wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Wed,Apr 13 2005 1:16 am

wrote:
From: K4YZ on Apr 12, 6:04 am

I've provided names and callsigns of those who know
me, but you have NOT contacted them. Instead, you
MANUFACTURE some person at NADC that claims to know
me...a decade after I'd been there and a PhD to boot
but NOBODY (but you) knows the name.

Let's see....I "contact" some beer drinking buddy of yours who
you've already briefed on what to say and he'll tell me...what?

And The person I knew at NADC was an acquaintance of
mine...certainly no one who owed me any favor or would make up
something.

He has a REAL Doctorate in Electrical Engineering and HAS been
published. He has credentials that I trust. You don't.

You are getting way too deep in your psychosis.

Regardless of how much you "believe" the above to be
true, for the purposes of argument in here you must reveal
the name of that person or PUT IT AWAY. I was visiting NADC
34 years ago as an employee of RCA Corporation and stayed
there a total of three months. The former Naval Air
Development Center, NOT NAS Warminster across the road.
I had daily contact with only three NADC engineers in
that group and NONE of them would be "your acquaintence."

Your freedom of speech allows you to verbalize any statement you
care to make, Lennie.

Saying it does not make it true.

You were useless to them. Period. Now suck it up and move along,
old man! You ran your mouth off about all your hot jobs. You happened
to drop one name where I had an "in". I found you out.

Sucks to be you.

The only one "fortunate" was you, Lennie. But then I've had
several years of rubbing your nose in your lies, deceit and
mistruths
here to make up for it.

You are living in some fantasy again. Reset.

Reset yourself, old man. About 50 years worth.

Nothing lost for me. Lot's lost for you. Like any chance at
ever
being accepted for what you THINK you should be....

Tsk, tsk. The ONLY thing I've "lost" is thinking you
might be rational. I'm way too optimistic. You aren't
rational.

Sure I am.

That you try and redirect from YOUR misfortunes by making such
claims is ludicrous and transparent.

I had all the "proof" I need, Lennie.

A third party with no allegience to protect. A man with a
professional reputation that I can bank on.

You have BOGUS "proof." Non-existant. That "acquaintence"
doesn't exist. You made him up.

Nope.

What I TRULY know is that YOU find it hard to believe that there
really are people in the world who didn't develop a life-long devotion
to your wisdom, knowledge and skill.

He didn't know you "a decade after (you were) there". He knew
you
WHEN you were there.

And I do not name him because I protect his privacy at his
request.

1. You can't name him because he doesn't exist.

I WON'T name him becasue I promised.

2. The ONLY thing you are protecting is your own
bragging LIE about that fantasy individual.

That is not a truthful statement. And no matter how many more
times you repeat it, Lennie, it STILL will NOT be true.

3. "Protecting privacy" is totally bogus. Rationalization
expressed to attempt masking your own LIE.

No rationalization. A promise to a friend.

I have no reason to doubt his assessment or opinion.

You probably believe your own fantasy. To you it is
"truth." To everyone else it is just your fantasy.

Again, Lennie, you may repeate that over and over if you think it
will salve your ego...But the bottom line is that people at NADC did
not find you very effective.

There is nothing "rational" about adult males repeatedly and
adamandtly lying in public, Lennie. but the two of you keep doing
it.

Then you are your own worst enemy since you are describing
YOURSELF.

Nope.

The only way you can clear your LYING is to name this
supposed person in order to actually prove something.
Your "word" that he exists is also bogus. He doesn't
exist anywhere except in your own psychotic imagination.
Your "word" is therefore meaningless.

My "word" is bogus to YOU since claiming it is so is the ONLY way
you have of escaping the fact that you ran your mouth off one time too
many.

Provide this "name." Without it you have a bogus
"reference" that means nothing.

Here's a name that is bogus and means nothing: Leonard H.
Anderson.

You are SICK and need help. Go get some.

I am quite well, thank you. You, on the otherhand, still have
issues to deal with. Accepting that not everyone thinks you're the
genius and expert YOU think you are is one of them.

You're outted, Lennie. Get over it.

Steve, K4YZ

From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:40 am

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Wed,Apr 13 2005 1:16 am
wrote:
From: K4YZ on Apr 12, 6:04 am

Regardless of how much you "believe" the above to be
true, for the purposes of argument in here you must reveal
the name of that person or PUT IT AWAY. I was visiting NADC
34 years ago as an employee of RCA Corporation and stayed
there a total of three months. The former Naval Air
Development Center, NOT NAS Warminster across the road.
I had daily contact with only three NADC engineers in
that group and NONE of them would be "your acquaintence."

Your freedom of speech allows you to verbalize any statement you
care to make, Lennie.

Saying it does not make it true.

You were useless to them. Period.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You don't know anything about what took
place on three successive R&D jobs where NADC was the test
agency for evaluation of SECANT (the RCA acronym for the
anti-collision system back then).

At NO time was I doing anything "for" NADC. NADC was the
federal test agency for that project and a similar one of
Minneapolis-Honeywell. My employer was RCA and that remained
so until 1975. As a field engineer I was representing RCA
for technical support of RCA equipment under test. NADC had
the aircraft and air crews available in 1971 and were directed
by Naval Air System Command to perform the testing of RCA's
and Minny-Honey's systems. USN was requested by the U.S.
government to do the testing (as a disinterested third-
party) and the USN passed that to Systems who passed it to
NADC.

