EchoLink and Emergency Communications
Charles Brabham (N5PVL)
on
October 28, 2005
View comments about this article!
During the course of any emergency, Internet connections in the affected area are typically stressed near to or past the point of breakdown. These fragile connections should be preserved as long as possible, as they are essential to preserving lives and property.
Loading up these vital, overstressed Internet links with a sudden rash of high bandwidth VOIP requests is utterly irresponsible, directly endangering the lives and property of persons living in the affected area, to no particular purpose.
Rubberneckers are seldom seen as valuable in any situation.
How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?
First rule for EchoLink in an emergency: Turn it off!
Let's try and remember that amateur radio is supposed to enhance, not undermine the ability to communicate during an emergency.
Step aside for real hams using ham radio, and stop endangering lives and property with EchoLink during emergencies.
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by LNXAUTHOR on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
- i think that EchoLink is not as dangerous as WinLink 2000... now there's a BAD idea!
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W4LGH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well now that you have had your 2cents worth, I feel compelled to add mine. One of the first things that goes down in an affected area are power and phone lines....hmmmmm...let me see now, how does one run Echolink in an affected area? Echolink has many uses in emergency situations, such as linking multi-repeaters together to transfer much needed info out of the affected areas.
My defination of a "REAL" Ham ( I believe that is the term you used) is one who holds a valid FCC Amateur License, whether it be a Tech, General or Extra Class. And REAL Hams invented and started Echolink, as well as many other modes of communications over the past 100 years.
Your problem is that "You" do not like Echolink, and that is 100% fine, and you do not have to use it, everyone has opinions, but tlet them form their own.
Echolink is REAL amateur radio, just another mode or extension of it, and it DOES have its place in Emergency's!
73 de W4LGH
Alan Jones ARES EC St Johns Co. Florida
"It is not the class of license the Amateur holds, but the class of the
Amateur that holds the license." - Unknown
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KE6EBA on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This article started out sounding like a reasonable and well formed argument against EchoLink then "How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts" happened. Now I'm not sure how to take it, is it satire to ridicule the anti-echo zealots or what?
I am not a common user of EchoLink, to be honest I probably do more simplex work than any other one mode on HAM radio. So I admit I don't know that much about the realities of EchoLink in emergency communication. From my book knowledge, I would think EchoLink itself would fail quickly in the area affected by the emergency if internet communication was stressed at all. Mission-critical internet connections on the other hand would have multiple redundancies architected in (dual homed connections, etc.) that are far to expensive for an amateur operation. Where EchoLink comes in then is right outside the affected area, repeaters can be linked to pass traffic long distances. In my mind this helps to bridge an emergency "last-mile" kind of situation. EchoLink can bring communication to within 25 miles of an emergency and the HAMs then cover the last 25 miles with battery powered radios.
Do I not understand this right?
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by NA4IT on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Charles,
I agree with you that the internet SHOULD NOT be relied on for emergency communications.
But, if it is working use it. During Katrina, I was able to check on a loved one for a man local to me (Tenn.) in the Biloxi area through an Echolink hook up.
Sure, I am an Extra class, have a good HF station, could have put the request into the NTS H/W system, and waited. But why not use what is working.
I whole heartedly support amateur radio for EMCOMM use, and believe that emergency planners are doing a great injustice to the general public by trying to use technologies that are either unproven, or not designed for the purpose they are being used for. Amateur radio works, period, and it is cheap to the public. (BUT, IT COSTS TONS FOR US TO USE, AS MY WIFE WILL BE GLAD TO REPORT!)
NA4IT
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N4ZOU on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Anyone have any information on the number of Winlink 2000 or echolink emergency traffic messages into or out of the disaster areas? This should be available in the message logs somewhere or were there any messages passed via Winlink 2000 or echolink?
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K9FV on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
EchoLink was the main form of contacts during the Tsunima in SE Asia. Mainly because some of those countries like Thailand make HF so difficult (legal wise) that VHF is the main form of radio there.
I was surprised at that, but while I was visiting this past summer I found that ham radio there is mostly 2 meter. They used 2 meter from the affected area to un-affected areas where the internet was still working - hence EchoLink. The hams there seemed to feel EchoLink really worked to their advantage.
