![]() |
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 18:50:39 -0400, N8KDV
wrote: smithxpj wrote: On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:08:17 GMT, Jeff Renkin wrote: Now instead of trying to find my address so you can pull your pranks, why not read the rest and learn.... Gee...a straight shootin' lateral thinker (like me) for a change! Yair... we have the same problem in Oz where some idiots think that putting a ham callsign at the end of a usenet post is going to provide some golden aura of revelation about the individual placing the post and that anyone who doesn't put their ham callsign (if they have one) on usenet is anonomously 'hiding'. I mean...you're dead right (and my line of thinking is) that *all* anyone is going to be able to do with a ham callsign is to run off like a snivvelling little sneak to a database and (possibly) get a name and an address. Then what? Are they going to send a posse around and blow up your household mailbox? Or sit scouring the airwaves hoping to come across you on-air so that they can give you an earful? And the argument that putting a ham callsign into a post provides 'credibility' is a load of hooey. Let's face it, if anyone can pirate a ham callsign on-air...they can sure as hell do it on usenet as well. And the average newsgroup player would be absolutely *none* the wiser about the person or the personality on the other end of the post. Is a mere ham callsign going to tell them anything more about an already anonomous situation? It is going to tell them whether you're a beer-swilling yobbo or a connoisseur of fine red wines, or whether you drive a beat up jalopy or drive a Rolls-Royce. As I profess, a ham callsign is nothing more than a mere *radio* transmission identifier and usenet is all about computers, landlines and stuff. But, no doubt, you have your fair share of poor misguided souls who seem to think that a ham callsign is some sort of extension of their personality. What he's really saying is that if he did have a callsign, (he doesn't), then he wouldn't even give it out on the air for fear that someone actually might look it up in a database. LMAO Who says it's "fear"? That so far seems to be the *most* popular conjecture as to why someone won't tag their callsign on usenet. What if it's a bit of human power play thing? I mean, the world's full of all these sticky beaks (you probably call them nosey Parkers in the US) who want to know information for no other reason than wanting to know. Some of us reckon that sticky beaks should be kept in their box and be told what they need to know when they need to know. That's certainly how I operate. The key thing here though is that poor Jeff doesn't have a call, and won't have one till the Morse requirement is dropped. That seems to be a common affliction in most nations at the moment...no different here in Oz. There are plenty of existing non-Morse licence holders here sitting tight waiting for our communications authority to implement the recent WARC recommendation so that they get a freebie upgrade to our unrestricted licence. That's their prerogative, I guess, if they are prepared to wait. Same deal with anyone launching into ham radio for the first time...if they are prepared to wait until the licencing conditions change rather than learn Morse code, then again that's their choice. |
``There's no government facility listening,'' he said.
The CIA is. Bill, K5BY |
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 21:20:15 -0500, WShoots1 wrote
(in message ): ``There's no government facility listening,'' he said. The CIA is. Bill, K5BY But only as a hobby. Gray Shockley ----------------------- DX-392 DX-398 RX-320 DX-399 CCradio w/RS Loop Torus Tuner (3-13 MHz) Select-A-Tenna ----------------------- Vicksburg, MS US |
Jeff Renkin wrote in message ...
I've actually dealt with a marine emergency on the radio. Have you? No, all mine have been on land, but I am prepared to do so. Not using CW you aren't, Point is, CW is not used for marine emergencies anymore. Says who? I or the victim in distress can use any mode we/they choose. Thank you very much. What it has to do is, every ship has to have someone with with this license, and if you had the license, you would know that CW is not used anymore in emergencies. The test insures you know what frequencies to monitor and use, and the procedures, and to call using MAYDAY, not CW. Who is talking about ships or commercial marine operations? Again , you are confused. note. Lazy handicapped people? You said it, not me. But we both agree on this. We do? I said you said it, not me. I gave no input on that subject. Or is it that when you are handicapped or injured in an emergency, you may not be able to operate a code key, only a microphone??? Aha! If I can push a mike button, I can work a paddle. Besides, the mike on my 706mk2g can be used as a code key in a pinch. Looks like I just knocked down those lame ass excuses. Exactly! So why are handicapped people excused from learning the code then? Besides, the test today only requires you to LISTEN to code not pound it out. So there should be no excuse why a handicapped person is excused from the code, but no one else is! Who cares. I guess the fcc decided to give them a break. I guess this bothers you, but that is a personal problem. I could care less. Fine tuning in to hear someone on sideband, and being able to do all the other more complicated adjustments other than a simple closure of two contacts to send code, requires a lot more dexterity and I don't