SECANT (SEparation and Control of Aircraft by Non-
synchronous Techniques) performed well on the air-to-air
testing, as did the Minneapolis-Honeywell system. The data
acquisition and data-reduction by NADC was deemed costly (to
NADC) so that group was directed to employ tape-recording
of data instead of using the old-style (at the time) of
phototheater recording on synchronized motion-picure film.
The government and USN suggested some slight alterations in
threat logic used to provide avoidance manuever warnings as
well and both corporations agreed to do a second generation
of collision avoidance equipment to be tested in 1973. This
generation included bring-outs of signals and logic states
to be tape-recorded in a multi-channel tape unit. That
second generation equipment was successfully flight-tested
but I was spared having to be the on-site field engineer.
I did participate in some of the design on that generation
and did work with the principal NADC engineering crew that
visited Van Nuys (twice) before 2nd gen testing began.

Based on the results of that 2nd gen flight test, RCA was
requested to and awarded a contract for a third generation,
this time representing a "preproduction" airborne version.
A "prepro" is as close as can be to a final production
prototype and includes as many specialized circuits as
would be considered for a production model. That was done
by mid-1975 and I was responsible for the 8-channel (pulse)
receiver, front-end to video out (1.6 GHz RF band then) plus
co-designer of the (non-flyable) checkout set which presented
simulated air-traffic signals to evaluate crowded conditions.
Jim Hall, KD6JG, was immediate group manager and Al Walston,
W6MJN, was both my office cubicle sharer and the designer on
the transmitter (pulse) portion. Packaging shrunk from 3
full-ATR cases of generation 1 to the quarter-ATR single-case
of the 3rd generation. Three 3rd generation SECANTs were
done and checked out, ready for shipment to PA, when the
U.S. government (likely through FAA) canceled any further
work or testing on a new aircraft anti-collision system.
The government decided on adopting a relatively untried
hodge-podge system devised by MIT which supposedly fit
inside the RF spectrum of present-day ATCRBS frequencies.

Now suck it up and move along,
old man! You ran your mouth off about all your hot jobs.

Wasn't a "hot" job. Was an everyday kind of design job.

It was "hot" only in the SAW filters used to make it
possible to have "brick-wall" response matched filters
in a terribly small size in the 50 to 65 MHz region.
RCA corporate back east funded one of the labs there to
do the design and aluminum deposition on quartz plates
(first time I ever put a purchase order in on BLANK
quartz...kind of a novelty). In 1974 that was truly
state of the art. Once they were shipped in to Van Nuys
I had to mount them on something...RTV on epoxy PCB with
compression-bonding wires connecting aluminum film
contact ends to PCB lands. Luckily, Van Nuys had a
good thin-film lab at the time. Skirt response on the
filters was (to me) unbelievable...50 db drop in less
than 100 KHz at the edges, very nearly flat across the
top in the mid-VHF range.

You happened
to drop one name where I had an "in". I found you out.

Steve Robeson was *NEVER* "in" on either the RCA or
Minneapolis-Honeywell aircraft anti-collision systems.
Steve Robeson wan't even AT NADC in 1971 to 1975. He
was a jarhead who never got beyond Warminster NAS on
the other side of the road A DECADE LATER.


You are living in some fantasy again. Reset.

Reset yourself, old man. About 50 years worth.

No, just two hours worth...had a good sandwich for lunch
and it tasted like more. I'll settle for another cup of
coffee, though. :-)

Tsk. I have a copy of the FINAL report on SECANT. I
helped write it (name is on the cover). NOWHERE in there
is any mention of any "Steve Robeson" as part of the
government personnel at NADC. The document identifier is
VNES-74-TR-001 and was then marked "company confidential."
It's somewhere in the General Electric archives now.
Considering it is 31 years later, I doubt that presence
of the revealed document number is going to hurt the
RCA Corporation. :-)


That you try and redirect from YOUR misfortunes by making such
claims is ludicrous and transparent.

Tsk. Lil Stevie can't name detail one on what went down
at NADC, has NO knowledge of the SECANT or Minny-Honey
System testing. You can't even name the military aircraft
at the NAS or which ones were used for anti-collision
testing. [one was shared with NAVSTAR...which would later
become GPSS...:-) ] Tsk, tsk, tsk.


I had all the "proof" I need, Lennie.

A third party with no allegience to protect. A man with a
professional reputation that I can bank on.

You have BOGUS "proof." Non-existant. That "acquaintence"
doesn't exist. You made him up.

Nope.

What I TRULY know is that YOU find it hard to believe that there
really are people in the world who didn't develop a life-long devotion
to your wisdom, knowledge and skill.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-) The only person "devoted to me" is my
wife...as I am devoted to her. Nothing else is requested in
life. The only "credential" needed is that marriage
certificate. :-)

He didn't know you "a decade after (you were) there". He knew
you
WHEN you were there.

Amazing. After a total of six trips to NADC and a total
time there of about three months, this (fantasy) person
"knows" me? 34 years AFTER the fact?!? :-)

Incredulosity uber alles! :-)


And I do not name him because I protect his privacy at his
request.

1. You can't name him because he doesn't exist.

I WON'T name him becasue I promised.

Total BULL****, bluffmeister! :-)


2. The ONLY thing you are protecting is your own
bragging LIE about that fantasy individual.

That is not a truthful statement. And no matter how many more
times you repeat it, Lennie, it STILL will NOT be true.

