I won't cry
great crocodile tears of a thousand-plus humans who perished
on the Titanic in 1912. Nope.

"Bleeding-heart imaginary sailors"? Who would that be?

Yeah, what's with that?


Tsk. You two don't really READ what you've written? :-)

Jimmie wanted me to show ten kinds of respect and sorrow for all
the passengers and crew of the Titanic who perished in 1912!

When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".



I'll just reflect that the subject
made a LOT of money for Linda Hamilton's ex-husband

You mean James Cameron? If so, why not just use his name?

You seem to have a serious problem calling people by their names. Perhaps

you

don't have the guts to do it.


Tsk. "Serious problem?" More tsk. :-)

Not much show-biz action in PA...but there is in this neck o' the woods.


and
employed many Mexican laborers on the set of "Titanic"...
many many years later with a little gilt statuette awarded for
Best Motion Picture to the producer-director. No crying great
tears on-stage on that Oscar Night.

What possible significance does that have?

And is that on topic for rrap? ;^)


Tsk. More PCTA extra Double Standard.


Linda is quite quirky in a cute sort of way... or is that quite cute in


a quirky sort of way?


Why do you wish to continue talking about Linda Hamilton?


Well you brought her to the conversation. 8^)


Does she have a ham license? [pun intended]

[just think what fun the ARRL news page would have with...drum
roll...HAM ACTOR! :-)


Boeing doesn't test fly
new aircraft with commercial paying passengers.

Not many aircraft companies were busy working out Test
Proceedures for test-flying new aircraft in 1912... :-)


How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)


Not a matter of focus. Just some discussion among friends. And the
discussions among friends tend to go where they will.


Boeing innovated the pre-flight checklist around 1940 or
thereabouts after they lost a prototype Flying Fortress (and
their chief test pilot) on takeoff.

Of course there was the PROFESSIONAL pilot who tried to roll a B-52 at low
altitude.

Did you see the case study of that one, Jim? Spooky! Too bad so many of


the folk flying with him knew they were probably going to die some day
with him at the yoke.


So...this is now a FLYING newsgroup?

No, but there are some on Netnews, I'm sure.



Or are you PCTAs just "high?"


Ick, getting high is a sure fire method of wasting one's life.




Not to worry. U.S. amateur radio regulations are Up To Date.

Yes, they are.

Seems like it to me!


For maybe, 1913... :-)


I took the tests recently, all within the past 5 years, and a couple
within 3 years. They are up to date enough, covering satellite ops, all
manner of relevant band and technical questions dealing with present day
equipment. They are up to date for at least mid 2001.


They still require all amateurs to test for beloved morse code
cognition capability in order to have priveleges of operating
below 30 MHz...in the ham bands.

Why does that bother you so much?


Tsk. Doesn't bother me much. I haven't gotten an amateur radio
license yet. :-)

Why should I sell my soul for some high-rate morsemanship? :-)


Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just
study the material. I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage. Here I am, soul intact , and just
as fat dumb and happy as ever! 8^)



It seems that some amateurs
bent on constantly re-living the past (in almost anything) think
that morse code skill is still the epitome of "radio operation" in
the year 2004.

Perhaps some do.


Jimmie Who do.

Jimmie do the voodoo that who do? 8^)



Many more think that a simple test of Morse code skill at a very basic
level is a worthwhile requirement for an amateur license.


Only because THEY had to do it...therefore everyone else has to
do the same! :-)

Nahh, I think they should take it because that is the rule at present.


Why does that bother you so much, Len?


Why is Jimmie so bothered that he has to keep asking that?


Oh, Bother..... W.T. Pooh


Very "progressive." State of the Art.

Len, do you live in a "State Of The Art" house? Drive a "State Of The Art"

car?

Wear "State Of The Art" clothes?

Is your computer "State Of The Art", complete with broadband connection?


Far more modern in all respects on all items compared to 1912. :-)


If we owns PC's, we isn't state of the art.


Tsk. Bad grammar to boot...up.

Yup, kind of illustrating the point that many people seem to think that
they are some kind of high tech wizard because they own a PC or cell
phone, or other such icons.


Try "If we own PCs, we are not state of the art." :-)

Thanks for the suggestion, but I kind of like the other way if you
don't mind. 8^)

Your English syntax and grammar is NOT state of the art...

