| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
April 16th 05, 11:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
wrote: From: on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am Amateur radio isn't the US military. MARS is military. "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" No Amateur Radio = No MARS. The "A" in MARS stands for "Affiliate", as in "Affiliated" with Amateur Radio. Amateur radio is NOT Private Land Mobile Radio Service. But Amateur Radio is used as an emergency adjunct to it, so sayeth the FCC. (You know, Lennie...the FEDERAL Communications Commission...) Amateur radio is NOT Mass Media Radio Service. But under certain circumstances may be used to assist in that pursuit...so sayeth the FCC. Amateur radio is NOT Maritime Radio Service. But Amateur Radio is routinely carried aboard both commercial and pleasure vessles of many types...Including warships of the United States Navy...So sayeth the FCC AND the Deaprtment of Defense. Amateur radio is NOT Aviation Radio Service. But with the permission of the pilot-in-command, Amateur Radio activities may be conducted from both private and commercial aircarft...So sayeth the FCC AND the FAA. Amateur radio is NOT Personal Radio Service. But Amateur Radio may be rotinely used for many of the same purposes of the Personal Radio Service...So sayeth the FCC... So...so far we have at least three federal agencies telling us that Amateur Radio CAN be used under all of the flags above that Lennie said Amateur Radio "wasn't". Sheeeesh. Leonard H. Anderson is a putz. A loser again...\ Steve, K4YZ |
|
#3
April 17th 05, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
From: on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am wrote: From: Dave Heil on Apr 12, 9:31 pm 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. What brags, Len? Look at American foreign policy since the end of the USA's involvement in Vietnam. Plenty of "hostile actions" for active-duty, career military personnel to be a part of in a variety of roles. And that's just the "hostile actions" we civilians know about. How does that tie in with the use of morse code in museum windows? The same way your service at ADA ties in with amateur radio policy. 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****. Well, you're certainly the authority on *that* subject, Len! ;-) I know TRUTH as opposed to snow-job braggadoccio. Really? Like what encryption systems the US Navy used in WW2? Psycho Pstevie is an "extra class" snow-jobber. So you're saying he wasn't involved in "seven hostile actions"? And, mister wizard, you REWROTE what Robeson wrote. Not me. You must be thinking of someone else. "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio." That's not what I wrote. In NO way did Pstevie write what YOU say he wrote. What did I say he wrote? In NO way did Pstevie's single sentence say what you IMPLY it did. He is NOT "correct." You're misquoting all over the place, Len. But it doesn't matter. Here, I'll clear it up: MARS and amateur radio aren't the same thing. But many radio amateurs are involved in MARS. That's my position. If Steve says different, argue with *him*. MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system. But most of the participants aren't in the military. How do YOU know? I have sources, Len. Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the slightest opposition to your cherished statements, or when someone refuses to feed your insult machine. "Insult machine?" Yes, that's right. It's what you're all about here. Jimmie Noserve wants the exclusive use of that "machine?" Do you feel insulted by my posts, Len? It seems so - you seem to find insult in everything. Oh, yes, that ties right in with a Canadian museum having morse code in its window...sure... Those windows really seem to bother you. If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that. Then you must think that Brian Burke, N0IMD-allegedly- /T5, "ain't done it", because he won't give any details about his amateur radio operation in Somalia. Then you must be as nuts as Psycho Pstevie. Tsk. Not me, Len. I'm not the one calling people names and telling them to shut up. You are. Pstevie pervertedly pejorated hisself at least a couple orders of magnitude with his alleged "poor repfit" of NADC on my visit there 34 years ago...and is still trying (vainly) to rationalize his LIE as some kind of "truth." What has that to do with your claim that: "If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that." That's what you wrote, Len. Does it only apply to Steve and not to Brian. I'm just showing what a damn LIAR he is. What lie? The claim he has made is that he found someone who knew you from when you were allegedly at NADC. And that someone says you didn't do such a great job there. Now maybe it's true and maybe it isn't. But it's basically your word against that of some unknown person. But, Pstevie is your BUDDIE and therefore can do NO wrong. That's not true at all. He is PCTA extra Double Standard class and can therefore say ANYTHING he wants in your complete approval. Not true at all, Len, but you would rather claim so than to face the