|
If CW is dead....
.....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up
SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm |
W2DNE:
So that no one confuses military radios with amateur hobby radios? John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:58:28 +0000, W2DNE wrote: ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm |
W2DNE wrote:
....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? Because it's not dead, and never will be. It will just get harder to find and train operatives. |
"W2DNE" wrote in message ... ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm because you have to have something to use when the aliens have invaded and destroyed all the satellites and cities. |
"W2DNE" wrote in message ... ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm The reality is that the arguements will continue of code vs no code. Few folks understand that a fair number of hams can send and receive Morse faster than these folks can type. A surprising number of people cannot type more than 30 or 40 words per minute; their skill is that they can point and click with a mouse ;) Likewise, a number of folks think that typing is outdated. It is, so long as you only wish to copy and paste other's work and pass it off as your own. Somehow, if one wishes to actually create an article, it is useful to be able to type. 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim:
You should fully investigate "text-to-speech" and "speech-to-text"; typing is indeed becoming as extinct as the dodo bird (and cw.) Frankly, keyboards are probably only as prevalent as they are for much the same reasons as cw--humans are creatures of habit, the newest generations probably will kill the keyboard... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:48:35 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "W2DNE" wrote in message ... ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm The reality is that the arguements will continue of code vs no code. Few folks understand that a fair number of hams can send and receive Morse faster than these folks can type. A surprising number of people cannot type more than 30 or 40 words per minute; their skill is that they can point and click with a mouse ;) Likewise, a number of folks think that typing is outdated. It is, so long as you only wish to copy and paste other's work and pass it off as your own. Somehow, if one wishes to actually create an article, it is useful to be able to type. 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: You should fully investigate "text-to-speech" and "speech-to-text"; typing is indeed becoming as extinct as the dodo bird (and cw.) Frankly, keyboards are probably only as prevalent as they are for much the same reasons as cw--humans are creatures of habit, the newest generations probably will kill the keyboard... John Hello, John Well, I guess I've got to admit that I might be getting stumped. How do I use speach to text to write programs in Visual Basic or C? Can the program understand the difference between "to", "too", and "two"? Don't worry as the China will probably do your work for you ;) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim:
It is only necessary to create the association between any spoken word and the series of characters you wish to generate when that word is spoken, into a library of such associations... In other words, if I speak "the" and make the association to the characters "t-h-e" the speech to text engine will always generate those characters when I speak that specific word--I could just as easily associate the spoken "the" with any other series of characters. Now, while you and I might not go to that trouble if we are fast typists, others who do not type will... those who are blind will... companies and corps will (and especially those employing disabled workers.) I have seen such libraries on the net for specific uses, such as programming, before. You most likely can download one for the speech engine in question... There are groups devoted to the blind who could easily supply you with them, I am sure... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:11:42 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: You should fully investigate "text-to-speech" and "speech-to-text"; typing is indeed becoming as extinct as the dodo bird (and cw.) Frankly, keyboards are probably only as prevalent as they are for much the same reasons as cw--humans are creatures of habit, the newest generations probably will kill the keyboard... John Hello, John Well, I guess I've got to admit that I might be getting stumped. How do I use speach to text to write programs in Visual Basic or C? Can the program understand the difference between "to", "too", and "two"? Don't worry as the China will probably do your work for you ;) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim Hampton wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: You should fully investigate "text-to-speech" and "speech-to-text"; typing is indeed becoming as extinct as the dodo bird (and cw.) Frankly, keyboards are probably only as prevalent as they are for much the same reasons as cw--humans are creatures of habit, the newest generations probably will kill the keyboard... John Hello, John Well, I guess I've got to admit that I might be getting stumped. How do I use speach to text to write programs in Visual Basic or C? Can the program understand the difference between "to", "too", and "two"? Don't worry as the China will probably do your work for you ;) The way I figure it, as long as we know how to ask "Would you like fries with that?" We've had all the job training we need these days! 8^( For better or worse, I would hazard that 99 people out of 100 would not even think of programming when they think of keyboards. But then, isn't programming something they do in India? Congrats on getting that new job! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Then the world has come to an end
Long live CW and it will. -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! |
Mike:
Text-to-speech and speech-to-text should be thought of in the same way as the internet in regards to the pony-express or the US Postal System... While in the future there will be keyboards, it would make as much sense to use them as attempting to participate in this newsgroup via us postal mail--worse, get someone on horseback to deliver your post! .... some adapt easier than others ... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:48:50 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote: Jim Hampton wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: You should fully investigate "text-to-speech" and "speech-to-text"; typing is indeed becoming as extinct as the dodo bird (and cw.) Frankly, keyboards are probably only as prevalent as they are for much the same reasons as cw--humans are creatures of habit, the newest generations probably will kill the keyboard... John Hello, John Well, I guess I've got to admit that I might be getting stumped. How do I use speach to text to write programs in Visual Basic or C? Can the program understand the difference between "to", "too", and "two"? Don't worry as the China will probably do your work for you ;) The way I figure it, as long as we know how to ask "Would you like fries with that?" We've had all the job training we need these days! 8^( For better or worse, I would hazard that 99 people out of 100 would not even think of programming when they think of keyboards. But then, isn't programming something they do in India? Congrats on getting that new job! - Mike KB3EIA - |
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:58:28 -0000, "W2DNE" wrote:
