On topic Post: Clansman 5.4m Mast
Brian Reay
doesn't really need instructions, they are so pristine it would be nice to
have them "as issued", which I suspect includes a set of "field
instructions". (I've some older 27' metal masts with such instructions on a
metal plate.)
Does anyone know if similar field instructions are issued with the Clansman
masts? If so, a scan or description would be nice so I know what to look for
under the table at rallies.
--
73
Brian G8OSN/W8OSN
www.g8osn.net
Paul Starship
wrote:
>I've just acquired a couple of Clansman 5.4m masts and, while erecting them
_TWO_ masts.... how predictable.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
wrote:
>I've just acquired a couple of Clansman 5.4m masts and, while erecting them
ISTR there are a few pages on masts and antennas in the Clansman field
manuals. Try your local TA signals unit... For your location, that
would probably be Maidstone.
They're a helpful bunch of guys and providing you explain what you are
looking for and the item doesn't have SECRET stamped on it, they might
be able to help.
Nick.
Paul Starship
>They're a helpful bunch of guys and providing you explain what you are
>looking for and the item doesn't have SECRET stamped on it, they might
>be able to help.
Hmmmm... assumptions... assumptions.
Jim GM4DHJ ...
> Does anyone know if similar field instructions are issued with the
> Clansman masts? If so, a scan or description would be nice so I know what
> to look for under the table at rallies.
>
> 73
> Brian G8OSN/M3OSN
> www.m3osn.net
>
>
>
>
you will be asking for the instructions on how to tune up a valve PA
next.........
Ian Jackson
luc...@eternal-flames.gov writes
>
>They're a helpful bunch of guys and providing you explain what you are
>looking for and the item doesn't have SECRET stamped on it, they might
>be able to help.
>
I've got a BC221 instruction manual with "SECRET" stamped on it, in red.
Presumably the information isn't secret any more.? Or can I expect an
unexpected visit from the Dept of Homeland Security?
--
Ian
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
<ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I've got a BC221 instruction manual with "SECRET" stamped on it, in red.
>Presumably the information isn't secret any more.? Or can I expect an
>unexpected visit from the Dept of Homeland Security?
I doubt it, but there used to be - and probably still is - a notice
close to photocopiers at army camps etc. Reminding users it was
against regulations to photocopy any document with SECRET stamped on
it.
The funny thing was, it never mentioned any of the other document
classifications. :-)
Nick.
DieSea
"Toxic Waste" <Trabant Owners Cl...@nicksplace.co.com> wrote in message
news:7aDJm.3047$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
> "Paul Starship" <p.bl...@google-nospam-email.com> wrote in message
> news:4af6e0fc...@news.albasani.net...
> merely invite it, you actually sit up and beg for it.
>
> As you say, how predictable...
>
> Do try and grow up, there's a good chap.
>
> HTH
>
Perhaps he's going to hang a twig between them for "_His_NEW_FOUND_FRIENDS_" Tox
I can thing of summat much better to string between them ,
I'll let you answer that one Tox
DieSea
Spike
luc...@eternal-flames.gov wrote:
>On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:57:14 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>>I've got a BC221 instruction manual with "SECRET" stamped on it, in red.
>>Presumably the information isn't secret any more.? Or can I expect an
>>unexpected visit from the Dept of Homeland Security?
>
>I doubt it, but there used to be - and probably still is - a notice
>close to photocopiers at army camps etc. Reminding users it was
>against regulations to photocopy any document with SECRET stamped on
>it.
>The funny thing was, it never mentioned any of the other document
>classifications. :-)
>
>Nick.
Ah....that might be because documents with that word on them were
accountable, and there are different rules for photocopying them...
[I know Lucifer knows this, but for the hard of thinking on this group
- a disappointingly high percentage - the classification TOP SECRET
also contains the word SECRET, thus falling within the scope of the
notice referred to]
[Another comment for the hard of thinking: there are only two other
classifications (although it has been argued that UNCLASSIFIED is a
classification), neither of which contain the word SECRET]
--
from
Aero Spike
Not a member of the RSGB for 50 years 1959 - 2009
Paul Starship
Cl...@nicksplace.co.com> wrote:
[snippity snip]
Said one of Brian's little helpers.
How predictable.
Len GM0ONX
> "Len GM0ONX" <gm0...@goooooglemail.com> wrote in message
> news:hd7b9n$ukd$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> How predictable.
>
>> You're some person to to talk about predictable.
>
> Yeah, one of his predictable rants about Morse, is way overdue.
>
> He must be experiencing cold turkey.