facts. Orwell did a good job describing the subjective reality mindset in his classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len, in the way you want to rewrite history to fit your mindset. Pizz off, sweetie. What's the matter, Len? Are you insulted? I'm simply telling you how you appear in this newsgroup. You claimed: "If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that." which is a pretty good definition of subjective reality, where if something isn't described, it doesn't exist. Which is what you're telling us *you* believe. You are going hot and heavy into this personal insult thing and Brian Burke is NOT a part of it. The personal insults are your bag, Len. Brian plays a related but slightly different game. If a person does something, they've done it whether they talk about it or not. Or whether you believe it or not. Simple as that. Tsk. Turn your phrase around. No. The converse of a true statement isn't necessarily true. The contrapositive is. If a person TALKS about something, that isn't "proof" that they've DONE it. :-) Which applies to *you*, Len... Psycho Pstevie still hasn't come up with a SINGLE detail of "proof" on his insult of my "fitrep" at NADC. Nor have you proved him to be mistaken. And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not. HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IS TRUTH? :-) It's basic logic, Len. If K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not. That's objective reality. |
|
#4
April 17th 05, 11:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote: wrote: And, mister wizard, you REWROTE what Robeson wrote. Not me. You must be thinking of someone else. "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio." That's not what I wrote. That IS what I wrote and what Brain has vainly attempted to use as some messaging point out of context, but that's OK. In NO way did Pstevie write what YOU say he wrote. What did I say he wrote? In NO way did Pstevie's single sentence say what you IMPLY it did. He is NOT "correct." You're misquoting all over the place, Len. But it doesn't matter. Here, I'll clear it up: MARS and amateur radio aren't the same thing. But many radio amateurs are involved in MARS. As a matter of fact, most MARS operatives are licensed Amateur Radio operators who are civilians. A few are members of the uniformed Armed Forces of the United States who are also licensee, and participate in MARS independent of their duties in the Armed Forces. The remainder are either uniformed mmebers assigned to work in post stations or are DoD civilians who run the program. But the FACT remains that under current regulations and staffing requirements, without Amateur Radio, there would be NO MARS programs. Period. MARS always was and remains a MILITARY radio system. But most of the participants aren't in the military. How do YOU know? I have sources, Len. Like CQ....QST...The MARS programs themselves... Haw, that's funny. Len, you pretty much come unglued at the slightest opposition to your cherished statements, or when someone refuses to feed your insult machine. "Insult machine?" Yes, that's right. It's what you're all about here. Now he has Todd and Brian as "Affiliates". Jimmie Noserve wants the exclusive use of that "machine?" Do you feel insulted by my posts, Len? It seems so - you seem to find insult in everything. Oh, yes, that ties right in with a Canadian museum having morse code in its window...sure... Those windows really seem to bother you. If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that. Then you must think that Brian Burke, N0IMD-allegedly- /T5, "ain't done it", because he won't give any details about his amateur radio operation in Somalia. Then you must be as nuts as Psycho Pstevie. Tsk. Not me, Len. I'm not the one calling people names and telling them to shut up. You are. Pstevie pervertedly pejorated hisself at least a couple orders of magnitude with his alleged "poor repfit" of NADC on my visit there 34 years ago...and is still trying (vainly) to rationalize his LIE as some kind of "truth." What has that to do with your claim that: "If you ain't got the guts to tell the details, you AIN'T done it. Simple as that." That's what you wrote, Len. Does it only apply to Steve and not to Brian. I'm just showing what a damn LIAR he is. What lie? The claim he has made is that he found someone who knew you from when you were allegedly at NADC. And that someone says you didn't do such a great job there. Now maybe it's true and maybe it isn't. But it's basically your word against that of some unknown person. And me. Two to one so far. But, Pstevie is your BUDDIE and therefore can do NO wrong. That's not true at all. Jim and I have never met save for here and one QSO on the air. Jim and I have shared many opinions and we have disagreed on many. Publically. Without name calling. He is PCTA extra Double Standard class and can therefore say ANYTHING he wants in your complete approval. Not true at all, Len, but you would rather claim so than to face the facts. Google archives prove otherwise, Lennie. Orwell did a good job describing the subjective reality mindset in his classic "1984". You