Re: Sputnik
JM
"Hils" <hi...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9P4PUuL7...@newearth.demon.co.uk...
> October 4 will be the 50th anniversary of the first, and, arguably, most
> successful, intercontinental laxative ever launched. A request from an
> interested "reporter" for radio amateurs who heard it at the time brought
> this to the Amsat mailing list from Domenico I8CVS:
>
> "I was listening several time the beacon of Sputnik-1 on 20 MHz using an
> Hallicrafters SX-28 and a long-wire antenna and it was very easy.
>
> The 20 MHz beacon was also recorded several time on a magnetic wire
> recorder by my (SK) friend Roberto i1NU on day 6 october 1957 when he was
> living in Trieste."
>
> I thought how interesting it must have been to have been around at the
> dawn of the space age, and when there were few TVs and no microprocessors
> or SMPSUs to pollute the aether, and whether any of URA's experienced
> netizens had any reminscences.
>
> --
> Hil
I heard it on an old HRO.
It was 5 kHz below WWV on 20 MHz.
No digital readout in those days.
Magic.
De Johnny G3LIV
Spike
Hils wrote:
>I thought how interesting it must have been to have been around at the
>dawn of the space age, and when there were few TVs and no
>microprocessors or SMPSUs to pollute the aether, and whether any of
>URA's experienced netizens had any reminscences.
I used to listen to Radio South Africa in the 25 Mc/s band on my R208.
A cracking signal, and no CB either. Loads of AM DX on ten metres too;
but this was 1957 - the like of which hasn't been heard since.
--
from
Aero Spike
Brian Reay
"Hils" <hi...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9P4PUuL7...@newearth.demon.co.uk...
> October 4 will be the 50th anniversary of the first, and, arguably, most
> successful, intercontinental laxative ever launched. A request from an
> interested "reporter" for radio amateurs who heard it at the time brought
> this to the Amsat mailing list from Domenico I8CVS:
>
> "I was listening several time the beacon of Sputnik-1 on 20 MHz using an
> Hallicrafters SX-28 and a long-wire antenna and it was very easy.
>
> The 20 MHz beacon was also recorded several time on a magnetic wire
> recorder by my (SK) friend Roberto i1NU on day 6 october 1957 when he was
> living in Trieste."
>
> I thought how interesting it must have been to have been around at the
> dawn of the space age, and when there were few TVs and no microprocessors
> or SMPSUs to pollute the aether, and whether any of URA's experienced
> netizens had any reminscences.
I'm not old enough to remember Sputnik but I recall the pre-Apollo Mercury
and Gemini missions and the early satellite TV programmes from the USA.
"Telestar" is the name I have in mind for the satellite but that may have
been later.
I also recall listening to what, at the time, seemed very exotic stations on
an old valve BC radio that lived in the sitting room. I must have been no
more than 7 or 8 at the time and I'm sure that was what fired my interest in
radio. Sadly, I can't recall the details of this set- it was an Ekco- and
I'd love to acquire one the same but have never seen one I recognise.
--
73
Brian, G8OSN
www.g8osn.org.uk
John
"Brian Reay" wrote
I remember watching Raymond Baxter on Tomorrows World doing a programme from
Goonhilly for the first transatlantic TV transmission - in black and white
no less.
The camera showed one of the monitors at Goonhilly go from noise - to an
unlocked picture to a fully locked piture then fade out after about 5 or 10
minutes. I recall one of Raymond Baxter's comments as being something like -
"look, look, yes, yes, now we can see New York" in total amazement as the
picture started to lock.
I think the satellite was Telstar which was in a low earth orbit. Way before
the days of geostationary satellites and the more powerful rockets required
to get them into geostationary orbit.
Now you can turn on the TV and watch live broadcasts from a number of
countries. How things change in 40 years.
Brian Reay
> Now you can turn on the TV and watch live broadcasts from a number of
> countries. How things change in 40 years.
Indeed, it is interesting to discuss such things with the "younger
generation" who didn't really know the world before home PCs, the internet,
and mobile 'phones'. I think the way technology has become common place and
"just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of the lack of interest
technical hobbies in youngsters. Conversely, if you can expose them to the
"snap crackle and pop" of radio they suddenly become aware of the fun they
can have.
--
73
Brian, G8OSN
www.g8osn.org.uk
Now your amateur licence is free, why not send at least £15 per year to
support the
Radio Communications Foundation or STELAR?
Jimbo gm4dhj ...
> technical hobbies in youngsters. Conversely, if you can expose them to the
> "snap crackle and pop" of radio they suddenly become aware of the fun they
> can have.
here we go again...... Cornflake packet Licenses .......
John
"Brian Reay" wrote
> > Now you can turn on the TV and watch live broadcasts from a number of
>> countries. How things change in 40 years.
>
> Indeed, it is interesting to discuss such things with the "younger
> generation" who didn't really know the world before home PCs, the
> internet, and mobile 'phones'. I think the way technology has become
> common place and "just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of
> the lack of interest technical hobbies in youngsters. Conversely, if you
> can expose them to the "snap crackle and pop" of radio they suddenly
> become aware of the fun they can have.
>
Fully agreed. Also things have become too instant - you go out and buy a
black box - plug it in and you have instant whatever.
I also can remember the times when if you have relatives overseas, you may
if you felt very flushed with cash - telephone them - usually on Christmas
Day. And the call had to be booked via the operator days in advance.
Even with BT calling Australia or the States is cheaper than a call to a
mobile - even cheaper if you use Skype.
class_a
No Jim, this is the Rice Crispies version of the licence!
Brian Reay
"John" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fbtkpm$5u3$1...@aioe.org...
>
> "Brian Reay" wrote
>
>> > Now you can turn on the TV and watch live broadcasts from a number of
>>> countries. How things change in 40 years.