see how these handicapped people are excused because they don't want to use code, but the rest of us who also don't want to use code had to learn and pass it, only to go and forget it again because we had no intentions of ever using it. Again this is a personal problem. It takes no more dexterity to work phone on my rig as it does CW. Probably less. Wanna know how the boat got our attention though all the noise on 40m? CW. That doesn't do any good to those monitoring for a "mayday" like every GROL licensee is doing. What in the hell are you talking about? Who cares about GROL? I don't have anything to do with GROL. I don't really care what they do. It has nothing to do with me, or amateur radio. Hams don't monitor for maydays. If a ham has an emergency, he gets on the radio and calls someone in a precise, orderly, military manner. Gasping out histrionic calls of mayday is not the normal procedure used. What does GROL have to do with being able to work a cw qso in an emergency? , or even noise in general? Do GROL'ers constantly listen to the 40m phone band for emergencies? No, but there were two frequencies you were required to monitor, and at specific times of the hour to, not any HF frequencies, and you were listening for a mayday, not CW. This changes constantly, and unless I am going to be in a marine situation, I don't need to find out what frequency or frequencies are monitored now unless I am going to be doing that, then I will update my self on what has changed since I was last tested. But the point here is that there were only two frequencies I had to monitor, and anyone else in a distress situation would know to use those two frequencies since he had the same license. Again, you are utterly confused. Get off this GROL crap. Amateur radio is NOT GROL in any form or fashion. He would also then know that no one would be listening for morse code. No, probably not on a GROL freq....Good grief...You are numb aren't you. What ever it is you are using, can you send me some? I'll even pay the shipping. After reading all this crap, I think I need a new wonder drug to be able to cope. :/ So? Most are probably too lazy to learn it anyway... Is the reason you never learned every language of every country in the world is because you are lazy, or because you don't waste time learning things you don't intend to use? No , the reason is I live in the U.S. I already know the most commonly used language of english. I've had to waste countless hours learning stuff I'll never use. So what? Life's a bitch. Some divorce one. Some more than one. Everytime you tell someone who never intends to use code that they are lazy for not learning it, they can come back at you with thousands of things YOU must therefore also be too LAZY to learn. You are a silly man. I could care less if they learn it or not. I'm too lazy to do lots of things. So what? Who gives a rats rectum. How does this pertain to your original claim that no one ever uses CW in an emergency. Which I proved you wrong by the way... Did you ever learn how to perform brain surgery? No, sounds like fun though. Do I get to stick my finger in it and wiggle it around? French Law? Naw, I'd rather find a good french whore. How to produce fuel for the space shuttle? Naw, the only fuel I produce is when I fart. Unfortunately, not enough energy to propel the shuttle to any decent altitude. I did make some printed circuit boards that are on the shuttle and in JSC though. Does that give me 2 points extra? Marine biology? Yep, I like to dive with the fishes. I even met Mr. Limpett once. Even he knows morse code. Russian sentence structure? Can we spell VODKA? Rules of the road in Japan? They have none. Egyptian Hieroglyphics? Yes, lots of fun. But you would never be able to deal with those. If you can't master a measly 5 wpm of morse code with only 26 letters and 10 numbers involved, those hieroglyphics are sure to bite you in the ass big time. Now what if I told you you had to learn one of more of those before you were allowed to talk into a microphone on HF? Well, I would do it. Like I actually did. Hell, I was copying 18 wpm when I took my first novice test. The dog ass slow 5 wpm test gave me time to twiddle my thumbs, fart, and belch all while still maintaining 100% solid copy. You would tell me I was friggin crazy! Now you know how everyone else feels when told they have to learn morse code before they can use a microphone. Well, hell yes I know. I grew up in the ham radio of the not so distant past, where ALL hams had to know morse code. It didn't bother me at all. I thought it was fun. I worked nothing but CW the first 7 years I was a ham. Didn't even own a mike. I am surprised that people that had to learn the code like I did, never found it and odd thing when they were told they had to do it. I understand NOW why some people want the requirement.... because "if we had to learn the worthless crap, so does everyone else." As I read on further down , it occurs to me, I'd be here another 45 min or more answering all your questions and goofball quotes of commercial radio regulations, etc. I have better things to do than banter with someone who is totally confused, and doesn't know the difference between commercial and amateur radio. Or GROL and amateur radio...Soooooooooo SKIP.............................................. .......................... Here is the IMPORTANT PART for you to read.... Whoa daddy! stand back! The U.S. Coast Guard ceased Morse operations several years ago and no longer monitors radio frequencies used