"Type Accepted"?
Richard Cassano
"Type Accepted" for HF Ham bands and why is the IC-706MK2G not Type accepted
on marine frequencies?
Background: The SGC-2000 is a terrible radio. I would like to replace it
with the Icom 706, however, I need to have access to the marine frequencies
so I can communicate with non-Ham marine stations. Can I do both with the
706 and stay strictly legal? It would be best for me, financially, to buy
one radio to do both marine and ham.
Richard Cassano, KC2ISG
S/V Gray Eagle, Tashiba 40
Oyster Bay, NY, USA
Bobby4a7vv
>I have an "FCC Type Accepted" SGC-2000 Marine/Ham SSB. What makes this
radio"Type Accepted" for HF Ham bands and why is the IC-706MK2G not Type
accepted on marine frequencies?.."
The "Type Acceptace" of the SGC is just for the Marine Bands. That was a
marine Band radio, also usable/modifyable for Amateur bands below 30Mhz.
Amateur radios that only operate below 30Mhz don't require "type acceptance",
that is why many Marine, Cb & other rigs are routinely modified for Amateur
bands, & it's also the "loophole" that allows the thousands of "40 channel"
style 10M rigs to be imported every year.
As far as I am aware, the FCC hasn't allowed Amateur radios to be "out of
the box" type accepted for other dual services such as Marine, commercial, CB
or aircraft bands , even though many will "mod" there...
Dwight Stewart
>
> I have an "FCC Type Accepted" SGC-2000
> Marine/Ham SSB. What makes this radio
> "Type Accepted" for HF Ham bands and
> why is the IC-706MK2G not Type accepted
> on marine frequencies?
Obviuosly, it is "type accepted" for the marine band, not the ham
band. The "type acceptance" has nothing to do with the ham band -
covered by another set of rules and a license.
> Background: The SGC-2000 is a terrible
> radio. I would like to replace it with
> the Icom 706, however, I need to have
> access to the marine frequencies so I
> can communicate with non-Ham marine
> stations. Can I do both with the 706
> and stay strictly legal? It would be
> best for me, financially, to buy one
> radio to do both marine and ham.
It is not legal to modify a ham radio to operate in the marine bands.
Radios in those bands must be "type accepted" for that use and the Icom
is not. However, the Icom can probably be easily modified to operate on
those frequencies if you have a ligitimate reason to do so. As a member
of the CG Auxiliary, I use my Yaesu on the marine band, and on the
military frequencies next to the marine band, strictly for activities
associated with the Auxiliary. For private radio use, I use a marine
"type accepted" radio.
Dwight Stewart (W5NET)
Dave Holford
Somewhere, but unfortunately I can't find it now, there is a web site
which lists ham transceivers which can be legally used on U.S.
Government systems. IIRC it was primarily aimed at military, reserve and
National Guard users and the main requirement was the addition of a high
stability master oscillator - I assume a similar requirement exists for
commercial services like marine and aviation. Maybe someone can point
you to the site and you can check if the 706 is on the list.
Dave Holford
John
nobody cares. When was the last time you actually heard of someone,
anyone, getting charged with using a non type accepted radio for any
purpose? Just doesn't happen. There is a hell of a lot more people
using ham equipment on CB than the marine bands. Few, if any, people
get arrested for doing that, and the pool is a lot larger. If anyone
asks you what kind of radio you are using, tell them you are using the
piece of crap SGC. How are they to know that is not true?
Reminds me of hearing stories of calling the fire department to get a
cat out of a tree. When was the last time you saw a cat skeleton in a
tree? They come down when hungry, and they don't need the FD to do so.
Jim Weir
outside the band, with or without the nonexistant cover of CG Aux operation. Do
I do it. Perhaps. Do I admit to it in writing in public. What kind of a
damned fool do you take me for?
You really need your CO to send you to a good training facility. That or expect
that knock at your front door some day.
Jim
Lt., USCG Aux. Ret.
Comm Officer
Dwight Stewart <ste...@sc.rr.com>
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
As a member
->of the CG Auxiliary, I use my Yaesu on the marine band, and on the
->military frequencies next to the marine band, strictly for activities
->associated with the Auxiliary. For private radio use, I use a marine
->"type accepted" radio.
Jim Weir, VP Eng. RST Eng. WX6RST
A&P, CFI, and other good alphabet soup
J Yazel
wrote:
> =============================
That label indicates that the equipment has undergone extensive
testing by the FCC and approved for a specific use.