>>
>> Indeed, it is interesting to discuss such things with the "younger
>> generation" who didn't really know the world before home PCs, the
>> internet, and mobile 'phones'. I think the way technology has become
>> common place and "just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of
>> the lack of interest technical hobbies in youngsters. Conversely, if you
>> can expose them to the "snap crackle and pop" of radio they suddenly
>> become aware of the fun they can have.
>>
>
> Fully agreed. Also things have become too instant - you go out and buy a
> black box - plug it in and you have instant whatever.
But that is one of the "genies" you can't put pack in the bottle- our world
is full of technologies that make things "easy" and there will be more to
come. The real danger, for "UK plc", is that we get totally out of the game
and "buy in" all of our technology from countries that have a more sensible
approach to industry etc.
The way things are, we are heading that way and unless someone tries to make
science and technology more attractive as career options the writing is on
the wall. As a first step, we need to spark the interest in technology
beyond the "buy it from Argos" stage. As radio amateurs, I think we can
help with this by showing the hobby in a good light and firing the
enthusiasm of those (young and old) that many of us have for the hobby.
class_a
> As radio amateurs, I think we can
> help with this by showing the hobby in a good light and firing the
> enthusiasm of those (young and old) that many of us have for the hobby.
Said someone who had no enthusiasm to learn Morse for >20 years!
Spike
John wrote:
>I remember watching Raymond Baxter on Tomorrows World doing a programme from
>Goonhilly for the first transatlantic TV transmission - in black and white
>no less.
>
>The camera showed one of the monitors at Goonhilly go from noise - to an
>unlocked picture to a fully locked piture then fade out after about 5 or 10
>minutes. I recall one of Raymond Baxter's comments as being something like -
>"look, look, yes, yes, now we can see New York" in total amazement as the
>picture started to lock.
ISTR that the very first transatlantic TV transmission was via Telstar
and with Raymond Baxter as the BBC presenter, and that the first
picture that was transmitted, at least from this end, was a 'Wanted'
poster of Ronnie Biggs.
The picture quality was awful, due to the fact that the engineers had
got confused over which way to wind the helixes that formed the aerial
system, with a consequent ~30dB signal loss.
>I think the satellite was Telstar which was in a low earth orbit. Way before
>the days of geostationary satellites and the more powerful rockets required
>to get them into geostationary orbit.
It was also a question of accurate guidance and navigation to get the
satellites in the right place.
--
from
Aero Spike
Brian Reay
<luc...@eternal-flames.gov> wrote in message
news:jsl4e398hjnit8fp2...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 07:38:14 GMT, "Brian Reay" <s...@website.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>I think the way technology has become common place and
>>"just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of the lack of
>>interest
>>technical hobbies in youngsters.
>
> anywhere?
<snipped for brevity only>
I don't have much argument with your points but do you have a better answer
to the problem? If you just sit back and shoot done the ideas of others
then you aren't really helping.
I don't think that those who govern us have a clue- they jump on the latest
band wagon that is either a "tax opportunity" or a "vote winner" and pray.
However, there are moves to encourage the take up of Maths, Science, and
Technology subjects in schools and a bit of a "helping hand" from our hobby
would, in my view, be mutually useful.
If the rest of us just sit back and leave "them" to it, our off-spring will
pay the price.
Peter
"Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message
news:fti3e312cliqujaok...@4ax.com...
> I used to listen to Radio South Africa in the 25 Mc/s band on my R208.
> A cracking signal, and no CB either. Loads of AM DX on ten metres too;
> but this was 1957 - the like of which hasn't been heard since.
So, Mrs.Nugatory, if that was 50 years ago, why have you not even managed to
pass
the Fools' Licence exam and establish that you are at least the equivalent
of the
6-year-old mind in intelligence and education?
Peter
"Brian Reay" <s...@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:GjsEi.328$HW...@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> Indeed, it is interesting to discuss such things with the "younger
> generation" who didn't really know the world before home PCs, the
> internet, and mobile 'phones'. I think the way technology has become
> common place and "just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of
> the lack of interest technical hobbies in youngsters.
So speaks the fool who encourages such lack of technical interest by
promoting
the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB Fools' Licence scheme which
has no purpose other than to fill the coffers of the RSCB, a decrepit
organisation that
the said fool mistakenly thought would bring him fame instead of the
notoriety
which resulted.
Peter
>As radio amateurs, I think we can help with this by showing the hobby in a
>good light and firing the enthusiasm of those (young and old) that many of
>us have for the hobby.
A necessary preface.....
(It is becoming increasingly difficult to fly the flag for
decency and for civilised behaviour in Radio Hammery.
However, there still exists the fundamental basis on
which Ham Radio is based, and that will never die.
This FAQ ("What Is Ham Radio?") will
be regularly published and will not be shouted or bullied
down. It is important that those of a technical bent, who
are the natural seed-corn of Radio Hammery and who
gravitate towards us to be the real novitiate, can
still find us, (and know that we are still here), their fellows.)
-----ooooo-----
So,.....What is Ham Radio?
Ham Radio is a technical pursuit for those who
are interested in the science of radio wave
propagation and who are also interested in the
way that their radios function. It has a long-standing
tradition of providing a source of engineers who
are born naturals.
Ham Radio awakens in its aficionados a whole-life
fascination with all things technical and gives
an all-abiding curiosity to improve one's scientific
knowledge. It's a great swimming pool, please dive in!
This excitement causes a wish to share the experience
with ones fellow man, and shows itself in the
gentlemanly traditions of Ham Radio.
