They were trying to get administrative action, i.e. no petitions, no NPRM,
just have the FCC remove the requirement. Not surprisingly, they failed.
Now we have 19 petitions and a long wait for an NPRM



And it's probably a low priority item on the FCC's agenda
anyway. Whenever they get around to it....

When they do repeal the code test, we will all have to nag Len to get a
licence, as he will have no excuse

Someone will start a new organization "No License International".
"NLI"

:-)

From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sun, Feb 27 2005 9:43 am

Dave Heil wrote in news:42220344.9E902FD4
:

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

When they do repeal the code test, we will all have to nag Len to
get a
licence, as he will have no excuse

Len really has no excuse now. He has had the no code option
available

snip of clotted stuff

I understand that Len is already eyeing the British Monarchy as a
target
for future rants. He has discoverd that the royals have rank,
status,
privilege and TITLES. They have a church with a number of parishes
called Saint-something. They and their supports are conservative
traditionalists. The entire British Isles are loaded with lodge
halls
repleat with rules for keeping out the riff-raff.

Dave K8MN

I'm a VE. Is there some way we could arrange to send three VEs around
to
his house when the code test is repealed? We would announce it in
advance
of course, to comply with all the rules, on here naturally.

What IS the point of all that?

All those who demand EXCLUSIVITY on entrance to this newsgroup
can do so to the proper authorities. Paul Schleck will have the
procedure. RESTRICTING access will be wonderful for all those
who want to lock out all but "their kind" (I should spell
that "thier" in their honor but won't) and they won't suffer
all the outrage of seeing the reality of the rest of the radio
world when they are called wrong. Just think, their own
"clubhouse" where others can't be admitted (nyah, nyah).

Keep everything SECRET, "hams-eyes-only" stuff. Nobody else
can or should know anything.

Tsk.

Years ago, poor Dave wanted to bluster and brag about his really
neat CW on State Department radio in Africa during the '80s. He
made it sound like a major diplomatic save-the-world kind of thing,
even mentioned being in "Guinea-Bisseau" one of those litle-
known and who-cares kind of ex-colonies. He wanted to parade
like a Big Shot using CW for some kind of vital mission when,
supposedly, RTTY wouldn't get through. [spell Shot with an i]

Poor Dave got trumped. He ran into someone who had bigger
experience in government communications that didn't need to
brag. Dave tried and tried to beat that guy down, by any means
possible. He was the "superior!" He ruled. All bow down to
him and all that sort of rot. Dave never forgot.

Now Dave insists on rewriting the past, of saying I wrote one
thing but "really wanted" something different. He has stretched
that to include "topics I will discuss in the future!" Amazing.

So, by all means, have three VEs come to my house when the
code test is eliminated. Hopefully they will come from the east
coast first-class, paying their own way. My address is on my
old Ham Radio Magazine bylines, hasn't changed. ["three
wiseguys out of the east," so to speak]

So, what are those three wisemen, er, VEs going to do?

Administer a TEST whether I want to take one or not? I don't
think so. My representative Mr. Glock will address them in
that case. [he is very accurate]

The three VEs can wait at the curb. If they behave, I might
invite them to the back patio for milk and cookies. Or not.

Now, if EXCLUSIVITY is so very desireable, feel free to try for
private access-by-permission only. That will insulate all the
participants in their "clubhouse" and they can cuss out all
on the outside without being hurt in the process. They know
it all anyway and don't need "outsider" information. They are
"superior!"

wrote:

From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sun, Feb 27 2005 9:43 am

Dave Heil wrote in news:42220344.9E902FD4
:

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

When they do repeal the code test, we will all have to nag Len to
get a
licence, as he will have no excuse

Len really has no excuse now. He has had the no code option
available

snip of clotted stuff

I understand that Len is already eyeing the British Monarchy as a
target
for future rants. He has discoverd that the royals have rank,
status,
privilege and TITLES. They have a church with a number of parishes
called Saint-something. They and their supports are conservative
traditionalists. The entire British Isles are loaded with lodge
halls
repleat with rules for keeping out the riff-raff.

I'm a VE. Is there some way we could arrange to send three VEs around
to
his house when the code test is repealed? We would announce it in
advance
of course, to comply with all the rules, on here naturally.

What IS the point of all that?