Only commercial equipment (including CB radios, etc.) must be type
accepted.
Amateur radio equipment does not need to be type accepted.
Jack W8RAG
Dwight Stewart
>
> Jesus, I wish I had the balls to post
> how I illegally use an amateur transceiver
> outside the band, with or without the
> nonexistant cover of CG Aux operation. Do
> I do it. Perhaps. Do I admit to it in
> writing in public. What kind of a damned
> fool do you take me for?
>
> You really need your CO to send you to a
> good training facility. That or expect
> that knock at your front door some day.
>
> Jim
> Lt., USCG Aux. Ret.
> Comm Officer
Jim, you're showing your considerable ignorance of the Auxiliary.
First of all, there are no retired Auxiliary lieutenants, or any other
similar rank. We're a civilian organization, created by Congress, and
controlled by the Coast Guard Commandant (similar to the Civil Air
Patrol's association with the Air Force).
Second, there are no Comm Officers in the Auxiliary. We either serve
watches at Coast Guard communications facilities, or operate from our
homes using privately own equipment to supplement Coast Guard
communications, or operate from out vessels using privately own
equipment during CG related activities.
Third, there are no COs in the Auxiliary. We have a command structure
similar to the military, but different in many ways.
Fourth, the FCC has no authority over Auxiliary communications on the
military frequencies (the Coast Guard controls its own frequencies), so
there will not be any knock on my front door.
And, finally, if I were doing anything illegally, do you really think
I would write about it in this, or any other, newsgroup.
Bob Lewis (AA4PB)
Amateur radio *transmitters* do not need to be type accepted. Amateur
radio receivers capable of operating in the VHF range do.
Jim Weir
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
-> Jim, you're showing your considerable ignorance of the Auxiliary.
You are correct. I was only doing search and rescue duty for an AuxCoastie
Flotilla for 15 years. Perhaps you've got time and rank on me. I listen for
your august words of advice.
->First of all, there are no retired Auxiliary lieutenants, or any other
->similar rank.
You are correct. I was a lieutenant (railroad tracks with a superimposed red
"A", still gottem in my top bureau drawer) when I moved out of San Diego and had
to resign. I'll use "former" instead of "retired" in my next post.
We're a civilian organization, created by Congress, and
->controlled by the Coast Guard Commandant (similar to the Civil Air
->Patrol's association with the Air Force).
Exactly so. However, within a given flotilla, at least in the Air Search And
Rescue group, all pilots were given the butterbars rank of Ensign upon joining
and then we progressed with time and duty experience. We had a complete command
structure from the Flotilla Commander (4 year term, rank Cdr. as I recall)
through ExO, TO, CO, and all the rest of it.
->
-> Second, there are no Comm Officers in the Auxiliary.
I only taught it for the last 5 years I was in. I set up the airborne
communications net for the patrol of the waters from San Diego to Newport. I
guess I must have been dreaming it.
We either serve
->watches at Coast Guard communications facilities, or operate from our
->homes using privately own equipment to supplement Coast Guard
->communications, or operate from out vessels using privately own
->equipment during CG related activities.
The stuff I had to work with had an anchor on it. I guess I was dreaming that,
too. So also the portable stations we set up for the weekend stinkpot patrol on
Soledad and Palomar.
->
-> Third, there are no COs in the Auxiliary. We have a command structure
->similar to the military, but different in many ways.
Oh, boy, do YOU have a lot to learn. Just because you little backwater flotilla
is set up the way you understand it, don't tell the rest of the world that we
are doing it wrong.
->
-> Fourth, the FCC has no authority over Auxiliary communications on the
->military frequencies (the Coast Guard controls its own frequencies), so
->there will not be any knock on my front door.
In the first place, you said you were using your Yaesu on the marine band. The
USCG does NOT have standing to use the marine band except under the rules set
down by the FCC, which requires type-accepted equipment. In the second place,
at least in the Southern California jurisdiction, any equipment used on the
military frequencies had to be individually approved by (guess who) the
Communications Officer of the flotilla or the region.
->
-> And, finally, if I were doing anything illegally, do you really think
->I would write about it in this, or any other, newsgroup.
I have no idea of your mental capacity.
Jim
Dwight Stewart
>
> Dwight Stewart wrote...