Sweetums, NOBODY can "prove" the non-existance of a
non-existant entity. NOBODY. :-)

All you have is a BLUFF. A LIE. :-)

3. "Protecting privacy" is totally bogus. Rationalization
expressed to attempt masking your own LIE.

No rationalization. A promise to a friend.

QUIT bull****ting us, Little Big Man. You tried a BLUFF.
You CANNOT BACK IT UP. :-)

Name the department this (fantasy) "friend" worked in at
NADC. Name some DETAILS that ONLY an NADC worker would
know. You have NOT revealed a thing.

I have no reason to doubt his assessment or opinion.

You probably believe your own fantasy. To you it is
"truth." To everyone else it is just your fantasy.

Again, Lennie, you may repeate that over and over if you think it
will salve your ego...But the bottom line is that people at NADC did
not find you very effective.

No problem! I WILL "repeate" it (better, I'll just repeat
it) that I could care less how "that [sic] people at NADC
did not find..." I never worked for NADC, never worked for
the USN as a civilian, never even applied for any job at
NADC. :-) I was an employee of RCA Corporation at the time
and REMAINED an employee until the RCA shut-down of the Van
Nuys, CA, Electromagnetic and Aviation Systems Division's
Position Locating Systems Group in November, 1975.

My "word" is bogus to YOU since claiming it is so is the ONLY way
you have of escaping the fact that you ran your mouth off one time too
many.

Your "word" is bogus. Period. You can't name a thing about
that (fantasy) "reference" individual...not a thing about
what went on at NADC in 1971-1975, not a thing about any
other projects under Naval Air Systems Command then.

You are FABRICATING a falsity. You have NO references
except what I reveal. YOU can't describe a damn thing
except your bogus "outrage" at "not being believed." :-)

Provide this "name." Without it you have a bogus
"reference" that means nothing.

Here's a name that is bogus and means nothing: Leonard H.
Anderson.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Emotionalism and name-calling.

Not to worry. Your buddies Jimmie Miccolis and Davie Heil
will support you. PCTA extra Double Standard MUST be
operative to you and them! :-)

You are SICK and need help. Go get some.

I am quite well, thank you. You, on the otherhand, still have
issues to deal with.

No "issues to deal with." Haven't submitted any
manuscripts to any publications having "issues" in the
last year. Not expecting any proofs on those. :-)

Accepting that not everyone thinks you're the
genius and expert YOU think you are is one of them.

Poor baby. Getting all petulant and snoddy again?

I COULD CARE LESS. :-)

Electrons, fields and waves don't much care for human
emotions like "love" or "personal desire." One works
by THEIR laws, not yours, not by somebody else's ideas.

Similarly, when trying to "prove" someone "wrong," you
have to REALLY PROVE them by REAL references, details,
information, VERIFIABLE sources. Trying to use some
unspecified, unnamed imaginary person is just bluffing
BULL****. Quit doing that. You will be better off
doing so.

You're outted, Lennie. Get over it.

Tsk. I was out this morning. Nice day. Still is.
Tomorrow will be a repeat of that. I will not "get
over it," since I like that kind of weather. :-)

Let me just repeat what your buddie Jimmie Miccolis
used to write in he "It ain't bragging if ya done
it!" Okay, I did it.

Not only that, I KNOW what was done and have valid
references as to what I did there. Not a problem to me.
Seems to be a helluva problem to you, though, and you
have your psychotic imagination in afterburner and you
can't get off the ground. Tsk, tsk.

Get some mental help. You need it.

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:40 am

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Wed,Apr 13 2005 1:16 am
wrote:
From: K4YZ on Apr 12, 6:04 am

Regardless of how much you "believe" the above to be
true, for the purposes of argument in here you must reveal
the name of that person or PUT IT AWAY. I was visiting NADC
34 years ago as an employee of RCA Corporation and stayed
there a total of three months. The former Naval Air
Development Center, NOT NAS Warminster across the road.
I had daily contact with only three NADC engineers in
that group and NONE of them would be "your acquaintence."

Your freedom of speech allows you to verbalize any statement
you
care to make, Lennie.

Saying it does not make it true.

You were useless to them. Period.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You don't know anything about what took
place on three successive R&D jobs where NADC was the test
agency for evaluation of SECANT (the RCA acronym for the
anti-collision system back then).

It doesn't matter, Lennie. I know what happened on ONE of them.

At NO time was I doing anything "for" NADC...(SNIP)

But you were there and your performance was lackluster.

You got a bad "fit rep". Oh well. We can't all be "100%" 100% of
the time. Deal with it.

One of my first fitreps in the Corps was less than what it could
have been. Not bad, but certainly a wake-up call. I took my
"spanking", did what I needed to do to correct the shortcomings, and
moved on. No big deal.

SECANT (SEparation and Control of Aircraft by Non-
synchronous Techniques) performed well...(SNIP

Has nothing to do with Amateur Radio policy or that you were
deemed less than adequate at NADC.

Based on the results of that 2nd gen flight test...(SNIP)

Twenty one lines of non-relevent story telling.

Now suck it up and move along,
old man! You ran your mouth off about all your hot jobs.

Wasn't a "hot" job. Was an everyday kind of design job.

One you didn't do well at. Oh well.

It was "hot" only in the SAW filters...(SNIP)

Great. Ohhhhhhhhhhh...Ahhhhhhhhhhhh....Stuff that extend's an
engineer's slide rule, I am sure.