All those who demand EXCLUSIVITY on entrance to this newsgroup
can do so to the proper authorities. Paul Schleck will have the
procedure. RESTRICTING access will be wonderful for all those
who want to lock out all but "their kind" (I should spell
that "thier" in their honor but won't) and they won't suffer
all the outrage of seeing the reality of the rest of the radio
world when they are called wrong. Just think, their own
"clubhouse" where others can't be admitted (nyah, nyah).

Hams already have such a place and the authorities support it. You
can't be admitted.

Keep everything SECRET, "hams-eyes-only" stuff. Nobody else
can or should know anything.

If we use morse, it'll certainly be a secret from you.

Tsk.

Years ago, poor Dave wanted to bluster and brag about his really
neat CW on State Department radio in Africa during the '80s.

No bluster and brag to it, disingenuous old boy, just statements of
fact.
You to humbrage to the facts. You still do. Tough.

He
made it sound like a major diplomatic save-the-world kind of thing,
even mentioned being in "Guinea-Bisseau" one of those litle-
known and who-cares kind of ex-colonies.

I just have to ask--what does mentioning that it took place in
Guinea-Bissau have to do with making something sound like a
"save-the-world kind of thing"? Now, knowing that all of the material
is archived at Google, is there anything you'd like to amend about your
claim?

He wanted to parade
like a Big Shot using CW for some kind of vital mission when,
supposedly, RTTY wouldn't get through. [spell Shot with an i]

Any amendments at all? Otherwise, Steve's frequent claim that you are a
liar is about to wham you in the can again. I can provide an accurate
account of what I wrote and what you wrote.

Poor Dave got trumped.

....not by you, I didn't.

He ran into someone who had bigger
experience in government communications that didn't need to
brag.

Now I know that we're not talking about you. You have less experience
and you've posted endless accounts of your past exploits.

Dave tried and tried to beat that guy down, by any means
possible. He was the "superior!" He ruled. All bow down to
him and all that sort of rot. Dave never forgot.

No, he never forgot and he's about to display your comments of the time
so that all can see what a fabricator you are.

Now Dave insists on rewriting the past, of saying I wrote one
thing but "really wanted" something different.

Rewriting, Leonard? What was rewritten?

He has stretched
that to include "topics I will discuss in the future!" Amazing.

Buy a sense of humor, Leonard.

So, by all means, have three VEs come to my house when the
code test is eliminated. Hopefully they will come from the east
coast first-class, paying their own way. My address is on my
old Ham Radio Magazine bylines, hasn't changed. ["three
wiseguys out of the east," so to speak]

So, what are those three wisemen, er, VEs going to do?

Administer a TEST whether I want to take one or not? I don't
think so. My representative Mr. Glock will address them in
that case. [he is very accurate]

Just what does that mean, Len?

The three VEs can wait at the curb. If they behave, I might
invite them to the back patio for milk and cookies. Or not.

Now, if EXCLUSIVITY is so very desireable, feel free to try for
private access-by-permission only. That will insulate all the
participants in their "clubhouse" and they can cuss out all
on the outside without being hurt in the process. They know
it all anyway and don't need "outsider" information. They are
"superior!"

Classic Anderson--the rantings of a crackpot.

Dave K8MN

wrote:

Administer a TEST whether I want to take one or not? I don't
think so. My representative Mr. Glock will address them in
that case. [he is very accurate]

BBBBWWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHA!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh! Lennie making THREATENING
insinuations with firearms! ! ! ! !

W H A T A P U T Z ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

BBBWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:

Poor Dave got trumped. He ran into someone who had bigger
experience in government communications that didn't need to
brag.

Hmmmmmmmmmm...Who would that be, Lennie?

It's sure not you. According to your own "CV", you've never been
CHOP of ANY government communications facility. You weren't even a
military radio operator while you were in the Army...Just a radio
mechanic.

Dave tried and tried to beat that guy down, by any means
possible. He was the "superior!" He ruled. All bow down to
him and all that sort of rot. Dave never forgot.

Forgot what?

No one's ever "beat (him) down", nor has Dave tried to beat anyone
else down.

He has, of course, repeatedly humiliated you, but then you keep
supplying us with the tools with which to do it....

Now Dave insists on rewriting the past, of saying I wrote one
thing but "really wanted" something different. He has stretched
that to include "topics I will discuss in the future!" Amazing.