Oh, but they are as necessary!


Heck, the only HF radio equipment you've admitted to owning is over 20 years
old. Definitely not "State Of The Art", yet you lecture others about it.


Tsk. Jimmie have loss of memory. Poor fella. Has to "recycle" all his
radio construction in order to do "state of the art" TUBE designs in the
1990s. Tsk. With a double degree... :-)


Despite their virtual obsolescence, hollow state technology is quite
interesting, at least to me.


Random though mode on:

I have a 1987 Transciever. IC-745. Suits me just fine. All digital
(excluding the necessary analog bits)

Wow, even digital radios are getting old hat.

"Why", the Grinch said as a smile lit his face, "Maybe for everything,
everymode all has it's place."

I have a chunk of galena setting on the shelf in front of me - maybe
I'll make a cat's whisker detector and radio from it

Random thought mode off.......


Put a carbon mike in your antenna lead and you can do AM like
Reggie F. in his Big Broadcast of 1906! :-)

AM never really appealed to me. Takes a lot of energy for all you get
out of it. But I do like historical processes and equipment as a
diversion after working all day with much more modern techniques. Kinda fun.

Wow! "State of the Art!"

I suppose at one time it was!

Amaze your friends and neighbors by being able to talk without wires
for at least 10 miles! :-)

Hehe, AM is probably just about at the bottom of the heap (with
apologies to all the AM'ers out there)


Have a Happy, your Grinchness...


You also, Lenover21.



I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

Do you have a preference? Does simply "Len" work? Or "Leonard"?

- Mike KB3EIA -

impact loads. Apparently analyses are showing that if one or another
of the tower's steel stucture had been properly insulated it might
have not come down. There's a congressionally-mandated technical
report in the works which gets into the topic in depth which should be
released soon and is reported to pass out some spankings.

I was at a presentation made by the head of the engineering team that
investigated the Twin towers disaster.
^^^^

"The" engineering firm?? Do you have any idea just how *many*
engineering firms have been involved in the WTC disaster??

Um, I said TEAM Brian. I didn't say FIRM!

QSL.


I ain't lying.

I still have his presentation, I will get his name for you.

Good, I'll take it if you find it and chase him down.


- Mike KB3EIA -

w3rv

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 10/25/2004 12:05 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse.

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.

Lennie does love to make those "tough sounding" accusations, then
chastises anyone who dares to do the same.

I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to
see?

When you're already in the dark without a clue as to where the light
switch is, the best you can do is fumble around and hope to hit it sooner or
later...

Lennie's DEFINITELY in the "...or later" stage.

Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.

Actually, quite a bit.

It was the need to have a "universal" communications medium that has drive
the Morse Code issue for all these decades.

Of course Lennie KNOWS that, has stated it himself...Re-stating it would
ruined the rant effect.

Jimmie wanted me to show ten kinds of respect and sorrow for all
the passengers and crew of the Titanic who perished in 1912!

When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".

Of course Lennie has no respect or sorrow for those people.

How can you respect anyone else when you have no SELF respect?

Why do you wish to continue talking about Linda Hamilton?

Well you brought her to the conversation. 8^)

Who wouldn't...Unless, of course, your "preferences" of the "alternative
lifestyle" mode...?

So...this is now a FLYING newsgroup?

No, but there are some on Netnews, I'm sure.

It's only a "FLYING" newsgroup when Lennie wants to discuss his student
pilot days in 1950-something.

And it's a "MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS" newsgroup when Lennie wants to
discuss 1950's-era Army RTTY or 1980's era "SINCGARS" radio.

It's also a MODEL AIRPLANE newsgroup when he wants to parallel the AMA
with the ARRL.

And it's a "MENTAL HEALTH" newsgroup when Lennie wants to make allegations
about other's "meds" or how "crazy" they are.

In short, it can be ANY KIND of newsgroup that Lennie wants WHEN Lennie
wants, but WOE BE to the Licensed Amateur who dares to deviate from Lennie's
topic-du-jour.

Why should I sell my soul for some high-rate morsemanship?

Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just

study the material. I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage. Here I am, soul intact , and just
as fat dumb and happy as ever! 8^)

Mike, if you ever notice, Lennie doesn't do ANYthing that requires him
being more than an arm-length away from the computer.



