|
bb wrote: wrote: What does it matter whether I served in any military or not? Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve. Where has Jim EVER claimed ANY aspect of military or federal service, Brian? Now answer the man's question. Here's a hint: The Canadian military forces used Morse Code in WW2. Oh, now I see the connections. Because you saw photos of Ham soldiers in QST, and you're a ham, you "served" by extension. The coat-tail connection. You really are in a max-putz mode today, aren't you? WHERE did Jim EVER claim to be a Veteran? WHERE did he EVER say he "served" in the Armed Forces? I could go on about the political and economic effects, but since this is a radio newsgroup I thought I'd stick to electronic and radio subjects. And Canadian war museum topics. That happened to have a connection to radio communications. You see, Brian, THAT is why you catch the flak taht yopu do for your behaviour. Just like Lennie, you like to stop where it serves you to do so and ignore facts. If I did talk about any military service I had, you would be certain to make fun of it. It's just what you do, Len. So typical. You "served" in other ways. And Kelly has "real" military experience. Do YOU, Brain? You were only a weatherman in the USAF. We can make all sorts of issues if you want. It's only those who disagree with you about Morse Code testing that get your disrespect, abuse, name calling, and general jack(expletive deleted] behavior. Do you eat with that mouth? Sure he does. You kiss your wife with the same lips you have on Lennie's butt all the time...Does SHE complain? Is there any reason to doubt that Steve, K4YZ, was involved if he says he was? Is there any reason to not apply Steve's rules of facts to Steve's claims? There are no "rules of facts". Things either "are" or they "are not". Like your ARES claims (are not true). And your Somalia claims (are not true). Then there's your "unlicensed devices" claims. (are not true). I see. His mistake somehow justifies *your* behavior? Mistake? He's had ample opportunity to correct that mistake. Instead he piles up the lies. Thee was no mistake. YOU have yet to cite a single error or lie, Brain. You keep claiming one after another refuse to cite why ANY statement is a "lie". There you go again - calling names. "jack(expletive deleted] behavior" Godwin invoked. You lose. Why not use the person's name and callsign? Kim, W5TIT. Miccolis invoked. You lose. Rest of your double-standards snipped. If "double standards" were "snipped", you'd be extinct already. Steve, K4YZ |
wrote: bb wrote: wrote: What does it matter whether I served in any military or not? Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve. But then comes you. A licensee with no antenna. In your case one has to conclude that becoming a Veteran was easier than putting up an antenna. Brian P Burke and Leonard H Anderson both epitomize all of the things that give other veterans a black eye. I would not want to be in a social setting where their status as veterans was known and then announce that I was a vet too. That's one "guilty by association" that I will gladly avoid. Steve, K4YZ |
wrote:
From: on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm wrote: I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted it here so many times I can recite it from memory. But he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy today. I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago. No, you didn't. Not how *your* experience at ADA (a military radio station) has any bearing, or relevance, to amateur radio policy today. Let's take it again, from the top... Back in the beginning of the 1950s, the U.S. military was NOT using any morse code modes for long-distance point-to-point communications. How do you know this for sure? Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the US military is a different thing. What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many other radio services such as press services. Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications" by the US military is about as relevant as the fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the 1930s. Most of that message "traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the vast majority of military communications. Yep. And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment most individuals could not afford to buy. And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast majority of amateur radio communications. NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits afterwards. At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long after the beginning of the 1950s. So was the Coast Guard. They are "US military". That SHOULD have some meaning to rational persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for communications... There you go, Len, assuming your conclusion. What you're saying is that because the Army didn't use it, nobody should use it. Here's a hint: Ham radio isn't the US Army. When Uncle Sam is willing to buy radios for all hams, then maybe you'll have a point. in short, morse code was way too slow, For some applications, yes. But not for many applications. too prone to human errors by its operators, All communications modes are prone to operator error. The person typing on a teleprinter can make a mistake, too. and generally so inefficient that, Nope. You just don't like the mode. by now, EVERY other radio service has either DROPPED the mode (if they used it at all in the past) or NEVER CONSIDERED it when that radio service began. So what, Len? That's like saying that since almost all motor vehicles don't have