"William" wrote ...

Wow. Warms the heart to see such humanity on the group.


Apparently you've never been on the end of a personal attack from Leonard.
I have. He deserves a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his way.

It would certainly be
an improvement over what we've seen here from you in the past.

Arn, ever see what Steve posts?

Sure. They are usually in response to a first strike from Leonard. What's
your point?

BTW, we put our Amateur Radio gear on-line for the first time in the
Mobile
Incident Command Center the other day.

But 9/11 was more than 2.5 years ago.


We've had plenty of comms ability since then, but put the gear in the MICP
as a means of improvement. Improvement of comms systems is a good thing,
right William?

First contact was via CW with a
station in Iowa.

Was it Iowa that you needed to contact? I'm trying to think what an
East Coast military installation might need with Iowa? Looking for
obsolete Collins parts?

Conditions for SSB were just not up to par.

For a contact with Iowa? Did you try a band higher? Did you try a
band lower? Again, what was the reason Iowa was needed for a contact?


We tested the gear on ALL bands (and both modes). And Iowa was the place we
happened to contact first. If I need to contact FEMA via HF in another
state (including IOWA) I think I have proven that it can be done by this
test. And that, after all, was the purpose to begin with.

We just love
having all those tools in our communications kit.

Wow. Me too.

We also tested our state of the art sat-phone/VTCs and wireless VOIP
network. They worked flawlessly -- what wonderful pieces of gear. We
are
now completely wireless (including phone lines) so we can go wherever
needed.

So you really didn't need to contact Iowa with amateur radio. I was
wondering about that.

Sure we did. The Ham gear is for redundancy. That's why we have it. A
test of it's HF capability was important. Test complete, test successful.

21st Century comms at its best -- which means a mixture of the old
and new together to give us the strongest redundancy possible.

Strong redundancy equals GAO audits. They don't like redundancy even
if it means survivability. They'd rather have the money spent on food
stamps and WIC.


Strong redundancy equals uninterrupted communications in an emergency. The
GAO cares not as long as we spend the money appropriately. Since the
purchases were pre-approved, I guess we already did that.

Arnie, its always great to read one of you posts. Thanks for stopping
in.

And you too William.

Arnie -

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"William" wrote ...

Wow. Warms the heart to see such humanity on the group.

Apparently you've never been on the end of a personal attack from Leonard.
I have. He deserves a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his way.

I'm sure you think so. You have a terrible ego problem in that
you need to have agreement from everyone that your viewpoint
is the only possible "correct" one. It isn't, and you don't like
certain folks who won't kiss your [expletive deleted].

You managed a personal attack on me some time back via a
web page with my allege "photo" on there. Beat the gunnery
nurse by months.

I've been up-front in public in all these arguments. I didn't try
to sneak behind any backs to defame another like you or the
gunnery nurse did.

It would certainly be
an improvement over what we've seen here from you in the past.

Arn, ever see what Steve posts?

Sure. They are usually in response to a first strike from Leonard.

Wayyyyy incorrect, inspector clueless.

Want proof? Go to Google. Start looking. It will take days.

But, if past is prologue, you will see only what you WANT to see.

What's
your point?

BTW, we put our Amateur Radio gear on-line for the first time in the
Mobile
Incident Command Center the other day.

But 9/11 was more than 2.5 years ago.

We've had plenty of comms ability since then, but put the gear in the MICP
as a means of improvement. Improvement of comms systems is a good thing,
right William?

Work on your SSB equipment some more. You couldn't reach Iowa.

First contact was via CW with a
station in Iowa.

Was it Iowa that you needed to contact? I'm trying to think what an
East Coast military installation might need with Iowa? Looking for
obsolete Collins parts?

Conditions for SSB were just not up to par.

For a contact with Iowa? Did you try a band higher? Did you try a
band lower? Again, what was the reason Iowa was needed for a contact?

We tested the gear on ALL bands (and both modes). And Iowa was the place we
happened to contact first. If I need to contact FEMA via HF in another
state (including IOWA) I think I have proven that it can be done by this
test. And that, after all, was the purpose to begin with.

But, you couldn't make there and had to resort to CW.

We just love
having all those tools in our communications kit.

Wow. Me too.