remind me of "Big Brother", Len, in the way you want to rewrite history to fit your mindset. Pizz off, sweetie. What's the matter, Len? Are you insulted? I'm simply telling you how you appear in this newsgroup. That was "Absolute Lennie". And the analogy wa absolutely accurate. If a person TALKS about something, that isn't "proof" that they've DONE it. :-) Which applies to *you*, Len... But...but...but...LENNIE! This very week you've stated that if anyone had done something, then they SHOULD brag about it. Certainly YOU do a LOT of talking in this forum and precious little corroboration of what you say. Some dubiously original by-lines in a magazine that went belly-up while you were an "associate editor". Psycho Pstevie still hasn't come up with a SINGLE detail of "proof" on his insult of my "fitrep" at NADC. Nor have you proved him to be mistaken. And if K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not. HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IS TRUTH? It's basic logic, Len. If K4YZ really did participate in seven hostile actions, then it happened regardless of whether details are given or not. That's objective reality. Let him wallow in his doubts, Jim. Nobody could have done anything before or better than he, ergo none of the things I did in the Armed Forces could have happened! (chucklechucklesnortsnort...) 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
#5
April 18th 05, 06:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: on Sun,Apr 17 2005 9:29 am
wrote: From: on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am How does that tie in with the use of morse code in museum windows? The same way your service at ADA ties in with amateur radio policy. "My service at ADA" was NOT ever presented as any form of "justification" about "amateur radio policy." What I originally presented was factual information based on personal experience in regards to USE OF MORSE CODE by a large Army communications station. Army station ADA (it still exists, by the way) USE OF MORSE CODE MODE was nil, none, nada from 1953 onwards. World War II ended in 1945. Further, I stated that (based on Pacific Stars & Strips published story of 1955) ADA relayed 220 thousand messages a month in 1955. ADA (also known by the TTY message identifier of "RUAP") was only the third largest Army station in ACAN (Army Command and Administrative Network). Such traffic operation took place around the clock, every day ("24/7"). Further, I stated (correctly, from Army documents) that the ONLY morse code operator training in the 1950s was for Field Radio Operator. Field Radio is exemplified by operations of Regimental-level AN/GRC-26 self-contained transmitter-receiver huts on the bed of a 2 1/2 ton truck. "Angry-26s" were in use at much lower traffic levels, by unit command, and also used TTY much more than any morse code...in Korea, in Japan, or anywhere else in the Far East Command in the early 1950s. Field radio did not normally communicate with Far East Command Headquarters directly, but had the capability. Such was never witnessed by myself, nor appeared in any operations orders of the station. The brunt of military messaging is done by the (relatively, speaking in 1950s terms) high-speed TTY that can carry message traffic 24/7. All of that constituted the NORMAL means of logistical communications...all of that necessary for troop movements, shipping of supplies, operational orders, etc., etc., etc. The total personnel and installations in the Far East Command then was akin to a small state, therefore the amount of communications was quite large. At NO TIME was any bank of morse code operators seen OR KNOWN serving either the FEC Hq or Army Central Command ("central" insofar as Japan). Did I "know" all that? Yes. It was part of my duty there to not only be at a part of the communications station but to make trips to nearby units. Do I have absolute proof of all of it by referencible documents? No. Only some. Am I "lying" in stating any of the above? No. There is NO reason for me to "lie" about anything there. There is no reason for N2JTV to say anything about it, yet Gene was there at the same time I was, the same station but on a different operating team. [Gene doesn't access this group] The gist of all that is that: MORSE CODE WAS NOT IN USE FOR MAJOR COMMUNICATIONS TRAFFIC. Not in The Far East Command at the time. That Command included USAF and USN. I've seen documents that stated the communications plans from 1948 onwards would handle ALL normal message traffic by TTY for the future. I do not have such a document to "prove" it but can state that, from 1953 onwards, it WAS TRUE by example, by all operational orders between 1953 and 1956, by various Army documents published since 1956, by various Signal Corps photographs (none of which show any morse code operators at work) in the Far East Command. Was there ANY morse code used in the U.S. military? Of course. All in Battalion or smaller units for field radio in the Army...on board ship in what Hans Brakob describes as "small boys" such as DDs (destroyers) or lesser-tonnage vessels. Morse code skill was required by some airborne radio