If CW is dead....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm Answer: For the same reason that, if you search the web long enough, you might possibly come up with all or part of an operating manual for an old military spark-gap transmitter - namely that a lot of information about old military stuff can be found on the Internet. For example, I followed the link above, only to find myself staring at part of the instructions for the AN/VRC-45 and AN/VRC-49 radios. Not unlike the use of CW in US military communications, these two radios are obsolete, having been replaced by the AN/VRC-93 UHF TACSAT (as in TACtical SATellite) radios. John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS) zIRC #monitor Admin |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: It is only necessary to create the association between any spoken word and the series of characters you wish to generate when that word is spoken, into a library of such associations... In other words, if I speak "the" and make the association to the characters "t-h-e" the speech to text engine will always generate those characters when I speak that specific word--I could just as easily associate the spoken "the" with any other series of characters. Now, while you and I might not go to that trouble if we are fast typists, others who do not type will... those who are blind will... companies and corps will (and especially those employing disabled workers.) I have seen such libraries on the net for specific uses, such as programming, before. You most likely can download one for the speech engine in question... There are groups devoted to the blind who could easily supply you with them, I am sure... John Hello, John You have an idea that is remiss in a thought or two. One of my friends I have known for years is blind. He types. You do *not* have to see in order to type. I need not (and usually do not) look at the keyboard. In fact, I never look at the keyboard. Once you know where the home keys are, you don't need to see. In fact, check and see if your "f" and "j" keys have little bumps on them to assist you in finding the home keys. Amazing, ain't it LOL I learned grade 1.5 Braille when I was a teenager. I used a Braille slate, although it is far easier to use a Braille writer. My friend has a text to speach translator. They work quite well and are great for his e-mail, but speach to text has a problem. This brings to mind a simple diddy: Rockabye homonym, on the tree top when the wind blows, the homonym will rock and when the bow breaks, the homonym will fall and down comes your arguement, homonym and all. takes a bough As you can see, I might associate "to" with the letters "t" and "o" combined for one word. Unfortunately, when I wish to add the word "two", I will see that the spoken word is already associated with the word "to". Too big a problem, I suspect. Woops, there just went another too, too - or is that tu-tu? Further, how does one do addresses? I want the numbers to be stated as one block, with no commas should the address be something like 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Of course, no one is usually there at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue, but the arguement seems solid. I can't even use "my address" as two words come out rather than my street address - heaven help me if I want to add my e-mail address. Will "at" appear as "at" or "@"? Will ampersand appear as "ampersand" or "@"? Suppose I wish to use the word in a sentence? If you can't speak, you could always be in a restaurant with a lap-top with text to speach and type in "blew cheese dressing, please" and it sounds perfectly proper, despite the error in spelling. However, it doesn't work in the other direction. Now you have a spelling and/or context problem. Hope you understand my point ;) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim:
Yes, I thought "typing by touch" was a given, I thought it a waste of time in mentioning to anyone using a keyboard... However, once it is necessary to present the blind with text-to-speech it is only obvious they can make excellent use of speech-to-text--especially since the text is usually spelled back to them for checking... We used to have a blind coder at a kernel driver shop I worked for, that was ten years ago, and he was using the both engines... I don't even have a concept of how far all that has advanced in a decade. But, I take it for granted, the only reason I am still using a keyboard is because of my religious devotion to it... on IRC chat I come into contact with those using the speech-to-text engines (many blind/disabled use IRC for social contact)--if they did not make me aware, I would only believe they were faster typists than myself... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 19:55:27 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: It is only necessary to create the association between any spoken word and the series of characters you wish to generate when that word is spoken, into a library of such associations... In other words, if I speak "the" and make the association to the characters "t-h-e" the speech to text engine will always generate those characters when I speak that specific word--I could just as easily associate the spoken "the" with any other series of characters. Now, while you and I might not go to that trouble if we are fast typists, others who do not type will... those who are blind will... companies and corps will (and especially those employing disabled workers.) I have seen such libraries on the net for specific uses, such as programming, before. You most likely can download one for the speech engine in question... There are groups devoted to the blind who could easily supply you with them, I am sure... John Hello, John You have an idea that is remiss in a thought or two. One of my friends I have known for years is blind. He types. You do *not* have to see in order to type. I need not (and usually do not) look at the keyboard. In fact, I never look at the keyboard. Once you know where the home keys are, you don't need to see. In fact, check and see if your "f" and "j" keys have little bumps on them to assist you in finding the home keys. Amazing, ain't it LOL I learned grade 1.5 Braille when I was a teenager. I used a Braille slate, although it is far easier to use a Braille writer. My friend has a text to speach translator. They work quite well and are great for his e-mail, but speach to text has a problem. This brings to mind a simple diddy: Rockabye homonym, on the tree top when the wind blows, the homonym will rock and when the bow breaks, the homonym will fall and down comes your arguement, homonym and all. takes a bough As you can see, I might associate "to" with the letters "t" and "o" combined for one word. Unfortunately, when I wish to add the word "two", I will see that the spoken word is already associated with the word "to". Too big a problem, I suspect. Woops, there just went another too, too - or is that tu-tu? Further, how does one do addresses? I want the numbers to be stated as one block, with no commas should the address be something like 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Of course, no one is usually there at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue, but the arguement seems solid. I can't even use "my address" as two words come out rather than my street address - heaven help me if I want to add my e-mail address. Will "at" appear as "at" or "@"? Will ampersand appear as "ampersand" or "@"? Suppose I wish to use the word in a sentence? If you can't speak, you could always be in a restaurant with a lap-top with text to speach and type in "blew cheese dressing, please" and it sounds perfectly proper, despite the error in spelling. However, it doesn't work in the other direction. Now you have a spelling and/or context problem. Hope you understand my point ;) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
John:
I entered #monitor though dalnet servers. The channel welcome notice states it is cross linked with zirc (if there isn't a split or other tech probs), what is your nick there? John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:52:25 -0400, John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:58:28 -0000, "W2DNE" wrote: If CW is dead....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm Answer: For the same reason that, if you search the web long enough, you might possibly come up with all or part of an operating manual for an old military spark-gap transmitter - namely that a lot of information about old military stuff can be found on the Internet. For example, I followed the link above, only to find myself staring at part of the instructions for the AN/VRC-45 and AN/VRC-49 radios. Not unlike the use of CW in US military communications, these two radios are obsolete, having been replaced by the AN/VRC-93 UHF TACSAT (as in TACtical SATellite) radios. John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS) zIRC #monitor Admin |
John:
From the following: John_Smith, lexicon says John_Smith, lexicon says: KNY2VS ) was last seen quitting #satcom 4 days 18 hours 53 minutes ago (22.08. 17:23) stating ""th y R .g"" after spending 1 hour 34 minutes there.: KNY2VS I take it, KNY2VS is it... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:52:25 -0400, John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:58:28 -0000, "W2DNE" wrote: If CW is dead....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm Answer: For the same reason that, if you search the web long enough, you might possibly come up with all or part of an operating manual for an old military spark-gap transmitter - namely that a lot of information about old military stuff can be found on the Internet. For example, I followed the link above, only to find myself staring at part of the instructions for the AN/VRC-45 and AN/VRC-49 radios. Not unlike the use of CW in US military communications, these two radios are obsolete, having been replaced by the AN/VRC-93 UHF TACSAT (as in TACtical SATellite) radios. John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS) zIRC #monitor Admin |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Mike: Text-to-speech and speech-to-text should be thought of in the same way as the internet in regards to the pony-express or the US Postal System... While in the future there will be keyboards, it would make as much sense to use them as attempting to participate in this newsgroup via us postal mail--worse, get someone on horseback to deliver your post! ... some adapt easier than others ... John Hello, John It is all a matter of the proper tool at the proper time. Sure, you can order a new computer via the Internet, but the Internet cannot deliver it. They you go to the post office or UPS. One tool doesn't work for everything LOL. 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
W2DNE wrote: ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm This is an amateur radio forum. For an answer to you question, may I direct you to the United States Army? |
From: W2DNE on Aug 27, 6:58 am
....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...iew/public/479... Answer: THEY DO NOT for manual radiotelegraphy ("morse code"). FM 24-18 is a basic PRIMER on radio communications, an introductory text which has been around for at least three decades. The version approved for public distribution is dated 30 Sep 87, superseding the one for 13 Dec 84. Much of the equipment mentioned is OBSOLETE now and has been for decade(s). The AN/GRC-26D, for example, (an HF station in a hut on the bed of a 2 1/2 ton truck) dates back to the first half of the 1950s! The AN/PRC-70 manpack HF set went bye- bye in the 1980s, replaced with the AN/PRC-104 designed by Hughes Aircraft Ground Division. There is NO "SINCGARS-V" in the U.S. military. You are confusing "single-channel" as in one set, one operator, with the SINCGARS family of SINgle Channel Ground Air Radio System that begins with the manpack AN/PRC-119 (first operational 1989) and continues on through two ground/vehicular versions (using same R/T) and two airborne avionics versions. Just as the AN/PRC-77 replaced the AN/PRC-25 VHF portable FM transceiver, the frequency-hopping digitized voice/data (with selectable COMSEC internal) AN/PRC-119 replaced the PRC-77. The PRC-25 and PRC-77 were both used in the Vietnam War that ended 30 years ago. The SINCGARS family is perhaps the most produced of any military radio communications set with 250 Thousand produced and fielded between 1989 and end of 2003 by ITT Fort Wayne, IN, and General Dynamics Ground Division (now dissolved) in Florida. The PRC-119 is expected to be replaced by the PRC-150 designed and built by Harris Corporation, NY. SINCGARS sets, along with nearly every HF-VHF-UHF radio set designed and built since WW2, have provisions for remote operation through various interface-control equipments. When remote operation talks about "CW" they do NOT mean manual radiotelegraphy as is common in radio amateur parlance. "CW" in the military manual sense is control over the basic CARRIER transmission. In actual practice SINCGARS is used in small-unit operations (a few vehicles, squads) and many may be in the same radio-range area but "separated" (non- interference operation) by their digital/frequency-hopping option. SINCGARS sets, manpack through airborne, have NO provision for connecting any manual "morse code" key or sending any "morse code" radiotelegraphy signals. The U.S. military does NOT teach any manual radiotelegraphy skills for communications purposes. It does teach radiotelegraphy cognition for ELINT intercept-analysis as part of four MOSs for Military Intelligence operations at the M.I. School in Fort Huachuca, AZ. FM 24-18 is a fairly good introductory handbook on radio for anyone who wishes to learn basic radio facts and radio wave propagation along with several types of antennas. It is a free download through the Army Training and Doctrine Digital Library (in the given link) and may be copied from military CDs containing Field and Techmical Manuals (not fully public distribution) through LOGSA (LOGistics Supply Agency). In particular, the "nevis" (pronounced version of NVIS or Near Vertical Incidence Skywave) techniques used by U.S. land forces radio since the 1970s; known colloquially as "cloud burners" by amateurs. Manual radiotelegraphy for communications is essentially "dead" for every other U.S. radio service...except amateur radio. Accept that and carry on. As you were... |
"W2DNE" wrote in message ... ....why do the US Army Field Manuals provide instructions for setting up SINGCARS-V radios in CW mode? https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldier...18/FM24-_9.htm CQ Magazine reports they had the most EVER CW entries in the CQWWDX (World Wide DX Contest) in 2004. Not bad for a dead mode, eh? Dan/W4NTI |
Jim:
Did you have a job where you were paid to state the obvious, or is this a new career for you? A mental disorder? A fad? hmmmmm...... John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:38:43 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Mike: Text-to-speech and speech-to-text should be thought of in the same way as the internet in regards to the pony-express or the US Postal System... While in the future there will be keyboards, it would make as much sense to use them as attempting to participate in this newsgroup via us postal mail--worse, get someone on horseback to deliver your post! ... some adapt easier than others ... John Hello, John It is all a matter of the proper tool at the proper time. Sure, you can order a new computer via the Internet, but the Internet cannot deliver it. They you go to the post office or UPS. One tool doesn't work for everything LOL. 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Model Ts aren't dead.
Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand-cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. Makes no sense to me. Jim "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message k.net... Not bad for a dead mode, eh? |
Hello, John
One thing that I hadn't thought of is Windows and Linux/Unix. Just wait until the unthinkable happens and you get dropped into the command line interface. Then you either know what you are doing and start typing, or you drop in the bootable cdrom, reboot, reformat, and start over. Been there, worn that t-shirt LOL. Best regards from Rochester, NY Jim "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: Yes, I thought "typing by touch" was a given, I thought it a waste of time in mentioning to anyone using a keyboard... However, once it is necessary to present the blind with text-to-speech it is only obvious they can make excellent use of speech-to-text--especially since the text is usually spelled back to them for checking... We used to have a blind coder at a kernel driver shop I worked for, that was ten years ago, and he was using the both engines... I don't even have a concept of how far all that has advanced in a decade. But, I take it for granted, the only reason I am still using a keyboard is because of my religious devotion to it... on IRC chat I come into contact with those using the speech-to-text engines (many blind/disabled use IRC for social contact)--if they did not make me aware, I would only believe they were faster typists than myself... John |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: Did you have a job where you were paid to state the obvious, or is this a new career for you? A mental disorder? A fad? hmmmmm...... John Of course not. However, it seems just as silly for someone to argue that any one thing has no purpose. So ... :)) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
"RST Engineering" wrote in message ... Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Model Ts aren't dead. Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand-cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. Makes no sense to me. Jim Well, that sounds like a good deal (eliminate the cw only bands) for the no-codes, but it would end up a very *good* deal for the cw enthusiasts. Believe me, ssb would get clobbered from one end to the other by cw stations simply because of the wide spectrum that ssb occupies (compared to cw, that is). I have a feeling that if the cw bands were eliminated, a lot of phone folks would be screaming to bring them back. I'm not sure, but based upon my 75 watts being able to cut through a kilowatt station trying to clobber me and another station ..... both of us maintained a solid qso for half an hour at 35 to 45 words per minute cw whilst Mike, W2OY, was trying to jam us with a kilowatt of am. Didn't work then and I doubt it would work now. You're talking a 6 kHz wide am signal vs cw signals needing only a couple hundred of Hertz. You're talking at least a 14 dB or so advantage for the cw based upon bandwidth of the receiver. For the protection of the phone stations, I believe you will want to keep the cw bands intact. 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim:
You put words in my mouth (or text on my fingers, rather) CW has a great entertainment value for some... I would never choose to argue that... I do not make light of that fact, some of the most important things I have found in life are books, movies, songs, stories, hobbies--entertainment. Things need to be no bigger than they are, nor diminished, they are as they are... I see now why you made the statement you did, however, it was not my point CW was/is "worthless", it is just not what some attempt to make it... John On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 01:49:27 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: Did you have a job where you were paid to state the obvious, or is this a new career for you? A mental disorder? A fad? hmmmmm...... John Of course not. However, it seems just as silly for someone to argue that any one thing has no purpose. So ... :)) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Jim:
Strange how you place everyone who disagrees with you in a "wannabe" category. I have always been "commandline material." As we speak right now, I am compiling my linux 2.4.20 (yes, I should get the new 2.6.9x kernel.) In windows xp I drop to the command line to move files, program (in the old borlandbuilder c++ commandline compiler) my "personal stuff", etc... However, the commandline is dead, I know it, there is nothing you can do at the commandline which cannot be done in gui, launchers and installers do exist... in the future there will be no commandline, I just have a religious devotion to the commandline--if I followed that in my employment--I would soon be unemployed--like it or not the gui does make me more productive... still, once in awhile, I can come up with an excuse to use it... in my personal life, I will probably die using the commandline, some who follow after me will only know it from books... so it is with CW... the brave men call the truth for what it is, the cowards still just die a thousand deaths, and look pitiful as they snivel... John On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 01:48:11 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: Hello, John One thing that I hadn't thought of is Windows and Linux/Unix. Just wait until the unthinkable happens and you get dropped into the command line interface. Then you either know what you are doing and start typing, or you drop in the bootable cdrom, reboot, reformat, and start over. Been there, worn that t-shirt LOL. Best regards from Rochester, NY Jim "John Smith" wrote in message ... Jim: Yes, I thought "typing by touch" was a given, I thought it a waste of time in mentioning to anyone using a keyboard... However, once it is necessary to present the blind with text-to-speech it is only obvious they can make excellent use of speech-to-text--especially since the text is usually spelled back to them for checking... We used to have a blind coder at a kernel driver shop I worked for, that was ten years ago, and he was using the both engines... I don't even have a concept of how far all that has advanced in a decade. But, I take it for granted, the only reason I am still using a keyboard is because of my religious devotion to it... on IRC chat I come into contact with those using the speech-to-text engines (many blind/disabled use IRC for social contact)--if they did not make me aware, I would only believe they were faster typists than myself... John |