Of no relevence to Amateur Radio policy at ANY level or you
behaviour herein.


You happened
to drop one name where I had an "in". I found you out.

Steve Robeson was *NEVER* "in" on either the RCA or
Minneapolis-Honeywell aircraft anti-collision systems.
Steve Robeson wan't even AT NADC in 1971 to 1975. He
was a jarhead who never got beyond Warminster NAS on
the other side of the road A DECADE LATER.

Nope...wasn't in those programs.

I did have an "in" with a gentleman who was, however.

Outted you nicely.

You are living in some fantasy again. Reset.

Reset yourself, old man. About 50 years worth.

No, just two hours worth...had a good sandwich for lunch
and it tasted like more. I'll settle for another cup of
coffee, though.

Perhaps all that coffee is your undoing, Lennie.

At your age more thyan one cup a day is a sure bet for premature
cardiac demise.

Tsk. I have a copy of the FINAL report on SECANT...(SNIP)

I am sure the Anderson household is ripe with files of old
projects that have absolutely nothing to do with Amateur Radio.

Fifteen more lines of non-relevent stuff snipped for brevity.

That you try and redirect from YOUR misfortunes by making such
claims is ludicrous and transparent.

Tsk. Lil Stevie can't name detail one on what went down
at NADC, has NO knowledge of the SECANT or Minny-Honey
System testing. You can't even name the military aircraft
at the NAS or which ones were used for anti-collision
testing. [one was shared with NAVSTAR...which would later
become GPSS...:-) ] Tsk, tsk, tsk.

And not a bit of it relvent to the fact that Leonard H. Anderson
was at NADC, was a less than stellar performer, and when I asked around
about him, I got a "hit"...

I've not once "challenged" that any of that occured at NADC, nor
have I "challenged" that you were there. I KNOW you were there,
Lennie.

What I TRULY know is that YOU find it hard to believe that
there
really are people in the world who didn't develop a life-long
devotion
to your wisdom, knowledge and skill.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-) The only person "devoted to me" is my
wife...as I am devoted to her. Nothing else is requested in
life. The only "credential" needed is that marriage
certificate.

A marriage certificat is NO guarnatee of devotion, Lennie. It was
only legal permission for the two of you to get maried.

An old high school acquaintence of mine has been "cohabitating"
with his high school sweetheart for over 25 years now. No marriage.
They are as devoted as any couple I've ever known.

He didn't know you "a decade after (you were) there". He
knew
you
WHEN you were there.

Amazing. After a total of six trips to NADC and a total
time there of about three months, this (fantasy) person
"knows" me? 34 years AFTER the fact?!?

Actaully at the time I found you out it was only 20-some years,
and no, he didn't "know" you off the top of his head. He did some
research, however, on contractors who had been there.

You were there. You weren't the best "engineer" in their
estimation.

I WON'T name him becasue I promised.

Total BULL####, bluffmeister!

No "BS", Lennie....I won't name him. No bluff intended.

2. The ONLY thing you are protecting is your own
bragging LIE about that fantasy individual.

That is not a truthful statement. And no matter how many more
times you repeat it, Lennie, it STILL will NOT be true.

Sweetums, NOBODY can "prove" the non-existance of a
non-existant entity. NOBODY.

Who's "sweetums"...?!?!

All you have is a BLUFF. A LIE.

Nope.

3. "Protecting privacy" is totally bogus. Rationalization
expressed to attempt masking your own LIE.

No rationalization. A promise to a friend.

QUIT bull####ting us, Little Big Man. You tried a BLUFF.
You CANNOT BACK IT UP.

Name the department this (fantasy) "friend" worked in at
NADC. Name some DETAILS that ONLY an NADC worker would
know. You have NOT revealed a thing.

I have revealed that you were less than spectacular at atleast ONE
of your "jobs".

And there will be no further "details" forthcomimg. You can't
squeal and whine all you like, Lennie, but just like your promises to
us, that's all you'll get from me on this subject.

I have no reason to doubt his assessment or opinion.

You probably believe your own fantasy. To you it is
"truth." To everyone else it is just your fantasy.

Again, Lennie, you may repeate that over and over if you think
it
will salve your ego...But the bottom line is that people at NADC did
not find you very effective.

No problem! I WILL "repeate" it (better, I'll just repeat
it) that I could care less how "that [sic] people at NADC
did not find..." I never worked for NADC, never worked for
the USN as a civilian, never even applied for any job at
NADC. I was an employee of RCA Corporation at the time
and REMAINED an employee until the RCA shut-down of the Van
Nuys, CA, Electromagnetic and Aviation Systems Division's
Position Locating Systems Group in November, 1975.

And the people at NADC that had to evaluate the performace of the
contract weren't impressed with YOU, Lennie.

Rant all you care to. It really is THAT simple.

My "word" is bogus to YOU since claiming it is so is the ONLY
way
you have of escaping the fact that you ran your mouth off one time
too
many.

Your "word" is bogus. Period. You can't name a thing about
that (fantasy) "reference" individual...not a thing about
what went on at NADC in 1971-1975, not a thing about any
other projects under Naval Air Systems Command then.

And I could care less about them, Lennie.

I inquired about YOU, and YOU are what I got answers about.

You are FABRICATING a falsity.

Nope.

You have NO reference except what I reveal.

Your "refrences" where what lead me to find out what I did.
Thanks.

YOU can't describe a damn thing
except your bogus "outrage" at "not being believed."