manual transmissions anymore, no vehicles should have them. gave up having The main reason Morse Code was replaced by other modes in other radio services is that it required skilled operators at both ends of the circuit. Skilled operators cost money and have to be taken care of, and the speed and accuracy of communications is limited to their skill level. So the skilled operator was eliminated by technology, to save time and money. What you're saying, then, is that you want to eliminate the skilled operators from ham radio, too. The sole exception is AMATEUR radio... It's all those things - and a lot more. For over half a century (actually, since before WW2) the brunt of messaging in the military has been done by modes OTHER than morse code. Even if true, (it's not) so what? Ham radio isn't "the military", and amateur radio communications isn't only about "messaging". You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today, even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time for enjoyment." Very illogical. An approximation of the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of 1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955. So what? Hams don't have the same resources, nor the same basis and purpose. The old Bell Telephone system handled a lot more than 1.5 million "messages" a month back then, too. It was not trivial, it wasn't confined to a few ship's radio rooms. It was the logistical supply "glue" that enabled the United States military to support itself worldwide. It was necessary to keep "getting the messages through" as the old, and still current, Signal Corps phrase puts it. And it required how many people to do it all? At a cost of how many millions of taxpayer dollars? What possible connection does that have to the self-trained, self-funded amateur radio operator? It should be obvious to rational people that there is NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio activity. There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected to what hams should do. But you never say what the connection is. Just that "it's obvious to rational people" - which it isn't. It is NOT a "national service." Actually, amateur radio is internationally recognized by treaty, and it's a radio service. It is NOT needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio operators" for the nation or even a locality. Sure it is. Just ask those folks who ran the recent emergency drills. They were very appreciative of the contributions of amateur radio operators. What morse code testing for a hobby radio activity has become is a travesty, a gross artificiality kept in there by old-timers who managed to pass such tests and keep insisting that all newcomers MUST do as they did. No, that's simply not true at all. It's just your way of rationalizing your hatred, Len. There is NO rational reason for that. Sure there is. Here ya go: Since amateur radio operators *do* use Morse Code extensively, today, on the air, for a wide variety of activities, it is perfectly obvious to rational people that a basic test of Morse code skill is a reasonable test requirement for a license. That's the whole thing, right there. There is only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of doing something that few can. Nope. It's a bout a basic skill, that's all. Almost anyone can do it. Nonsense. Yes, that's what your arguments and insults amount to. I don't want to read it again. Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who thinks of little else but morse code operation on the HF amateur bands. No, that's not true at all. That's just one of my interests. You want to enforce your own private desires and accomplishment goals on others regardless of their wishes or the irrationality of your demands. That's a pretty good description of *your* purpose here, Len! You don't want to read it because someone else was able to be in a position to do REAL HF communications all the time. So what hams do, and did, isn't "REAL"? Then why are you so concerned about it? And even you can't do it all the time, Len. That's way above the average amateur experience. No it isn't. It's *different from* the amateur radio experience. Just like riding in a commercial airliner is different from flying your own private aircraft. You resent knowing that another has done it. I don't resent it at all, Len. I'm just bored by your constant repetition of the same old story and illogical conclusions. But...you are going to have to live with it. Why? "It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it. All by yourself? Or were there hundreds - thousands - of others there too, backed up by the enormous resources of the USA - both civilian and military? And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a half-century ago has any relevance to ham radio today. Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic: Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now. Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use electronic cash registers to do the calculations. Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill. Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, let alone square roots or other techniques. That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense. |