"Cmdr Buzz corey" wrote in message ... Jim Hampton wrote: Hello, John It is all a matter of the proper tool at the proper time. Sure, you can order a new computer via the Internet, but the Internet cannot deliver it. Darn, and I just ordered a pizza over the Internet but couldn't figure out how to download it. Downloading is easy. Once it is delivered, you open your mouth and download the thing, one byte at a time ;) 73, Jim AA2QA |
RST Engineering wrote: Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Yes, they have. Obviously they haven't actually listened to the parts of the ham bands where Morse Code is used. Model Ts aren't dead. Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. True enough. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand- cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. That's because the percentage of autos with handcranks is very small. So is the percentage of taildragger aircraft. But the percentage of ham stations on HF/MF using Morse Code is much, much higher. However, the remaining Morse Code test is probably going away soon. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? "Obsolete"? Morse Code is the second most popular mode in HF amateur radio. Why are there written exams with questions on electronics for those who chose not to build their radios? Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. But there are special lanes on some roads for cars only, high-occupancy vehicles only, etc. There are sidewalks and trails on which motor vehicles are banned. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. The only CW-only parts of the US ham bands are 50.0-50.1 MHz and 144.0-144.1 MHz. All other HF "CW" subbands are shared with digital/data modes. 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message k.net... Not bad for a dead mode, eh? |
Jim:
Judging from the obese state of this nation--I'd almost be willing to suffer the argument "they" have figured out a way to download 'em! grin I may be the only height/weight proportionate person within blocks of my home--and I am beginning to worry about my resolve to stay thin! John On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 02:35:22 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote: "Cmdr Buzz corey" wrote in message ... Jim Hampton wrote: Hello, John It is all a matter of the proper tool at the proper time. Sure, you can order a new computer via the Internet, but the Internet cannot deliver it. Darn, and I just ordered a pizza over the Internet but couldn't figure out how to download it. Downloading is easy. Once it is delivered, you open your mouth and download the thing, one byte at a time ;) 73, Jim AA2QA |
Jim Hampton wrote:
Hello, John It is all a matter of the proper tool at the proper time. Sure, you can order a new computer via the Internet, but the Internet cannot deliver it. Darn, and I just ordered a pizza over the Internet but couldn't figure out how to download it. |
RST Engineering wrote:
nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. But you will have to get checked out on a tail dragger before you can fly it. |
From: John Smith on Aug 27, 4:52 pm
Len: Unfortunately, the only things more dead than CW is the brain dead amateurs too dumb to stop sounding ignorant, I mean, before they opened their mouths (or fingers on the keyboard) we only wondered, now we know, having been shown time and time again... frown Well, so be it, I'm saddened to see. I'll just try to inform these poor souls (or pour souls in some, they obviously pouring something before writing) what military radio IS, not what they imagine it to be. Ackshully, FM 24-18 is a good tutorial for a beginner. In re- checking the link given, there's a download-the-whole-thing link at the bottom but the file is roughly 10 MB in size. Takes a few minutes to get. [glad I already had it on a CD) It has an objective comparison of wire antenna gains in various terrain/environment, untainted by advertising claims and myths of some amateur users. FM 24-24 is available from the Army Training and Doctrine Command Digital Library. It is a veritable catalog of land force radios and communications devices as of 1994. Public distribution. I've given the link to it before in here. The ATDLS website has changed slightly so those precise links I gave before won't get there, but anyone can do so from the 'web, through their home page. Some of the equipment shown has gone obsolete in the past 9 years, or it is in storage in a depot "just in case" or whatever. The ITT 'web page has more informative technical material on the SINCGARS family of radios. Aerospace and Ground Division at Fort Wayne, Indiana, at the old Magnavox plant. Harris Corporation has some more plus future things they are trying to get contracts on, forgotten division name for the moment (somebody will pipe up with the correct name in triumph and imagined glory). Harris has already sold some SINCGARS-compatible work-alikes to the UK last year. SINCGARS is interesting in that it doesn't have so many of the conventional controls. From day one it has a Touchscreen for entering frequency, for entering net properties (frequency hopping pattern). A little OS built into the internal micro- processor. When commanding it to frequency/net operation, one enters a "hopset" (colloquial) which is a rather large data group with its own authenticators from a separate piece of equipment to be used at local Net central. Internal power demand at idle (such as in transport or listening only) is so low that it all the entered data is retained until the LiON battery is replaced. Internal time/frequency accuracy is phenomenal over the full military environmental range. Newer models (the SINCGARS Improvement Plan or SIP versions) will allow the "Plugger" (AN/PSN-11) GPS receiver to connect to it to synchronize the internal time/frequency to the GPS. The "Plugger" (military refined nickname in place of what GIs have called it - the PSN) saw its first field operational duty in the First Gulf War. A very few PRC-119s were tried then, but not many fielded in 1990 since the first ones went to Army forces in Korea. The frequency hopping rate is 10 per second, damn hard to get a handle on in the field for either DF or interception. With digitized voice or data, SIP versions have built-in crypto (selectable) while the older versions needed external COMSEC keyers. It is also "QRP"-like in that there's a three-position front panel switch to select RF power output; DX it ain't but that isn't needed in small-unit ops. The vehicular model with larger PA can push out some RF for (easily) up to 200 miles. It ain't yer daddie's old backpack raddio and it beats the old (but still neat) AN/PRC-10 I once wore on weekly sojer training sessions in the 1950s. The Harris AN/PRC-150 covering HF through UHF is compatible with some more bells and