units (ASW and the like) and for aircraft on long, over-water flights...also for the (then) Distress and Safety (international) frequencies shared by everyone. I do not have any specific cites of morse code use by SAC units of the 50s or 60s, but TAC does not include it. Long over-water flights my USAF military transports required morsemen on board. What you have to understand is that the cruiser or heavier class ships had carried RTTY since first starting with that in 1940. That was necessary to insure the secure "rotor machine" encryption terminals (on-line or off-line capable) for Command orders and responses. Regardless of nit-picking on the names of such systems or their absolute, exact nomenclature, their existance was acknowledged in at least two civilian books first published in the 1960s (David Kahn's "Codebreakers" was on the NYT non-fiction bestseller list for several months, a seminal text on history of cryptography). Morse code use in small-unit radio decreased and decreased from the 1950s onward. All branches, even the USCG. TTY rates jumped from 60 WPM to 100 WPM, then morphed into "data" in various forms at rates up to 2400 WPM over HF radio links. By 1978 the USAF (one of the remaining strong users of HF) was shutting down HF as a spectrum component in favor of the new satellite relay and troposcatter, VHF and UHF (they'd had the 225-400 MHz "military aviation band" since shortly after WW2). By then the sole use of morse code was limited to emergency communications as a secondary. It MAY have been used for ALERT messaging of submarines but another (with actual experience of such communications) will have to give details. By the 1980s, the ALERT messaging to boomers and sharks was done by some form of encrypted DATA. As to the SAC messaging on "oil burner routes" or otherwise on loitering flights, I can't comment on those formats or content other than to say morse code was NOT used for those. So, there has been a lessening NEED for any "trained morsemen" in the U.S. military over the past HALF CENTURY. It has VANISHED for use in actual communications in the military...since the International Distress and Safesty system was implemented a few years ago worldwide, the USCG has stopped monitoring 500 KHz. The military has had MILLIONS of U.S. citizens in service in all that time, still has a million-plus serving. Morse code use in the military is limited solely to INTELLIGENCE INTERCEPTS (one-way, "silent listening"). GONE is the NEED for "trained morsemen" of any kind by the United States government. There is NO NEED of any sort of "trained pool" of such morsemen for the national use. That lessening began about 57 years ago although it was already happening during WW2 when HF commercial SSB was carrying TTY messaging to Europe and Asia. What is left is a lot of daydreaming by amateurs based on myths begun in WW2 of glorious use of morse "in battle zones" or as the valiant radio operators of B-17s and B-24s (actually more gunners than radio operators) and "fighting men" in ship radio rooms, etc. Generations of day- dreaming amateurs passed them on to succeeding generations until the mythos became almost palpable. The only radio service in the USA that requires morsemanship skills is Amateur Radio Service and that ONLY for privileges below 30 MHz. When it comes to "handling traffic" on HF, *NO* amateur radio group or net can come even close to the amount handled by the third-largest radio communications station of the Army did a half century ago. Not even if you use mulltipliers to make up for the (usually specious) claim that amateurs "use only their own purchased equipment." Further, amateurs do NOT do it 24/7 for months on end, "CW" or not. You are getting very tiresome on this petulant complaint about one other radio activity on HF or bitching about someone who was there. Put an end to it. All your petulant whining about the glory and efficacy of morse code is of NO value in the whole wide world of radio communications today. All you have left is the mythology of "greatness in morsemanship" to rationalize keeping the morse code test for a HOBBY use of radio by amateur radio hobbyists. |
|
#6
April 18th 05, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
From: on Sun,Apr 17 2005 9:29 am wrote: From: on Sat,Apr 16 2005 8:44 am How does that tie in with the use of morse code in museum windows? The same way your service at ADA ties in with amateur radio policy. "My service at ADA" was NOT ever presented as any form of "justification" about "amateur radio policy." So why tell us about it so many times? It was interesting the first couple of dozen times, but not any more. In fact, why tell us about it at all, since there's no connection to amateur radio policy? What I originally presented was factual information based on personal experience in regards to USE OF MORSE CODE by a large Army communications station. But why? That has nothing to do with amateur radio policy. You said yourself that amateur radio isn't the US military. Army station ADA (it still exists, by the way) USE OF MORSE CODE MODE was nil, none, nada from 1953 onwards. Even *if* that is true - so what? World