Radio Hams are in a unique privileged position in that
they can construct and operate their own equipment! No-one
else has this privilege. Users, such as broadcasters,
the po lice and armed farces, CBers and mobile phone
users have to purchase ready-made gear. Manufacturers
are not licensed to operate their gear. Radio Hams
are qualified to design, build and then
operate their own pieces of equipment. They do this
with gusto, and also repair and modify their own
equipment. This is a privilege well worth the effort
to gain, and one to be jealously guarded.
The excitement that drives a Radio Ham starts with
relatively simple technologies at first, perhaps making
his own Wimshurst machine and primary cells. Small pieces
of test equipment follow, possibly multimeters and signal
generators. Then comes receivers and transmitters. It is with
the latter that communication with like-minded technically
motivated people takes off. The scope for technical
development grows with the years and now encompasses DSP
and DDS. There is also a great deal
of excitement in the areas of computer programming to
be learnt and applied.
The technical excitement motivates Radio Hams to compete
with each other to determine who has designed and manufactured
the best-quality station. This competitiveness is found in DXing,
competitions and fox-hunts.
-----OOOOO----
However, beware! A Ham Radio licence is such a
desirable thing to have that there are large
numbers of people who wish to be thought of
as Radio Hams when, in fact, they are nothing
of the kind! Usually such people are a
variation of the CB Radio hobbyist; they buy their
radios off the shelf and send them back to be
repaired; they are not interested in technical discussion
and sneer at those who are; they have no idea how
their radios work inside and have no wish to find out;
they are free with rather silly personal insults.
-----ooooo-----
One infallible way to disambiguate the CB Radio Hobbyist
from the _REAL_ Radio Ham is to solicit their view of the
difference between CB Radio and Ham Radio. A Radio Ham will
perceive Ham Radio to be a technical pursuit and will
perceive CB Radio to be a social communications facility
no different in essence to a land-line telephone or a
GSM mobile in the hands of a 6-year-old. Thus a Radio Ham
could also use a CB set safe in the knowledge that
such use says no more about him than having a land-line
telephone, whilst continuing to regard Ham Radio as a separate
technical pursuit.
A CB Radio hobbyist, on the other hand, sees no difference between
Ham Radio and CB Radio. To him, they are
sisters-under-the-skin. Wrongly, the CB Radio Hobbyist then
tries to classify himself as the equal of the Radio
Ham when, in fact, he is nothing of the kind.
Ham Radio is not CB Radio and has no common ground with it!
Ham Radio is _THE_ technical pursuit for gentlemen; CB Radio
is the name for the operating hobby for those who buy their
rigs and equipment off the shelf.
-----ooooo-----
If you are the sort of person who is motivated by
a technical interest in how things work; if you took apart
malfunctioning clocks, toasters and the like and put them
right despite never having seen them working, then
a Ham Radio licence is your traditional route! There has
never been a shortage of such people, and those who gravitate
towards such an interest have always been welcomed into
our shacks and their interests fostered. There is not today,
nor has there ever been, a need to go out and encourage
and press children, children who have never expressed an
interest in Ham Radio, to come into our shacks. Such an
activity should cause eyebrows to be raised - what
normal well-adjusted adults seek the social acquaintance
of children?!
-----ooooo-----
Please remember that this FAQ is a _POSITIVE EXHORTATION_
to you to exert yourselves to join our fraternity!
Peter
"class_a" <cla...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:qaadnRVjQqhzwH_b...@comcast.com...
"Do as I say but not as I do", once again?
Peter
"Brian Reay" <s...@website.invalid> wrote in message
> I don't have much argument with your points but do you have a better
> answer to the problem? If you just sit back and shoot done the ideas of
> others then you aren't really helping.
That's such a preposterous and pompous assertion that it cannot be left
unanswered!
Shooting down the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB Fools' Licence
scheme
is helping more than you could ever imagine.
BTW, ITYM, "down" and not "done". What a good job that you are no longer a
school teacher because your public and international examples of spelling
and of
grammar are an absolute disgrace.
Peter
"Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message
> ..... to wind the helixes.....
ITYM, "helices".
Tch! Tch! Mrs.Nugatory!
John
"Brian Reay" wrote
>>
>>> > Now you can turn on the TV and watch live broadcasts from a number of
>>>> countries. How things change in 40 years.
>>>
>>> Indeed, it is interesting to discuss such things with the "younger
>>> generation" who didn't really know the world before home PCs, the
>>> internet, and mobile 'phones'. I think the way technology has become
>>> common place and "just there" in a sanitized form, is the root cause of
>>> the lack of interest technical hobbies in youngsters. Conversely, if you
>>> can expose them to the "snap crackle and pop" of radio they suddenly
>>> become aware of the fun they can have.
>>>
>>
>> Fully agreed. Also things have become too instant - you go out and buy a
>> black box - plug it in and you have instant whatever.
>
> But that is one of the "genies" you can't put pack in the bottle- our
> world is full of technologies that make things "easy" and there will be
> more to come. The real danger, for "UK plc", is that we get totally out of
> the game and "buy in" all of our technology from countries that have a
> more sensible approach to industry etc.
>
> The way things are, we are heading that way and unless someone tries to
> make science and technology more attractive as career options the writing
> is on the wall. As a first step, we need to spark the interest in
> technology beyond the "buy it from Argos" stage. As radio amateurs, I
> think we can help with this by showing the hobby in a good light and
> firing the enthusiasm of those (young and old) that many of us have for
> the hobby.
>
Agreed - at least in part.
IMHO one of problems with the current licencing structure is that it
semi-encourages the new FL Licencee to go out and buy a black box - i.e.
instant Radio Amateur.
I partly understand OFCOMs logic for prohibiting homebrew gear, but for me
it was assembling a handful of components and making it work was the spark
that got me going. (For those old enough to remember it was a Philips
Electronic Engineer Kit given as a Christmas present when I was about 10
years old). Never looked back since!