whistles in it, all in manpack size and weight. The AN/PRC-104 IHFR (Improved High Frequency Radio) family debuted in 1986 out of Hughes Aircraft Co. Ground Division. For those missions where HF is thought to be better, it can do so nicely, even the manpack version having an automatic antenna tuner (using latching relays to hold the L and C selections for the internal L network). Little microprocessor in that, too, also controlling the frequency synthesizer permitting good SSB performance. COMSEC is external with that model but they handle all the voice/data crypto formats. Early PRC-104s had a KY-114 knee key (why, I don't know) which was left out of later models. Back in World War 2 times, someone at the Pentagon thought it a fine idea to improve the horse cavalry radio...a lighter and better version than the 1930s model they did have but needed to be set up and operated while the troop was stopped. The answer was in the BC-511, the infamous "guidon radio" (set was IN the combination guidon-bottom with top mount whip antenna, carried like the old horse cavalry guidon pennant). That was thunk up around 1942. However, at the same time HORSE cavalry was disbanded in the U.S. Army! Motorola in Chicago made a bunch of them. Neat little sets, AM and on low HF, crystal controlled. So, a whole bunch of horse cavalry radios being made with no horse cavalry to use it! Stagnated old-soldier thinking in DC. Infantry got some of them, GIs calling it the "pogo stick," terribly clumsy to use on foot. Some new-soldier thinking got vehicle adapters for them but those pogo-sticks went surplus storage when the BC-1000 Walkie-Talkies were built (also by Motorola in Chicago, also beginning in 1943). The SCR-300 (using BC-1000 R/T) was FM voice-only on low VHF. It weighed the same as the cavalry pogo-stick but was in backpack form and much more mobile on foot, worked far better in the field as a radio. Some of the "old radio ops" just can't give up morsemanship. It must be part of their religion or whatever. Like the never-quit horse cavalryman of long ago, their beliefs insist that "CW" or on-off keying of a carrier is somehow "necessary" for today. They can't be budged from that in "the service." :-) It's like 60+ years ago, the cavalrymen insisting that all "good soldiers" had to know how to ride a horse...even when the horses were put out to pasture, glue, or pet food. So it is when all other radio services have abandoned morse code for communications purposes, U.S. amateur radio morsemen INSIST that morsemanship MUST be in the amateur license test. Horsesnit. |
Len:
ahhhhh.... I like to build antennas... I like to experiment with them... But, I am a software engineer, not a hardware engineer (some of the math interests me) and frankly, anyone who will pay attention to my rants about the either consider me a loon frown... something has to seem like "magic" to me--or I will lose faith altogether! grin I tend to look at the whole antenna as a "tunable balun" which interfaces the signal from the transmitter to the ether--the ether being a near-superconductor, or at the very least--a "superior conductor." I am still stuck on just studying, devising new feeds for, and generally playing with the 1/2 vertical on 10 meters, nice size to work with, some local amateurs on the freqs there, etc... and the lack of need of a counterpoise (virtually) makes the 1/2 wave interesting and fun... I have built dozens of them and given quite a few away... my "coaxial match" is my most exciting development to date, simple, stable, almost bullet proof and an excellent performer! I am waiting for the next revelation as I type here, and type here, and type here, and type here, and type here... deep-in-thought-and-highly-intellectual-look-on-the-face-to-fool-'em! John On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:59:15 -0700, wrote: From: John Smith on Aug 27, 4:52 pm Len: Unfortunately, the only things more dead than CW is the brain dead amateurs too dumb to stop sounding ignorant, I mean, before they opened their mouths (or fingers on the keyboard) we only wondered, now we know, having been shown time and time again... frown Well, so be it, I'm saddened to see. I'll just try to inform these poor souls (or pour souls in some, they obviously pouring something before writing) what military radio IS, not what they imagine it to be. Ackshully, FM 24-18 is a good tutorial for a beginner. In re- checking the link given, there's a download-the-whole-thing link at the bottom but the file is roughly 10 MB in size. Takes a few minutes to get. [glad I already had it on a CD) It has an objective comparison of wire antenna gains in various terrain/environment, untainted by advertising claims and myths of some amateur users. FM 24-24 is available from the Army Training and Doctrine Command Digital Library. It is a veritable catalog of land force radios and communications devices as of 1994. Public distribution. I've given the link to it before in here. The ATDLS website has changed slightly so those precise links I gave before won't get there, but anyone can do so from the 'web, through their home page. Some of the equipment shown has gone obsolete in the past 9 years, or it is in storage in a depot "just in case" or whatever. The ITT 'web page has more informative technical material on the SINCGARS family of radios. Aerospace and Ground Division at Fort Wayne, Indiana, at the old Magnavox plant. Harris Corporation has some more plus future things they are trying to get contracts on, forgotten division name for the moment (somebody will pipe up with the correct name in triumph and imagined glory). Harris has already sold some SINCGARS-compatible work-alikes to the UK last year. SINCGARS is interesting in that it doesn't have so many of the conventional controls. From day one it has a Touchscreen for entering frequency, for entering net properties (frequency hopping pattern). A little OS built into the internal micro- processor. When commanding it to frequency/net operation, one enters a "hopset" (colloquial) which is a rather large data group with its own authenticators from a separate piece of equipment to be used at local Net central. Internal power demand at idle (such as in transport or listening only) is so low that it all the entered data is retained until the LiON battery is replaced. Internal time/frequency accuracy is phenomenal over the full military environmental range. Newer models (the SINCGARS Improvement Plan or SIP versions) will allow the "Plugger" (AN/PSN-11) GPS receiver to connect to it to synchronize the internal time/frequency to the GPS. The "Plugger" (military refined nickname in place of what GIs have called it - the PSN) saw its first field operational duty in the