"TOM" wrote in message
...

Dan/W4NTI wrote in message
ink.net...

[snip]
I wonder how this FRS service with toy radio's is going to talk past the
end
of their block? Oh with that useless ham stuff? On Vhf/Uhf.....uh....Oh
I
get it, FRS and V/UHF ham radio will be the emergency channel and then
carrier pigeon will take care of the long haul stuff.

One thing about it....Ya just cain't fix stupid.

Dan/W4NTI

It's already being done... CERT http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/CERT/
communities are using FRS to organize their efforts in reponse to disaster
preparedness or simply community watch and its working quite well. The
idea
that a ham is needed to supply communications is somewhat outdated---hams
have out-geeked themselves. If a CERT member has a radio that doesn't
work
just throw it away and get another. What really matters is organization
and
team skills and communities have plenty of indviduals professionally
trained
in all manner of skills besides a token ham or two. Some CERT teams are
guarded about disclosing their capabilities and SOP...

Besides, who's to say that repeaters won't become available to extend the
range of FRS radios---if there is a need anything is possible. What about
GMRS? Take a look at what the Aussies have done with their UHF CB
allocations http://www.alphalink.com.au/~parkerp/cb.htm

The issue with the future of FRS-type communications should be carefully
considered. I think that amateur long-haul coms are becoming less
important
compared to short range communications networks---especially within
communties. Considering the ease of getting FRS communications the
amateur
service has little to offer---unless amateurs can re-invent themselves.

Maybe... just maybe... stupid can be fixed.



There is nothing at all wrong with using FRS, GMRS or any of the citizen
accessible radio systems. But there is NO REASON to re-invent the wheel.

Ham radio can and does provide long haul and short haul communications.

Why throw away that capability (HF) to put all the eggs in a repeater system
that can, does and likely will fail when most needed.

Furthermore I am trying to show you that once communications is established,
ham, FRS, CB, GMRS, whatever then how is this link sent further down the
line? Such as what happened recently on the Gulf Coast.

I.E. Red Cross requests amateur radio assistance. Hundreds go to their
help. They say we only want you for "shelter communications". VHF will do
fine. NO WAY TO PASS IT FURTHER DOWN THE LINE as in ....how to get commo
from Montgomery Red Cross to the shelters and back?
Ham Radio High Frequency on the ESTABLISHED ARRL National Traffic System
nets. Which were ready, willing, and able to do so.

It is NOT Amateur radios fault that the Red Cross apparently chose to sit on
their hands and NOT UTILIZE the system.

Dan/W4NTI

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Cmdr Buzz Corey" wrote in message
m...
TOM wrote:
I did not hear a single
health-and-welfare message during the disasters. In bygone times, NTS
would
have been buzzing with activity.
[snip]

Try turning your receiver on next time, I heard lots of H&W traffic
during
Katrina and Rita.

I think he will respond with "not on the National Traffic System". And
he
would be right. I heard lots of "traffic" on the designated emergency
nets.
Although most of that was not formatted properly (as in NTS format).

who peed in your cherrois tonight Dan?

Dan/W4NTI


You and your ignorant attitude Markie. Read your own posts. Everyone is
wrong and everyone is a liar. When indeed it is YOU that is wrong.

Then you come back with oh no your wrong. It goes on and on. You don't
debate Markie you MIMICK and I for one am real sick of it. Some of us
actually want to discuss things of value to Amateur Radio. What the hell
your doing is certainly NOT that.


Dan/W4NTI

"TOM" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 22:17:13 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI"
wrote:
Tom,

I hate to break your ham hating crusade but the NTS can't run any
traffic,
if none is sent to it.

meaning you are greing with me and Tom

why is it ham hating if you say and ham hating if I do

you also make my point no vital traffic can be passed by ham radio if
it was not sent to ham radio

I had the exact same complaint. I did manage to
handle a few messages, but NOTHING like I was expecting.

which brings you to stating the same thing I was

I have since found that the American Red Cross, for WHATEVER REASON
decided
that ham radio was not good enough to use. Other than for a VHF
Telephone
network between shelters that is.

which is a dangerous state of affairs for one of the supports that we
use in our spectrum battles

but you were unwilling to even discuss such things


Not our bad Tom. We were there, ready, willing, and able.

maybe we were maybe we were not, but it seems whatever the truth were
not seen as ready willing and able, and the preception of the served
agencies is more important than the reality.