wrote: wrote: From: on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm wrote: I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted it here so many times I can recite it from memory. But he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy today. I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago. No, you didn't. Not how *your* experience at ADA (a military radio station) has any bearing, or relevance, to amateur radio policy today. Let's take it again, from the top... Back in the beginning of the 1950s, the U.S. military was NOT using any morse code modes for long-distance point-to-point communications. How do you know this for sure? Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the US military is a different thing. What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many other radio services such as press services. Yeah...Let's just forget that this forum has had at least two participants who had career-length service in military communications who have testified that Morse Code was INDEED in daily use. Morse Code is STILL taught to this day in the Armed Forces. Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications" by the US military is about as relevant as the fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the 1930s. Most of that message "traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the vast majority of military communications. Yep. And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment most individuals could not afford to buy. And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast majority of amateur radio communications. NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits afterwards. At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long after the beginning of the 1950s. So was the Coast Guard. They are "US military". Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy? And I believe Jeff said the Coast Guard still had SOME facilities into the 80's? For over half a century (actually, since before WW2) the brunt of messaging in the military has been done by modes OTHER than morse code. Even if true, (it's not) so what? Ham radio isn't "the military", and amateur radio communications isn't only about "messaging". You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today, even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time for enjoyment." Very illogical. Yep. And since we have drag lines and other "commercial" methods of fishing, no one may use a hook, line and sinker any more. Who needs it? An approximation of the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of 1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955. So what? Hams don't have the same resources, nor the same basis and purpose. I say that was Bravo Sierra. Bravo Sierra in spades. That would have been 50,000 pieces of traffic A DAY. It should be obvious to rational people that there is NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio activity. There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected to what hams should do. For CB radio, absolutely. For Radio Control models, no contest. For Part 15 experimenters, no doubt. For an Amateur Radio license on HF...you don't know what you're talking about, Lennie. It is NOT a "national service." Actually, amateur radio is internationally recognized by treaty, and it's a radio service. It's an internationally recognized resource that is codified into law, and, despite Lennie's protestations to the contrary, DOES provide a service within the United States of America. His attempts to draw parallels between "The Amateur Radio Service" and Amateur Radio as a "service" vis-a-vis the Armed Forces is worn, lame, and ineffective. It is NOT needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio operators" for the nation or even a locality. Sure it is. Just ask those folks who ran the recent emergency drills. They were very appreciative of the contributions of amateur radio operators. And again Lennie utters an assertion in the face of FACTS to the contrary and demonstrates his own utterly failed understanding of what it's all about... There is only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of doing something that few can. Nope. It's a bout a basic skill, that's all. Almost anyone can do it. Blind and deaf persons have passed the Morse Code exam. Lennie has made occassional statements that he was, at least at one time, proficient in Morse Code at about 8-10WPM. If Lennie can do it, then ABSOLUTELY any one else can do it! Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who thinks of little else but morse code operation on the HF amateur bands. No, that's not true at all. That's just one of my interests. I wonder why Lennie keeps trying to bouy that lie when tons and tons of conversations in this forum have demonstrated otherwise...?!?! "It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it. All by yourself? Or were there hundreds - thousands - of others there too, backed up by the enormous resources of the USA - both civilian and military? We remember the "1.2 million message" claim from two years ago, Lennie...Back then you tried to make it sound as if it was YOUR doings alone. Then you switched gears after a bit of elementary school math rubbed the numbers in your face and 'admitted' that it was a 'team effort' at ADA. It still doesn't put YOU in the comm center other than to change broken black boxes, because YOUR MOS's were as a radio mechanic. You were never a radio operator in the Armed Forces. Now, in THIS post, it was "1 1/5 MILLION messages average for "military traffic" in 1955", so you've even further diluted your original boasts. Before long you'll be claiming how you saved the Postal Service because you licked a stamp to send mom and dad a letter. And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a half-century ago has any relevance to ham radio today. Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic: Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now. Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use electronic cash registers to do the calculations. Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill. Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, let alone square roots or other techniques. That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense. A...yup! 73 Steve, K4YZ |
