Gee TOM....do you think you had problem on the "National Simplex Frequency"
of 146.52 because you are NOT SUPPOSED TO USE IT for contesting?

Just a thought.

Dan/W4NTI

"TOM" wrote in message
...
I thought I might share a couple of observations I've made regarding the
Amateur Service; the situation in other locations may differ.

Based upon my adventures last year in Florida when we got pounded by three
hurricanes I was interested in finding out the utility of my Ham two meter
transceiver by taking advantage of Field Day (simulated emergency test) in
June. I raised a collinear with an advertised gain of 7 dB to thirty feet
and powered my transceiver with a deep cycle battery. Operating on the
'National Simplex Calling Frequency' 146.52 MHz with 75 watts output power
I
attempted to find out how many stations I could contact and the extent of
my
operating range during the test. From my numerous calls I was able to
contact NO ONE! Not one person responded to my Field Day calls throughout
the day and I heard NO ONE calling Field Day! Not one Ham could I find
operating Field Day on the two meter National Simplex Calling Frequency!
Yet
to my surprise, I was able to consistently 'key-up' repeaters from
Jacksonville to Palm Bay---approximately 2/3's the length of the state of
Florida. And to consider, this is an amateur service simulated emergency
test in Florida occurring only 10 months after the destruction of Charley,
Frances, and Jeanne. It made me wonder just how interested Hams are in
emergency communications. I did have a nice conversation with a fellow
100
miles away via his repeater.

With regard to the Alaskan Emergency Frequency of 5167.5 kHz. As the FCC
recently granted amateurs five channels in the HF (60 meter) band: 5332,
5348, 5368, 5373, and 5405 kHz, it would seem to me that the ARRL would
have
taken an interest and evaluate those frequencies for channelized emergency
operations. The frequencies between the 75 and 40 meters bands might
offer
propagation characteristics of both bands and make those channels
particularly useful for short and long haul message handling.
Furthermore, the Alaskan Emergency Frequency channel might be added to the
new assignment for emergency use in the lower 48. Ideally, the 60 meter
amateur band might become an important part of an emergency response
provided by the amateur service. But, I just don't see any interest by
the
ARRL and those frequencies, every time I check them, remain unused.
A citation from the ARRL's Petition for Rule Making to the FCC
concluded, in part, "An Amateur Allocation in this band (60 meters) would
improve the Amateur Service's already exemplary record of providing
emergency
communications during natural disasters when even modern communications
systems typically fail." Perhaps the ARRL may take a break from their
publishing activities someday and investigate its possibilities.

Additionally, its odd about the amateur service that proclaims itself to
be
devoted to emergency service but dropped its distress frequencies. Until
the 1960's the ARRL had specific calling frequencies reserved for distress
and safety in the HF bands for radiotelephone and radiotelegraphy. These
frequencies were regularly printed in its journal 'QST'. I haven't found
out why the ARRL dropped them. Its beyon my comprehension that a
communications service, world wide in extent, that doesn't assign
frequencies,
routinely monitored, for distress signaling and calling. Similarly, some
years ago,
a manufacturer hardly wanted to discuss the necessary modifications of my
transceiver so I could access the, FCC authorized, 5167.5 kHz amateur
service Alaskan Emergency Frequency. It was only through the force of my
professional credentials did they finally agree and sent me the service
note
I required. I like to point out that until recently, as far as I know,
Yaesu, (FT-857 and FT-817 for example) is the first amateur equipment
manufacturer to provide amateur equipment capable of accessing the Alaskan
Emergency Frequency without equipment modification. If the amateur
service
is so concerned with emergency communications why did it take so long for
this to occur?

After nearly forty years as an amateur radio operator, these are some of
the
issues that make me reconsider the utility of the amateur service as an
emergency communications provider . Although the amateur service has
played a significant role in handling emergency communications in the
past,
the changing face of technology has relegated the amateur service to
a position of little consequence---possibility, with better leadership,
the amateur service can regain its former stature.

I sincerely think, that with the devastation of Charley, Frances and
Jeanne
last year, and Katrina this year, the ARRL really needs to get off their
ass
and come up with a serious emergency communications plan. I suspect that
the ARRL is a 'has been' organization and a new vision for amateur radio
(emergency communications) needs to take their place.