I must admit that I don't know exactly the sylabus for the practical portion
of the FL, but I'm certain that there would be much merit in the candidates
building a simple QRP rig such as the FOXX, and then using them to have QSOs
across the class room. Great fun, they'll learn a bit about electronics**,
soldering and they can also use their CW skills. They may also appreciate
the elegance of CW as a mode when using such simple rigs.
**They may also realise that resistors aren't polarised!
Peter
"John" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fbu2sp$b41$1...@aioe.org...
>
> **They may also realise that resistors aren't polarised!
Yes, one of the more stupid ideas promoted by M3OSN over the years!
Brian Reay
"John" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fbu2sp$b41$1...@aioe.org...
>
>
> Agreed - at least in part.
>
> IMHO one of problems with the current licencing structure is that it
> semi-encourages the new FL Licencee to go out and buy a black box - i.e.
> instant Radio Amateur.
>
> I partly understand OFCOMs logic for prohibiting homebrew gear, but for me
> it was assembling a handful of components and making it work was the spark
> that got me going. (For those old enough to remember it was a Philips
> Electronic Engineer Kit given as a Christmas present when I was about 10
> years old). Never looked back since!
I had one of those around that age, also the Mechanical Engineer one.
> I must admit that I don't know exactly the sylabus for the practical
> portion
> of the FL, but I'm certain that there would be much merit in the
> candidates
> building a simple QRP rig such as the FOXX, and then using them to have
> QSOs
> across the class room. Great fun, they'll learn a bit about electronics**,
> soldering and they can also use their CW skills. They may also appreciate
> the elegance of CW as a mode when using such simple rigs.
FL licensees can homebrew, the only restriction is that transmitters should
be from commercial kits. I've come across a few who have build K2s (if I've
recalled the number correctly).
I also find that my students are keen to progress on to the Intermediate
which includes the basic practical skills to homebrew.
> **They may also realise that resistors aren't polarised!
I always make a point of ensuring they do ;-)
John
>
> FL licensees can homebrew, the only restriction is that transmitters
> should be from commercial kits. I've come across a few who have build K2s
> (if I've recalled the number correctly).
Although the K2 is truely an excellent rig - it is fairly expensive. I feel
it needs something simpler and much cheaper - hence the reference to the
FOXX - to create the spark and ignite the fire.
> I also find that my students are keen to progress on to the Intermediate
> which includes the basic practical skills to homebrew.
I'm pleased to hear that.
Brian Reay
> "Brian Reay" wrote
>
> >
>> FL licensees can homebrew, the only restriction is that transmitters
>> should be from commercial kits. I've come across a few who have build K2s
>> (if I've recalled the number correctly).
>
>
> Although the K2 is truely an excellent rig - it is fairly expensive.
Of course, I merely quoted as an example of what some M3s are doing.
>I feel it needs something simpler and much cheaper - hence the reference to
>the FOXX - to create the spark and ignite the fire.
Well, if there aren't kits about people won't buy them. I've not followed
the kit market recently- is the FOXX a commercial kit?
JM
"JM" <joh...@melvin.com> wrote in message
news:SKiEi.61898$HA1....@newsfet08.ams...
The rest of you have just babbled on.
Nothing to do with the question.
Who else remembers it ?
Time to fit new asbestos pants.
de Johnny G3LIV.
John
"Brian Reay" wrote
>
>>I feel it needs something simpler and much cheaper - hence the reference
>>to the FOXX - to create the spark and ignite the fire.
>
> Well, if there aren't kits about people won't buy them. I've not followed
> the kit market recently- is the FOXX a commercial kit?
>
It was and it was sold by Kanga kits. I think it was killed off by the EU
Electromagnetic Compatibility Regulations.
I would have thought that the way around the original regs was to sell the
PCB and components separately - components were always exempt from the regs.
But there's some very good news according to the September edition of
Practical Wireless. The previous regs have been superceded by a new set of
regulations whioch came into force on 20th July 2007 which specifically
exempt kits from the need to demonstrate compliance - with all the costs and
hassle that that involves.
Jimbo gm4dhj ...
>> here we go again...... Cornflake packet Licenses .......
>
> No Jim, this is the Rice Crispies version of the licence!
>
>
I remember the packets used to have the morse code all over them........
Ian Jackson
writes
I would have heard it, but unfortunately, when Sputnik was launched, I
hadn't progressed to a 'proper' communications receiver, and was still
listing on a domestic BC set. This didn't tune to 20MHz. I remember
being peeved!
--
Ian
Jimbo gm4dhj ...
> So am I the only one alive that heard the Sputnik
>
> The rest of you have just babbled on.
> Nothing to do with the question.
> Who else remembers it ?
>
> Time to fit new asbestos pants.
>
> de Johnny G3LIV.
>
Come on I was 6 years old and living in a top floor tenement flat at 24
Seedhill Road Paisley.........
Peter
"Jimbo gm4dhj ..." <jim.g...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:dyAEi.56298$sI3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> Come on I was 6 years old and living in a top floor tenement flat at 24
> Seedhill Road Paisley.........
Same here but I do remember the neighbourhood fish wives discussing
whether the sunlight glinting off an aircraft was the Sputnik.
Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI
deleted
Got a job yet, Beanie?
owners club@nicksplace.comco Pikey Market Trader
"Peter" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fbu0ag$4co$1...@aioe.org...
class_a
At least he passed it! Some didn't, and still haven't, after 25+ years!
JM
"Jimbo gm4dhj ..." <jim.g...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:dyAEi.56298$sI3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
Always excuses.
Lol,
Just fooling Jim honest.
6 year olds now near have a license.
OH MY GOD
Johnny. G3LIV
John Siegel
I remember listening to it with my Dad in the basement. Receiver
was the regular station receiver (Hammurlund but I don't recall the
model). Used the 20 M dipole and the signal was loud and clear in New
Jersey. I got my first license about 6 months later.
