On Mar 20, 8:14�am, wrote:
On Mar 19, 3:16 pm, Steven Stone wrote:

The biggest problems with the roving radio comm centers is desense.
With all the antennas ganged up on the roof of such a small area they
take each others radios out every time the other one transmits.

Not if the comm center is properly designed. *The techniques for
siting multiple transmitters/receivers in confined areas and
minimizing mutual interference are pretty well established.

If that is a real worry, each local amateur radio group can
check it out for themselves...base-mobile-handheld, any
combination they can operate on/in. There is really a
great freedom in amateur radio to convene such a group
for a real test at equipment distances on same or different
bands using different RF output powers. That will yield
data that can be of good use later in real emergencies.

73, Len AF6AY

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.

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

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. Glad handing has sometimes
been called the wages of volunteerism. Perhaps a situation similar to
Volunteer firefighters is at work? Some people have issues with them
also. Yet they fill an important function.

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

73 de Mike KB3EIA -

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

On Mar 18, 2:11 am, wrote:


This doesnt' work with other radio services very well. Why would
it be appropriate for Amateur Radio?



Other radio services have distinct markets with distinct needs that
they are chartered to serve.

Amateur Radio is unique in that it is chartered as a playground for
tinkerers and experimenters. It seems ironic to tightly regulate
modes/bandwidths/modulation schemes in an environment where
experimentation is officially encouraged.

73, de Hans, K0HB

On Mar 22, 1:18�am, wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:11 am, wrote:

* * This doesnt' work with other radio services very well. *Why would
it be appropriate for Amateur Radio?

Other radio services have distinct markets with distinct needs that
they are chartered to serve.

Amateur Radio is unique in that it is chartered as a playground for
tinkerers and experimenters. *

That's one of the reasons for amateur radio. But not the
only one! A lot of different activities have to share the bands.

But I like the playground analogy.

All the playgrounds I've seen are carefully designed to
support a variety of different activities. There are
designated areas for various sports, for example. And
there are rules to keep order, permitted and prohibited
activities, etc. Certain activities need special permission,
others are informal.

IOW, there's a structure to a playground. And the structure
is most important when the playground is small and the
number of people who want to use it is large.

There was a time when 99% of ham radio activity was
either CW/Morse Code or plain AM voice. Back then, a
simple structure was all that was needed.

Those days are long gone. We need a lot more structure
than before, IMHO.

It seems ironic to tightly regulate
modes/bandwidths/modulation schemes in an environment where
experimentation is officially encouraged.

Amateurs are much less regulated in that regard than
any other radio service. IMHO

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:33:26 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

Of course, I could probably
take the FCC prose and ask Google to translate it; it would be just as
opaque in the machine-translated version as it is in English/legalese.
grin

There's nothing wrong with the English version! Any communications
attorney can understand it with no problem. big grin.

When I was an advisor to the Israeli Ministry of Communications (40
years ago) one of my jobs was to rewrite and translate their amateur
rules into English. No big deal - I'm technically fluent in both
languages. Same for the Norwegian, or Swahili, or Urdu - get someone
who is technically fluent in both languages and it's a snap.

That job was a lot of fun, however. I fixed some problems that they
didn't even know they had (and got reciprocity and third-party traffic
approved in the process)! even bigger grin
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On Mar 22, 5:11 pm, wrote:


All the playgrounds I've seen are carefully designed to
support a variety of different activities.


Must be boring to explore in such a playground with all that structure
and rules. One of my favorite playgrounds is the Superstition
Mountain Wilderness, a playground completely disorganized except for
the boundary around it.

You can go hiking there or ride your horse, prospect for gold (the
"Lost Dutchman Mine" hasn't been found yet), camp for a night or a
week or a month. You can follow trails which have been blazed by many
hikers or horsemen before you, or be an explorer and leave the
established trails to the timid. The only rules here are don't burn
the place down, and don't trash the place for others. Explore without
rules and structure.

Kinda like I'd like to see the amateur bands, open for the explorers
and visionaries (so long as they're polite to the other children).

73, de Hans, K0HB

wrote in news:1174628469.011228.92910
@l75g2000hse.googlegroups.com:


Kinda like I'd like to see the amateur bands, open for the explorers
and visionaries (so long as they're polite to the other children.

I think that the crux *is* just that politeness though, Hans. When the
PSK31 segment (as an example) is stomped on by the robot Winlink
stations, who is playing politely? Yeah, I guess we can just move, but
won't it be fun to try to figure out where? And our next stop can just as
easily be disrupted by whatever wideband mode decides to park itself
right over top of us. Eventually a survival of the fittest situation
occurs, and I suspect that Winlink stations and SSB would come to be the
only modes around. And that would be a real tragedy. No DX windows, no
areas in which to search those who pursue the same modes as you seems
like a recipe for chaos. And I suspect that the Gentlemen's agreements
came about for those reasons, not that the people who came up with such
things lacked intelligence or vision.

I look at the framework as a guideline of just where I might like
to pursue my particular part of this hobby. If it were just a matter of
SSB and OOK CW, it would be one thing, but these days there is OOK CW,
SSB, RTTY, PSK31, 64, SSTV, Pactor, and on and on. Many modes, and some
don't exist very well together. Not all regulation is bad. In fact
excessive regulation and no regulation at all produce strikingly similar
results.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

On Mar 23, 11:18 pm, Mike Coslo wrote:


I think that the crux *is* just that politeness though, Hans.


Almost any country you want to name, with the notable exception of the
USA, hands their hams a set of frequencies and charges them to "play
politely". I don't see any evidence that this policy is causing any
problems.

Even in our country, one mode is given free reign to use virtually any
frequency they chose, and we all seem to get along. One has to wonder
"if market-based cooperation works for one mode, why won't it work for
the others?"

73, de Hans, K0HB

On Mar 13, 11:01 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
What is the process of modifying the gentlemen's agreements?
Specifically, I would like to explore the idea of adding a new PSK31
segment or two.


It strikes me that we've beat this subject into oblivion without
actually answering Mikes original question.

Actually, the ARRL bandplans (for whatever weight they carry) are
pretty much silent on the topic of PSK31. The mode settled by
convention into a small spot on each band, and the original small
number of players fit nicely into a fairly narrow slot by convention
of usage. Since it's gained in popularity, I think the next logical
step is for the users to start a discussion 'in-band' about annexing
additional nearby territory. I'm not into that mode, but it's my
impression that there's room in most of the data segments for you to
spread out a bit without any particular resistance.

In other words, let the 'market forces' come to bear.

73, de Hans, K0HB