>
> > First of all, there are no retired Auxiliary
>
> You are correct. I was a lieutenant (railroad
> tracks with a superimposed red "A", still gottem
> in my top bureau drawer) when I moved out of San
> Diego and had to resign. I'll use "former"
> instead of "retired" in my next post.
Auxiliary personnel wear insignia similar to military rank, but those
are symbols of office or position held, not rank. In fact, the Auxiliary
rules specifically prohibit any misrepresentation of rank or authority
(Auxiliary Manual, pg 3-8, E3f). The two full bars with red "A" shows an
appointment to a staff officer position either at the district level
(ADSO or D-AD) or national level (BA, if worn with corresponding
National Staff ID badge).
> Exactly so. However, within a given flotilla, at
> least in the Air Search And Rescue group, all
> pilots were given the butterbars rank of Ensign
> upon joining and then we progressed with time and
> duty experience. We had a complete command
> structure from the Flotilla Commander (4 year term,
> rank Cdr. as I recall) through ExO, TO, CO, and all
> the rest of it.
How long ago was this? Are you sure you're talking about the Auxiliary
and not the active duty Coast Guard? I've been with the Auxiliary for
almost fifteen years and am not aware of any of the things you
mentioned. No Auxiliary member has been given military rank that I'm
aware of. Personnel are given authority commonly associated with rank
while engaged in certain situations for the Coast Guard, but that always
ends when the situation ends (it is not permanent rank held).
Flotilla Commanders serve for a period of one year with a maximum of
two consecutive terms followed by one year out of office (no limit on
number of times repeated). I verified that using COMDTINST M16790.IE. A
Flotilla Commander wears two bars with a silver "A" (the silver "A"
represents an elected position versus the red "A" for appointed positions).
There are no ExO, TO, or CO, positions (see more below).
> I only taught it for the last 5 years I was in.
> I set up the airborne communications net for
> the patrol of the waters from San Diego to Newport.
> I guess I must have been dreaming it.
Jim, you must be thinking about the active duty Coast Guard instead of
the civilian Auxiliary. There is a huge difference between the two. We,
the Auxiliary, have a specialty course, called AUXCOM, that is based on
Coast Guard communications training, but it is different in a number of
ways (procedures, frequencies, etc). Of course, since we are able to
serve watches at Coast Guard stations, that course must also contain
proper Coast Guard procedure in addition to the slight variations
associated with Auxiliary communications. The course is most often self
taught (though some flotillas offer training classes), with a proctored
final exam given by an active duty officer (commissioned or petty) or an
AUXOP specifically appointed by the director.
> The stuff I had to work with had an anchor on it.
> I guess I was dreaming that, too. So also the
> portable stations we set up for the weekend stinkpot
> patrol on Soledad and Palomar.
I'm not suggesting that you're dreaming about anything, Jim. Only that
one of us is somewhat confused about Auxiliary procedure and organization.
> > Third, there are no COs in the Auxiliary. We
> > have a command structure similar to the military,
> > but different in many ways.
>
> Oh, boy, do YOU have a lot to learn. Just because
> you little backwater flotilla is set up the way you
> understand it, don't tell the rest of the world that
> we are doing it wrong.
Jim, I'm basing my comments on the national Auxiliary manual
(COMDTINST M16790.IE) and on my experience all the way through to the
national level of the Auxiliary. The Auxiliary's "chain of leadership"
is very different than the military's "chain of command." There are no
Commanding Officers ("COs") in the Auxiliary. The closest thing to that
is the active duty command structure when serving directly with the
Coast Guard on patrols or at a fixed facility. However, the Auxiliary
itself has no "command" structure, hence there cannot possibly be a
"commanding officer" within the Auxiliary.
> In the first place, you said you were using your
> Yaesu on the marine band. The USCG does NOT have
> standing to use the marine band except under the
> rules set down by the FCC, which requires type-
> accepted equipment. (snip)
Jim, none of the Coast Guard's radio equipment is "type accepted" by
the FCC. With activities directly associated with the Coast Guard,
Auxiliary personnel fall under military regulations (just like the Coast
Guard does), not FCC regulations. And it is up to each Coast Guard
district to regulate communications within that district. In District
13, the use of ham equipment by Auxiliary personnel is authorized, or at
least it was when I was there (the Group Operations Center's
Communications Officer in District 13 was an active ham, so he should
have known what the rules were or are if he is still there). I'm not
aware of the regulations here since I'm not directly involved with
communications except for the very occasional patrol (my boat is not a
facility here, so is not used for Coast Guard patrols here).
