Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:
Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Propagation is poor, but I am hearing beacon activity here on 14100 between 2045
and 2050.
"I am hearing beacon activity"...

...so, any idea -which- beacons you were hearing?
Yes.

That would have been
quite germane to the thread.
Yes it would!, but I didn't sign on to be your Morse de-coder, Tommy Tootard!
You are not doing it for "me" at all, but for 'billcalley' the OP and
others reading the thread. (Which is to say, you gave a bull****,
generic answer, even before you knew I was going to post, so don't blame
it on me).

But thanks for actually -confirming- you are a poseur "ace"!

A REAL ace would have known that:

You DON'T need to be a "Morse de-coder"...that you don't have to
"decode" at all, for example if one didn't know the code or propagation
was so bad that the CW was indecipherable.

A REAL "ace" would have known that:

There are several freeware programs that flash on the screen what beacon
is currently transmitting on what band, the only requirement being that
your internal computer clock has been set to within a second or two of
WWV time (also many freeware programs to do that). No Morse decoding
required.

A REAL "ace" would have those programs installed and would have given a
-specific- answer instead of your bull**** non-answer "I am hearing
beacon activity".

The poor, fake "ace", face down in the dust yet again. :-(

dxAce wrote:

Sorry, a *real Ace* doesn't need a Morse de-coder!

Well make up your mind! First, you said you "weren't going to be my
Morse decoder"--implying a decoder -is- needed, now you said a "real
ace" doesn't need one. In any event, it seems being a "real ace" lets
you out.

BTW, looks like with your reading comprehension problem you again missed
the point. NONE of the software I was referring to decodes the Morse.
It's all done by timing. The beacons adhere to a very rigid, known,
published timing schedule derived from a GPS based clock contained in
the beacon hardware. That is why, with your computer clock set
accurately, the software knows what beacon from what band and what
location is on the air without doing any Morse decoding at all. Get it now?

At any rate, I answered the original posters questions regarding propagation and beacon
activity.

Yes you did answer it--sort of, and IMHO, a real half-assed answer. Had
you been a real ace and told him "I was barely hearing the NY beacon,
conditions are lousy" or said you were "hearing the Hong Kong beacon,
conditions are good"...it would have been sooo much more of a meaningful
answer than just saying "I'm hearing beacon activity".

Try again, Tommy Tootard.

Thanks, just did, Dusty..

What kind of meds are you on, Tommy Tootard?

dxAce wrote:

Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:
Tommy Tootles wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Propagation is poor, but I am hearing beacon activity here on 14100 between 2045
and 2050.
"I am hearing beacon activity"...

...so, any idea -which- beacons you were hearing?
Yes.

That would have been
quite germane to the thread.
Yes it would!, but I didn't sign on to be your Morse de-coder, Tommy Tootard!
You are not doing it for "me" at all, but for 'billcalley' the OP and
others reading the thread. (Which is to say, you gave a bull****,
generic answer, even before you knew I was going to post, so don't blame
it on me).

But thanks for actually -confirming- you are a poseur "ace"!

A REAL ace would have known that:

You DON'T need to be a "Morse de-coder"...that you don't have to
"decode" at all, for example if one didn't know the code or propagation
was so bad that the CW was indecipherable.

A REAL "ace" would have known that:

There are several freeware programs that flash on the screen what beacon
is currently transmitting on what band, the only requirement being that
your internal computer clock has been set to within a second or two of
WWV time (also many freeware programs to do that). No Morse decoding
required.

A REAL "ace" would have those programs installed and would have given a
-specific- answer instead of your bull**** non-answer "I am hearing
beacon activity".

The poor, fake "ace", face down in the dust yet again. :-(

dxAce wrote:

Sorry, a *real Ace* doesn't need a Morse de-coder!

Well make up your mind! First, you said you "weren't going to be my
Morse decoder"--implying a decoder -is- needed, now you said a "real
ace" doesn't need one. In any event, it seems being a "real ace" lets
you out.

BTW, looks like with your reading comprehension problem you again missed
the point. NONE of the software I was referring to decodes the Morse.
It's all done by timing. The beacons adhere to a very rigid, known,
published timing schedule derived from a GPS based clock contained in
the beacon hardware. That is why, with your computer clock set
accurately, the software knows what beacon from what band and what
location is on the air without doing any Morse decoding at all. Get it now?

At any rate, I answered the original posters questions regarding propagation and beacon
activity.

Yes you did answer it--sort of, and IMHO, a real half-assed answer. Had
you been a real ace and told him "I was barely hearing the NY beacon,
conditions are lousy" or said you were "hearing the Hong Kong beacon,
conditions are good"...it would have been sooo much more of a meaningful
answer than just saying "I'm hearing beacon activity".

Try again, Tommy Tootard.

Thanks, just did, Dusty..

What kind of meds are you on, Tommy Tootard?

Anything like that Korean was on?

m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

What kind of meds are you on, Tommy Tootard?

*YOU* would be the expert on 'meds' Acehole.

Nah, I'm a dxAce, not a medsAce, like you and Tommy Tootard!

Best you go back and get in line at your nearest HealthCanaDuh office.

Angela McGlowan is a real Sweetheart,not withstanding the fact that she
is from Mississippi.She was on the Paul Gallo Super Talk Mississippi
radio talk show yesterday morning.Angela McGlowan,,, I luvvvvv
youuuuu,,,,,
cuhulin