First Gulf War. A very few PRC-119s were tried then, but not many fielded in 1990 since the first ones went to Army forces in Korea. The frequency hopping rate is 10 per second, damn hard to get a handle on in the field for either DF or interception. With digitized voice or data, SIP versions have built-in crypto (selectable) while the older versions needed external COMSEC keyers. It is also "QRP"-like in that there's a three-position front panel switch to select RF power output; DX it ain't but that isn't needed in small-unit ops. The vehicular model with larger PA can push out some RF for (easily) up to 200 miles. It ain't yer daddie's old backpack raddio and it beats the old (but still neat) AN/PRC-10 I once wore on weekly sojer training sessions in the 1950s. The Harris AN/PRC-150 covering HF through UHF is compatible with some more bells and whistles in it, all in manpack size and weight. The AN/PRC-104 IHFR (Improved High Frequency Radio) family debuted in 1986 out of Hughes Aircraft Co. Ground Division. For those missions where HF is thought to be better, it can do so nicely, even the manpack version having an automatic antenna tuner (using latching relays to hold the L and C selections for the internal L network). Little microprocessor in that, too, also controlling the frequency synthesizer permitting good SSB performance. COMSEC is external with that model but they handle all the voice/data crypto formats. Early PRC-104s had a KY-114 knee key (why, I don't know) which was left out of later models. Back in World War 2 times, someone at the Pentagon thought it a fine idea to improve the horse cavalry radio...a lighter and better version than the 1930s model they did have but needed to be set up and operated while the troop was stopped. The answer was in the BC-511, the infamous "guidon radio" (set was IN the combination guidon-bottom with top mount whip antenna, carried like the old horse cavalry guidon pennant). That was thunk up around 1942. However, at the same time HORSE cavalry was disbanded in the U.S. Army! Motorola in Chicago made a bunch of them. Neat little sets, AM and on low HF, crystal controlled. So, a whole bunch of horse cavalry radios being made with no horse cavalry to use it! Stagnated old-soldier thinking in DC. Infantry got some of them, GIs calling it the "pogo stick," terribly clumsy to use on foot. Some new-soldier thinking got vehicle adapters for them but those pogo-sticks went surplus storage when the BC-1000 Walkie-Talkies were built (also by Motorola in Chicago, also beginning in 1943). The SCR-300 (using BC-1000 R/T) was FM voice-only on low VHF. It weighed the same as the cavalry pogo-stick but was in backpack form and much more mobile on foot, worked far better in the field as a radio. Some of the "old radio ops" just can't give up morsemanship. It must be part of their religion or whatever. Like the never-quit horse cavalryman of long ago, their beliefs insist that "CW" or on-off keying of a carrier is somehow "necessary" for today. They can't be budged from that in "the service." :-) It's like 60+ years ago, the cavalrymen insisting that all "good soldiers" had to know how to ride a horse...even when the horses were put out to pasture, glue, or pet food. So it is when all other radio services have abandoned morse code for communications purposes, U.S. amateur radio morsemen INSIST that morsemanship MUST be in the amateur license test. Horsesnit. |
wrote in message
ups.com... RST Engineering wrote: Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Yes, they have. Obviously they haven't actually listened to the parts of the ham bands where Morse Code is used. Model Ts aren't dead. Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. True enough. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand- cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. That's because the percentage of autos with handcranks is very small. So is the percentage of taildragger aircraft. Better example from the auto anology is manual gearboxes. There are significant numbers of new vehicles made every day which have manual gearboxes...but no state mandates driver testing on a manual gearbox to be able to drive one. But the percentage of ham stations on HF/MF using Morse Code is much, much higher. So? Nothing in the amateur rules requires anyone to every make a CW QSO, or, for that matter any contact using any mode at all. The issue is and always has been the exclusive CW test in comparison to knowledge tested for any other modes. However, the remaining Morse Code test is probably going away soon. Just a matter of time. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? "Obsolete"? Morse Code is the second most popular mode in HF amateur radio. Why are there written exams with questions on electronics for those who chose not to build their radios? No separate test exists for only the electronics. The written is scored on an overall basis....not on a subject area stand-alone basis. Add some CW questions (similar in forat to existing questions on the phonetic alphabet) to the tests then. Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. But there are special lanes on some roads for cars only, high-occupancy vehicles only, etc. There are sidewalks and trails on which motor vehicles are banned. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. The only CW-only parts of the US ham bands are 50.0-50.1 MHz and 144.0-144.1 MHz. All other HF "CW" subbands are shared with digital/data modes. Correct. Cheers and I see my July 06 prediction becoming more of a possibility every day that passes now. Bill K2UNK |
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... RST Engineering wrote: Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Yes, they have. The anonymouse "John Smith" has claimed that repeatedly. He's wrong, of course. Obviously they haven't actually listened to the parts of the ham bands where Morse Code is used. Model Ts aren't dead. Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. True enough. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand- cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. That's because the percentage of autos with handcranks is very small. So is the percentage of taildragger aircraft. Better example from the auto anology is manual gearboxes. There are significant numbers of new vehicles made every day which have manual gearboxes...but no state mandates driver testing on a manual gearbox to be able to drive one. Last statistics I saw were that 5% of new cars have manual transmissions. The other 95% sold today are automatics. Morse Code accounts for a lot more than 5% of amateur radio HF/MF operation. But the percentage of ham stations on HF/MF using Morse Code is much, much higher. So? Nothing in the amateur rules requires anyone to every make a CW QSO, or, for that matter any contact using any mode at all. Exactly. Yet there are all sorts of test questions on things no ham is required to do. Why? The issue is and always has been the exclusive CW test in comparison to knowledge tested for any other modes. Without knowledge of those other modes, you can't get a license, even if all you want to do is to use Morse Code. However, the remaining Morse Code test is probably going away soon. Just a matter of time. Probably. