"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

... most of the traffic handled via NTS is

1) of little/no importance

To whom? And you'd allege that there is no other possibility ? Sure
sounds like it. You
*should* know that even health and welfare traffic is important to the
mission of the ARS, as it not only relieves worried families etc but also
gies important
exposure to the capabilities and mission of the ARS. Sorry you missed all
that.

and

2) much makes use of "coded messages" (sending a canned message number)

that would be of little use in an emergency situation where the
situation,
needs,
details would need to be spelled out in some detail.

N onsense bafflegab! Have you ever worked a *real* disaster/emergency of
any consequence?

Yes ... major earthquakes, forest (brush) fires, and the crash of a
commercial airliner
into a residential area in SoCal ... over many years. Hurricanes in
Florida, etc.
Often was NCS ...

Sure doesn't sound like it! And for your edification, the "canned"
mesages, right along
with prosigns and the many other CW shortcuts merely add
significantly to the efficiency of the mode.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Sorry, the "Morse is necessary for emergency communications" argument
doesn't hold water, and the FCC has already realized that.

BS! FCC has never made any statement even close to that, and WE all know
it.

YES THEY HAVE - from the R&O in WT Docket No. 98-143 ("restructuring")
- read it and weep:

31. We also find unconvincing the argument that telegraphy proficiency is
one way to keep amateur radio operators ready to be of service in an
emergency. In this regard, we note that most emergency communication today
is performed using either voice, data, or video modes. We also note that
most amateur radio operators who choose to provide emergency communication
do so, according to the amateur radio press, using voice or digital modes of
communication, in part, because information can be exchanged much faster
using these other modes of communication.[1] Further, we note that in
traditional emergency services, such as police, fire, and rescue, there is
no requirement that emergency service personnel hold amateur radio licenses
or any other license that requires telegraphy proficiency. We conclude,
therefore, that telegraphy proficiency is not a significant factor in
determining an individual's ability to provide or be prepared to provide
emergency communications.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

[1]See, e.g., The ARRL Letter, Volume 18, Number 7, at 3-4 (use of single
side band when Hams Help Staff Colombian Relief Call Center); Volume 17,
Number 13 at 3 (VHF repeaters use to assist tornado victims); Volume 18,
Number 4 at 1-3 (use of VHF 2 meter repeaters to assist Emergency Operations
center after tornado outbreak). See also Worldradio, February, 1999, at 6
(Salvation Army Emergency Team Radio Network (SATERN) maintaining a network
of stations on 14.265 MHz during Hurricane Mitch); and Newsline, Issue No.
1129, February 29, 1999 (communications for Colombian earthquake assistance
on 14.347 MHz using voice modes.)


One NEVER knows in advance what will be needed to deal with any unforseen
emergency/disaster.

That's why one should be prepared with spare gear, good plans, etc. so that
one does not have to rely on outdated methods ...

We all know that, and of course you do too, but it works against that
enigmatic agenda of yours.

Sorry, Dick, YOU'RE the one with the "enigmatic agenda" ... but the FCC
doesn't
buy it ...

Carl - wk3c