Coming from a guy who has tried to embellish his military service
with the sacrifices of guys who were KIA 3 years before he even
enlisted, I find your insinuation that anyone else is trying to
"rewrit(e) the past" to be morbidly offensive....Not that you care, of
course.

So, by all means, have three VEs come to my house when the
code test is eliminated. Hopefully they will come from the east
coast first-class, paying their own way. My address is on my
old Ham Radio Magazine bylines, hasn't changed. ["three
wiseguys out of the east," so to speak]

Your address isn't the ONLY thing you haven't changed, Lennie.

Maybe that's why the Old Lady didn't favor you with
offspring...?!?!

So, what are those three wisemen, er, VEs going to do?

Administer a TEST whether I want to take one or not? I don't
think so. My representative Mr. Glock will address them in
that case. [he is very accurate]

Not in YOUR hands, he's not! (Still busting a gut over that
Lennism! W H A T A H O O T ! ! ! ! )

The three VEs can wait at the curb. If they behave, I might
invite them to the back patio for milk and cookies. Or not.

Now, if EXCLUSIVITY is so very desireable, feel free to try for
private access-by-permission only. That will insulate all the
participants in their "clubhouse" and they can cuss out all
on the outside without being hurt in the process. They know
it all anyway and don't need "outsider" information. They are
"superior!"

A five year old with an NCT callsign and a used HT is superior to
you, Lennie, so it doesn't take much!

Steve, K4YZ

Dee Flint wrote:
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...


Earn your priviliges. It isn't impossible.


Just be sure that the things one needs to do to earn the
privileges are revalent to modern ham radio.

Why should ham radio be different than other activities? Most
of
the things we do to gain privileges in this world are not
relevant
to the privilege itself.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE




Oh, so everything else is messed up, so ham radio should be
messed
up too? Even if I thought it were true, that would still be the
worst argument I have heard yet, ROTFLMAO!



It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact
that
a very effective way to motivate people to do something that
they
don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much
want. Parents do it all the time.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE




So treat prospective hams like errant children?

No not at all. Let's use a workplace example instead. Many
people,
even if they like their jobs, do have elements of the work they
don't
like. However they get a reward or privilege in the form of money
for
performing those elements.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE




And Morse isn't an element of my operating, but I had to take a
test in
it.
That's like having to take a typing test and then having a
secretary to do
your typing.

Well that example proves the point that you don't know what you may
need or
want in the future as secretaries are now going the way of the dodo
bird in
large part. Almost all employees that have a need to do
correspondence do
their own these days in any company that I have been in. The company
I work
for right now let their last secretary go about four years ago.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Probably why much business correspondence is just so much mumbo jumbo,
or maybe it was outsourced to China.

wrote:

Years ago, poor Dave wanted to bluster and brag about his really
neat CW on State Department radio in Africa during the '80s. He
made it sound like a major diplomatic save-the-world kind of thing,
even mentioned being in "Guinea-Bisseau" one of those litle-
known and who-cares kind of ex-colonies. He wanted to parade
like a Big Shot using CW for some kind of vital mission when,
supposedly, RTTY wouldn't get through. [spell Shot with an i]

Poor Dave got trumped. He ran into someone who had bigger
experience in government communications that didn't need to
brag. Dave tried and tried to beat that guy down, by any means
possible. He was the "superior!" He ruled. All bow down to
him and all that sort of rot. Dave never forgot.

Google never forgot:

from me on Jan. 1, 1998:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Len, you tried to give me a lesson in the history of radio and you
also
twisted some dates and events but, to what end? What was that all
about? FYI: I was handling the QSYs, openings and closings for a
government 75 baud circuit via CW from late '87 through late '89 from
Guinea-Bissau. Guess we didn't know CW was obsolete, huh?

Dave Heil OH2/K8MN"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

from Len Anderson on Jan. 5, 1998:

No CW Test
Jan 5 1998, 12:00 am


Subject: Can't we all just get along?
From: Dave Heil
Date: Mon, Jan 5, 1998 00:44 EST
Message-id:
You failed reading comprehension. My post stated that CW was used to
coordinate openings/closings, QSYs of an RTTY circuit.

Ok, let me requote, word for word, what you originally wrote:

about? FYI: I was handling the QSYs, opening and closings for a
government 75 baud circuit via CW from late '87 through late '89
from
Guinea-Bissau. Guess we didn't know CW was obsolete, huh?