> In the second place, at least in the Southern
> California jurisdiction, any equipment used on
> the military frequencies had to be individually
> approved by (guess who) the Communications Officer
> of the flotilla or the region.
All that is covered in the basic Auxiliary manual. Auxiliary
communications equipment used for Coast Guard communications must be
inspected and approved before it is accepted as a facility, and that
inspection is one by staff officers at the flotilla, division, or
district level. That is nationwide policy, not just limited to Southern California.
Bob Miller
>I have an "FCC Type Accepted" SGC-2000 Marine/Ham SSB. What makes this radio
>"Type Accepted" for HF Ham bands and why is the IC-706MK2G not Type accepted
>on marine frequencies?
>Background: The SGC-2000 is a terrible radio. I would like to replace it
>with the Icom 706, however, I need to have access to the marine frequencies
>so I can communicate with non-Ham marine stations. Can I do both with the
>706 and stay strictly legal? It would be best for me, financially, to buy
>one radio to do both marine and ham.
Welllll, looking at my AES catalog, HF marine radios run about $1250 to $1900.
You can get a new 706 for $800-ish. It would seem you could get, say, the
Kenwood HF marine at $1250, and a 706mk2g, for about the same as your SGC cost,
or a little more.
You could also go to a VHF marine radio, and save a bundle over the HF jobs.
They're only a couple of hundred bucks.
Bob
k5qwg
Reg Edwards
> on marine frequencies?
==================================
Nobody has yet asked them to accept it, or they just havn't found time to
sign the papers.
Gary P. Fiber
Service. It does not meet the technical standards set forth in Part 80
to end rules which the Marine radio service falls under. You will find
most if not all amateur HF and VHF transceivers do not meet Part 80 to
end technical standards. Much is due to VFO control where Marine
equipment is channelized. There is no slipping up ro down a few kiz to
get rid of interference under the Marine Rules like we can as
amateurs.
Gary K8IZ
Jim Weir
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
-
->
-> Auxiliary personnel wear insignia similar to military rank, but those
->are symbols of office or position held, not rank.
I'm not going to debate semantics between postion held (which implies some sort
of authority) and rank. Perhaps the purists will want a distinction.
->
-> How long ago was this?
1967 through 1981.
Are you sure you're talking about the Auxiliary
->and not the active duty Coast Guard?
Oh, sure, I have no idea whether I was flying my own aircraft on search and
rescue on the weekends or being paid a salary to wear a brown suit every day for
four years. Come on.
I've been with the Auxiliary for
->almost fifteen years and am not aware of any of the things you
->mentioned.
Things may have changed in the ensuing 20 years. That doesn't make them any
less real when they happened.
->aware of. Personnel are given authority commonly associated with rank
->while engaged in certain situations for the Coast Guard, but that always
->ends when the situation ends (it is not permanent rank held).
So we have authority associated with rank, temporary rank, and permanent rank.
If it walk like a duck, quacks like a duck...
->
-> Flotilla Commanders serve for a period of one year with a maximum of
->two consecutive terms followed by one year out of office
It was either a two or three year term, and as I recall (never having held the
post myself) it was butterleaf with a red superimposed "A".
-> There are no ExO, TO, or CO, positions (see more below).
Having served for two one-year stints as the ExO and five years as the CO, I
respectfully disagree.
-> Jim, you must be thinking about the active duty Coast Guard instead of
->the civilian Auxiliary. There is a huge difference between the two.
No kidding. Who the hell you think you are talking to here, sonny? You think a
15 year chunk of my volunteer life just vanishes?
We,
->the Auxiliary,
That's the royal imperative We, of course. You'd do well on the Queen's staff.
>> have a specialty course, called AUXCOM,
Our Air Flotilla had no formal procedure as we were (to the best of my
knowledge) either the only, or one of the very few, aircraft-only flotillas in
the country. We were writing the manual as we went. My job was to travel
around Southern California teaching the methods and procedures for
communications between the Auxiliary water fleet and the Auxiliary air fleet.
Beings as that most communications of the day (early '70s) was still with radios
that glowed in the dark, that was a nontrivial task.
->
-> I'm not suggesting that you're dreaming about anything, Jim. Only that
->one of us is somewhat confused about Auxiliary procedure and organization.