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? "Obsolete"? Morse Code is the second most popular mode in HF amateur radio. Why are there written exams with questions on electronics for those who chose not to build their radios? No separate test exists for only the electronics. Nope - but try to pass the exam without electronics knowledge. The written is scored on an overall basis....not on a subject area stand-alone basis. Add some CW questions (similar in forat to existing questions on the phonetic alphabet) to the tests then. What Canada has done solves that problem. Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. But there are special lanes on some roads for cars only, high-occupancy vehicles only, etc. There are sidewalks and trails on which motor vehicles are banned. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. The only CW-only parts of the US ham bands are 50.0-50.1 MHz and 144.0-144.1 MHz. All other HF "CW" subbands are shared with digital/data modes. Correct. Cheers and I see my July 06 prediction becoming more of a possibility every day that passes now. Let's see...comments close sometime this fall...FCC takes six months to produce the R&O, coming out in early spring 2006...effective early summer 2006. You may be the winnah! 73 de Jim, N2EY |
wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message ups.com... RST Engineering wrote: Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode. Yes, they have. The anonymouse "John Smith" has claimed that repeatedly. He's wrong, of course. Obviously they haven't actually listened to the parts of the ham bands where Morse Code is used. Model Ts aren't dead. Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW. True enough. However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand- cranking Model T engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include 3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes. That's because the percentage of autos with handcranks is very small. So is the percentage of taildragger aircraft. Better example from the auto anology is manual gearboxes. There are significant numbers of new vehicles made every day which have manual gearboxes...but no state mandates driver testing on a manual gearbox to be able to drive one. Last statistics I saw were that 5% of new cars have manual transmissions. The other 95% sold today are automatics. Agreed, but in terms of total vehicles sold new each year in the US, that is several hundred thousand vehicles with stick shifts every year. Morse Code accounts for a lot more than 5% of amateur radio HF/MF operation. The point still reverts to the exclusivity (i.e. stand-alone) testing for one mode and one mode only. No other mode, or subject area is so tested for an amateur license. But the percentage of ham stations on HF/MF using Morse Code is much, much higher. So? Nothing in the amateur rules requires anyone to every make a CW QSO, or, for that matter any contact using any mode at all. Exactly. Yet there are all sorts of test questions on things no ham is required to do. Why? Read again the following: The point still reverts to the exclusivity (i.e. stand-alone) testing for one mode and one mode only. No other mode, or subject area is so tested for an amateur license. The issue is and always has been the exclusive CW test in comparison to knowledge tested for any other modes. Without knowledge of those other modes, you can't get a license, even if all you want to do is to use Morse Code. Wrong....you can ignore or not learn about several specific subject areas...one or more modes of operation, etc. and still get a passing test grade. However, the remaining Morse Code test is probably going away soon. Just a matter of time. Probably. Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode? "Obsolete"? Morse Code is the second most popular mode in HF amateur radio. Why are there written exams with questions on electronics for those who chose not to build their radios? No separate test exists for only the electronics. Nope - but try to pass the exam without electronics knowledge. It still isn't a separate exclusive test. If you get all the other stuff (rules, regs, etc) 100%, you can miss a greater percentage of electronic questions then if it was a separate subject area test. The written is scored on an overall basis....not on a subject area stand-alone basis. Add some CW questions (similar in format to existing questions on the phonetic alphabet) to the tests then. What Canada has done solves that problem. Works for me. Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model Ts, nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes. But there are special lanes on some roads for cars only, high-occupancy vehicles only, etc. There are sidewalks and trails on which motor vehicles are banned. Why are there special segments of the band for CW. The only CW-only parts of the US ham bands are 50.0-50.1 MHz and 144.0-144.1 MHz. All other HF "CW" subbands are shared with digital/data modes. Correct. Cheers and I see my July 06 prediction becoming more of a possibility every day that passes now. Let's see...comments close sometime this fall...FCC takes six months to produce the R&O, coming out in early spring 2006...effective early summer 2006. You may be the winnah! 73 de Jim, N2EY Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
wrote Morse Code accounts for a lot more than 5% of amateur radio HF/MF operation. That's obvious-to-the-most-casual-observer-with-a-receiver correct. It's the favorite mode of a lot of hams (including you and me), and that fact isn't likely to change. It's also an inherently self-testing mode. In other words, if I'm on the air using Morse code, then obvious-to-the-most-casual-observer, I've taken the time/effort to learn it. The need for a government test is obviated by this simple observation. 73, de Hans, K0HB -- E=IR. It's not just a good idea; it's the LAW! |
No, according to G. S. Ohm, R=E/I. The other two forms are merely algebraic
manipulations. {;-) Jim "KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... -- E=IR. It's not just a good idea; it's the LAW! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com