Ken
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W5GNB on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sorry Charles but I find your suggestion of "Outlawing" Echolink to be quite amusing! I can assure that downloading Large programs, photos and movies of the darker side of society will require far more bandwidth than a simple VOIP connection.
If you want to use the Internet for "Emergency" communications, you have the wrong idea to start with, there are yet far too many unstable factors in the iternet to call it a reliable resource for emergency communications. If it is working, then it should be used but by all means you certainly need other systems as a main course of emergency communications.
If the ham bands had been clear on the weekend of Katrina, I feel that there would have been far better use of the spectrum but unfortunately the CONTESTERS pressed onward right over the top of designated emergency frequencies with no regard to life and welfare of the emergency traffic that was attempting to be delt with. How about that for a "Bandwidth" issue?
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Why would anyone NOT use a workable system, be it EchoLink or not, to communicate in an emergency?
Anyone serious about emergency communications should be versed in every form of telecommunication available. We had a mock emergency this week and tested AirMail. It can be used with or without an Internet connection which is great because the day we had the drill the local broadband vendor, Comcast, went down. We could still communicate radio to radio as that is how we were set up. We just could not send e-mail directly via ham radio, we had to do it using a WLAN that hit a DSL node. If the exercise were longer we would have set up an HF AirMail port to the Internet somewhere outside our county and all would be well. No time to do that in a 3 hour drill.
If I were in a dark (meaning all utilities down) area I sure could see a use for EchoLink. I have a little cardboard tube in my basement that houses a 14 element VHF yagi. I could drag yagi to the top of a building and hit a repeater 100 miles away or so. If that repeater had EchoLink or IRLP I would now have a gateway to the rest of the world. If I really wanted to get fancy I could park my cross band repeater there as well and have 440 HT access to a repeater 1000's of miles away, perhaps even with a phone patch.
I am very uncomfortable with anyone that tells us we should not use a particular means of communication in an emergency. We should not only use them, but train with them and make sure our operators know how to use them.
I entered ham radio to do emergency communications. We traditionally used VHF but are now looking at how we can use it all. We are now installing HF gear in our mobile command post and I am looking at the different HF modes and transmission methods. I have found NVIS to be very interesting and useful along with modes such as Hellschreiber for use in high noise environments.
A good post has everything it can get it's paws on set up for use. EchoLink is just one tool. It may or may not be used, but purposeful non-utilization is a very bad idea. I should add that total dependence on EchoLink is also a bad idea, but that goes for any single form of communication.
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Step aside for real hams using ham radio, and stop endangering lives and property with EchoLink during emergencies."
Can you please show me one specific incident in which EchoLink endangered life or property in an emergency?
Please include date, time, location and call sign if you have them.
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This whole mentality surrounding the idea that the internet doesn't work in a disaster area during an emergency event is dead wrong.
Consider that just because the internet is dead in the affected region doesn't mean the whole internet is suddenly dead across the entire planet.
The internet is a useful "relay tool" for radio messages, images, whatever - coming out of the affected disaster area to stations located outside the disaster zone. These stations outside the disaster zone DO in fact have internet connectivity.
So, why this idea of limiting ones capabilities of what one can do during an emergency? The more methods, modes and ways available to provide communications during an emergency, the better.
We are hams and as such we have a full array of various communication technologies at our disposal during any emergency.
If you only wanna play voice chit chat behind a microphone during an emergency, then go out and buy a CB radio. Hams on the other hand have a various assortment of communication technologies at their disposal to facilitate the idea of providing various forms of communication during an emergency event. This is what distinguishes hams from the ordinary CB'er.
So if we are all supposed to be hams, then let's use ANY and ALL forms of communication technology to our full advantage during an emergency.
73 Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K0BG on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Chuck, the internet is somewhat more robust than you would have us believe. The use of VoIP is actually one of the lesser bandwidth modes. Sending UHR (ultrahigh resolution) X-rays almost requires ATM interconnections if transfer times are to remain near real time. Fact is, they're being used more and more everyday.
Further, the cost effectiveness and robustness of the internet is also growing. While DSL may seem high priced to some at present, in the not too distant future, OIC (optical interconnect) will become commonplace, and inexpensive. I'm not a seer of the future, but I'd bet I live to see inexpensive desktop internet speeds in excess of 10Mbs. And it'll be months, not years.