Boy, ain't THAT the truth of it.
->
-> Jim, I'm basing my comments on the national Auxiliary manual
->(COMDTINST M16790.IE) and on my experience all the way through to the
->national level of the Auxiliary. The Auxiliary's "chain of leadership"
->is very different than the military's "chain of command." There are no
->Commanding Officers ("COs") in the Auxiliary.
Here we go again with semantics. All I can tell you was that back in the stone
ages the leader of a flotilla was called the Commanding Officer. What you do
today may be different.
->
-> Jim, none of the Coast Guard's radio equipment is "type accepted" by
->the FCC.
I'm not willing to fly 600 miles back and pull a radio out of the rack to prove
or disprove that contention. However, I will state that somewhere in the
process, the company that designed that radio got some form of FCC
acceptance/approval, whether or not it went through CGHQ and thence to the FCC,
or directly from the manufacturer.
In District
->13, the use of ham equipment by Auxiliary personnel is authorized, or at
->least it was when I was there (the Group Operations Center's
->Communications Officer in District 13 was an active ham, so he should
->have known what the rules were or are if he is still there).
I doubt sincerely that any competent engineer or technical person would give
blanket approval for ANY ham gear to be used on the marine band without SOME
sort of testing stamp on the back plate. Either that or a list of acceptable
models that had gone through some sort of evaluation.
Auxiliary
->communications equipment used for Coast Guard communications must be
->inspected and approved before it is accepted as a facility, and that
->inspection is one by staff officers at the flotilla, division, or
->district level.
And we wouldn't call that flotilla staff officer that inspects the
communications gear the...Communications Officer...would we? Heaven forfend.
Jim Weir
It isn't a matter of "signing the papers". Lord don't I wish it so. I've been
the signatory engineer on about two dozen TAs, and each one of them has been
like pulling teeth back in Washington. (FCC Laurel Labs, specifically.) The
tests aren't too bad (about a week for a typical VHF transceiver, by the time
you set the antenna pattern range up, get the generator running again, and all
that stuff), but the interminable wait from the Laurel Puzzle Palace is a royal
pain in the labonza.
(Thanks for your help on understanding the rough theory behind a thin tape
antenna's bandwidth, btw.)
Jim
"Reg Edwards" <g4fgq...@btinternet.com>
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
->> . . . . and why is the IC-706MK2G not Type accepted
->> on marine frequencies?
->==================================
->
->Nobody has yet asked them to accept it, or they just havn't found time to
->sign the papers.
->
Bob Lewis (AA4PB)
> process, the company that designed that radio got some form of FCC
> acceptance/approval, whether or not it went through CGHQ and
> thence to the FCC, or directly from the manufacturer.
>
I know nothing about the auxiliary but having spent over 30 years
working for the U.S. Government, I can tell you that in that time no
Federal agency has to go through or get approval from the FCC. The
Federal Government falls under the authority of the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), a part of
the Dept of Commerce. NTIA assigns the frequencies and sets the
standards for the Federal Government in the same manner that the FCC
does for everyone else in the U.S.
Dwight Stewart
>
> I'm not going to debate semantics between
> postion held (which implies some sort
> of authority) and rank. Perhaps the purists
> will want a distinction.
It's not just a matter of semantics, Jim. It is against Coast Guard
regulations to misrepresentation of rank or authority. While we are
strongly associated with the Coast Guard, and wear insignia very similar
to the military rank of officers, we are not commissioned officers and
therefore cannot just assume military rank or titles.
By the way, this topic was hotly debated within the Auxiliary
recently. Many pointed out that the present system (titles associated
with position held) does not serve well for written correspondence or
for past officers not presently holding office (hence, no present
position title). Most agreed that if military sounding titles are
adopted, they should clearly different - such as "Auxiliary Captain"
instead of just "Captain." However, no consensus of opinion was reached,
so no action is planned relating to this.
> 1967 through 1981.