John K4BNC
Roger Muggleton
> So am I the only one alive that heard the Sputnik
>
> The rest of you have just babbled on.
> Nothing to do with the question.
> Who else remembers it ?
I didn't hear it on account of not understanding radio at the time (I
remember asking my Dad how radio worked, but he didn't know either). But
I remember seeing it pass overhead.
--
Roger.
owners club@nicksplace.comco Pikey Market Trader
"Peter" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fbtvtj$30e$1...@aioe.org...
So Peter, it took you 13 years to pass the "simple" 12WPM, Morse test?
owners club@nicksplace.comco Pikey Market Trader
>>>
>> Said someone, who took 13 years to pass the "simple" 12WPM Morse test...
>
> At least he passed it! Some didn't, and still haven't, after 25+ years!
Can someone "please" tell me what a "Class A" licence is?
It's got me feckin' beat!!!
Pikey Market Trader.
owners club@nicksplace.comco Pikey Market Trader
"Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI" <g3...@turner-smith.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fdBEi.53860$h11....@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
> on 08/09/2007 12:15 Peter, aka Beanie posted some crap which has Bean
> deleted
>
> Got a job yet, Beanie?
13 years to pass the "simple" 12WPM Morse test, what do you think, Frank?
Regards
tox
class_a
Have you even achieved the level of a foundation licence yet? No wonder
you can't understand some things!
Spike
Don't be so hard on him - he did all those investigations on the
VHF/UHF bands, and I expect it took him a long time to write them all
up.
And even longer to publish, as we're still waiting.
ITMT he's still excusing being unable to tune up his FT-101E.
What a busy life he leads.
--
from
Aero Spike
Spike
"Pikey Market Trader" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
Oh, don't apologise. There are people on here who took more than a
decade to upgrade their licence privileges, finally winding up with an
A licence by the easiest route possible. I suspect they are ashamed of
it, because of all the Freudian Projection they employ.
--
from
Aero Spike
DieSea
"Pikey Market Trader" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in message
news:M%GEi.933$gZ....@newsfe7-win.ntli.net...
Summat tells me YOU don't even have a farce Licence (000000000Ops sorry Foundation
Licence)
It would be nice to be proved wrong though
DieSea
Jimbo gm4dhj ...
> 6 year olds now near have a license.
> OH MY GOD
But it is worthless!!! ..............
>
>
>
> Johnny. G3LIV
>
>
The highest tech we had was a bakerlight (ebay spelling) radio and a console
TV with add on band three converter on the side for STV..........
Peter
>
> 13 years to pass the "simple" 12WPM Morse test, what do you think, Frank?
Mick Hunter, you prove yourself time and again to be a vacuous bag of wind.
If you want to be successful in your campaign to win an infantile
pissing-in-the-playground
contest then you really ought to find something to sneer about which bothers
me.
Talking of 13 years, what have you achieved in the last 13 years, apart from
an
inability to pass a "simple" (Your word, I think?) hurdle to prove yourself
the
intellectual and educational equal of a 6-year-old?
If you were to put as much effort into your studies as you do into rather
silly
and infantile exposes of your psyche, who knows what you might achieve?
Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI
>
> If you were to put as much effort into your studies as you do into rather
> silly
> and infantile exposes of your psyche, who knows what you might achieve?
>
rather silly and infantile exposes of your psyche, who knows what YOU
might acheive?
...(_!_)...
owners club@nicksplace.comco Pikey Market Trader
"Peter" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:fc0go6$o50$1...@aioe.org...
> "Pikey Market Trader" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in
> message news:1tHEi.640$HW....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> 13 years to pass the "simple" 12WPM Morse test, what do you think, Frank?
>
Why are you in denial about the 13 years it took you to pass the "simple"
12WPM Morse test?
It's nothing to be ashamed of!
In this world, some people are naturally, slow learners, some people can't
seem to hold down a job, some people are unemployable, some people come up
with all types of harebrained theories, some people know the inside of their
local ploddery better than their own home, some people are just out and out
crackpots and some people fall into everyone of these categories.
HTH
Jimbo gm4dhj ...
> In this world, some people are naturally, slow learners, some people can't
> seem to hold down a job, some people are unemployable, some people come up
> with all types of harebrained theories, some people know the inside of
> their local ploddery better than their own home, some people are just out
> and out crackpots and some people fall into everyone of these categories.
you know my local 2M0s then ? ..........
John
> JM wrote
>
>>So am I the only one alive that heard the Sputnik
>
> time. It's salutory that from Sputnik to Apollo 11 took 12 years, while in
> the 38 years since, the most significant "advance" in space technology has
> been satellite TV. >:^(
>
> There's some interesting stuff about US Sputnik paranoia here.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/partners/aol/special/sputnik/main.html
>
> And I wonder whether any British listeners got this kind of coverage.
>
> http://www.w9az.com/1957_his.html
>
In fact yes - the Douai Abbey School in Woolhampton Berkshire always seemed
to be in the news and on TV in the mid 60's often hearing new satellites
before the professionals. I recall they did have an active Amateur Radio
Club.
Brian Reay
>
> In fact yes - the Douai Abbey School in Woolhampton Berkshire always
> seemed to be in the news and on TV in the mid 60's often hearing new
> satellites before the professionals. I recall they did have an active
> Amateur Radio Club.
Didn't Kettering School also do this?
--
73
Brian, G8OSN
www.g8osn.org.uk
Now your amateur licence is free, why not send at least £15 per year to
support the
Radio Communications Foundation or STELAR?
John
"Brian Reay" wrote
>> In fact yes - the Douai Abbey School in Woolhampton Berkshire always
>> seemed to be in the news and on TV in the mid 60's often hearing new
>> satellites before the professionals. I recall they did have an active
>> Amateur Radio Club.