Exactly... the amateur service had an unprecedented golden opportunity for
PR at New Orleans and they blew-it big time. Probably not so much from
lack
of interest by individual amateurs but from lack of leadership from the
ARRL. Now it is seen the ARRL is trying to re-make the amateur service
after the fact. The truth is the ARRL is more interested in running a
business than promoting a service. For giggles... I'll say the shift in
interest by the ARRL started when they changed the format of QST back in
the
1970's. Remember how many of us remarked that QST didn't seem anything
more
that a radio catalog---and many of us dropped our subscription?
Seriously,
the ARRL hasn't done anything in recent times other than to publish which,
in many cases, are nothing more that collections of QST articles. I do
have a copy of, 'The ARRL Emergency Communication Handbook'---it should
contain twice the present content.

Nevertheless, I am happy to see discussion on the topic
continue---especially if they are constructive comments.


\

I don't agree that it is/was a failure with or from the ARRL. The ARRL
National Traffic System was and is STILL running. I operate it every single
day and evening. I know what it does or doesn't do.

I believe it is the RED CROSS that is behind this non use of a resource. I
personally delivered several immediate notifications to families that their
people were alive. Nothing more. At my expense on the phone. I was just a
small cog in a large wheel. And these DID NOT COME FROM THE RED CROSS.
They came from the BAPTIST Church group that was in Biloxi feeding thousands
per day. And in between were able to send out some messages. I can't
describe how grateful these people were. Can you imagine what publicity Ham
Radio COULD HAVE RECEIVED if the RED CROSS would have allowed the MOSTLY
IDLE operators at the shelters to send out HW traffic? Don't tell me the
ARRL dropped the ball. It was the RED CROSS.

Dan/W4NTI

"TOM" wrote in message
...

Dr.Ace wrote in message
...
SATERN = SALVATION ARMY TEAM EMERGENCY RADIO NETWORK

http://www.satern.org/

What We Do
Emergency communications etc. etc.
-----------------------------------------
LAT exposé: "The Red Cross money pit" - The TRUTH at last!!!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/25/95628/8554

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

It has always been my personal opinion that the Salvation Army is a
MUCH
better organization than the Red Cross / Red Crescent . Organizations
like
the Red Cross / Red Crescent have enormous overhead, including high-paid
executives and posh offices.

Ace - WH2T

Sounds like an interesting group---I'll check them out. Yes... I often
heard unfavorable remarks made about the Red Cross---especially from
servicemen (including my father after the WWII) but consistent praise for
the Salvation Army.

I recall the Red Cross blood drives of 9/11---then blood thrown away
because
there were no storage facilities available; some doctors wondered why all
the blood since there was no need for it. The story made the national
news
for a couple of days then forgotten.

I hear good words about the Church of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) as
providing excellent service during disaster relief; however, I don't know
of
their communications needs.

If the Red Cross is 'particular' then the heck with them; better to
concentrate efforts elsewhere and make a good showing---the word will get
out.





Thats right Tom. You hit it right on the head mate.

Dan/W4NTI

"TOM" wrote in message
...

Dan/W4NTI wrote in message
link.net...

"TOM" wrote in message
...
The future of the National Traffic System
http://www.eham.net/articles/12198

[snip]
For those of you who may not know, the National Traffic System (NTS)
consists of a carefully choreographed collection of section, region,
and
area nets designed to relay messages throughout the US. In a sense it's
the
second "R" in ARRL. NTS has a long and honorable history and has some
of
the
best operators in the world as its membership.

The recent hurricane season has raised serious doubts for me about the
role
that NTS plays in the current ham-radio environment. I did not hear a
single
health-and-welfare message during the disasters. In bygone times, NTS
would
have been buzzing with activity.
[snip]


Tom,

I hate to break your ham hating crusade but the NTS can't run any
traffic,
if none is sent to it. I had the exact same complaint. I did manage to
handle a few messages, but NOTHING like I was expecting.

I have since found that the American Red Cross, for WHATEVER REASON
decided
that ham radio was not good enough to use. Other than for a VHF
Telephone
network between shelters that is.

Not our bad Tom. We were there, ready, willing, and able.

Dan/W4NTI

You incorrectly credit me as being the author of the eham.net article;
however, I do share the same sentiments.


You seem like a reasonable man Tom. I am sure you will see that it was not
the HAMS, or the ARRL that were the problem. It was/is the Red Cross.

