i have both cordless phone and an old type phone in my house where the
handset is connected to the base station. Neiher one was working. If I had
to contact either cops or amublance i would have no way of doing that except
of standing on the street and waiting for the cop car to pass by. That's why
i asked the question of how one would keep a line of communications if the
regular ones were out.

"Michael Black" wrote in message
...
Tim May ) writes:
In article , mad
amoeba wrote:

I was affected by the recent blackout in North East. That got me
thinking of
how would
one communicate during such an event. Electricity including phones
were
out.

This is not true. There were long lines to use payphones, and most home
and business phones worked.

I wasn't in the blackout area, but one thing I heard on the radio here
was that people did suffer from lack of phones, because they had only
cordless phones, which of course need power from the AC line. They
couldn't use those phones, and likely some/many thought the phone
lines were down. Only people who had real phones, that get their
limited power needs from the phone line, would know that the phones
were in fact running. I know cordless phones are pretty widespread
at this point, but I have no idea how many households have nothing but
a cordless phone.

Even if phone systems weren't working, one of the things to remember
is that other things come into play in an urban area. If the phone
doesn't
work, then you have your neighbors to talk to. If the phones don't work,
then emergency systems will come into effect, so there will be means of
getting welfare traffic out. For that matter, emergency systems will come
into play to handle local emergency calls.

I think it's a bit of a myth to suggest that amateur radio is a means
for the individual to keep in communication during an emergency.
Amateur radios place in an emergency has always been in terms of
organized help.

So hams work with the Red Cross to supply non-emergency communication to
get around faults and blockades. It's not the place for "help me"
messages,
it's the welfare messages "I am fine, don't worry" or maybe even "I won't
be coming this weekend, the airports are closed" things that might be
important but not of high priority.

And if the emergency warrants it, hams can supply local communcation as
an auxiliary to emergency services. So in some cases, hams could
be a way of providing some sort of replacement for phone lines, with
them placed in important points where it's known people can get to
if they need to communicate.

It's also quite organized, and those hams working in such public
service work prepare for emergencies. Ham radio is not a utility,
so unless the emergency framework is in place, someone getting a license
"in case of an emergency" may not find it all that useful, because as
mentioned the familiar people you want to talk to likely aren't licensed,
and in an emergency one might find the bands crowded with the organized
communication, and for instance, someone doing phone patches may not
feel like dealing with some guy off the street.

In a rural area, I suspect the benefits of amateur radio to the individual
may increase significantly, but then that's the case when there's no
emergency.

And if someone is interested in emergency work, then it probably is
worthwhile getting a ham license, because that will mean one more person
who can help out when an emergency comes up.

Michael

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:03:05 GMT, "mad amoeba" wrote:

i have both cordless phone and an old type phone in my house where the
handset is connected to the base station. Neiher one was working. If I had
to contact either cops or amublance i would have no way of doing that except
of standing on the street and waiting for the cop car to pass by. That's why
i asked the question of how one would keep a line of communications if the
regular ones were out.

Doesn't surprise me all that much that digital or analog mobiles
wouldn't be working, but would think that landlines should have been.

I would expect my landline phone to work for at least 12 hours on a
power failure, and if it didn't would be asking a lot of questions if
it wasn't.

If cannot reliably use a telephone for police, fire, or ambulance
coverage what the hell good is it?

Better to have a good CB or amateur radio transceiver. Other than
emergency use and dialup connection for internet many people could
easily get along without a phone.

Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder.

Passing thought: Don't assume that everyone with an amateur license
is going to advertise the fact. If reveal call letters, then name
and address is trackable.

Very dangerous to reveal true name and address on misc.survivalism,
as there are people on misc.survivalism who will not only accuse you
of criminal activities but even make death threats. This warning
especially applies to anyone outside of the USA whatever their
citizenship.

Take it from me. Been there, done that. May be able to offer more
info by email of don't think it is an entrapment excercise.

Maybe better for anyone outside the US to post questions on the
misc.survivalism group and see how they are answered.

If anyone would like to check my past posting history on the
misc.survivalism newsgroup it is easy enough to do by checking through
advanced group search in "Google".

My earlier posts were from another pseudonym, "

I stand on my previous record of useful posts no matter how some on
misc.survivalism are now falsely accusing me.