>
> tox
>
>
More like 'cold parrot'!
Len GM0ONX
Paul Starship
Cl...@nicksplace.co.com> wrote:
[snippity snip]>
yet more predictable squawking from a parrot
is it any wonder thats all you can do...
squawking parrot hidden(no) licence.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
wrote:
>Ah....that might be because documents with that word on them were
>accountable, and there are different rules for photocopying them...
<snipped>
>[Another comment for the hard of thinking: there are only two other
>classifications (although it has been argued that UNCLASSIFIED is a
>classification), neither of which contain the word SECRET]
Shhhh! Don't go giving them too many clues, Spike. :-)
Nick.
p.s. I understand there was great confusion when Maggie's govt. came
out with the booklet "PROTECT and Survive" :-)
nn...@benison.co.uk
>>[Another comment for the hard of thinking: there are only two other
>>classifications (although it has been argued that UNCLASSIFIED is a
>>classification), neither of which contain the word SECRET]
Restricted and Confidential come to mind. But there are others.
Dave
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
>On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:42:38 +0000, luc...@eternal-flames.gov wrote:
NO I DIDN'T
nn...@benison.co.uk
>NO I DIDN'T
>
Apologies, the perils of playing with new functionality!
Dave
G1LVN
wrote:
> In message <3kpdf514mjijaul6l37glmhpvfogtbu...@4ax.com>,
> luci...@eternal-flames.gov writes
>
> I've got a BC221 instruction manual with "SECRET" stamped on it, in red.
> Presumably the information isn't secret any more.? Or can I expect an
> unexpected visit from the Dept of Homeland Security?
> --
> Ian
or worse if you've signed the OSA :-)
Ian Jackson
<32895a60-6567-4309...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
G1LVN <gareth...@gmail.com> writes
doesn't really make any difference, of course. I'm as guilty as hell.
Will they go easy on me if I come clean and confess to being a
morse-test-passing G3 who actually knows how to use a BC221 and that I
only really needed it to comply with the terms of my licence, or am I
more likely to 'get the book thrown at me'?
--
Ian
G1LVN
wrote:
> In message
> <32895a60-6567-4309-bb59-58ba397c1...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
> G1LVN <gareth.pa...@gmail.com> writes>On 8 Nov, 16:57, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjack...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk>
No only joking. But the OSA is for life. I had to sign if for the most
trivial of reasons, and now it's stuck.
One of my teachers at grammar school gave me a stack of old signals
pamphlets from his national service. Absolutely cracking they were
particularly on antennas and propagation. Pity you never see them at
rallies I guess the classification puts a fair few vendors off.
If I had a copy of the OP's wanted manual wouldn't have to think once
never mind _TWO times about NOT giving him a copy what with his
appauling record on this NG.
Ian Jackson
<44f960f7-e19c-4159...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
G1LVN <gareth...@gmail.com> writes
>One of my teachers at grammar school gave me a stack of old signals
>pamphlets from his national service. Absolutely cracking they were
>particularly on antennas and propagation. Pity you never see them at
>rallies I guess the classification puts a fair few vendors off.
>
>If I had a copy of the OP's wanted manual wouldn't have to think once
>never mind _TWO times about NOT giving him a copy what with his
>appauling record on this NG.
>
I doubt if being marked 'SECRET' makes a scrap of difference to a
document's official status. Ideally, when no longer secret, it should be
'de-mobbed' by being over-stamped with something like 'declassified'.
Just DON'T contact the MOD and ask!!!!
--
Ian
nn...@benison.co.uk
<ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Just DON'T contact the MOD and ask!!!!
Somebody will :-)
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
> Will they go easy on me if I come clean and confess to being a
> morse-test-passing G3 who actually knows how to use a BC221 and that I
> only really needed it to comply with the terms of my licence, or am I more
> likely to 'get the book thrown at me'?
no...coz I was the same ....got one in a wooden box in 1974.....and I
certainly knew how to use it .....with its nice book of calibration tables
..........
DieSea
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c0gcMQJm...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
More importantly
Do the Serial numbers match
Or
Have "they" been doctored ??
DieSea
Jim
There are classifications within classifications.
--
Jim, G4RGA
Slartibartfast
has the audacity to use it for the intended purpose, they now have to prefix
the title with "On Topic".
"Brian Reay" <s...@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:jWAJm.59106$MG6....@newsfe13.ams2...
> I've just acquired a couple of Clansman 5.4m masts and, while erecting
> them doesn't really need instructions, they are so pristine it would be
> nice to have them "as issued", which I suspect includes a set of "field
> instructions". (I've some older 27' metal masts with such instructions on
> a metal plate.)