War II ended in 1945. And Morse Code was used by the US military in WW2, wasn't it? Further, I stated that (based on Pacific Stars & Strips published story of 1955) ADA relayed 220 thousand messages a month in 1955. ADA (also known by the TTY message identifier of "RUAP") was only the third largest Army station in ACAN (Army Command and Administrative Network). Such traffic operation took place around the clock, every day ("24/7"). But why? Further, I stated (correctly, from Army documents) that the ONLY morse code operator training in the 1950s was for Field Radio Operator. Operator training and use aren't the same thing. Field Radio is exemplified by operations of Regimental-level AN/GRC-26 self-contained transmitter-receiver huts on the bed of a 2 1/2 ton truck. "Angry-26s" were in use at much lower traffic levels, by unit command, and also used TTY much more than any morse code...in Korea, in Japan, or anywhere else in the Far East Command in the early 1950s. Field radio did not normally communicate with Far East Command Headquarters directly, but had the capability. Such was never witnessed by myself, nor appeared in any operations orders of the station. So you really are just going on the words of others. The brunt of military messaging is done by the (relatively, speaking in 1950s terms) high-speed TTY that can carry message traffic 24/7. Morse can carry message traffic "24/7", Len. You can't. All of that constituted the NORMAL means of logistical communications...all of that necessary for troop movements, shipping of supplies, operational orders, etc., etc., etc. Sure. And they used HF radio because other means weren't available or were inadequate. The total personnel and installations in the Far East Command then was akin to a small state, therefore the amount of communications was quite large. And the number of personnel assigned to the communications was quite large, too, wasn't it? Not just you but more than 700 people at ADA alone, wasn't it? At NO TIME was any bank of morse code operators seen OR KNOWN serving either the FEC Hq or Army Central Command ("central" insofar as Japan). "seen or known" by whom? Did I "know" all that? Yes. It was part of my duty there to not only be at a part of the communications station but to make trips to nearby units. Do I have absolute proof of all of it by referencible documents? No. Only some. So you don't really know from personal experience. Besides, as you have said, the non-existence of something cannot be completely proved. Am I "lying" in stating any of the above? No. There is NO reason for me to "lie" about anything there. Sure there's a reason. Several, actually. But I've never accused anyone here of lying. Not even you. I've pointed out mistakes, but that's a different thing entirely. A lie is intentional, a mistake isn't. There is no reason for N2JTV to say anything about it, yet Gene was there at the same time I was, the same station but on a different operating team. [Gene doesn't access this group] Do you call him "Genie" or some other insulting nickname, Len? Or just "Gene" or "N2JTV"? The gist of all that is that: MORSE CODE WAS NOT IN USE FOR MAJOR COMMUNICATIONS TRAFFIC. Not in The Far East Command at the time. That Command included USAF and USN. Even if that's true - so what? The Far East Command wasn't amateur radio. And it seems that you are hyper focused on "MAJOR COMMUNICATIONS TRAFFIC" as if nothing else matters. I've seen documents that stated the communications plans from 1948 onwards would handle ALL normal message traffic by TTY for the future. I do not have such a document to "prove" it but can state that, from 1953 onwards, it WAS TRUE by example, by all operational orders between 1953 and 1956, by various Army documents published since 1956, by various Signal Corps photographs (none of which show any morse code operators at work) in the Far East Command. Even if that's all true - and you could be mistaken about it, but let's not go there right now - what possible connection does that have to amateur radio policy in 2005? Was there ANY morse code used in the U.S. military? Of course. FINALLY!! Len admits the US military actually used Morse Code! Next thing we'll see is the sun coming up in the west ;-) All in Battalion or smaller units for field radio in the Army...on board ship in what Hans Brakob describes as "small boys" such as DDs (destroyers) or lesser-tonnage vessels. How about submarines? Did you know that approximately half of all Japanese ships sunk in WW2 were sunk by US submarines - a force that was only a very small part of the US Navy at the time? Subs also sent back vital information from Japanese-controlled areas (such as weather and enemy task force movements). Also rescued downed airmen and aviators, placed and retrieved covert operatives. You can look all this up. I don't think US Navy submarines had teletype aboard in WW2. Morse code skill was required by some airborne radio units (ASW and the like) and for aircraft on long, over-water flights...also for the (then) Distress and Safety (international) frequencies shared by everyone. How about that! I do not have any specific cites of