Michael Coslo wrote on Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:53:57 EDT:

wrote:
Has amateur radio actually helped handle problems caused
by a disaster DURING an event or have they been relegated
to emotional-support health-welfare messaging AFTER it?

Personal listening experience here.

There was a hurricane that went through South America a year or two
back, on the way toward the US. I listened to an emergency net as a Ham
was helping another who was on a small ship caught in the storm. I
believe it was near Grenada. The ship was having engine problems, the
skipper was inexperienced, and a ham with maritime experience was
"procured" to talk the other guy through saving the boat and passengers.

Listening to the transmissions, I have no doubt that had the
instructions and help been relayed, the skipper and his passengers might
have become statistics.

Not being a mariner and one who avoids riding ON water, I can't
comment on the veracity of that. :-)

In a relatively recent event, a west coast sailor was attempting
to sail solo towards the southern tip of South America, became
damaged (de-masted?) and the Chilean Navy - Coast Guard came to
his rescue along with other private ships in the area. The news
of both search and rescue was carried on all the TV news and
amateur radio did relay that news albeit a bit late.

Was amateur radio communications "vital" in that case? Or wasn't
it of a secondary nature in the form of "health and welfare?"
I say the latter since the principal rescuer was the military
of the government of Chile with the cooperation of fishing
vessels in the area. Safety of Life at Sea has been a bond of
ALL mariners since well before radio was demonstrated as a
communications medium. This was a case of SOLAS in action.

Those are two different conditions. Communications DURING
an event have direct bearing on life-death situations while
communications afterwards concern survivors, the living.

The emergency is not a finite point.

I have to disagree. Those directly involved in ANY emergency
would probably agree with me on that.

People who are injured during an
emergency can survive or expire during the aftermath. Who can say which
particular communications are critical except in retrospect?

I would say the individuals directly involved can say that very
definitely. Before this solo sailor's power ran out, he reported
being de-masted and adrift and that his power was running low.
To my mind that is about as direct a determination of an actual
emergency as can be...albeit my not being a mariner.

An airliner captatin reported an emergency when an air carrier's
nose wheel did not retract properly; the nose wheel assembly had
become turned from its natural position. The FAA accepted that
as an emergency, coordinated with Los Angeles airports for
emergency help, having fire engines standing by along with rescue
workers. TV news relayed it live for viewers. Spectacular safe
landing even though the nose wheel assembly caught fire. I don't
recall the number of passengers on board but at least a hundred
lives were directly at risk...all survived.

Health and
welfare comms are extremely important to those affected. It is important
work, whether involved in dire emergency or the less pressing aftermath.

Well, I was taking things in order of importance. When human life
is at stake, I put the priority on direct emergency communications
to save such life. Reporting on the results of aid/rescue
afterwards after that would, in my mind, be deemed secondary.
Yes, that secondary role is important for the emotional well-
being of relatives and friends via "health and welfare" comms,
but I still rank it secondary. Others may disagree.

My question has always been, who is kidding who on all
this "emergency work?" It's a serious question which
always seem to raise the emotional hackles of some.

There is a difference between Amateurs and those who are being paid for
their work. The amateurs are not being paid.

Yes, that is why the FCC titles Part 97 as "AMATEUR Radio
Service." :-)

Glad handing has sometimes been called the wages of volunteerism.

Good point! But, my mention was in regards to amateur radio
as a hobby, an avocation, something to be done in one's free
time. Is/was the amateur radio service organized as an
"emergency communications" primary role? Or was it organized
as an unpaid, personal, technological-oriented activity done
by individuals? I say the latter.

Too often some individuals blend the two organization-origins
with the "emergency" part rationalized as justifying the real
activity. I would say that is wrong. As responsible citizens
we all should help in some part with our communities in some
way. Amateur radio is only one way to help and then primarily
for rather extreme situations.

I respectfully have to say that if a ham says something about Amateur
radio contributions to emergency communications, there are some people
who automatically dismiss their statements.

Yes, there are. I've been called one of those! :-)

Fortunately one does not
have to engage in the activity as a ham. It is completely voluntary.

True. The state of California Auxiliary Communications Service
will accept anyone to help in emergency communications, licensed
or not, as long as they can demonstrate they know something about
communications. The California ACS considers ALL forms of
communications to be vital and ANY that survive extreme
emergencies would be used. Yes, having a license helps, whether
commercial or amateur (in my case both), but that license by
itself is not proof positive that an individual knows enough
about radio and less about wired communications.

Now, I've been accused of being geographically bigoted by
mentioning California and the Greater Los Angeles area as models
of emergency communications. For one thing, California is BIG
having over 10 percent of this nation's population, rivaling
the entire population of Canada. The state has weathered a
tsunami wiping out a small coastal city, many earthquakes, many
brush and timber firestorms, flooding, and damage from heavy
rainstorms. The L.A. emergency communications center was new
and operating for the 17 Jan 94 Northridge earthquake that
affected about 10 million people and killed 53 humans...it
worked through the efforts of organization, training, and
regular drilling of participants. The "infrastructure" didn't
fail and the cities making up this megalopolis survived.
There's quite enough history of successful operations through
very real emergencies available to anyone who bothers to look
and seriously consider adopting those plans and experiences for
their own communities. Examination of what has worked and what
hasn't can be considered as a form of volunteerism...

73, Len AF6AY