Well, after reading your messages, all I can say is that things have
sure changed in a short amount of time. You would hardly recognize the
Auxiliary today. Our status, missions, and roles were dramatically
expanded following two bills passed by Congress in the 1990's (1994 &
1996). Today, the relationship between the Auxiliary and regular Coast
Guard is getting much tighter. Auxiliary personnel today can do just
about anything active duty Coasties do (except direct law enforcement
and direct military actions, but even those restrictions are less
today). Some Coast Guard jobs have been turned over entirely to the
Auxiliary. The 9-11 tragedy caused still further changes, offering
Auxiliary personnel more duties and responsibilities (to free up active
duty personnel for homeland defense activities). Membership at the
entrance level is now much easier (everyone is invited to join), while
membership at the more senior levels is more restrictive (background
checks and security clearances are now required for most senior
positions, for example).
You should think about joining again, Jim. You might like the
Auxiliary today. Anyway, take care.
Terry Taylor
> the FCC. With activities directly associated with the Coast Guard,
> Auxiliary personnel fall under military regulations (just like the Coast
> Guard does), not FCC regulations. And it is up to each Coast Guard
> district to regulate communications within that district. In District
> 13, the use of ham equipment by Auxiliary personnel is authorized, or at
> least it was when I was there (the Group Operations Center's
> Communications Officer in District 13 was an active ham, so he should
> have known what the rules were or are if he is still there). I'm not
> aware of the regulations here since I'm not directly involved with
> communications except for the very occasional patrol (my boat is not a
> facility here, so is not used for Coast Guard patrols here).
This is correct, BUT the CG's equipment DOES meet NTIA standards or they
would NOT be able to
use Federal money to procure it. If you are using an amateur Yaesu radio,
almost NONE of them meet
NTIA standards, and even auxilarists and CAP members MUST comply with NTIA
standards.
That said, can you guy's take your little urination contest to eMail and
leave the group out of it?
Terry Taylor, LtCol, CAP
(Former DCS/Communications, Pacific Region)
Jim Weir
family decided to transfer our CAP activities to the USCG Aux, courtesy of the
gentleman whose answers, shall I say, were more reflective of a gentleman and an
officer than you would ever conceive of?
By the way, it seems to me that you have your choice of which posts to read.
Don't you have a "no" button on your machine? Or don't you know how to use it?
Jim
(In my long relationship with the USAF and the USAF-CAP, there are two kinds of
leaf colonels. Those who got there being a horse's ass and are at the end of
their promotional capabilities, and those who are making reservations at Maxwell
for AWC. Seems to me I see where this one is headed.)
"Terry Taylor" <n6...@pacbell.net>
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
->
->That said, can you guy's take your little urination contest to eMail and
->leave the group out of it?
->
->Terry Taylor, LtCol, CAP
->(Former DCS/Communications, Pacific Region)
Dwight Stewart
>
> That said, can you guy's take your little
> group out of it?
Oh, come on, Terry. Since this discussion was vaguely about ham radio,
and a good number of hams are involved with the Auxiliary, this
discussion was not that much of an intrusion, was it? :)
Furthermore, when you posted the message above, the discussion had
already ended in this newsgroup several hours before (after all, most
discussions that end with "take care" have ended).
Besides, what you saw as a "urination contest" was simply two people
with different viewpoints discussing a similar interest. And I would
strongly prefer that, here and within the Auxiliary, to no discussion at all.
However, if our discussion truly bothered you that much, please accept
my apology. And, to insure the thread does not continue (bothering you
still more), I'll try to end it here by not responding further. Take care.
Jim Weir
women, and fast horseflesh. (Or was that fine whiskey, fast women, and good
horseflesh. I never could remember the difference.)
At any rate, Terry, you sure as hell could take lessons.
Jim
Dwight Stewart <ste...@sc.rr.com>
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
->> "Terry Taylor" wrote...
->>
->> That said, can you guy's take your little
->> urination contest to eMail and leave the
->> group out of it?
->
-> However, if our discussion truly bothered you that much, please accept
->my apology. And, to insure the thread does not continue (bothering you
->still more), I'll try to end it here by not responding further. Take care.
Dwight Stewart
>
> As I stated, Dwight is a gentleman, scholar,
> and judge of good whiskey, fine women, and
> fast horseflesh. (Or was that fine whiskey,
> fast women, and good horseflesh. I never
> could remember the difference.)
Stop, Jim. You're making me blush. As for the rest, it's a matter of
age for most. In youth, it is good whiskey, fine women, and fast
horseflesh. By middle age, it is fine whiskey, fast women, and good
horseflesh. Later, it is just whiskey and women (the horse is just too
darn hard to ride and few are very selective when it comes to women -
which means any whiskey is just fine to help forget what once was). :)