>
> Didn't Kettering School also do this?
>
Possibly - it's just that I always remember Douai being in the news. I also
recall that Douai calculated the satellite orbits as well.
Actually a very good project for a school - applied electronics, physics and
mathematics all together in a single exercise - and the students can see how
the different subjects relate to, and are dependant upon, each other.
Brian Reay
>
> "Brian Reay" wrote
>
>
>>> In fact yes - the Douai Abbey School in Woolhampton Berkshire always
>>> seemed to be in the news and on TV in the mid 60's often hearing new
>>> satellites before the professionals. I recall they did have an active
>>> Amateur Radio Club.
>>
>> Didn't Kettering School also do this?
>>
>
> Possibly - it's just that I always remember Douai being in the news. I
> also recall that Douai calculated the satellite orbits as well.
Kettering did that also, clearly there was more than one school at it.
> Actually a very good project for a school - applied electronics, physics
> and mathematics all together in a single exercise - and the students can
> see how the different subjects relate to, and are dependant upon, each
> other.
Indeed. We had a physics teacher who explained the process- which, as I
recall, was based on Doppler shift to find the point of maximum elevation
of a several orbits. Sadly the school didn't have a radio club, just a few
interested pupils who played with such things.
class_a
> In this world, some people are naturally, slow learners,
Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
Dave Liquorice
> It's salutory that from Sputnik to Apollo 11 took 12 years, while
> in the 38 years since, the most significant "advance" in space
> technology has been satellite TV. >:^(
But the race has been won, why bother running any more?
Having said that there have been quite a lot of advances since Apollo
days. But most unmanned, things like the Hubble Space Telescope, a couple
of Martian rovers still trundling about *well* beyound their design life,
probes to the planets, the larger asteroids and a comet or two, some will
(or have) returned material to earth. Then of course there are probes like
Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 launched at the end of 1977 that are still
operational and returning data about the extremities of the solar system.
It's just that space exploration stuff isn't reported in the UK media to
any great extent. The last thing to get even half decent coverage was
Beagle 2.
--
Cheers new...@howhill.com
Dave. pam is missing e-mail
Spike
class_a wrote:
I hate to point out the obvious, but I'll make an exception and do so
for you.
This group is called uk.radio.amateur.
People can appear on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
called uk.amateur.radio.
'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
Amateurs themselves.
So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
--
from
Aero Spike
Arfur Mo'
I don’t understand your reply.
class_a asked this question:
>> Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
To which you replied:
> I hate to point out the obvious, but I'll make an exception and do so
> for you.
>
> This group is called uk.radio.amateur.
He didn't ask for clarification of the group name.
> People can appear on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
> called uk.amateur.radio.
He didn't ask for the door policy, or what people are allowed to talk about.
> 'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
> say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
> an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
> Amateurs themselves.
He didn’t ask what his justification for posting here was.
> So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
> or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
> here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
Nope, he didn't ask for your opinion on the quality of the information
provided by 'Pikey Market Trader' either. Add to that the fact that
he wasn't addressing you, and I have to ask:
Can you read?
Dave
> Spike wrote:
>
> I don’t understand your reply.
> class_a asked this question:
>
>>> Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
>
>
> To which you replied:
>
>> I hate to point out the obvious, but I'll make an exception and do so
>> for you.
>>
>> This group is called uk.radio.amateur.
>
>
> He didn't ask for clarification of the group name.
No, you needed the clarification. You do not need an amateur licence to
post here.
>> People can post on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
>> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
>> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
>> called uk.amateur.radio.
Oh! I don't know :-)
> He didn't ask for the door policy, or what people are allowed to talk
> about.
Agreed. So what is your point about a 'door policy'?
>> 'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
>> say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
>> an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
>> Amateurs themselves.
>
>
> He didn’t ask what his justification for posting here was.
>
>
>> So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
>> or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
>> here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
Agreed. He is a vendor to the amateur radio fraternity that has, in the
past, informed us of bargains that he will market at the next rally he
attends.
> Nope, he didn't ask for your opinion on the quality of the information
> provided by 'Pikey Market Trader' either. Add to that the fact that
> he wasn't addressing you, and I have to ask:
> Can you read?
I have to ask 'what is your level of understanding of English language'?
Dave
Spike
Arfur Mo' wrote:
>Spike wrote:
>
>I don’t understand your reply.
Never mind. I'll walk you through it.
>class_a asked this question:
>
>>> Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
>
>To which you replied:
>
>> I hate to point out the obvious, but I'll make an exception and do so
>> for you.
>>
>> This group is called uk.radio.amateur.
>
>He didn't ask for clarification of the group name.
No-one said he did, sunshine.
However, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, what follows in the
paragraph below is a crucial bit. The bit that - according to you -
he didn't ask for clarification for is a lead-in to that.
>> People can appear on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
>> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
>> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
>> called uk.amateur.radio.
>
>He didn't ask for the door policy, or what people are allowed to talk about.
No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit depends on the
preceding bits.
>> 'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
>> say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
>> an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
>> Amateurs themselves.
>
>He didn’t ask what his justification for posting here was.
No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit is the conclusion drawn
from the preceding bits.
>> So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
>> or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
>> here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
>
>Nope, he didn't ask for your opinion on the quality of the information
>provided by 'Pikey Market Trader' either.
He doesn't have to, sunshine. I didn't ask for you comments on what
you perceive as the quality of the post you replied to, but you
replied to it. So it's OK for you, but not for me. Are you a complete
idiot, or are you still working at it?
>Add to that the fact that he wasn't addressing you,
This is a discussion forum, and it's public. If Class-A Moron wanted a
private discussion, he should have taken it to email. Otherwise,
anyone can respond to any posting. Simple, innit?