morse code use by SAC units of the 50s or 60s, but TAC does not include it. Long over-water flights my USAF military transports required morsemen on board. You mean "radio operators skilled in the use of Morse Code" What you have to understand is that the cruiser or heavier class ships had carried RTTY since first starting with that in 1940. All of them? Why do I "have to" understand that? That was necessary to insure the secure "rotor machine" encryption terminals (on-line or off-line capable) for Command orders and responses. But other USN ships were able to communicate securely without RTTY. Regardless of nit-picking on the names of such systems or their absolute, exact nomenclature, You mean you were mistaken in your earlier posts, as corrected by K0HB. their existance was acknowledged in at least two civilian books first published in the 1960s (David Kahn's "Codebreakers" was on the NYT non-fiction bestseller list for several months, a seminal text on history of cryptography). Hams aren't allowed to encrypt their transmissions. Against the rules. "Encrypt" meaning "to conceal the meaning". Morse code use in small-unit radio decreased and decreased from the 1950s onward. All branches, even the USCG. Nobody disputes that. Yet even in the 1990s it was in use, and there were maritime rescues dependent on it. SOLAS and all that. TTY rates jumped from 60 WPM to 100 WPM, Hardly a "jump", Len. More like a slide. then morphed into "data" in various forms at rates up to 2400 WPM over HF radio links. By 1978 the USAF (one of the remaining strong users of HF) was shutting down HF as a spectrum component in favor of the new satellite relay and troposcatter, VHF and UHF (they'd had the 225-400 MHz "military aviation band" since shortly after WW2). How does this have anything to do with amateur radio policy? All amateur radio privileges above 30 MHz are available without a code test. By then the sole use of morse code was limited to emergency communications as a secondary. Even if true...so what? It MAY have been used for ALERT messaging of submarines but another (with actual experience of such communications) will have to give details. Why, Len? You give all sorts of details on things you have no experience with... By the 1980s, the ALERT messaging to boomers and sharks was done by some form of encrypted DATA. As to the SAC messaging on "oil burner routes" or otherwise on loitering flights, I can't comment on those formats or content other than to say morse code was NOT used for those. Even if that's true..... So, there has been a lessening NEED for any "trained morsemen" in the U.S. military over the past HALF CENTURY. Did the military call them "trained morsemen", Len? Or something else, like "Radioman First Class"? (Rm1C)? It has VANISHED for use in actual communications in the military...since the International Distress and Safesty system was implemented a few years ago worldwide, the USCG has stopped monitoring 500 KHz. Because they don't have to, anymore. Did you know that a new Morse shore station was just licensed to operate on 600 meters (500 kHz) and HF maritime frequencies? Call is KSM. The military has had MILLIONS of U.S. citizens in service in all that time, still has a million-plus serving. Morse code use in the military is limited solely to INTELLIGENCE INTERCEPTS (one-way, "silent listening"). Even if that's true.... GONE is the NEED for "trained morsemen" of any kind by the United States government. Who ever said there was such a need in modern times, Len? Not me. There is NO NEED of any sort of "trained pool" of such morsemen for the national use. Who ever said there was? That lessening began about 57 years ago although it was already happening during WW2 when HF commercial SSB was carrying TTY messaging to Europe and Asia. Here's a clue, Len: The FCC, in Part 97, mentions the need for a pool of trained skilled radio operators or some similar verbiage. You can look up the exact words if you're so inclined. The key point is that one of the Basis and Purpose of the Amateur Radio Service is to have such a pool of radio operators. Doesn't say anything about "morsemen". And it never has - the Basis and Purpose were first put there in 1951, and the phrase has always referred to "skilled radio operators" with no mention of Morse Code. What is left is a lot of daydreaming by amateurs based on myths begun in WW2 of glorious use of morse "in battle zones" or as the valiant radio operators of B-17s and B-24s (actually more gunners than radio operators) and "fighting men" in ship radio rooms, etc. What "myths", Len? Were you there? Have you ever been in a B-17, B-24 or B-29? Generations of day- dreaming amateurs passed them on to succeeding generations until the mythos became almost palpable. So you're saying Morse Code wasn't used in WW2 for anything important, huh? The only radio service in the USA that requires morsemanship skills is Amateur Radio Service and that ONLY for privileges below 30 MHz. And that's perfectly reasonable because hams *do* use Morse Code - particularly below 30 MHz. Seems to me your whole argument comes down to the idea that since the US military doesn't use Morse