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC5AV on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The meter on my flamebait detector is reading about 60 over right now.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AC0H on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<"Chuck, the internet is somewhat more robust than you would have us believe. The use of VoIP is actually one of the lesser bandwidth modes">>
This is true depending on the quality and bandwidth of the signal being put out on the net.
The POTS (plain old telephone system) was designed with 64K of bandwidth for the human voice, 8000 samples per second and 8 bits for each sample. Depending how you've got your soundcard setup you can change the sampling rate from 8Kbps all the way up to 44.1Kbps, or higher. Now you've gone from 64K for one second of voice bandwidth to 352K for 1 second of voice. Double that if you use 16 bits per sample.
350K is about 20% of a T1 connection for any given second so you can have at most 5 VoIP conversations going on on a T1 connection simultaniously. This sodesn't even take into acount network overhead and other uses. How about email, video, etc....?
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KD6NIG on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't have a problem with, nor have I ever had a problem with, Echolink, IRLP, etc. I don't like the technology because I don't think internet linking is Ham Radio, but I make my choice by simply not using it.
This topic was brought up on another BB and basically, I don't have a problem with people using Echolink. The primary gripe, and the thing I didn't like much, was the fact that some Ham Operators used it to 'dial into' repeaters in a storm affected area so they could get live commentary from those who were in the thick of things.
Using Echolink to dial out, or getting on Echolink to help relay traffic out of an area is one thing. Using it so you can find out whats happening on the ground with the only intention is for it being entertainment is another.
I've commented before that there should be some better controls on the technology, ie, allowing repeater owners to lock out other users who choose to abuse the system, and, in a genuine emergency, the ability to lock the node out altogether, or limit it to people who are 'dialing in' to help, not to just find out how bad the weather is.
There are plenty of facets of Ham Radio that I don't nessacarily agree with, but instead of insisting every ham think like me, I use what I like and don't use the rest. I hear a lot of people spouting about these digital modes and stuff also, but FM works fine for me so I'll stick to it until it doesn't exist anymore.
If a mode is really that bad and the community thinks so, the community will eventually not use it anymore, and it will die of its own lack of use. Thats the approach I prefer to take with stuff like Echolink. If you like it, and you consider 'punching up' a repeater in England to be DX, hey, thats fine with me, I'll just exercise my right not to do so.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AC on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Ah, but you're forgetting about compression. Skype, a popular VOIP program, uses about 3 - 16kb / sec bandwidth. The higher settings on one's soundcard are more useful for music than voice, so a higher samping rate really isn't used for VOIP.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC0NYK on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have no idea of who the author of this article is or how much he operates in emergent situations, but I have used EchoLink in emergency situations to very good effect. In the most recent hurricane, Wilma, I was able to use EchoLink to contact a ham in Miami, FL who in turn was able to use his 2 meter rig to contact a ham in Boca Raton who was able to find a lady and two small children who were way overdue in transit. The process began with a ham operator in Jacksonville, FL issuing a call to SATERN net. Our net control operator was unable to get clear copy on her so I picked up the call as a relay. While our net control was getting information moved from point to point within the SATERN system, I found a ham on the EchoLink, made the call and the net result was that we had the situation handled in a couple of hours and a worried father/grandfather knew where his family was and that they were safe.
My question for all the nay sayers is simply, "how much blood will you have on your hands" by not using every method available to communicate in an emergency?
We have used EchoLink along with our normal systems here in Kansas on SKYWARN operations for several years
with great results.
The point is, quit moaning and communicate. The 'rubberneckers' can go to listen only mode and not effect anything on the system. It is pretty much practice for the sysop to drop anyone not in the affected area from the lineup.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KX8N on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"While DSL may seem high priced to some at present"
Verizon DSL is currently $14.95 per month where I'm at. That's not high priced. In fact, that's $7 less than I paid for dial-up about five years ago.
Then when we switch to talking about cable access, whether or not the phone system is working is totally irrelevant to whether or not your internet access is working.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Thats the approach I prefer to take with stuff like Echolink. If you like it, and you consider 'punching up' a repeater in England to be DX, hey, thats fine with me, I'll just exercise my right not to do so."
I guess it's all in the individual's definition of DX. It is short for 'distant exchange' and the true meaning is self evident. Any long distance contact of any sort is DX. Ham radio does not even need to be involved, as the term existed long before amateur radio did.