"K4YZ" wrote in message ups.com... Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy? No, Hans didn't. The last significant use of Morse in the Navy was in the late 50's/early 60's. This usage was by small-boys, DD and smaller, on "fox" broadcasts and "A1" ship/shore circuits. Both uses ended with fleetwide deployment of Jason and Orestes circuits in the early 60's. Morse training for general duty Navy RM's ceased at the same time, and Morse operator became a specialized NEC (MOS to you grunts) held by only a few sailors, mostly in SPECOM branches (intercept operators, etc.). The single operational Morse use which survived was the VLF SSBN transmissions (two transmitters, one Cutler, ME and the other at Jim Creek, WA). That was a simple slow-speed beaconing system which notified boomers to pop up their satcomm antennas for the actual communications. 73, de Hans, K0HB Master Chief Radioman, US Navy |
K=D8HB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote in message ups.com... Didn't Hans put that well into the 70's for the Navy? No, Hans didn't. Thank-you for the correction. Master Chief Radioman, US Navy You forgot something..."Retired". Steve, K4YZ |
|
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm wrote: wrote: From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm wrote: Does it bother you, Len? You read his lengthy post and saw the style he used. You bet it bothered him. NAH. I did it. Jimmie didn't do it. So? To be fair, Len has exhibited jackass behavior toward K0HB and Hans does not support retention of morse code testing. Tsk. Everyone who disagrees with Davie is guilty of "jackass behavior?" :-) That's quite incorrect. You, Lena Anderson, exhibits jackass behavior :-) Riiiight...only ARRL-speak and the beauty, nobility, and grandeur of morsemanship is spoken in here...:-) What is ARRL-speak? about his famous "seven hostile actions" Do you know what they are? Where *you* involved in any of them? He doesn't have any idea what they were. It kills him. NAH. It only shows what a snow-jobbing laid-off murine does under the guise of a U.S. AMATEUR radio extra callsign. Tosses brags like they were bagels. In your view, anyone who does anything not blessed by you is a snow job. Anyone except you who was in the military and is now out of the military is laid off. An Amateur Extra callsign with the "amateur" in capital letters is something to be derided. To my knowledge, Steve has never stated that DOD does not direct MARS. His claim is that if there were no radio amateurs, there'd have been no MARS program. In that, he is correct. Bull****. My statement is quite correct. The United States ARMY started MARS...but under a different name before WW2. Tsk. I'm well aware of that. Davie ought to read up on the subject...lots of references. Lena is the one who should read up on it. AACS and MARS (with the "A" standing for "Amateur" were the names used in the past. The current Military Affliate Radio System would not be in existence without radio amateurs. I first participated in the MARS program in 1969. I last participated in 1985. I participated in the program on the military side in 1969 from the U.S. and in 1971 from Vietnam as a volunteer (quite separate from my other military communications duties. MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system. No kidding? Duh. A small one, about as effective as having special services put on shows and entertainment. You must be thinking of something different than MARS. Morale boosting thing. It certainly was that. That's pretty much why I've left details out. As with Steve's military service, Len doesn't know what I did or where I did it and it kills him. No problem with me. Apparently it is a problem for you. You've alluded to it on a number of occasions. If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that. No, it isn't quite that simple. It has nothing to do with guts. It has to do with having seen how you treat the experiences of others while trumpeting your own. ...and Len has invariably demeaned that service. He has always known more about my job that I did. Foreign service tours were dismissed as tropical backwaters, places of insignificance and Cashew capitals. Awwwww...you doing a Rodney Dangerfield? Get no "respect?" :-) No comedy, Len, but your insulting behavior over things you aren't in a position to know. Don't leave out his attempts at insult by stating that my name never appeared in any lists of embassy staff. That blew up in his face when I produced a couple of urls in which I was listed. Len's response was to dismiss the lists as some sort of telephone directory. Tsk. Sounds like you are bucking for an Intelligence Star. Couldn't you get a sponsor at the NSA to award you one? Did I write anything of that? Your two-step doesn't disguise that you aren't in a position to deny my statement. Because Len is all about Len. That isn't the important part though. The important part is where Len's sphincter post speaks of what it is like to be in battle. Len was never in battle. Only ONE very brief exchange of gunfire. Did you fire a weapon, Len? Was one fired directly at you? If so, was it from the enemy? Doesn't count as a "battle," though. Then it certain doesn't count as an artillery barrage, does it? Want to recount your "sphincter post" or shall I? Big Hero