[Milsurplus] Strong Stomach Needed.

[J. Forster]

AMEN,
-John

============


>>The question at the end of the day is Ham radio history,
>>including the practice of modification of surplus equipment
>>just as valid as that of the military history in the context
>>of communications equipment?
>
> I vote NO.  I have absolutely zero interest in how hams
> exercise(d) their engineering "skills" on a piece of military
> radio gear, unless they operate(d) it exactly as it was
> designed, with all original or contemporary parts, and
> without attempts to "improve" its performance with
> subtle so-called "reversible" or "invisible" mods.
>
> In other words, I'm interested in how the equipment
> performed, exactly as issued, for the intended customer.
> I don't care to know how a ham made a 200 watt PEP
> SSB transmitter from a BC-696.
>
> I've been a ham for more than 40 years.  My first
> station was a beat-up T-18/ARC-5 modified for 80m CW,
> plus a beat-up BC-454-B, plus a BC-453-B that I used
> for copying merchant marine Morse, plus an AVR-20
> receiver I got for a dollar in a local junk shop in 1966.
> Just a lot of cheap surplus!
>
> While I still have that BC-453 and wax nostalgic sometimes,
> I wouldn't expect a story of my use of this gear to have
> any level of interest today.
>
> I want to know the history of the gear's development and
> engineering, and especially the history of its use by the people
> for whom the gear was procured in the first place.  That would
> be our military people, not us ham hobbyists.
>
> I do not expect anyone to share this outlook.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>