Oh, Lennie, I am farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr from "outraged"! YOU, old
man, are the one with the outrage issues!. To the tune of thousands of
lines of irrelevent rhetoric over the last several years meant only to
blunt the damage of what I discovered.

Too late! Shudda kept your mouth shut!

Provide this "name." Without it you have a bogus
"reference" that means nothing.

Here's a name that is bogus and means nothing: Leonard H.
Anderson.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Emotionalism and name-calling.

Nope. Fact. Established by YOUR track record of lying, deceit,
misconduct and dishonesty.

Not to worry. Your buddies Jimmie Miccolis and Davie Heil
will support you. PCTA extra Double Standard MUST be
operative to you and them!

"Jimmie" Miccolis? Jim has a little son? Whether or not N2EY or
K8MN "support" me is also irrelevent. I know what I know because YOU
shot your mouth off and I just happened to know someone in a postion to
verify it.

You are SICK and need help. Go get some.

I am quite well, thank you. You, on the otherhand, still have
issues to deal with.

No "issues to deal with." Haven't submitted any
manuscripts to any publications having "issues" in the
last year. Not expecting any proofs on those.

How can you expect a "proof" on something that doesn't exist?

On the otherhand, the foregoing rant and spin-doctoring you just
hit us with IS evidence of your "issues" with your own condcut.

Accepting that not everyone thinks you're the
genius and expert YOU think you are is one of them.

Poor baby. Getting all petulant and snoddy again?

I COULD CARE LESS.

Liar, liar, pants on fire! Several YEARS worth of YOUR rantings
reveal otherwise!

You're outted, Lennie. Get over it.

Tsk. I was out this morning. Nice day. Still is.
Tomorrow will be a repeat of that. I will not "get
over it," since I like that kind of weather. :-)

Let me just repeat what your buddie Jimmie Miccolis
used to write in he "It ain't bragging if ya done
it!" Okay, I did it.

Not only that, I KNOW what was done and have valid
references as to what I did there. Not a problem to me.
Seems to be a helluva problem to you, though, and you
have your psychotic imagination in afterburner and you
can't get off the ground. Tsk, tsk.

Get some mental help. You need it.

No, I don't. You, on the otherhand, have honesty issues to get
straightened out. Still.



Still The Putz Today That You Were Yesterday And Will Be Tomorrow.

Steve, K4YZ

From: "K4YZ" on Fri,Apr 15 2005 12:15 am

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:40 am


Tsk, tsk, tsk. You don't know anything about what took
place on three successive R&D jobs where NADC was the test
agency for evaluation of SECANT (the RCA acronym for the
anti-collision system back then).

It doesn't matter, Lennie. I know what happened on ONE of them.

You know NOTHING. :-)

All you do in here is try to demean and denigrate others
who HAVE some experience in radio...especially those
who have done MORE than you ever have. Tsk.

At NO time was I doing anything "for" NADC...(SNIP)

But you were there and your performance was lackluster.

You got a bad "fit rep". Oh well. We can't all be "100%" 100%
of
the time. Deal with it.

Tsk. You have NO frame of reference in trying to compare
industry with your personal experience in the military.

To reiterate - because you can't understand how industry
works - I was NOT EVER an employee of the USN and NOT
EVER at NADC. I was an employee of RCA Corporation then
and remained so until 1975. At NO TIME did any NADC
people do any performance reviews of my work. They
couldn't. I was NOT an employee there. :-)

Industry doesn't have "fitreps" as you call them. They
are called performance reviews and are periodic, the
period of review times dependent on local corporate
policy. [see any Personnel department...or "Human
Resources" - same thing under a new buzzword]

One of my first fitreps in the Corps was less than what it could
have been. Not bad, but certainly a wake-up call. I took my
"spanking", did what I needed to do to correct the shortcomings, and
moved on. No big deal.

The electronics industry is NOT "the corps." :-)

I've not had a bad performance review in my whole
career in southern California aerospace. That career
started in 1956. Not anywhere close to what you
think deserves a "spanking." :-)

The only "wake-up calls" I've had were from
operators at motels and hotels I was staying at
while on field trips for my employers. :-)

SECANT (SEparation and Control of Aircraft by Non-
synchronous Techniques) performed well...(SNIP

Has nothing to do with Amateur Radio policy or that you were
deemed less than adequate at NADC.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Still trying to spin your undetailed
yarn of "less than adequate" performance at NADC?

Idiot. I was never employed by NADC. I was never
employed by the USN in any capacity. No part of
the USN ever rated me for any "performance review"
and certainly not a "fitrep" a la the murines. :-)

You are still trying a snow job on everyone in a
vague effort to cover up your original LIE. Tsk.

The ONLY way you can right your terrible wrong is
to give enough detail into what was actually done
while I was at NADC as "contractor personnel,"
aka field engineer. You can't do that. You have
NO real information to base your personal attack,
don't know how contracts are carried out, have NO
idea what this particular project was about (even
if explained in detail to you), have NO
understanding of research and development with
Department of Defense contractural procedures.

Based on the results of that 2nd gen flight test...(SNIP)

Twenty one lines of non-relevent story telling.

Tsk. VERY relevant and necessary to counter all
your pitiful little LIES told about others.

Now suck it up and move along,
old man! You ran your mouth off about all your hot jobs.

Wasn't a "hot" job. Was an everyday kind of design job.

One you didn't do well at. Oh well.

