On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:03:57 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote:

Well, he's not a troll in that he's making it up as he goes - it appears he
really is hoping to do for his company what he says (source: Google).

I have a clear history for anyone to Google.

However it's a job which really equates to:
Government fleeces tax-payers
Bureaucrat gets hold of budget allocation
Bureaucrat needs to succeed - ie. unload allocation
Ari and co. want to be under the hopper when the jackpot payout commences

Not too much wrong with that synopsis, Ken.

A valid way of doing business, but still a crock.

Ken

Indeed it is both. Considering we gave away a central DB technology to
DHS-NOLA, then they failed to use it, we are hoping to make money this time
around *and* that they will get their acts together.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:29:52 +1300, "Ken Taylor"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn
wrote:

DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second
messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.

Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.

Why a loco anyway? It would appear to be the mistaken assumption that
anything that big must have power to burn on anything plugged in by a user.
Not the case - the power from a loco is, not surprisingly, applied to the
tracks.

Actually, it's not.

What made you bring up tracks anyway -- my reference to the
tracks on the lake falling in? My point was that the locomotive is
going nowhere there aren't usable tracks.

On a diesel-electric locomotive, the generator's output is
applied, not to the tracks as you seem to think, but rather through
control circuitry to the stator around the axle. It's rather amusing
to see a repair yard worker with a set of wheels-and-axle (they're all
one single piece, in case you didn't know) clamp a stator around the
axle, connect a battery with a pair of short jumper cables and walk
the whole arrangement across a concrete floor as though he were
walking the family dog.

BTW, at 4,000+ horsepower, you could plug in nearly anything a
user might want, given proper appliances and the right plug. :-)



The electric generators used for powering gear other than the
train's vitals are not high power.

Ken

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:51:46 GMT, wrote:

Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.

Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.

Why a loco anyway? It would appear to be the mistaken assumption that
anything that big must have power to burn on anything plugged in by a user.
Not the case - the power from a loco is, not surprisingly, applied to the
tracks.

Actually, it's not.

What made you bring up tracks anyway -- my reference to the
tracks on the lake falling in? My point was that the locomotive is
going nowhere there aren't usable tracks.

On a diesel-electric locomotive, the generator's output is
applied, not to the tracks as you seem to think, but rather through
control circuitry to the stator around the axle. It's rather amusing
to see a repair yard worker with a set of wheels-and-axle (they're all
one single piece, in case you didn't know) clamp a stator around the
axle, connect a battery with a pair of short jumper cables and walk
the whole arrangement across a concrete floor as though he were
walking the family dog.

BTW, at 4,000+ horsepower, you could plug in nearly anything a
user might want, given proper appliances and the right plug. :-)

This is what we have been led to believe and the schematics are on their
way in. Jeez, if we can't find wattage on these beasts.........
--
Drop the alphabet for email

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:29:52 +1300, "Ken Taylor"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn
wrote:

DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive
alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a
disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second
messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at
speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.

Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.

Why a loco anyway? It would appear to be the mistaken assumption that
anything that big must have power to burn on anything plugged in by a
user.
Not the case - the power from a loco is, not surprisingly, applied to the
tracks.

Actually, it's not.

What made you bring up tracks anyway -- my reference to the
tracks on the lake falling in? My point was that the locomotive is
going nowhere there aren't usable tracks.

On a diesel-electric locomotive, the generator's output is
applied, not to the tracks as you seem to think, but rather through
control circuitry to the stator around the axle. It's rather amusing
to see a repair yard worker with a set of wheels-and-axle (they're all
one single piece, in case you didn't know) clamp a stator around the
axle, connect a battery with a pair of short jumper cables and walk
the whole arrangement across a concrete floor as though he were
walking the family dog.

BTW, at 4,000+ horsepower, you could plug in nearly anything a
user might want, given proper appliances and the right plug. :-)



The electric generators used for powering gear other than the
train's vitals are not high power.

Ken

4,000hp is a lot but not enough to swamp all the broadcast radios, which is
what the OP wants.

Incidentally my reference to tracks was just that the loco is made to move,
not power a boom-box. Like your anecdote though. :-)

Cheers.

Ken

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:29:52 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote:

Why a loco anyway? It would appear to be the mistaken assumption that
anything that big must have power to burn on anything plugged in by a user.
Not the case - the power from a loco is, not surprisingly, applied to the
tracks. The electric generators used for powering gear other than the
train's vitals are not high power.

Locomotive because of the need for a manual override by the Head Engineer.
CSX claims they can provide access to 1,000 watts.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

That would be much easier, simply sweep a modulated oscillator across the
band. With a couple of adjustments it would be easy to emulate a train
whistle, a somewhat universal warning.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn
wrote:

DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive
alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second
messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at
speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.

Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:44:09 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote:

That would be much easier, simply sweep a modulated oscillator across the
band. With a couple of adjustments it would be easy to emulate a train
whistle, a somewhat universal warning.

That's a better idea than a tone and what has been proposed is a tone and
an electronic pre-recorded message.

Thanks.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:16:33 GMT, wrote:

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn
wrote:

DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.

After Katrine/Rita, yes, not before.

Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.

I was there for a few days, didn't keep up with that.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn wrote:
DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

And what are these messages suppose to convey?

The target audience already knows it's screwed.

We all (outside the screwed zone) saw the blizzard of useless
"messages" the government(s) issued during and after Katrina.

Just what I need to hear from a locomotive blowing by at 50 mph:

"Hi! We're the government and we are here to help you."

The best that came out of post-Katrina was from self-help and
assistance from non-government organizations. And, the
government even thwarted some of that.

The inmates are running the asylum:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/02/news/storm.php

Ninety-one thousand tons of ice melting in idling 14-wheelers.

73
Jonesy
--
Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
Pueblo, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | OS/2 __
38.24N 104.55W | config.com | DM78rf | SK

On 4 Oct 2005 14:12:19 GMT, Allodoxaphobia wrote:

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:19:42 -0400, Ari Silversteinn wrote:
DHS has proposed a change in scenario. They want an on locomotive alerting
system that could be commandeered and driven at, near or about a disaster
site. Everything else stays more or less the same, overbroadcasting on
local AM/FM, power off the locomotive, selective or full frequency
broadcasting, train (s) to be in motion at all times. 20-30 second messages
that would also combine a message to be aware that a locomotive (at speed)
will be flying by the at grade crossings.

Comments?

And what are these messages suppose to convey?

Primarily two things, alerting pre-evac and at grade crossing alerts that a
high speed locomotive is approaching.


We all (outside the screwed zone) saw the blizzard of useless
"messages" the government(s) issued during and after Katrina.

And a blizzard of useful ones as well.

--
Drop the alphabet for email