After all, you butted in with your rather puerile questions, but you
seem to think that that's OK. Funny world you live in.
>and I have to ask: Can you read?
And I have to ask: are you a complete tosser, or are you still working
at it?
--
from
Aero Spike
Arfur Mo'
> Arfur Mo' wrote:
>
>> Spike wrote:
>>
>> I don’t understand your reply.
>
> Never mind. I'll walk you through it.
Please do, I'm sure it will be a fascinating journey.
>> class_a asked this question:
>>
>>>> Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
>> To which you replied:
>>
>>> I hate to point out the obvious, but I'll make an exception and do so
>>> for you.
>>>
>>> This group is called uk.radio.amateur.
>> He didn't ask for clarification of the group name.
>
> No-one said he did, sunshine.
I'm glad to see you realise that. What he asked was: "Is that why you
haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?"
> However, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, what follows in the
> paragraph below is a crucial bit. The bit that - according to you -
> he didn't ask for clarification for is a lead-in to that.
This quetion: “Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation
licence yet?”
Seems to be very simple question to answer – I can’t imagine why you
think that it requires a lead-in, but I’ll persevere with your nonsense
for a while longer.
>
>>> People can appear on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
>>> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
>>> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
>>> called uk.amateur.radio.
>> He didn't ask for the door policy, or what people are allowed to talk about.
>
> No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit depends on the
> preceding bits.
The ‘preceding bits’ are no more than long-winded idiocy.
>>> 'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
>>> say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
>>> an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
>>> Amateurs themselves.
>> He didn’t ask what his justification for posting here was.
>
> No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit is the conclusion drawn
> from the preceding bits.
Oh good, do you eventually answer the question: “Is that why you haven't
even achieved a foundation licence yet?”
>>> So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
>>> or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
>>> here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
>> Nope, he didn't ask for your opinion on the quality of the information
>> provided by 'Pikey Market Trader' either.
>
> He doesn't have to, sunshine. I didn't ask for you comments on what
> you perceive as the quality of the post you replied to, but you
> replied to it. So it's OK for you, but not for me.
You’re quite correct, but my question was not “Is that why you haven't
even achieved a foundation licence yet?”, so I’m afraid that you’re not
comparing like-for-like.
> Are you a complete
>> idiot, or are you still working at it?
I could never achieve your standard of pompous idiocy.
>> Add to that the fact that he wasn't addressing you,
>
> This is a discussion forum, and it's public. If Class-A Moron wanted a
> private discussion, he should have taken it to email. Otherwise,
> anyone can respond to any posting. Simple, innit?
You didn’t, and never could, answer the question: “Is that why you
haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?” ,because it was a
direct and personal question, that wasn’t addressed to you.
> After all, you butted in with your rather puerile questions, but you
> seem to think that that's OK. Funny world you live in.
I only asked one question and that was: “can you read?”
And your ‘walk through’ hasn’t managed to limp as far as that question yet.
Can you read?
>> and I have to ask: Can you read?
>
> And I have to ask: are you a complete tosser, or are you still working
> at it?
I could never rank as highly as you Woger.
Spike
Arfur Mo' wrote:
How generous of you.
>>>> People can appear on here who are not Radio Amateurs, but who talk of
>>>> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
>>>> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
>>>> called uk.amateur.radio.
>>> He didn't ask for the door policy, or what people are allowed to talk about.
>>
>> No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit depends on the
>> preceding bits.
>
>The ‘preceding bits’ are no more than long-winded idiocy.
It's true, you really are an idiot.
>>>> 'Pikey Market Trader' appears on here as he has things of interest to
>>>> say to the people on this group, including those like himself who have
>>>> an interest in Amateur Radio but who are not necessarily Radio
>>>> Amateurs themselves.
>>> He didn’t ask what his justification for posting here was.
>>
>> No-one said he did, sunshine, but the next bit is the conclusion drawn
>> from the preceding bits.
>
>Oh good, do you eventually answer the question: “Is that why you haven't
>even achieved a foundation licence yet?”
>
>>>> So, it matters not at all that 'Pikey Market Trader' has no licence,
>>>> or Morse Test. It has nothing to do with 'slowness'. That he appears
>>>> here, with information of interest to the group, is enough. See?
>>> Nope, he didn't ask for your opinion on the quality of the information
>>> provided by 'Pikey Market Trader' either.
>>
>> He doesn't have to, sunshine. I didn't ask for you comments on what
>> you perceive as the quality of the post you replied to, but you
>> replied to it. So it's OK for you, but not for me.
>
>You’re quite correct, but my question was not “Is that why you haven't
>even achieved a foundation licence yet?”, so I’m afraid that you’re not
>comparing like-for-like.
>
>> Are you a complete idiot, or are you still working at it?
>
>I could never achieve your standard of pompous idiocy.
You're giving a very credible imitation of a pompous idiot, but that's
your problem.
>>> Add to that the fact that he wasn't addressing you,
>>
>> This is a discussion forum, and it's public. If Class-A Moron wanted a
>> private discussion, he should have taken it to email. Otherwise,
>> anyone can respond to any posting. Simple, innit?
>
>You didn’t, and never could, answer the question: “Is that why you
>haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?” ,because it was a
>direct and personal question, that wasn’t addressed to you.
Then it should have been sent by email, rather than posted in a public
discussion forum. Public discussion forums are forums for discussion
by the public. That means....it isn't private. I'm amazed you haven't
realised this.
>> After all, you butted in with your rather puerile questions, but you
>> seem to think that that's OK. Funny world you live in.
>
>I only asked one question and that was: “can you read?”
>And your ‘walk through’ hasn’t managed to limp as far as that question yet.
It doesn't need to, since it isn't the topic being addressed.
The topic being addressed is this one:
[1] this group is called uk.radio.amateur.