Dave...tell us all YOUR "battle experience." I've never claimed to be any kind of hero, much less a big one and I've never ever posted or written any kind of manufactured tale like your "sphinter post". Were you behind the Viet Cong lines sending intel to HQ via CW? You might actually find the information if you had enough knowledge of how to use a search engine. As far as I'm concerned, amateur radio is about operating any mode I choose on any band I choose. Len isn't involved on any level. Everyone NOT licensed in amateur radio "isn't involved." :-) Oh, the FCC is involved here in the United States but you don't work for the Commission nor are you a radio amateur. The point is that some MIGHT want to GET INTO amateur radio. Dave loses his perspective on that. [age causing loss of sight...among other things...] I've not lost sight of that, Len. I have a stake in what kind of qualifications aspiring hams demonstrate in order to enter amateur radio. Davie ought to get with Paul Schleck pronto and have EVERYONE without a valid amateur radio license TOSSED OFF this newsgroup! Has Paul Schleck advocated such a thing? I know I haven't. Make it "safe" for the double- standard elitist PCTA EXTRAs to use as their personal chat room and blog... :-) There are plenty of radio amateurs who post here who don't hold Extra Class tickets. FYI, this isn't a chat room or a blog. Familiarize yourself with the definitions of those terms. Len knows more about what others did than those involved. Nope. But...I DO recognize a bull**** artist from a long distance. Davie be one of those... I'm sure you practiced that recognition from a much, much closer range. Len knows more about the military. I know enough to meet THIS level of homo saps. :-) It is evident that you do not. Been IN the Army...had lots of contact with Army as a civilian after service time done. So? Len knows more about communications. Tsk. I know some about that. Been IN that as a civilian. :-) So have many others. I was a civilian in communications in my last position. Len knows more about radio operation. Tsk. I know HOW they work and the protocols needed in some radio services. Some radio services? Whoop-de-doo! You have a need of info on those radio services, big honcho? No, I'm quite comfortable that I knowledge I have is quite sufficient for what I did for a living and what I do now. Len knows more about the U.S. Department of State. I do? Oh, my, aren't you stepping off into denied territory! :-) It wasn't denied territory to me, Len. You made statements about that which you did not and could not know. Len knows more about your work. Tsk. Jimmie "works in the transportation field" according to one Comment in the ECFS. Other than that, Jimmie do NOT say squat. He afraid others find out? I don't believe that Jim is afraid at all. I think he has observed your actions and that he is being prudent. Len knows more about Brian Kelly's work. I do? Oh, my. News to me. Isn't Kellie retired? Is he? Len knows more about Steve's work. Tsk. Stevie follows REAL DOCTORS' orders...which includes staying OUT of the Sharps box. :-) So you know nothing of his work. Whatever Len did at ADA more than a half century ago impacts amateur radio not in the least. Riiiiight old-timer. Ham radio NEVER operated on HF, did it? :-) Are you sure that the above is the response you'd like to make to my statement? Len tells it because he wants to be sure that everyone knows of it. (the frequent retelling of his ADA tale from 50+ years ago) You betcha! :-) It was obvious. The U.S. military did NOT use morse code in long-distance fixed-point to fixed-point communications a half century ago and still don't. Tsk. Some of you olde-tyme hammes need to get your noses out of old WW2 surplus radio books and inspect the rest of the radio world. If we were to desire operating in the rest of the radio world, I'm sure we would. That radio amateur continue to use morse daily, seems to have escaped your notice. How does it give him the right to insult those who never served? Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those with SUCH thin skin should NOT be ANYWHERE on the Internet!!!! :-) Really? Is this from the Gospel according to St. Leonard? Your bluster is just that--bluster. Now you've done it, Jim. You've denigrated a veteran. Jimmie (and Davie...and Stevie...and every other elitist double-standard PCTA EXTRA) will, without doubt, insult ANYONE they care to. ....or they might insult those who have constantly insulted them, someone who is not involved in amateur radio in the smallest way. It's in the fine print of their ham privileges as super-dooper under-the-dashboard douche bag guar-un-teed morsemanship EXTRA AMATEURS!!!! What is any of that to you? You aren't involved in amateur radio. Dave |
K4YZ wrote: wrote: bb wrote: wrote: What does it matter whether I served in any military or not? Kind of makes it hard to be a Veteran if you didn't serve. But then comes you. A licensee with no antenna. In your case one has to conclude that becoming a Veteran was easier than putting up an antenna. Brian P Burke and Leonard H Anderson both epitomize all of the things that give other veterans a black eye. I would not want to be in a social setting where their status as veterans was known and then announce that I was a vet too. That's one "guilty by association" that I will gladly avoid. Steve, K4YZ There is no guilt in military service, unless you lie about it. Like saying that you have "real military experience" when you don't, or saying that you have "seven hostile actions" when you have none. Best of Luck. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com