Firstly, you didn't qualify "government." Since you call from a
Finnish server, have an OH2 (Finland) slash on your signature,
and Guinea-Bissau is an independent country, one needs
telepathy to accurately attach "US" in front of "government."
Secondly you wrote "75 baud circuit via CW..." which could be a
high-speed CW one as much as TTY; "baud" is the old rate name
in all telegraphy.

If this was a United States government link, that slow a rate sounds
suspicious considering that the military and State Department were
already starting to upgrade to 110 Baud (100 WPM) TTY in the
late 1960s. Commercial TTY users were doing the same at the
same time. Lots of older 60 WPM TTY machines were becoming
available as surplus by the mid-1970s, many being converted for
TDD use by hearing-impaired persons courtesy of many clubs of
ex-telephone-company-workers.

Now, I'll grant you that surplus telecomm equipment COULD have
gone into use in Guinea-Bissau considering that country subsists
largely on grant money from other nations and such aid is of minor
value. [the USA is contributing $2.5 million to them in proposed
1998 aid grants] It's difficult to envision a US government circuit
running that slow some 20 years after starting to upgrade to 100
WPM machinery.

Now we get a geography lesson from Len. It was a U.S. government
circuit, Len. It wasn't 75 baud CW; it was 75 baud RTTY with CW to
coordinate it.

There's LOTS of geographic, socio-political information available
on the Web, many site choices. ARRL publications don't carry
much of such information. Anyone with Web access can look them
up. As to "lessons," do you think everyone knows ALL the small
and emerging nations of the world?

Why does an RTTY circuit (of any speed) need "CW to
coordinate it?" RTTY circuits have been used on HF since the
1930s without any extra CW circuit for "coordination." It's a very
simple task to tune in an 170 to 850 Hz shift RTTY signal and lock
onto mark and space with an RTTY demod. "R-Y" generators
were common in old 5-level days, even one-print-line "Fox Test"
generators. ???

Len Anderson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

from me on Jan. 6, 1998:

Dave Heil
Jan 6 1998, 12:00 am show options


No CW Test wrote:
Ok, let me requote, word for word, what you originally wrote:

about? FYI: I was handling the QSYs, opening and closings for a
government 75 baud circuit via CW from late '87 through late '89
from
Guinea-Bissau. Guess we didn't know CW was obsolete, huh?

Firstly, you didn't qualify "government." Since you call from a
Finnish server, have an OH2 (Finland) slash on your signature,
and Guinea-Bissau is an independent country, one needs
telepathy to accurately attach "US" in front of "government."
Secondly you wrote "75 baud circuit via CW..." which could be a
high-speed CW one as much as TTY; "baud" is the old rate name
in all telegraphy.

Len, you are perhaps the greatest picker of nits I've encountered in
ages. There aren't many 75 baud (100 wpm) CW circuits. Regarding the
Finnish server and /OH2 and my talk of Guinea-Bissau (or Sierra Leone
or
Botswana) I guess you assumed I'm some sort of commo mercenary, selling
my skills to the highest bidder. It doesn't really matter which
government in the end for purposes of comprehension, does it?

If this was a United States government link, that slow a rate sounds
suspicious considering that the military and State Department were
already starting to upgrade to 110 Baud (100 WPM) TTY in the
late 1960s. Commercial TTY users were doing the same at the
same time. Lots of older 60 WPM TTY machines were becoming
available as surplus by the mid-1970s, many being converted for
TDD use by hearing-impaired persons courtesy of many clubs of
ex-telephone-company-workers.

Yeah, that's it, Len. It was suspicious. I had some sinister purpose
in deliberately posting lies. Thanks for letting me know what the
State
Department (my agency) was using.

By the way, 45 baud equates to 60 wpm.

Now, I'll grant you that surplus telecomm equipment COULD have
gone into use in Guinea-Bissau considering that country subsists
largely on grant money from other nations and such aid is of minor
value. [the USA is contributing $2.5 million to them in proposed
1998 aid grants] It's difficult to envision a US government circuit
running that slow some 20 years after starting to upgrade to 100
WPM machinery.

Do your math homework regarding baud rates and we'll talk again and
please try to get over that difficulty in envisioning things. For
practice, try envisioning message traffic plus overhead for the
synchronous circuit. Throw in QRM, QRN, fading, multipath, etc.