>
> Does anyone know if similar field instructions are issued with the
> Clansman masts? If so, a scan or description would be nice so I know what
> to look for under the table at rallies.
>
> --
> 73
> Brian G8OSN/W8OSN
> www.g8osn.net
>
>
>
>
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
they must all do what they are best at...being pompous .....
"Slartibartfast" <Slartib...@Norway-Coastline.net> wrote in message
news:hda5h3$2oa$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
puffed up with vanity; "a grandiloquent and boastful manner"; "overblown
oratory"; "a pompous speech"; "pseudo-scientific ...
"Jimbo GM4DHJ ..." <jim.g...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:hda5jq$3eo$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Jim
There's no requirement for frequency measurement in the licence, as
far as I'm aware.
But there is, or used to be a requirement for you to have wavemeters
able to detect harmonics up to the the third - on the higest band
in use. (Well over a GHz for 70 cms users).
--
Jim, G4RGA
Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI
> It is a sad reflection upon this newsgroup and it's users, that when
> someone has the audacity to use it for the intended purpose, they now
> have to prefix the title with "On Topic".
>
a post without swearing in it.
--
;-)
..
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
..
http://turner-smith.co.uk
Brian Reay
news:hda5h3$2oa$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> someone has the audacity to use it for the intended purpose, they now have
> to prefix the title with "On Topic".
>
Even then no useful replies were forthcoming. Clearly the usual idiots don't
do radio anymore, if they ever did.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
<jim.g...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> puffed up with vanity; "a grandiloquent and boastful manner"; "overblown
>oratory"; "a pompous speech"; "pseudo-scientific ...
You mean, Brian.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
wrote:
> But there is, or used to be a requirement for you to have wavemeters
>able to detect harmonics up to the the third - on the higest band
>in use. (Well over a GHz for 70 cms users).
Damned Lechers.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
<seewe...@invalid.com> wrote:
>Clearly the usual idiots don't do radio anymore
I'm sure you "do" radio occasionally.
Try not to be so critical of yourself, when there are plenty on here
more than happy to do the job.
HTH
Nick.
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
<Shortyf...@Norway-Coastline.net> wrote:
>It is a sad reflection upon this newsgroup and it's users, that when someone
>has the audacity to use it for the intended purpose, they now have to prefix
>the title with "On Topic".
Never a problem you are likely to face though, is it old son?
Nick.
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
<luc...@eternal-flames.gov> wrote in message
news:rqthf5l55nc5qtrfk...@4ax.com...
do bears shit in the forest ? ...
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
"Brian Reay" <seewe...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:Go1Km.8057$dM3....@newsfe05.ams2...
didn't see you rushing to get that bloke a FT101 manual....you just took the
piss ...so why should people help you? ... yes we did radio before you
brought in a load of scumbags who made that made that impossible ....
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
<luc...@eternal-flames.gov> wrote in message
news:pnthf59j65p8pp595...@4ax.com...
what's got a hazelnut in every bite....?
Jimbo GM4DHJ ...
"Jimbo GM4DHJ ..." <jim.g...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:hdb3vm$sof$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
twice....glad it is therapy day ..........
Ian Jackson
luc...@eternal-flames.gov writes
Ho Ho!
I believe that this was a suggestion (somewhere), but I'm not sure if it
was actually written into the licence conditions. But to meet modern-day
spectrum purity expectations, you would probably need something more
sensitive than a tuneable lecher line with diode detector and
microammeter.
--
Ian
Spike
Ian Jackson wrote:
>I doubt if being marked 'SECRET' makes a scrap of difference to a
>document's official status. Ideally, when no longer secret, it should be
>'de-mobbed' by being over-stamped with something like 'declassified'.
>Just DON'T contact the MOD and ask!!!!
It's quite possible to download documents with classification and
sensitivity markings. You'll find them on the web sites of the Hutton
and Butler Inquiries.
I have on my computer a copy of Richard Hadfield's written report of
his interview with David Kelly, for example.
--
from
Aero Spike
Not a member of the RSGB for 50 years 1959 - 2009
Chris Kirby
>This must be an impostor, the Norwegian Coastline cleaner has never made
>a post without swearing in it.
You'd at least expect an F-word.
--
Chris
Spike
Jim wrote:
Jim talks yet more cobblers....
Jeff
>
> Jim talks yet more cobblers....
>
Well there are if you count caveats as "classifications within
classifications".
Such as "UK EYES", "NATO", etc. etc.
So "SECRET UK EYES B" could be considered a classification within a
classification.
Jeff