Tsk, tsk. You have NO idea of what was involved,
don't understand the technology, don't understand
the way contracts are performed, don't understand
the way individual performance is rated by the
electronics industry.

As I said, I've had NO bad performance reviews in
the aerospace industry. [research that all you
want...if you say you "found" something, then that
would be FALSE, a LIE]

Proof of performance is that equipment works
according to pre-established specifications. In
the case of Research and Development contracts,
test data may turn up some need to change the
original specifications (not unusual). Such
changes may be instituted by the contractee (or
testing agency assigned by contractee) or the
contractor. In the case of the first generation
SECANT, the testing agency (NADC) found that
their data recording methods (phototheater) was
inadequate. That was solved on the second
generation by incorporating a multi-channel tape
recorder formatted for the on-site NADC computer
(can your mythical "reference" name that main-
frame computer, hmmm?). That condition applied
to the Minneapolis-Honeywell collision avoidance
system also under test (separate contract).


It was "hot" only in the SAW filters...(SNIP)

Great. Ohhhhhhhhhhh...Ahhhhhhhhhhhh....Stuff that extend's an
engineer's slide rule, I am sure.

Tsk. Improper use of pluralities. :-)

"SAW" is an acronym for Surface Acoustic Wave. Those
are frequency-domain filters using the phenomena of
very ultrasonic wave propagation on surface of
piezo-electric material such as quartz or lithium
niobate. Interdigital SAW filters can be made
with extreme sharpness of skirt selectivity at the
passband edges. As such they make ideal "matched"
filters; i.e., their passband is equivalent to the
reciprocal of a pulse width...resulting in an RF
envelope output shape close to a cosine-squared
(very low harmonic content) waveform. SAW filters
are common as "roofing filters" or the very first
filter of multiple-conversion receivers. You will
find SAW filters in common use in cell phones due
to their very small size...as well as cell site
terminal equipment...and now TV receivers,
especially those for DTV. In 1974 SAW filter use
was "cutting edge" technology, especially in the
mid-VHF frequency range. 31 years later it is
rather common and Murata (among many makers) have
produced hundreds of thousands of SAW filters on
lithium niobate substrates.

Of no relevence to Amateur Radio policy at ANY level or you
behaviour herein.

"Behaviour?" :-)

Since when has YOUR name-calling, denigrations, and
attempts at defamation of character ever concerned
"amateur radio policy?" Tsk, tsk, tsk.

You happened
to drop one name where I had an "in". I found you out.

Steve Robeson was *NEVER* "in" on either the RCA or
Minneapolis-Honeywell aircraft anti-collision systems.
Steve Robeson wan't even AT NADC in 1971 to 1975. He
was a jarhead who never got beyond Warminster NAS on
the other side of the road A DECADE LATER.

Nope...wasn't in those programs.

I did have an "in" with a gentleman who was, however.

Outted you nicely.

An "in?" Tsk. You've been talking to YOURSELF, busy
telling your various personalities tall tales.

You are so far OUT you couldn't get "in" anything
but your own sociopathic psychotic activity of
constantly trying to denigrate ANYONE who opposes
you in any way. You keep compounding your own LIES.

You can NOT produce any DETAIL at all of what I was
doing at NADC or even whatever I did at any time in
my career in electronics design engineering. You
haven't a clue as to what is done in industry on a
regular basis. You can't describe NADC or Warminster
NAS across the street, you can't describe how one
crosses that road, the shape of the NADC buildings,
their special NASA astronaut test facilities (only
one), any of the broadband HF radio antennas outside,
the fact that the original building and airfield was
constructed for Brewster Aircraft (the only aircraft
corporation known to go bankrupt DURING WW2), or the
curious taxiway from ramp area to runway at the NAS.
You can't name anything about the NADC computer
center, can't identify the curious little tracks
on part of the ground floor buildings that were at
NADC, don't understand that the NAS was all-Navy but
NADC was largely civilian. You can't describe the
cafeteria at NADC or the "O club" right above it nor
the various little offices that can serve both NADC
and contractor personnel, can't describe their
internal police arrangement, or even their playing
of reveille at an unusual time.

All you can say is that you "knew somebody" there
who "gave me a bad fitrep" and said I did "lackluster"
work for NADC. You LIE and compound that LIE.


Tsk. I have a copy of the FINAL report on SECANT...(SNIP)

I am sure the Anderson household is ripe with files of old
projects that have absolutely nothing to do with Amateur Radio.

The proper word is "rife." Yes, I have enough from a half
century of working IN electronics and radio, but a small
part of it DOES have to do with hobby electronics (such
as amateur radio. I converted a spare 3rd bedroom into an
office/library for my wife and myself years ago...in the
southern house (not the northern one in WA)...one 13-foot
wall has three rows of bookshelves (and that isn't enough).


And not a bit of it relvent to the fact that Leonard H. Anderson
was at NADC, was a less than stellar performer, and when I asked
around
about him, I got a "hit"...

You got ****. Bad word or not, that describes what you do
to EVERYONE who disagrees with you. You **** on their
person, defecating on them verbally in a momentous
display of your rage and hatred if they so much as say
anything negative against you. All you do is practice
sociopathic verbal defecation.


And the people at NADC that had to evaluate the performace of the
contract weren't impressed with YOU, Lennie.

Idiot. A TESTING AGENCY "evaluates the performance" of
the TEST. It doesn't "evaluate contractor personnel."

