[Milsurplus] Professionally converted radios

[WA5CAB at cs.com]

Having for 31 of my last 45 years on the planet been in a position to 
"professionally" (meaning officially) carry out modifications to US military 
electronics equipment and conventional ordnance, I agree with several responders 
that although modifications (AKA conversions, ham hacks, etc.) can be 
competently done (and worth pointing out, as most were not), .using the term 
"professional" implies that the modifications were sanctioned by some 
organization with the right to authorize or approve such modifications and performed 
by someone authorized by said organization to perform said modifications.  
>From the description of modifications in the original post, it is obvious that 
neither case applies.  No MWO, T.O. or F.C. exists for said modifications.  


Which isn't to say that the modifications weren't done in a technically 
competent manner.  But that they couldn't have been professionally done as no 
profession exists for doing said modifications to said equipment.  They were 
presumably well done ham hacks.

In a message dated 11/26/2009 6:46:33 PM Central Standard Time, 
nerd at verizon.net writes: 
> Dude!  Put away the tin foil.  Ultimately it is you who will be the  
> shaper of your reputation, such as it is.
> 
> Have a nice day!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:50 PM, Michael Tauson <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Peter Gottlieb <nerd at verizon.net>  
> >wrote:
> >>You don't really know if the original poster has a clue or not.
> >
> >Then he should be ready to trot out his "professional".
> >
> >>Perhaps the choice of words isn't ideal but how many excellent  
> >>engineers
> >>or technicians are also English majors?
> >
> >Did you read what I said before the last paragraph or did you skip to
> >the end?  I'm betting on the latter since you missed the gist of it.
> >I did not say that a professional didn't do the work, I said it wasn't
> >done by someone who does it professionally which has been the thread
> >of this conversation.
> >
> >Or do you have something against me personally?  That actually makes  
> >more sense.
> >
> >>If you are a absolutist purist then even looking at a radio will  
> >>wreck
> >>it but if you want to retain any practicality then gear can indeed be
> >>modified to be usable, and it can be done well.
> >
> >Did I say it couldn't be?  I'm a purist in the sense that I prefer
> >equipment that hasn't been converted but I have pre-converted
> >equipment sitting waiting for my all mighty soldering iron to
> >"professionally " convert it further.  I'm one of a few here whose
> >main area of expertise is A.R.C. equipment (which is what started this
> >discussion) so I guess that qualifies me (us) as a professional(s) on
> >it.  But I do NOT make that claim nor do any of the others so far as I
> >know.
> >
> >Meir had the right of it when he asked about MWOs and documentation to
> >show when and by whom they were performed.  *THAT* would be
> >professional modification.  Anything else is amateur no matter what
> >the doer's background.
> >
> >>If you have personal knowledge of that guy's work or what was done,
> >>fine, but otherwise you have no right to trash him based on his post.
> >
> >I have every right to my opinion and to state it however I will.  Or
> >do you also hate the 1st Amendment along with having an exceptionally
> >low opinion of me?
> >
> >Michael, WH7HG
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480