[Milsurplus] Professionally converted radios

[Peter Gottlieb]

I have a tech in my lab, a non-ham, who I would trust with my most 
treasured gear to "professionally" do any mod.  He is a competent 
technician and a craftsman, professional in every way.  So I guess I 
disagree that there is no profession.


WA5CAB at cs.com wrote:
> 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