[2] it was incorporated before the system demanding a charter came
into being.
[3] it *isn't* uk.amateur.radio.
[4] it isn't uk.rec.amateur.radio.
Now [1] means that any topic of interest to Radio Amateurs is
relevant. [2] means that one can't break the rules of the charter, as
there isn't a charter to break the rules of. [3] might be more
restrictive than [1] but there still isn't a charter to break the
rules of. And despite many wishing it so, [4] doesn't exist.
If 'Pikey Market Trader' wants to talk on here, he can do so. He
doesn't need a licence, as it is Usenet. It isn't Amateur Radio. It's
a public disucssion forum, and isn't private.
You really are unaware of this? What a dimwit.
>Can you read?
>
>>> and I have to ask: Can you read?
>>
>> And I have to ask: are you a complete tosser, or are you still working
>> at it?
>
>I could never rank as highly as you Woger.
--
from
Aero Spike
Arfur Mo'
> How generous of you.
I try to do my bit for charity.
> It doesn't need to, since it isn't the topic being addressed.
>
> The topic being addressed is this one:
>
> [1] this group is called uk.radio.amateur.
>
> [2] it was incorporated before the system demanding a charter came
> into being.
>
> [3] it *isn't* uk.amateur.radio.
>
> [4] it isn't uk.rec.amateur.radio.
>
> Now [1] means that any topic of interest to Radio Amateurs is
> relevant. [2] means that one can't break the rules of the charter, as
> there isn't a charter to break the rules of. [3] might be more
> restrictive than [1] but there still isn't a charter to break the
> rules of. And despite many wishing it so, [4] doesn't exist.
>
> If 'Pikey Market Trader' wants to talk on here, he can do so. He
> doesn't need a licence, as it is Usenet. It isn't Amateur Radio. It's
> a public disucssion forum, and isn't private.
>
So if I can't answer a question - this one for example: "Is that why you
haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?" ,but I feel like typing
something - I can just say anything that makes me feel good.
I have no Idea why you're banging on about charters - I never asked
about them and I can't see why you think it's important. I just
questioned why you made an irrelevant response to a question you
couldn't possibly answer.
Can you give a definitive answer to this question (that was addressed to
Tox):
"Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?"
Don't you think it would be better if you had STFU and let Tox answer a
question that only he is qualified to answer?
Spike
Arfur Mo' wrote:
>So if I can't answer a question - this one for example: "Is that why you
>haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?" ,but I feel like typing
>something - I can just say anything that makes me feel good.
Whatever poles your pirogue.
>I have no Idea why you're banging on about charters - I never asked
>about them and I can't see why you think it's important. I just
>questioned why you made an irrelevant response to a question you
>couldn't possibly answer.
Just because you aren't bright enough to see why the reference to
charters is relevant isn't my problem. It's yours.
>Can you give a definitive answer to this question (that was addressed to
>Tox):
>
>"Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?"
I've already said why the question has no relevance, but you either
can't or won't see it.
>Don't you think it would be better if you had STFU and let Tox answer a
>question that only he is qualified to answer?
Do you think it would be better if you STFU and FOAD?
I take it you've now realised that a public discussion forum is a
forum for discussion in and by the public, as you seem to have stopped
claiming that the 'discussion' was 'private'. If so, that's an
advance, although I really can't understand why it was seen by you as
a relevant comment.
You're as big a windbag as that loony from Parts West, with the same
level of discussion technique.
--
from
Aero Spike
Mike Clayton
> Arfur Mo' wrote:
>
>> So if I can't answer a question - this one for example: "Is that why you
>> haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?" ,but I feel like typing
>> something - I can just say anything that makes me feel good.
>
> Whatever poles your pirogue.
LOL
--
Mike Clayton
Graham
> "Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message
>
>
> > ..... to wind the helixes.....
>
> ITYM, "helices".
>
> Tch! Tch! Mrs.Nugatory!
++++The camera showed one of the monitors at Goonhilly go from noise -
to an
>unlocked picture to a fully locked piture then fade out after about 5 or 10
>minutes. ++++
.Ah The good old GPO engineering ..long before muppet lab's took over
inventing the future ... .. .... dident goonhilly , live up to its
name and go tits up ... and it was the french who relayed the pics
back across the channel ....
full technical review and sound recording
http://www.cwmb.sa.gov.au/kwc/section3/3-09.htm
Peter
wrote:
>JM wrote
>
>>So am I the only one alive that heard the Sputnik
>
>On this ng, perhaps! Thanks for the information, Sputnik was before my
>time. It's salutory that from Sputnik to Apollo 11 took 12 years, while
Less time in fact that it took G4SDW to "upgrade" from his former G8
call!!
Mrs.Nugatory's, M3OSN's and Mick Hunter's Obsession
"Peter" <micro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46e848a3....@news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> Less time in fact that it took G4S.. to "upgrade" from his former G8
> call!!
Mrs.Nugatory's, M3OSN's and Mick Hunter's Obsession
> class_a wrote:
>>Pikey Market Trader wrote:
>>> In this world, some people are naturally, slow learners,
>>Is that why you haven't even achieved a foundation licence yet?
>
> subjects of interest to them. These subjects need not necessarily
> concern Amateur Radio. Such a limitation would exist if the group was
> called uk.amateur.radio.
Freudian Slip there, Mrs.Nugatory!
Class_A came dangerously close to showing you up in addition to Mick Hunter,
insofar as neither of you have been able to establish that you are the
intellectual
and educational equivalents or betters than 6-year-olds.
Your attempt at diversion fails. Whereas what you say is true, it is an
irrelevant response
to Class_A who was responding to Mick Hunter's infantile (Aren't they all?)
jibe about
qualifications. Class_A's rejoinder is entirely reasonable irrespective of
any group charter
or lack thereof.