If any reader who is contemplating posting on this group has any
doubts they might like to ask my accusers for any proof of their
libellous statements.

Am also willing to answer genuine email enquiries.





"Michael Black" wrote in message
...
Tim May ) writes:
In article , mad
amoeba wrote:

I was affected by the recent blackout in North East. That got me
thinking of
how would
one communicate during such an event. Electricity including phones
were
out.

This is not true. There were long lines to use payphones, and most home
and business phones worked.

I wasn't in the blackout area, but one thing I heard on the radio here
was that people did suffer from lack of phones, because they had only
cordless phones, which of course need power from the AC line. They
couldn't use those phones, and likely some/many thought the phone
lines were down. Only people who had real phones, that get their
limited power needs from the phone line, would know that the phones
were in fact running. I know cordless phones are pretty widespread
at this point, but I have no idea how many households have nothing but
a cordless phone.

Even if phone systems weren't working, one of the things to remember
is that other things come into play in an urban area. If the phone
doesn't
work, then you have your neighbors to talk to. If the phones don't work,
then emergency systems will come into effect, so there will be means of
getting welfare traffic out. For that matter, emergency systems will come
into play to handle local emergency calls.

I think it's a bit of a myth to suggest that amateur radio is a means
for the individual to keep in communication during an emergency.
Amateur radios place in an emergency has always been in terms of
organized help.

So hams work with the Red Cross to supply non-emergency communication to
get around faults and blockades. It's not the place for "help me"
messages,
it's the welfare messages "I am fine, don't worry" or maybe even "I won't
be coming this weekend, the airports are closed" things that might be
important but not of high priority.

And if the emergency warrants it, hams can supply local communcation as
an auxiliary to emergency services. So in some cases, hams could
be a way of providing some sort of replacement for phone lines, with
them placed in important points where it's known people can get to
if they need to communicate.

It's also quite organized, and those hams working in such public
service work prepare for emergencies. Ham radio is not a utility,
so unless the emergency framework is in place, someone getting a license
"in case of an emergency" may not find it all that useful, because as
mentioned the familiar people you want to talk to likely aren't licensed,
and in an emergency one might find the bands crowded with the organized
communication, and for instance, someone doing phone patches may not
feel like dealing with some guy off the street.

In a rural area, I suspect the benefits of amateur radio to the individual
may increase significantly, but then that's the case when there's no
emergency.

And if someone is interested in emergency work, then it probably is
worthwhile getting a ham license, because that will mean one more person
who can help out when an emergency comes up.

Michael

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:39:14 GMT, erniegalts
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:03:05 GMT, "mad amoeba" wrote:

Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder.

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

http://www.arrl.org/pio/hamlic.html

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

http://www.arrl.org/pio/hamlic.html

He's also in Australia, which, to my knowledge, isn't governed by the US
FCC.

I got my Tech license recently, and plan on taking SKYWARN classes in
the spring. The blackout has made me decide to accelerate my purchase
plans for a mobile radio. Handhelds are more portable, but max out at 5w
of transmit power, where most mobiles are 50-55w.

In a life-and-death emergency, anyone is authorized to transmit on any
frequency or any band to try to get help, even if they don't have a ham
license at all.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:54:36 GMT, Hagbard Celine
wrote:

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

http://www.arrl.org/pio/hamlic.html

He's also in Australia, which, to my knowledge, isn't governed by the US
FCC.

Well, to the best of my knowledge, I didn't use the term FCC. The IAU
set the morse requirement. However, just to set the record straight,
let's look here.

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2000/03/30/1/?nc=1

South Africa, Australia to Adopt 5 WPM Morse Test for Full HF Access

BTW, ernie was giving advice to someone who was impacted by the recent
power outage. I don't think it reached as far as Oz. So it doesn't
matter if he was talking about the NE US or Oz, he was wrong.
However, you will find that when ernie is wrong, he never acknowledges
that he has made a mistake. He simply moves to another thread and
starts over.


I got my Tech license recently, and plan on taking SKYWARN classes in
the spring. The blackout has made me decide to accelerate my purchase
plans for a mobile radio. Handhelds are more portable, but max out at 5w
of transmit power, where most mobiles are 50-55w.

