On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 18:38:04 -0400, Ari Silversteinn
wrote:

I don't know the details on how it works, but it seems to me that a
broadening of something akin to the On-Star technology might be a
solution work examining. I do not know if an On-Star operator can talk
to an equipped vehicle at On-Stars initiative, but certainly we have
the start of a system with a two-way radio with a satellite comms
link.

Admittedly, at the momeny On-Star is considered a luxury add-on option
and is currently available only in GM cars (to the best of my
knowledge.) But 23 years ago, I wrote a paper to my DOD bosses which
said this system the Swedes were developing called cellular phone
might have to be looked into. I was doing this as part of a survey on
new technologies which could have an impact upon intelligence
production. [I got a response from some Dilbert-type pinhead boss that
said it would go nowhere BTW]. Given a few years and some
competition, the On-Star paradigm could be as ubiquitous as
cell-phones are today. Even 23 years ago, I never forsaw the
possibility of virtually every teenager having a cell phone or that
there would be ten of them in just my immediate family [Wife, myself,
two adult children and their families. Son and his wife have two
systems each plus a Nextel.]

If an On-Star device, would be true two way, with GPS tracking, with
either end of the link able to activate the system. One could
broadcast a message to every active unit, either universally, or,
based upon GPS tracking to every unit with prescribed geo coordinates.
There already exists a somewhat similar system to broadcast weather
alerts to a passive receiver, although not normally deployed in cars.
Boaters already can have a Digital Selective Calling VHF radio in
their boats by which a coast guard can issue warnings. Such a system
is being mandated in the UK by a phase in process (e.g. new radios
with the old paradigm cannot be marketed unless they have DSC.)

And horror of horrors, one could alway investigate Broadband over
Powerlines (BPL). Wouldn't that give us hams some gas.

W3JT

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:27:17 -0500, Richard Harrison wrote:

Disruption of all normal channels is unecessary and undesirable. Some
won`t be tuned-in and won`t immediately get the message. Nearly everyone
has eyes and ears. Sight and sound are useful to communicate.

Air horns as used on locomotives are designed to get attention. They are
heard at great distances.

Ever hear of The Quiet Zone rulings?