I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

Do you have a preference? Does simply "Len" work? Or "Leonard"?

How about just "Putz", Mike...?!?!

Works for me.

Steve, K4YZ

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing.

Agreed! Len does more OT posting than anybody,

and is told more often than anybody that he is OT.

William wrote:
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:



In article , Robert Casey
writes:



One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.



Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)



So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing.

Agreed! Len does more OT posting than anybody,


and is told more often than anybody that he is OT.

Not by me! AFAIC Lenover21 can post on anything he wishes to.

Really, there isn't a need for any of us to be sensitive about this
stuff. It is after all, USENET.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Really, there isn't a need for any of us to be sensitive about this
stuff. It is after all, USENET.

TSK. NO. VERY SERIOUS! Might be better than World Serious!

This newsgroup is all about certain PCTAs needing a private chat
room to damn the NCTAs to eternal hell for not loving morse.

In article ,
(William) writes:

Agreed! Len does more OT posting than anybody,

and is told more often than anybody that he is OT.

...by those who are so "OT" they are older than dirt. :-)

Hey, gang, let's all make the Titanic disaster of 1912 the
principle topic of this newsgroup!!!

Hey, gang, let's all play like civil engineers and architects
to indict the designers of the WTC!!!

Hey, gang, let's all be Pilots In Command and talk all about
flying!!!

Hey, gang, let's all make sure Jimmie Who gets all that praise
and respect for vacuum tube kluges which are State of the Art!!!

All of which is vastly important to the few regulars in here who
can't figure out how to start their own private Internet chat room
so that they can all call the NCTAs nasty names behind their
backs and be King of the Ham Hill!

bwahahahahah small snicker in place of "hi hi"

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.

Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

It's all been public. Nursie is eager and chomping at the bit
to FIGHT with anyone.

I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to
see?

Tsk. See that opthalmologist.

Warning: You could be a victim of presbyopia and not know it...

Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.

Gosh...wonder who wrote that original phrase? :-)

It wasn't Mike Coslo. It wasn't nursie. It wasn't Brian. It wasn't Rev.
Jim, our Artist of the State. It wasn't Kellie. It wasn't Hans. It
wasn't Dieter. It wasn't Jim Hampton. It wasn't Dee. It wasn't Kim.
OK, that about exhausts the regulars in here. :-)


Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.

Actually, NONE.

However, the Titanic disaster is a favorite subject of his lordship,
Sir James. As Lord High Admiral of the newsgroup (sailing these
turbid waters every day), he has decreed the Titanic disaster IS a
worthy subject for amateur radio policy.

There we have it.


When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".

True enough. But only in the literal sense.

Hello? Can you see some sarcasm in my remarks? :-)


How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)

Not a matter of focus. Just some discussion among friends. And the
discussions among friends tend to go where they will.

So...you've joined the Society of Friends?

We quake at the thought...

But, of curse, you regulars all OWN this newsgroup. Despite it going
wherever the Internet carries it. What you dictate as Right and Proper
MUST be observed at all times!


Or are you PCTAs just "high?"

Ick, getting high is a sure fire method of wasting one's life.

I'm "high" on life itself. No drugs or substances needed.

Nor any morse code fantasies as the epitome of hobby radio arts.

:-)

I took the tests recently, all within the past 5 years, and a couple
within 3 years. They are up to date enough, covering satellite ops, all
manner of relevant band and technical questions dealing with present day
equipment. They are up to date for at least mid 2001.

You missed my point on that.

The present-day U.S. amateur regulations are just fine and dandy
to those who want to keep the morse code test for a license
examination.

Other than to this circle of "friends," somewhere in the neighborhood
of 700 thousand (give or take) licensed amateurs MIGHT have some
disagreement with that "up to date."

There are presently 18 ("count 'em, 18") petitions for consideration
on changes to U.S. amateur radio regulations made public by the
FCC. It should be obvious (except to the oblivious) that all is NOT
"up to date" in those regulations.


Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just

study the material.

Why? :-)

I'm really only interested in ending the U.S. amateur radio license exam
morse code test.

I do NOT need to "study material on morsemanship" to do that.

I do NOT need to "study material on any other test element" just to
get a federal merit badge saying I am "authorized" something or
other. You seem to forget that I was ON HF very legally and
correctly over a half century ago, over four decades ago, over three
decades ago, and even earlier this year...all without having ANY
requirement to "study morsemanship material."