Now we get a geography lesson from Len. It was a U.S. government
circuit, Len. It wasn't 75 baud CW; it was 75 baud RTTY with CW to
coordinate it.

There's LOTS of geographic, socio-political information available
on the Web, many site choices. ARRL publications don't carry
much of such information. Anyone with Web access can look them
up. As to "lessons," do you think everyone knows ALL the small
and emerging nations of the world?

No, I don't. Many amateurs I worked from J52US wanted to know what
part
of South America I was in. Again, it didn't really relate to my post.
I'm not certain why ARRL publications WOULD carry such information.
I'd
first turn to an atlas or a geography book. The only problem is that
you don't find much about digital data circuits in an atlas.

Why does an RTTY circuit (of any speed) need "CW to
coordinate it?" RTTY circuits have been used on HF since the
1930s without any extra CW circuit for "coordination."

How do you know that no cw cicuit was needed for coordination, Len?

It's a very
simple task to tune in an 170 to 850 Hz shift RTTY signal and lock
onto mark and space with an RTTY demod. "R-Y" generators
were common in old 5-level days, even one-print-line "Fox Test"
generators. ???

Here's a lesson for you, Len:

Synchronous circuits are not the same as async circuits. There's a
clocking factor thrown in to the equation. Not only that, there are
many, many, many such signals in designated portions of the bands. How
would you know which was the right one? Nobody constantly stands over
such a circuit which is pumping out traffic throughout the working day.
Let's say that propagation changes and you lose sync. You need a way
to
let the other station know where you'll be transmitting and where you'd
like him to transmit so that communication can be re-established.
That is accomplished via use of one of many CW guard frequencies.

When opening in the morning, you'd want to let the distant end know
that
you were ready to open and to state, again, where each of you should
be.
In sending a closure. You'd want to let him know your last sent and
received channel number and what time you'll reopen. Finally, though
equipment was redundant, there can be times when all of the RTTY
equipment is down. You'd need a way to let the distant end know that
you were down; why you were down, about how long you'd be down.

Len Anderson

Dave OH2/K8MN
downtown Helsinki
but not working for the Finnish Government

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
from me on Jan. 5, 1998:

Dave Heil
Jan 5 1998, 12:00 am show options


No CW Test wrote:
I would also ask what government was it that used
that circuit? The US government has been using encrypted
RTTY since at least the 60's and I'd question that
any USA government entity was still in a CW mode
as late as 1987.

You failed reading comprehension. My post stated that CW was used to
coordinate openings/closings, QSYs of an RTTY circuit.

Guinea-Bissau is a small, underdeveloped former Portuguese
colony of 1.1 million population just south of Senegal in West
Africa. They are listed as one of the poorest nations in the
world on several website reference sources. The country has
a per capita Gross Domestic Product of $235 (1995 estimate) and
less than 5000 telephones. I'm sure that ANY rapid
communications mode would be useful in such an environment,
even 75 Baud CW.

Len Anderson

Now we get a geography lesson from Len. It was a U.S. government
circuit, Len. It wasn't 75 baud CW; it was 75 baud RTTY with CW to
coordinate it.

Dave OH2/K8MN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

from Len Anderson on Jan. 8, 1998

No CW Test
Jan 8 1998, 12:00 am show options


Not being a tested high-speed telepath, it is difficult to comprehend
something NOT written. All any of us can do is read the actual
words written. Comprehension takes place on written words, not
the unwritten ones. You could have said "US circuit" or
identified that you were working for the US State Department, but
you did not do that until later...as in:

Yeah, that's it, Len. It was suspicious. I had some sinister purpose
in deliberately posting lies. Thanks for letting me know what the
State
Department (my agency) was using.
Do your math homework regarding baud rates and we'll talk again and
please try to get over that difficulty in envisioning things. For
practice, try envisioning message traffic plus overhead for the
synchronous circuit. Throw in QRM, QRN, fading, multipath, etc.

I broke into HF communications in the US Army Signal Corps at
Army station ADA in Tokyo, beginning in 1953. I realize that
primitive Army throughput of 220 to 240 thousand messages a
month, trans-Pacific to San Francisco, Seattle, Anchorage,
Honolulu, Guam, Manila, Okinawa, Pusan, and Seoul using 27
transmitters ranging from 1 to 40 KW output plus the then-
largest receiving site (shared with USAF) was not as good as
what State could accomplish. Since none of the circuits sending
nearly a quarter million messages a month were not CW, I have
little observation of CW nets.