For the last time: "Contractor personnel" do NOT work
FOR any federal test agency. They work FOR their
employer. Employers do the performance reviews of their
employees. If a contractor's employee does not perform
as they are required to do, the contractor removes them.
I've NEVER been removed for such a reason. I've never
been removed from a field test location for ANY reason.

You have to TRY and stop ****TING on people you don't
like. It isn't productive, it isn't civil, it isn't
according to The Amateur's Code.

All you've done so far is to dig yourself deeper into
your original LIE. You have NO proof. You can't
supply ANY details. You have so many misunderstandings
about defense contracts and procedure that it shows you
are totally BOGUS in all that ****TING on others.

You are SICK. You have diss-temper. You need a vet...
a veterinarian...or something. GET HELP for yourself.

wrote:


You can NOT produce any DETAIL at all of what I was
doing at NADC or even whatever I did at any time in
my career in electronics design engineering. You
haven't a clue as to what is done in industry on a
regular basis. You can't describe NADC or Warminster
NAS across the street, you can't describe how one
crosses that road, the shape of the NADC buildings,
their special NASA astronaut test facilities (only
one), any of the broadband HF radio antennas outside,
the fact that the original building and airfield was
constructed for Brewster Aircraft (the only aircraft
corporation known to go bankrupt DURING WW2), or the
curious taxiway from ramp area to runway at the NAS.
You can't name anything about the NADC computer
center, can't identify the curious little tracks
on part of the ground floor buildings that were at
NADC, don't understand that the NAS was all-Navy but
NADC was largely civilian. You can't describe the
cafeteria at NADC or the "O club" right above it nor
the various little offices that can serve both NADC
and contractor personnel, can't describe their
internal police arrangement, or even their playing
of reveille at an unusual time.

Just as an aside, Leonard, would it be possible for you to come up with
any details about my work overseas at U.S. Embassies in Helsinki,
Finland;
Bissau, Guinea-Bissau; Freetown, Sierra Leone; Gaborone, Botswana or Dar
es Salaam, Tanzania? Could you describe just one of the embassies or
one of the comm centers in any one of them? Would you be able to
outline what my typical day might entail or what equipment I used?

Would you be able to do the same for my Air Force tour in Vietnam?

The proper word is "rife." Yes, I have enough from a half
century of working IN electronics and radio, but a small
part of it DOES have to do with hobby electronics (such
as amateur radio.

Such as amateur radio--but not actually amateur radio.


"All you do in here is try to demean and denigrate others
who HAVE some experience in radio...especially those
who have done MORE than you ever have. Tsk."

--Leonard H. Anderson

"Since when has YOUR name-calling, denigrations, and
attempts at defamation of character ever concerned
'amateur radio policy?' Tsk, tsk, tsk."

--Leonard H. Anderson

You got SH*T. Bad word or not, that describes what you do
to EVERYONE who disagrees with you. You SH*T on their
person, defecating on them verbally in a momentous
display of your rage and hatred if they so much as say
anything negative against you. All you do is practice
sociopathic verbal defecation.

--Leonard H. Anderson


These are priceless, Len and I have no doubt that you'll be seeing them
again. You've succeeded in describing your own behavior.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Fri,Apr 15 2005 12:15 am

wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Thurs,Apr 14 2005 2:40 am


Tsk, tsk, tsk. You don't know anything about what took
place on three successive R&D jobs where NADC was the test
agency for evaluation of SECANT (the RCA acronym for the
anti-collision system back then).

It doesn't matter, Lennie. I know what happened on ONE of
them.

You know NOTHING.

I know enough about you, Lennie.

All you do in here is try to demean and denigrate others
who HAVE some experience in radio...especially those
who have done MORE than you ever have. Tsk.

At NO time was I doing anything "for" NADC...(SNIP)

But you were there and your performance was lackluster.

You got a bad "fit rep". Oh well. We can't all be "100%" 100%
of
the time. Deal with it.

Tsk. You have NO frame of reference in trying to compare
industry with your personal experience in the military.

To reiterate - because you can't understand how industry
works - I was NOT EVER an employee of the USN and NOT
EVER at NADC. I was an employee of RCA Corporation then
and remained so until 1975. At NO TIME did any NADC
people do any performance reviews of my work. They
couldn't. I was NOT an employee there.

Then your ignorance exceeds your arrogance, Lennie, becasue
SOMEone sure put pen to paper.

Huge snip of usual dodging and spinning behind volumes of
pontification and self-righteous indignation.


And not a bit of it relvent to the fact that Leonard H.
Anderson
was at NADC, was a less than stellar performer, and when I asked
around
about him, I got a "hit"...

You got ####. Bad word or not, that describes what you do
to EVERYONE who disagrees with you. You #### on their
person, defecating on them verbally in a momentous
display of your rage and hatred if they so much as say
anything negative against you. All you do is practice
sociopathic verbal defecation.

Lennie, if you'd stop doing the very same thing in THIS forum
under the guise of your self-conceptualized superior intellect and
breeding, people would stop doing it to you.

You ran your mouth off. I was able to do a bit of research and
came up with the money card. Sucks to be you.

No matter how much you scream, how many profanities you peel off,
and how you try to bog down the basics with technical dissertations
that have NOTHING to do with the underlying comments, you'll still be
you and no one really cares about you or your anti/hate Amateur Radio
rantings.

And the people at NADC that had to evaluate the performace of
the
contract weren't impressed with YOU, Lennie.