We also tested our state of the art sat-phone/VTCs and wireless VOIP
network. They worked flawlessly -- what wonderful pieces of gear. We
are
now completely wireless (including phone lines) so we can go wherever
needed.

So you really didn't need to contact Iowa with amateur radio. I was
wondering about that.

Sure we did. The Ham gear is for redundancy. That's why we have it. A
test of it's HF capability was important. Test complete, test successful.

But, you said you only got Iowa by CW. Only one mode.

21st Century comms at its best -- which means a mixture of the old
and new together to give us the strongest redundancy possible.

Strong redundancy equals GAO audits. They don't like redundancy even
if it means survivability. They'd rather have the money spent on food
stamps and WIC.

Strong redundancy equals uninterrupted communications in an emergency. The
GAO cares not as long as we spend the money appropriately. Since the
purchases were pre-approved, I guess we already did that.

Riiight...you got it through the bureaocracy. :-)

Is the General Accounting Office (GAO) staffed with radio experts?

LHA / WMD

"Len Over 21" wrote in part ...

Work on your SSB equipment some more. You couldn't reach Iowa.

Only God can improve atmospheric conditions. That's why we used CW. We
couldn't reach squat on SSB that day. Next test might show an improvement
in SSB capability. Sure hope so, it is our primary Ham mode.

Riiight...you got it through the bureaocracy. :-)

Is the General Accounting Office (GAO) staffed with radio experts?

Actually, they have some very knowledgeable folks in their tech area.
Thanks for asking.

Arnie -

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote in part ...

Work on your SSB equipment some more. You couldn't reach Iowa.

Only God can improve atmospheric conditions. That's why we used CW.

Of course. SHARES uses CW all the time? Military HF radio?

Back a half century ago, the ACAN used SSB on a 24/7 basis as
primary mode of long-distance communications..."long" as in
500 to 8000 miles over water or land.

We
couldn't reach squat on SSB that day. Next test might show an improvement
in SSB capability. Sure hope so, it is our primary Ham mode.

You really ought to consult with Army Signal Corps folks on how
to do SSB on HF from true emergency condition locations. Ask
for "Nevis." :-)

Signal Corps has some neat portable-mobile-fixed relatively low-
power HF radios that Get Through on SSB. Hughes Aircraft
(Ground division) designed and made some of it in the 1980s.
You can really "fly" with some of that. :-)

Fort Gordon, GA. They're in the DSN directory. They're on the
Internet. Signal Corps center. Good smarts there.

Riiight...you got it through the bureaocracy. :-)

Is the General Accounting Office (GAO) staffed with radio experts?

Actually, they have some very knowledgeable folks in their tech area.
Thanks for asking.

You cannot answer a specific question with a specific answer?

Does the GAO have RADIO EXPERTS?

Ask your "Nevis."

LHA / WMD

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"William" wrote ...

Wow. Warms the heart to see such humanity on the group.

Apparently you've never been on the end of a personal attack from Leonard.
I have. He deserves a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his way.

Perhaps. Hang in there with your semi-civil tongue. We may yet get
to civil debate.

It would certainly be
an improvement over what we've seen here from you in the past.

Arn, ever see what Steve posts?

Sure. They are usually in response to a first strike from Leonard. What's
your point?

No, no, no. You're just enabling Steve with such a an attitude.

Others in here appear to be able to withstand a "first strike" from
Len. Let's use you as an example. You said above that "He deserves a
lot harsher language than I have ever sent his way." So why didn't
you?

Do you have self-control? Self-respect?

Are you emotionally balanced?

Did Mark Morgan "deserve a lot harsher language than I have ever sent
his way?"

BTW, we put our Amateur Radio gear on-line for the first time in the
Mobile
Incident Command Center the other day.

But 9/11 was more than 2.5 years ago.

We've had plenty of comms ability since then, but put the gear in the MICP
as a means of improvement. Improvement of comms systems is a good thing,
right William?

Always.

First contact was via CW with a
station in Iowa.

Was it Iowa that you needed to contact? I'm trying to think what an
East Coast military installation might need with Iowa? Looking for
obsolete Collins parts?

Conditions for SSB were just not up to par.