You can pick up an amplifier for a few bucks to get you to the 25-30
watt zone. Going to 50 watts will only give you a 3 db gain. I've
got one laying around here somewhere that you could have if I can find
it.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:54:36 GMT, Hagbard Celine
wrote:

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

Not required here for some years now, at least for what you are
calling a "Technician license" which covers 2 metres and is useful for
communication in that band.

Are you going to call me wrong on this issue???

Please advise.

erniegalts

http://www.arrl.org/pio/hamlic.html

He's also in Australia, which, to my knowledge, isn't governed by the US
FCC.

I got my Tech license recently, and plan on taking SKYWARN classes in
the spring. The blackout has made me decide to accelerate my purchase
plans for a mobile radio. Handhelds are more portable, but max out at 5w
of transmit power, where most mobiles are 50-55w.

In a life-and-death emergency, anyone is authorized to transmit on any
frequency or any band to try to get help, even if they don't have a ham
license at all.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 07:51:40 GMT, erniegalts
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:54:36 GMT, Hagbard Celine
wrote:

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

Not required here for some years now, at least for what you are
calling a "Technician license" which covers 2 metres and is useful for
communication in that band.

Are you going to call me wrong on this issue???

Please advise.

Which issue do you want me to call you wrong on ernie? The first
piece of inaccurate information that you posted of this metamorphisis
of it?

On your initial statement, yes you were wrong. In case you forgot
this was your initial statement...

"Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder."

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:07:28 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 07:51:40 GMT, erniegalts
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:54:36 GMT, Hagbard Celine
wrote:

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

Not required here for some years now, at least for what you are
calling a "Technician license" which covers 2 metres and is useful for
communication in that band.

Are you going to call me wrong on this issue???

Please advise.

Which issue do you want me to call you wrong on ernie? The first
piece of inaccurate information that you posted of this metamorphisis
of it?

On your initial statement, yes you were wrong. In case you forgot
this was your initial statement...

"Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder."



WRC 03 removed the international Morse requirement, If you need to do
morse in the US that's the FCC's fault. In the UK there's no Morse.

Bob Brock wrote:



Which issue do you want me to call you wrong on ernie? The first
piece of inaccurate information that you posted of this metamorphisis
of it?

On your initial statement, yes you were wrong. In case you forgot
this was your initial statement...

"Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder."

The code requirement for the Technician class license was removed a long
time ago. Ernie was right. Take your head out of your ass.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:07:28 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 07:51:40 GMT, erniegalts
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:54:36 GMT, Hagbard Celine
wrote:

Bob Brock wrote:

General Class license still requires a Morse Code test. Morse has not
been "wiped." It has however, been lowered for the two higher class
licenses from 13 and 20 wpm to 5 wpm for both licenses. Morse is not
required for the Technician license which give full priviliges on
VHF/UHF.

So, once again ernie, you are wrong.

Not required here for some years now, at least for what you are
calling a "Technician license" which covers 2 metres and is useful for
communication in that band.

Are you going to call me wrong on this issue???

Please advise.

Which issue do you want me to call you wrong on ernie? The first
piece of inaccurate information that you posted of this metamorphisis
of it?

On your initial statement, yes you were wrong. In case you forgot
this was your initial statement...

"Not difficult to get an amateur license these days now that the code
requirement has been wiped. Anyone who knows a bit about radio should
be able to study the regs and pass an exam allowing VHF operation on 2
metres, and the "general class" [ or "full call" ] exam is not that
much harder."


Don't know the siatuation there, Brock, but the requirement has been
wiped here

Wireless Institute of Australia - WIA Victoria

Morse code watch
updated July 10 2003


Morse code requirement ends - Morse code watch closes
It is official! The ITU at the World Radiocommunications Conference
has removed Morse code as a mandatory requirement for amateur licences
below 30MHz - effective 5 July, 2003.

Radio administrations around the world that previously supported the
removal of the code requirement are now moving towards implementing
the ITU decision.

Demonstration of code proficiency is no longer an internationally
required qualification for an amateur licence though a radio
administration may still require it.

Some radio administrations are expected to take virtually no time to
end code tests, or maybe a few months, while the bureaucratic
processes elsewhere may take longer.

More at:
http://www.wiavic.org.au/mcw/

erniegalts