Idiot. A TESTING AGENCY "evaluates the performance" of
the TEST. It doesn't "evaluate contractor personnel."

If yuo don't do the job they expect of you, yes, they put things
in writting.

For the last time: ...(SNIP)

You never do ANYTHING for "the last time".

As a matter of fact, you haven't done ANY of the things you said
you'd do in this forum. So WHY do you think any of your screaming,
foot stomping, profantities and insults will change anyone's mind,
Lennie...?!?!

You have to TRY and stop ####TING on people you don't
like. It isn't productive, it isn't civil, it isn't
according to The Amateur's Code.

YOY are the very epitome of "not productive", Lennie.

All you've done so far is to dig yourself deeper into
your original LIE. You have NO proof. You can't
supply ANY details. You have so many misunderstandings
about defense contracts and procedure that it shows you
are totally BOGUS in all that ####TING on others.

It's not bogus.

Call it whatever you want, Lennie. It doesn't change anything.

You are SICK.

Nope. I'm doing quite well, actually.

You have diss-temper. You need a vet...
a veterinarian...or something. GET HELP for yourself.

Take your own advice, Anderson. Before you lacerate your
fingertips banging on the keyboard like that......

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

Amazing. After a total of six trips to NADC and a total
time there of about three months, this (fantasy) person
"knows" me? 34 years AFTER the fact?!?

Actaully at the time I found you out it was only 20-some years,
and no, he didn't "know" you off the top of his head. He did some
research, however, on contractors who had been there.

Inneresting. The difference between 34 years after the fact and 20
years is ~14 years. And Steve claims he hasn't been on RRAP even a
decade. So somehow, more than 4 years before Steve was on RRAP and
ever heard of Len, he was having a conversation with a former colleague
of Lens, discussing Len's performance reports.

"Captain, I find it Quiteillogical" Spock

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's? Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and #17?

bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's? Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Now...what about those "unlicensed devices"...?!?!?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's?
Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Neither, but nice try.

Steve, you lied. The only question is which time?

The conversation with a former colleague of Len's?

The length of tenure on RRAP?

Or both.

Fess up.

From: "bb" on Sat,Apr 16 2005 6:34 am

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

Amazing. After a total of six trips to NADC and a total
time there of about three months, this (fantasy) person
"knows" me? 34 years AFTER the fact?!?

Actaully at the time I found you out it was only 20-some years,
and no, he didn't "know" you off the top of his head. He did some
research, however, on contractors who had been there.

Inneresting. The difference between 34 years after the fact and 20
years is ~14 years. And Steve claims he hasn't been on RRAP even a
decade. So somehow, more than 4 years before Steve was on RRAP and
ever heard of Len, he was having a conversation with a former
colleague
of Lens, discussing Len's performance reports.

"Captain, I find it Quiteillogical" Spock

So, is lie #16 the conversation with a former colleague of Len's? Or
is lie #16 Steve's tenure on RRAP? Or is it actually lies #16 and
#17?

Psychotic Pstevie is doing a MARVELOUS job of back-
pedalling! :-) But...his LIE is still a LIE.

There were three contract numbers involved in SECANT.
I have the exact number on the first two generations;
I was at NADC on the first contract...representing RCA
Corporation, the REAL "contractor." Adminstratively
and for the purpose of my VISITING there, I was NOT
listed as "the" contractor. "Contractor personnel,"
perhaps...for the on-site security group (civilians
at NADC) and for the project reports, if then (I was
NOT listed as anything but one of the visitors in
the NADC report, a rather low-rank at that! :-)

Somewhere in the dusty archives of someplace MIGHT be
a few mentions of me 34 years ago signing for a
VISITOR badge plus a VISITOR parking placard for the
rented vehicle I had plus a sign-off on a two-page
standard form for VISITORS on-site. I could care
less, been there and done that at other sites. :-)
While VISITING there, I worked daily with only two
NADC engineers on a regular basis, maybe every two
days with the lead engineer, met the group leader a
couple times, the pilots of the test aircraft, and
the maintenance officer at the NAS. Pstevie thinks
I was "supposed" to do "stellar" things there, but
doesn't understand that I was simply a representative
of the contractor who knew the whole system under
test. There was no time or budget for a "technical
manual" (seldom is on an R&D program), just a tech
rep and a bunch of ozalid copies of schematics plus
a few photos of the system as set up. There wasn't
any chit-chatting "off-duty" nor was there any
"hoisting a few after hours." Neither did we "get
liberty" but were on our own recognizance as to
working hours. [must be amazing fact to a
conditioned military mindset like Pstevie's...:-) ]

Pstevie uses the word "colleague" as if I was working
for NADC. Was NOT the case. I tried to explain that,
but to no avail. :-) So..."performance reports" of
civilian contractor personnel are NOT done by
contractees. If they don't like a tech rep's
whatever, they can simply call up the contractor and
complain, probably have the tech rep replaced. Did
not happen with me...there were NO "reports" filed by
NADC as to behavior, demeanor, performance skills or
anything else except for a brief mention of my name
in an NADC internal project report.

So...not only is Pstevie all forked up on his
arithmetic but he don't know fecal matter from shoe
polish on how contracts with civilian firms are
handled...he doesn't really know much about anything
what happened across the street from the NAS.

As to REAL arithmetic on his LYING, it's hard to pin
that down. Most of his blabbering on personal
attacks after the first one is simply attempts at
rationalizing (badly) on his original LIE. Tsk.