I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage.

I always study for my blood tests. So far I've passed every time.




I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

What do you see on my "signature" line?

Tsk. If you can't understand my preferences, then that trip to an
opthalmologist for you is necessary. [remember, watch out for
presbyopia...]

If you pick up an IEEE Membership Directory, you wil see my legal
name in there. Been in there since 1973. That's the formal version.

Or you can call me any name, nasty or otherwise, that you care to
use. Even enclose it in quote marks as "Dave" does it. Just don't
call me late for dinner.

Shirley you jest. Roger that. Go to the John. Etc.

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing.

Agreed! Len does more OT posting than anybody, yet complains the loudest when
others do it. Just another example of his double standard, do as Len says not
as Len does mentality.

Tsk.

I say enjoy the hobby. I say don't try to force archaic, imaginary
needs in testing for an amateur radio license just because some
olde-tymers had to do it. I say enjoy freedom. I say try to keep
up with the technology. I say the technology isn't restricted solely
to what the ARRL publishes.

Is that "bad mentality?" Or would you rather everyone be subject
to rule by the raddio kopps carrying dazzling bright kopp badges?
[that way you could get to push around others who don't agree
with you and your opinions - which you call "facts"]

Do I do "OT posting more than anybody?" No.

If I DO talk about old time (OT) subjects it is for a reason of
explanation since I've DONE those things and have first-hand
experience. I don't need "confirmation" from any "league"
organization to "document" it. :-)

When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Agreed!

The denials are almost funny.

No. Tragic. The damp hankie slap on nursie's wrist isn't very
good therapy, "doctor" Jimmie.


Well, except to some who wish to turn this newsgroup into
a quasi-private Chat Room involving their own desires and
preferences..and to have them damn all others for not thinking
and feeling as they do. [yourself excluded]

That's a pretty good summation of what *you* want from this newsgroup, Len.
After all, you're the one telling other people to "shut the hell up"..

I've thought that Lenover21 wanted to be the moderator in here. He
claims otherwise.

It's how he acts that makes the claims ring hollow. Perhaps it's time to
repost the "feldwebel" classic...

Poor baby. Losing your "group leader" self-imposed title?

Awwww.

For the bleeding-heart imaginary sailors aboard, I won't cry
great crocodile tears of a thousand-plus humans who perished
on the Titanic in 1912. Nope.

"Bleeding-heart imaginary sailors"? Who would that be?

Yeah, what's with that?

Len's trying to cover up his gaffe of laughing at them.

Tsk, tsk. I don't, have never "laughed" at innocent victims of
anything.

What you've just said above is a damned LIE, sweetums.

Not unexpected from the Wrong Reverend Jimmie Who. It was
bound to happen that - as "led" by that other shining example of
modern U.S. hamdom, the gunnery nurse.

What next? Little eptithets in some language your aren't familiar
with? [nursie has the lock on cute Yiddish pejoratives, doesn't
know squat about Yiddishers or Judaism] Maybe something
choice in Italian? [you could use my neighbor, the Scicilian, in
that regard...:-) ]

I'll just reflect that the subject
made a LOT of money for Linda Hamilton's ex-husband

You mean James Cameron? If so, why not just use his name?

You seem to have a serious problem calling people by their names. Perhaps
you don't have the guts to do it.

Have you ever noticed, Mike, that Len practically *never* addresses someone
who
disagrees with him by the name they use on their posts? He almost always has
to
make up an insulting nickname for them.

Beggin' yer highbrow pardon, m'lord hamme-on-wry.


and
employed many Mexican laborers on the set of "Titanic"...
many many years later with a little gilt statuette awarded for
Best Motion Picture to the producer-director. No crying great
tears on-stage on that Oscar Night.

What possible significance does that have?

And is that on topic for rrap? ;^)

;-) ;-)

M'lord Hamme, what is the "significance" of discussing the Titanic disaster
at all in an amateur radio policy newsgroup?

Shouldn't you be taking that up before the House of Lords?

Linda is quite quirky in a cute sort of way... or is that quite cute in
a quirky sort of way?

Very attractive, really. Not at the Jan Smithers level, of course.