Dan/W4NTI

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:59:39 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI"
wrote:

Of course you won't believe me, or anyone else. But the cell phone network
was down for the majority of New Orleans. I know people that went there to
repair it.

I would believe some trust worthy

In fact some hams also helped repair the tower sites. Mostly getting
antennas back in working shape, and getting batteries and/or generators up
and running.

As for why text gets through easier and better than voice. It's just like
CW Markie, and if you understand that mode it would be easier for you to
comprehend text vs voice on a cell system.
shove your condesntion asshole

I know why it get though the system better when the system is under
stress

if you you would read you would know I was never confused on the issue

however the fact text was getting if very slwoly through much of the
city shows the network was not completely down, just damaged and over
loaded and in need of repair to restore full utily of the system

cuting snid remarks
Dan/W4NTI

wrote in message
news
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:22:14 -0700, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

wrote:

Cell phone does indeed show signs of being usable as a true emergency
network

How? The entire cell network was down in NO. The only way to get cell
coverage there was out on some remote point a few people managed to get
to and make a few calls.

not accrdoing to MSNBC while the netwaork was not working for voice it
was working for text according to MSNBC

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:59:40 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI"
wrote:


"an_old_friend" wrote in message
roups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
an_old_friend wrote:

a decent case can be made that the USA should sell of all ham VHF/UHF
spectrum and use the money to build more redunacy in to the cell tower
network so at text will get through no matter what

Unrelated.

Ignorant, and ridiculous. Typical Markie.

typical Danny boy no content just dismiss anything outside his horizion

the cell phone kept carry text message though out Katrina and the after
math recharging cell phone batteries became a challange but the are
ways of course

but then Danny has never wanted to take part in any discussion where he
does set the ground rules one of which is that everyone must agree in
adavnce to agree with him

Dan/W4NTI


Oh gee Markie.....what is the reason text made it through? You can read the
post I just made to get the answer.

becuase the system was not completely down

that is the reason it got though

as to why it got through better than voice I knew that too

Dan/W4NTI


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:59:42 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI"
wrote:


"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...

Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

I think the idea is that person 1 transmits to the end of his
block,
then person 2 transmits to the end of their block. And so on and so
on.
Be just like the olde days when the "relay" meant something in ARRL.
They will need every one of those "millions" of FRS radio owners.

When a kid did you ever play the party game 'pass it on'? You know where
you whisper something in someone's ear, they then pass it on to the next
person, then the next, then the next, ect. By the time it gets to the
last person it isn't anything like the orginal message. You don't need
that when you are trying to get critical information to a destination.

So the "Relay" in ARRL is a useless construct?

Wunnerful in theory, useless in practice?


No it simply means that without a structured format, message training,
means of checking the message (such as word count), etc that the system
breaks down. The formal message handling systems have these. The FRS
system does not.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Exactly correct Dee. Here is something I made up years ago.

"It takes two things to communicate, an operator at both ends"

A slight addition would be "trained operator"

wrong agian

Dan/W4NTI


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:59:43 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI"
wrote:


"TOM" wrote in message
...

Dan/W4NTI wrote in message
ink.net...

[snip]
I wonder how this FRS service with toy radio's is going to talk past the
end
of their block? Oh with that useless ham stuff? On Vhf/Uhf.....uh....Oh
I
get it, FRS and V/UHF ham radio will be the emergency channel and then
carrier pigeon will take care of the long haul stuff.

One thing about it....Ya just cain't fix stupid.

Dan/W4NTI

It's already being done... CERT http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/CERT/
communities are using FRS to organize their efforts in reponse to disaster
preparedness or simply community watch and its working quite well. The
idea
that a ham is needed to supply communications is somewhat outdated---hams
have out-geeked themselves. If a CERT member has a radio that doesn't
work
just throw it away and get another. What really matters is organization
and
team skills and communities have plenty of indviduals professionally
trained
in all manner of skills besides a token ham or two. Some CERT teams are
guarded about disclosing their capabilities and SOP...

Besides, who's to say that repeaters won't become available to extend the
range of FRS radios---if there is a need anything is possible. What about
GMRS? Take a look at what the Aussies have done with their UHF CB
allocations http://www.alphalink.com.au/~parkerp/cb.htm

The issue with the future of FRS-type communications should be carefully
considered. I think that amateur long-haul coms are becoming less
important
compared to short range communications networks---especially within
communties. Considering the ease of getting FRS communications the
amateur
service has little to offer---unless amateurs can re-invent themselves.