for the code. Where ever did you get the idea that I'm in the coast guard? What the coast guard does doesn't mean jack to me. ``There's no government facility listening,'' he said. Who cares. I have my own station. More than one, in fact. And now with the loss of the radio stations, there is ``nobody privately listening,'' Are you kidding me? You really are confused. So, now this incorrect argument of yours can be put to rest! :) Argument? The orignal "argument" was that you said no one ever uses CW for emergencies. As one who has been involved with one myself, I proved you wrong. You retort with a bunch of confused, non relevant jibber jabber. As far as the code- no code argument, you are barking up the wrong tree. I could care less. I will not involve myself with that. I have better things to do. I have my ticket. I passed ALL the code tests with a perfect score. What you do is not really a concern of mine. If you want to go through life as a confused code whiner, doomed to a life of multiple rubber duck misadventures, don't let me stop you. It's a free country. If you spent 1/4 as much time practicing the code as you do whining about it, you would be at 40 wpm by now. We now return to our regularly scheduled program. MK |
No, they don't do that. The NSA is in the business of electronic
surveillance. "WShoots1" wrote in message ... ``There's no government facility listening,'' he said. The CIA is. Bill, K5BY |
"Never anonymous Bud" wrote in message ... Having skipped an E.L.F. meeting to be here, (Mark Keith) scribbled: Point is, CW is not used for marine emergencies anymore. Says who? I or the victim in distress can use any mode we/they choose. Thank you very much. Well, knowing that the U.S. Coast Guard, and many other equivalent services in other countries DO NOT monitor CW any more, AND CW being slower and more cumbersome than voice, you'd have to be pretty damned stupid to USE CW in an emergency situation! What are you going to use when HF propagation is too weak to support voice??? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
No, they don't do that. The NSA is in the business of electronic
surveillance. The CIA has, in the past, hired CW monitors. With the high CW skills of the Russians and Chinese, I'd bet they still have those CW people. I'd heard, too, that the US Navy is thinking of restoring CW capability. Bill, K5BY |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message . com...
"Never anonymous Bud" wrote in message ... Having skipped an E.L.F. meeting to be here, (Mark Keith) scribbled: Point is, CW is not used for marine emergencies anymore. Says who? I or the victim in distress can use any mode we/they choose. Thank you very much. Well, knowing that the U.S. Coast Guard, and many other equivalent services in other countries DO NOT monitor CW any more, AND CW being slower and more cumbersome than voice, you'd have to be pretty damned stupid to USE CW in an emergency situation! I couldn't find the original post, but.... Another one hung up on the coast guard...How many times does a person have to say they have nothing to do with the frigging coast guard. Jeez....Ham radio operators are INDIVIDUALS!!! Not a section of the coast guard, GROL, or any other funky alphabet soup letters. The ONLY time I will ever deal with the coast guard is if I call them on freq myself, which I have done in the past. And CW is not slower and more cumbersome to ME. Maybe to you 5 wpm slow pokes, but not my 55-60 wpm ass. I'm like a frigging CW machine, and I don't even have to write it down unless I need a hard copy for something.. Using CW to ME, is no different than any other mode. Well unless the band is noisy or in bad shape, then it's superior to most others. You no-code people need to get a grip...I'll use whatever works the best at the time, or whatever is first sent to me. If someone calls me on CW for help, I will stay on CW unless they request otherwise. To do anything else would be pretty damn stupid. Some qrp rigs are CW ONLY!!! I know that must chap many asses all around the country, but you all need to get over it! What are you going to use when HF propagation is too weak to support voice??? They will whip out their 2m HT's. What else? This thread is unbelievable... Sheesh...Who gives a damn what mode I use, if I get the job done. And I DO get the job done. MK |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
In emergencies hams are NOT broadcasting to the public. They are using their skills to pass messages from the public and emergency services to the public and emergency services via the ham network. No one has to be able to understand the message while it is in transit except the hams. Thus hams can and will use any means at their disposal appropriate to the situation, that includes voice, computer digital modes and good old Morse code. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Bravo!!! It's nice to find some common sense out here in the wilderness. You summed it all up in a nutshell that maybe even ole Jeff can grasp and understand. Then again, maybe not...:( Most "live" emergencies that a ham would handle on the air, are from other hams in trouble. The sailboat I mentioned was a ham in a sailboat. Not a commercial vessel. I would think it quite rare to hear a commercial vessel call a ham for help. But we can handle traffic to and from anyone that might need it. But we can do it any ole way we please. If the general public can't decipher it, thats just too bad. MK |
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com