For a contact with Iowa? Did you try a band higher? Did you try a
band lower? Again, what was the reason Iowa was needed for a contact?

We tested the gear on ALL bands (and both modes). And Iowa was the place we
happened to contact first.

And that is the amateur's attitude to communications. I flipped on
the radio and talked to Costa Rica! Everythings great, I got
Emergency Comms!

If I need to contact FEMA via HF in another
state (including IOWA) I think I have proven that it can be done by this
test. And that, after all, was the purpose to begin with.

I don't. The true measure of a test is the test. As an IG augmentee,
I lay down a card, and Capt Soso reads it and say, "I can do that."

Do I mark down 100% on his say so, or do I say, "So let me see you do
it, Capt Soso."

We just love
having all those tools in our communications kit.

Wow. Me too.

We also tested our state of the art sat-phone/VTCs and wireless VOIP
network. They worked flawlessly -- what wonderful pieces of gear. We
are
now completely wireless (including phone lines) so we can go wherever
needed.

So you really didn't need to contact Iowa with amateur radio. I was
wondering about that.

Sure we did. The Ham gear is for redundancy.

Sort of. It's there for when your primary and secondary gear doesn't
do what its supposed to do. You still have a mission, and it's not
talking to a ham in Iowa.

That's why we have it. A
test of it's HF capability was important. Test complete, test successful.

In other words, you tested that the radio worked. You could have done
that with a dummy load and not wasted that Iowa ham's time.

Next time you inadvertantly contact an amateur in another state, ask
him to phone patch you through to that state's EMA or State Police.
That at least would be worth noting.

21st Century comms at its best -- which means a mixture of the old
and new together to give us the strongest redundancy possible.

Strong redundancy equals GAO audits. They don't like redundancy even
if it means survivability. They'd rather have the money spent on food
stamps and WIC.

Strong redundancy equals uninterrupted communications in an emergency. The
GAO cares not as long as we spend the money appropriately. Since the
purchases were pre-approved, I guess we already did that.

Which model HF radio did you get?

Arnie, its always great to read one of you posts. Thanks for stopping
in.

And you too William.

Arnie -

"William" wrote in part ...

Did Mark Morgan "deserve a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his
way?"

WOW, I haven't heard that name in a long time.

And that is the amateur's attitude to communications. I flipped on
the radio and talked to Costa Rica! Everythings great, I got
Emergency Comms!

I think you are missing the point here, William. I said that Iowa was the
first station that we contacted. You are making a huge presumption here
that it is the only station that we contacted. Do you really think that we
would contact one station, declare victory, then call it a day? You know
better than that. We made multiple contacts during the day as we switched
from band to band.

Next time you inadvertantly contact an amateur in another state, ask
him to phone patch you through to that state's EMA or State Police.
That at least would be worth noting.

Actually, not a bad idea; however, this was a function test of equipment in
preparation for an exercise later this month. When we activate that
exercise, we will be contacting those types of agencies directly (including
out of state) We didn't want to have to coordinate that contact in advance
because it would take away from the realism of the upcoming exercise and
give them a "heads up". Part of the exercise is to see how quickly they
will respond in a "no warning" situation -- or if they respond at all.

Which model HF radio did you get?

Kenwood TS 570D(s) and
Kenwood TM 261A (VHF)

Arnie -

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:42:46 -0500, Arnie Macy wrote:

Part of the exercise is to see how quickly they
will respond in a "no warning" situation -- or if they respond at all.

"Goofball, Goofball, this is Zoomer with a No Notice Test Message".

We used to just LOVE those...... ggg (The remote deskset was on
my desk....)

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

Retired and loving every minute of it....
Work was getting in the way of my hobbies

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"William" wrote in part ...

Did Mark Morgan "deserve a lot harsher language than I have ever sent his
way?"

WOW, I haven't heard that name in a long time.

I don't even remember anything about Mark. But I do remember Steve
getting his hemorrhoid tied up in knots over him.

And that is the amateur's attitude to communications. I flipped on
the radio and talked to Costa Rica! Everythings great, I got
Emergency Comms!

I think you are missing the point here, William. I said that Iowa was the
first station that we contacted. You are making a huge presumption here
that it is the only station that we contacted. Do you really think that we
would contact one station, declare victory, then call it a day? You know
better than that. We made multiple contacts during the day as we switched
from band to band.