Here's a lesson for you, Len:

Thank you, I'm always looking for new knowledge.

Synchronous circuits are not the same as async circuits. There's a
clocking factor thrown in to the equation. Not only that, there are
many, many, many such signals in designated portions of the bands.
How
would you know which was the right one? Nobody constantly stands over
such a circuit which is pumping out traffic throughout the working
day.
Let's say that propagation changes and you lose sync. You need a way
to
let the other station know where you'll be transmitting and where
you'd
like him to transmit so that communication can be re-established.
That is accomplished via use of one of many CW guard frequencies.

While I don't have many details of modern-day military signal
operations for Force XXI and the Digital Army, I can only draw
on texts and personal observations. According to NAVSHIPS
0967-255-0010 "Principles of Telegraphy (Teletypewriter)," June
1967, the difference between "synchronous" and "asynchronous"
is the absence/presence of start and stop bits. Since the old old
5-level TTYs at ADA always ran with start and stop bits, even
with the 4-loop time division multiplexers (Navy contract) on four
radio circuits, synchronous TTY is a stranger...I lept over that to
direct digital in industry. However, ADA never had any specific
problems with the propagation to Frisco, Honolulu, Seattle, or
Manila compared to the single-channel RTTY and SSB circuits.

At one end of the entire second floor of a converted warehouse
that housed the manual paper tape relay center was Control. It
was a largish room with acoustic insulation since the 200+ TTY
units (mostly chadless printer-punches and transmit distributor
racks) made a lot of noise. Control had eight handsets for the
first voice channel on each SSB circuit. Old Model 19s were
there as the teleprinter orderwires for non-voice circuits. There
were three loops for as many "Fox Test" generators always
running on the floor above in the Carrier room. If there was some
extreme problem to one circuit's location, there were work-arounds
through
other sites but those were not used as far
as I knew from a year at the Chou Kogyo relay center. If a
circuit was down, the printer made garble or sat idle; when it came
back up, printers synchronized themselves.

In modern Army communications, digital teleprinter circuits
synchronize themselves, even the ones that are encrypted. That
goes all the way down to manpack SINCGARS radios. No problem with
alleged
propagation variations affecting comm...it is
either there or not. Voice is the orderwire coordinator...or it is
another digital radio circuit. While CW "could" be used, it isn't
essential to "maintaining synchronization" any more than a voice
contact can "maintain synch."

Between Army service and later aerospace experience, I missed
the Model 28 era, even a lot of the Model 3x family except those
used as early computer terminals. Techniques could have
changed, of course, but teleprinters were fairly well established
in methods and principles at the end of the 1940s. Improvements
were external to the mechanisms such as the Navy MUX rack
(primitive, it used 7-pin miniature thyratrons as "memory
elements") which worked very well. Being all-manual, I missed
such improvements as the old AN/FGC-30 switcher not used at
ADA and could only view the many modern switchers/routers
used in today's Army. CW played NO role in maintenance of
the new or old signal centers...so it is difficult to imagine an
intermediary period where CW was essential to maintain circuits
as you described.

Finally, though
equipment was redundant, there can be times when all of the RTTY
equipment is down. You'd need a way to let the distant end know that
you were down; why you were down, about how long you'd be down.

In three years at ADA, there was only one period of about 4 to
5 hours when a Pacific area radio blackout happened. It had
been somewhat predicted but everyone, Army, Navy, USAF,
all knew when it occurred...and when it was expected to be back
up. Even CW could not get through such a situation...;-)

At all other times the 24-hour-a-day ORDERWIRES were there
to coordinate everything. No problem.

Len Anderson

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, Leonard, munch on the words. No boast or brag on my part.

If by trumping me, you meant that your word output exceeded mine, I
suppose you win. If you intended to trump me with facts, you failed
miserably. You weren't where I was. You weren't doing the job I was.
You quote scads of information on how the Army handled RTTY circuits
fifty years ago but not a single shred of information on how the U.S.
Department of State conducted AFRECONE communications.

In short, you were all wet then and you lied about the events now.

You know less of State Department communications than you know of
amateur radio. You were not and are not a part of either.

Any word on the mysterious "other" who was supposed to have "trumped"
me?

Dave K8MN