Tsk. Letting all your sexual fantasies hang out in public again?

What possible significance has YOUR sexual fantasies to do with
amateur radio policy matters?

Oh, yes, you like to present them to show your "manliness?"

Weird.


Boeing doesn't test fly
new aircraft with commercial paying passengers.

OT?

Commercial air carriers don't concern themselves with amateur
radios...requiring ANY RF radiation source to be turned off when
in-flight.

Again, that and mention of Boeing Aircraft Company is NOT an
amateur radio policy subject.

Not many aircraft companies were busy working out Test
Proceedures for test-flying new aircraft in 1912... :-)

Very OT

So is claims that vacuum tube kluges you've "designed" in
the 1990s as "state of the art." :-)


Boeing innovated the pre-flight checklist around 1940 or
thereabouts after they lost a prototype Flying Fortress (and
their chief test pilot) on takeoff.

Yawningly OT

So is Rev. Jimmie's regular "subject" of the Titanic disaster in
here.

Jimmie have fantasies of being a "hero" saving lives through
moursemanship in that disaster scenario?

Of course there was the PROFESSIONAL pilot who tried to roll a B-52 at low
altitude.

Did you see the case study of that one, Jim? Spooky! Too bad so many of
the folk flying with him knew they were probably going to die some day
with him at the yoke.

Did you see the film clip? It's on the 'net at a few sites. Not the best
quality, but scary enough.

Has Jimmie actually RIDDEN in a B-52?

Who cares? Jimmie never served his country in a military capacity,
wouldn't have any need to ride a B-52 for any reason.

Not to worry. U.S. amateur radio regulations are Up To Date.

Yes, they are.

Seems like it to me!

"Yawningly OT." Hi hi. :-)

The morsemanship test REMAINS and that suits Mr. "I serve my
country in OTHER ways" Miccolis, the artist of the state, just
dandy. That will secure U.S. amateur radio for morse-tested hams
and assure Jimmie someone to play with...

They still require all amateurs to test for beloved morse code
cognition capability in order to have priveleges of operating
below 30 MHz...in the ham bands.

Why does that bother you so much?

Notice how Len avoids the relevant questions...

What is the "relevant question?" :-)

Oh, I see. You be da Lord Hamme-on-wry, de Lawgiver of what
be relevant for all to follow! Beggin' me humble pardon, m'lord.

It seems that some amateurs
bent on constantly re-living the past (in almost anything) think
that morse code skill is still the epitome of "radio operation" in
the year 2004.

Perhaps some do.

Many more think that a simple test of Morse code skill at a very basic
level is a worthwhile requirement for an amateur license.

Why does that bother you so much, Len?

Very "progressive." State of the Art.

Len, do you live in a "State Of The Art" house? Drive a "State Of The Art"
car? Wear "State Of The Art" clothes?

Is your computer "State Of The Art", complete with broadband connection?

If we owns PC's, we isn't state of the art.

Roger that!

Who had a "personal computer" in 1912? :-)

Heck, the only HF radio equipment you've admitted to owning is over 20
years
old. Definitely not "State Of The Art", yet you lecture others about it.

"Lecture?" :-)

Tsk, tsk, TSK! I have an R-70. Leo has an R-70. Both still work to
specifications (which are quite good).

Oh, yes, a couple of NCTAs mentioned it, so, according to m'lord hamme
(on rye?) they are just snit. :-)


Random though mode on:

I have a 1987 Transciever. IC-745. Suits me just fine. All digital
(excluding the necessary analog bits)

Mostly analog, really!

Wow, even digital radios are getting old hat.

Yep.

How so? Can't get any digital parts to "recycle?" :-)

"Why", the Grinch said as a smile lit his face, "Maybe for everything,
everymode all has it's place."

Indeed.

Children's story characters? More fantasy portrayed as "fact?"

I have a chunk of galena setting on the shelf in front of me - maybe
I'll make a cat's whisker detector and radio from it

Oatmeal boxes made of cardboard are still used. They have a plastic rim at the
top but they still make good coil forms

Go for it, Mr. State of the Art! :-)

Reinvent the 1920s and claim your fame as the "innovator!"

Good grief.

Next thing you know, Rev. Jimmie will tout "Ralph 124C41+" as "mainstream
science fiction!" :-)

bwahahahahahah a snicker