Presumption? Perhaps.

If I dial home, and I get Iowa, then my comms failed.

You need to have a goal before you ever switch the radio on.

Let's say that your goal is the Military Police desk at Ft. Riley,
Kansas.

You get on the radio and "Viola," you got Iowa. Great. Good first
step. Ask that Iowa amateur to dial the Military Police desk at Ft.
Riley, Kansas (333-444-5555). Hmmmmm, who's gonna pay the $0.07/per
minute charges? Iowa ham won't do it. Iowa was a failure. Try
Nebraska if prop holds.

Make up your own scenario. Don't count off this ex-IG augmentee to
create your exercise scenario for you.

Next time you inadvertantly contact an amateur in another state, ask
him to phone patch you through to that state's EMA or State Police.
That at least would be worth noting.

Actually, not a bad idea; however, this was a function test of equipment in
preparation for an exercise later this month. When we activate that
exercise, we will be contacting those types of agencies directly (including
out of state)

OK, you are going to contact the EMA and State Police *_directly_*
with amateur radio? Cool. How are you going to do that?

We didn't want to have to coordinate that contact in advance
because it would take away from the realism of the upcoming exercise and
give them a "heads up".

Right. No prior coordination. But...

Part of the exercise is to see how quickly they
will respond in a "no warning" situation -- or if they respond at all.

No.

1. You state a requirement for them (your ham volunteers) to be able
to do such things. Your MOU is a place to state broad requirements.
The SOP or Instructions cover the specifics.

2. You train them to do such things.

3. You then give them a no warning exercise scenario where they have
to do what they (1) have a requirement to do, and (2) have been
trained to do.

That is how it's done in the military. Really.

Does your military installation have a MARS base support team?

Which model HF radio did you get?

Kenwood TS 570D(s) and
Kenwood TM 261A (VHF)

Excellent choices. Simple and capable.

bb

"William" wrote in part ...

If I dial home, and I get Iowa, then my comms failed. You need to have a
goal before you ever switch the radio on.

Our goal was to check the functionality of the HF gear. We made multiple
contacts on multiple bands -- making contacts throughout the day. Those
were the parameters of the test. Test successful. We have written MOAs
with the stations that we intend to contact during the exercise, so they
completely understand the nature of the "no-warning" scenario. We also ran
functionality tests on the VTC/SAT and VOIP equipment. It was a busy day.

As you know, all major exercises have an extensive OPORD that directs us
before anything begins. Ours has been in place for months. All T's
crossed.


Does your military installation have a MARS base support team?

We do not use MARS for multiple reasons. All of our ops are civil service
and FCC Licensed Hams. This gives us much greater latitude in the
equipment, modes, and frequencies available to us. The EM operation is a
completely civilian one. Sorry if I didn't make that clear before. Of
course, we had to clear the frequency use with the folks at the installation
DOIM, but that was just a formality.

Arnie -

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"William" wrote in part ...

If I dial home, and I get Iowa, then my comms failed. You need to have a
goal before you ever switch the radio on.

Our goal was to check the functionality of the HF gear. We made multiple
contacts on multiple bands -- making contacts throughout the day. Those
were the parameters of the test. Test successful.

Your initial post didn't make it appear that way.

We have written MOAs
with the stations that we intend to contact during the exercise, so they
completely understand the nature of the "no-warning" scenario. We also ran
functionality tests on the VTC/SAT and VOIP equipment. It was a busy day.

Sounds good.

As you know, all major exercises have an extensive OPORD that directs us
before anything begins. Ours has been in place for months. All T's
crossed.

And you've trained your volunteers to some standard?

Does your military installation have a MARS base support team?

We do not use MARS for multiple reasons. All of our ops are civil service
and FCC Licensed Hams. This gives us much greater latitude in the
equipment, modes, and frequencies available to us.

That's too bad. Military communications has a specialized function
for such purposes.

The EM operation is a
completely civilian one. Sorry if I didn't make that clear before. Of
course, we had to clear the frequency use with the folks at the installation
DOIM, but that was just a formality.

Arnie -

Always is.

Best of luck.