Maybe... just maybe... stupid can be fixed.



There is nothing at all wrong with using FRS, GMRS or any of the citizen
accessible radio systems. But there is NO REASON to re-invent the wheel.

Ham radio can and does provide long haul and short haul communications.

then why did it not carry it according to you
cut
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Dan/W4NTI wrote in message
.net...

"TOM" wrote in message
...

Dan/W4NTI wrote in message
ink.net...

[snip]
I wonder how this FRS service with toy radio's is going to talk past
the
end
of their block? Oh with that useless ham stuff? On
Vhf/Uhf.....uh....Oh
I
get it, FRS and V/UHF ham radio will be the emergency channel and then
carrier pigeon will take care of the long haul stuff.

One thing about it....Ya just cain't fix stupid.

Dan/W4NTI

It's already being done... CERT http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/CERT/
communities are using FRS to organize their efforts in reponse to
disaster
preparedness or simply community watch and its working quite well. The
idea
that a ham is needed to supply communications is somewhat
outdated---hams
have out-geeked themselves. If a CERT member has a radio that doesn't
work
just throw it away and get another. What really matters is organization
and
team skills and communities have plenty of indviduals professionally
trained
in all manner of skills besides a token ham or two. Some CERT teams are
guarded about disclosing their capabilities and SOP...

Besides, who's to say that repeaters won't become available to extend
the
range of FRS radios---if there is a need anything is possible. What
about
GMRS? Take a look at what the Aussies have done with their UHF CB
allocations http://www.alphalink.com.au/~parkerp/cb.htm

The issue with the future of FRS-type communications should be carefully
considered. I think that amateur long-haul coms are becoming less
important
compared to short range communications networks---especially within
communties. Considering the ease of getting FRS communications the
amateur
service has little to offer---unless amateurs can re-invent themselves.

Maybe... just maybe... stupid can be fixed.



There is nothing at all wrong with using FRS, GMRS or any of the citizen
accessible radio systems. But there is NO REASON to re-invent the wheel.

Ham radio can and does provide long haul and short haul communications.

Why throw away that capability (HF) to put all the eggs in a repeater
system
that can, does and likely will fail when most needed.

Furthermore I am trying to show you that once communications is
established,
ham, FRS, CB, GMRS, whatever then how is this link sent further down the
line? Such as what happened recently on the Gulf Coast.

I.E. Red Cross requests amateur radio assistance. Hundreds go to their
help. They say we only want you for "shelter communications". VHF will
do
fine. NO WAY TO PASS IT FURTHER DOWN THE LINE as in ....how to get commo
from Montgomery Red Cross to the shelters and back?
Ham Radio High Frequency on the ESTABLISHED ARRL National Traffic System
nets. Which were ready, willing, and able to do so.

It is NOT Amateur radios fault that the Red Cross apparently chose to sit
on
their hands and NOT UTILIZE the system.

Dan/W4NTI

You make valid points... Why is amateur radio so dependent upon the Red
Cross? Heck, looking back over my ham experience seemingly all the Red
Cross provided was a place to put a repeater and have emergency power. To
be honest... the Red Cross screwed us in NO---perhaps we had an image that
was lacking. In that case we ought to provide a service to some other
organization/s. I don't know where the future lies for the amateur service.
The numbers (of hams) just don't stack up against the numbers that can be
equipped with license free radios or radios that require a simple operating
permit. You can be sure if non-hams can get organized and provide a needed
service an important part of what justifies the amateur service will no
longer exist with the consequence that any leadership roles provided by the
amateur service will evaporate.

Perhaps this will happen anyway. We've watched the amateur service slowly
being de-regulated. A time may come where present day Amateur, FRS, MURS,
GMRS... will all become part of, say, the 'citizens communications service'.

You mention HF allocations as being a strong point for the amateur service;
however, I don't think that long haul communications are necessary for the
bulk of emergency communications---these disasters are local in scope. To
my way of thinking if anyone needs to communicate over long distances it
will be primary relief organizations and they can do that over satellite or
their own HF networks, besides, landlines generally remain
intact---providing an access point somewhere. I find the Australian VKS-737
an interesting example of what non-hams (CB) can do with five HF channels
http://www.vks737.on.net/ . Additionally, my experiences in the Caribbean
have made me become aware of how non-hams, who are boaters, can create
highly organized and effective communications networks using the HF maritime
allocations.

Discussion on the topic can hurt.