Phil Kane wrote:
. . . Not counting my HF rig, I have five radios for voice
comms: a VHF and a UHF in the home comm room, my mobile, my HT, and my
"grab-and-go". Who is going to subsidize that? I surely can't.

Pactor is fine - my setup works at minimal cost- as long as it's
Pactor I. The cost of the proprietary modem for Pactor II and III is
in the high three figures if not four by now with the falling dollar.

My perennial "what hath technology wrought" rant....

My misgivings in this area are related more to the complexity of the
technology, although the cost is certainly a consideration.

My experience in real disaster situations suggests that simple is better
and that much of the reason to have amateur radio participation is tied
to the simplicity of the gear that we use. The reason we're there in
the first place is that the commercial infrastructure isn't functioning.
Tying our operations to high-tech equipment puts us in the same realm
as what we're there to replace.

My experience also suggests that it's more the human factor than the
equipment factor that makes us valuable in a disaster operation. The
training and experience that the human has is much more important than
what kind of equipment is in use.

I suppose that the response to this is that the best of all worlds is a
trained cadre of operators using the best state-of-the-art equipment
available. In theory this is correct, but in the real world of an
actual disaster operation things might be a lot different.

73, Steve KB9X

My experience also suggests that it's more the human factor than the
equipment factor that makes us valuable in a disaster operation. The
training and experience that the human has is much more important than
what kind of equipment is in use.

I suppose that the response to this is that the best of all worlds is a
trained cadre of operators using the best state-of-the-art equipment
available. In theory this is correct, but in the real world of an
actual disaster operation things might be a lot different.

73, Steve KB9X


I know of a number of members of ARES and clubs wanting to be setup
with all kinds of high-tech communications in case of emergency. I
have also noticed that in most cases, while they receive lots of
verbal support and volunteers, they end up in the exercises with a
severe shortage of operators.

I volunteered in the aftermath of Hurricanes Hugo and Frances and many
very localized disasters. Locals aren't available in the aftermath of
area-wide disasters and in local emergencies, often comm needs require
multiple repeaters or very many HT communications.

In the early days of Amateur Radio, "High Tech" meant communicating
without wires and homing pigeons. The important thing is timely and
accurate communications. today's "High-tech" can help, but the
important thing is " any means necessary".

Buck
N4PGW