Code much if at all anymore, hams shouldn't use it either, nor have a test for it. All that verbiage of yours, summed up in one sentence. When it comes to "handling traffic" on HF, *NO* amateur radio group or net can come even close to the amount handled by the third-largest radio communications station of the Army did a half century ago. Sure we can. 700 amateurs, each with PSK-31 or some other modern data mode, 10 messages per day each. Do it for a month and there's 220,000 messages. But is size all that impresses you, Len? Seems like it. Not even if you use mulltipliers to make up for the (usually specious) claim that amateurs "use only their own purchased equipment." What "specious claim", Len? It's a fact - almost all hams have to buy/build and maintain their own equipment. Not like the military, where Uncle pays for everything. Sure, a few hams have access to club or other stations funded by others. But they're the exception that proves the rule. Further, amateurs do NOT do it 24/7 for months on end, "CW" or not. Neither do you, Len. Nor did you, at ADA or anywhere else. 700 plus personnel, remember? You are getting very tiresome on this petulant complaint about one other radio activity on HF or bitching about someone who was there. The main petulance and bitching are yours, Len, repeating the same story over and over and over, as if it is somehow relevant. It isn't. Put an end to it. Are you telling me to shut up, Len? Seems like it. You rail on about the First Amendment but then tell others to shut up. Double standard of the worst kind. I've never told you or anyone else here to shut up... All your petulant whining about the glory and efficacy of morse code is of NO value in the whole wide world of radio communications today. What "petulant whining", Len? Show us an example. And the fact is, Morse Code is of great "value in the whole wide world of radio communications today" - because that includes Amateur Radio. Or do you exclude Amateur Radio? Aren't we hams big enough to count? All you have left is the mythology of "greatness in morsemanship" to rationalize keeping the morse code test for a HOBBY use of radio by amateur radio hobbyists. No mythology, Len. Fact. |
|
#7
April 18th 05, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... TTY rates jumped from 60 WPM to 100 WPM, Hardly a "jump", Len. More like a slide. I'll have to side with Len on this one. It was a JUMP, not a slide or a slither. When the USN fleet broadcasts shifted to JASON cover (100WPM) from black uncovered (60WPM), estimates are that the TTY casualty rate approached 75%. Machines which had been happily chugging along for years on 60WPM gears literally self-destructed when 100WPM gears were installed. 73, de Hans, K0HB Master Chief Radioman, US Navy |
|
#8
April 18th 05, 10:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
K=D8HB wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... TTY rates jumped from 60 WPM to 100 WPM, Hardly a "jump", Len. More like a slide. I'll have to side with Len on this one. It was a JUMP, not a slide or a slither. Poor choice of words on my part, Hans. A better choice would be "step up" or "incremental increase". I think of a "jump" as an order-of-magnitude increase, like 60 wpm to 600 wpm, etc. When the USN fleet broadcasts shifted to JASON cover (100WPM) from black uncovered (60WPM), estimates are that the TTY casualty rate approached 75%. I can understand why! Machines which had been happily chugging along for years on 60WPM gears literally self-destructed when 100WPM gears were installed. didn't they test the machines at 100 before the changeover? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#9
April 19th 05, 12:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... didn't they test the machines at 100 before the changeover? Ponder that question a minute! It's pretty hard to test a 60WPM machine at 100WPM until you convert it to 100WPM. Duh!!! In some cases (CVA's, CL's, CA's, and flag-configured platforms) that was possible with spare machines, but most hulls did not have that luxury. You just swapped out the gearset and crossed your fingers. If it broke, you could always send a CASREPT and shift to the FOX broadcast. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
|
#10
April 18th 05, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... That was necessary to insure the secure "rotor machine" encryption terminals (on-line or off-line capable) for Command orders and responses. No, it wasn't necessary. The most popular "rotor machine" crypto system in us in ALL Navy ships was the off-line KL7 "ADONIS" system. It was incapable of on-line connection, and did not require TTY to transmit messages. Morse worked just fine, and 98% of all the "5-letter-coded-group" messages were generated on KL7 off-line machines. 73, de Hans, K0HB Master Chief Radioman, US Navy |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Don't forget ! | Broadcasting | |||
| Never Forget... | CB | |||
| Forget E-bay, post your 11 meter amps here. | CB | |||
| Tampa Turd Jail Dale's forgotten FELONY, don't forget Junior | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