Some hams, myself included, prefer to use the term to describe a particular form of distant exchanges, that being wireless and from one antenna to another with no relays in between.
Perhaps to differentiate between the two we should keep it real...there is DX and there is REAL DX!
Just thinking...even at QRO we run less power than a decent blow dryer consumes...and peg meters thousands of miles away with said power...pretty cool!!
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My question for all the nay sayers is simply, "how much blood will you have on your hands" by not using every method available to communicate in an emergency?
... Well Said.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC0RDG on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Move along, nothing to see here...
I'll use whatever I want in an Emergency.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC0SHZ on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How much innocent blood must drip from the fingers of those responding to that overwrought statement?
Echolink has a problem in EMCOMM, namely that the net is not always working due to internet issues. This is true, but MOST of our EMCOMM needs are not Katrina sized disasters with corrupt local politicians adding to the problem. For most EMCOMM needs (blizzards, tornadoes, mass-casualty drills, etc) Echolink could be of help. Sending text is faster via echolink than it is through packet.
Echolink's bigger problem is that there is rarely a time when you can actually find more than a handful of active users on it (and do QSO's with them), despite its listing of dozens of conferences and 1000's of users. Add to the lack of users, the number of ultra-specialized interest conferences that are either not open to regular users or are of no interest to regular users, and you find a big unused service that doesn't attract users and can't keep the ones it has current. That is is bigger flaw for Echolink's EMCOMM utility. A tool is only as great as the skill of the person using it. No users, No practice, No skill, therefore, we can't necessarily rely on it in a crunch.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N8VCL on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
A little dramatic, don't you think?
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AC0H on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<"Ah, but you're forgetting about compression. Skype, a popular VOIP program, uses about 3 - 16kb / sec bandwidth. The higher settings on one's soundcard are more useful for music than voice, so a higher samping rate really isn't used for VOIP.">>
Agreed, but we're talking about Echolink.
How many Echoloink users even know how to set the sampling rate on their soundcards? What is the default in the Echolink software?
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KE5GAE on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I am a new tech with a long background in IT and computer networking. I'm naturally interested in learning about digital technologies and how they are used in ham radio. I've learned a lot in the few short weeks I've been a ham about packet radio from Charles' website. But the smug, self-righteous attitude in Charles' article has done more to push me away from packet and toward echolink than anything else. If he typifies those who champion packet radio, I am not sure I want anything to do with it.
Being new around here, I do not know what process articles go through to get published on this website. Can anybody post an article? I found this article to be offensive and irresponsible.
Basil
KE5GAE
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K0RGR on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I haven't murdered anybody with my Echolink node lately that I'm aware of. Forget being dependent on the Internet - if 9/11 and Katrina taught us nothing else, it should be that dependence on repeaters is a poor idea. Keep your 2 meter simplex skills and capabilities up to par!
Echolink activity during Katrina was minimal and sporadic at best. I did hear some traffic being handled that way, but I think it was mostly individuals finding outbound Internet access sporadically. One repeater popped up occasionally. Rita was a different story, with a lot of traffic handled via Echolinked repeaters that were active in the area, and mostly managed to stay that way. Each situation is different.
I agree that ham radio needs to focus its energies on ensuring that the most basic forms of communication are available first. That doesn't mean packet, either. But beyond that, we need to be able to use the resources that exist.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N2OBY on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?>>
A ridiculous statement and obvious exageration, but I agree with the underlying idea.
I believe it's unwise to rely on an infrastructure-based communications channel such as the Internet for emergency communications. The whole point and success of amateur radio assistance during emergencies is the de-centralized and infrastructure-free nature of our operations.
While some previous comments have correctly pointed out that the Internet doesn't always go down in an affected area, and they have had success in finding out the status of a loved one, that cannot be relied on to always be the case. I'm no fan of Intenet-linked radio, however in light of those comments I believe that Internet-linked radio has a place, which would be the transmission of health/welfare traffic. That would further free the airwaves for priority and emergency traffic.
As far as those who grumble about WinLink - get over it. For the most part the nay-sayers are open-source advocates (nothing wrong with that) who hate Microsofts products & practices - however they must realize that the vast majority (virtually all) of the agencies we serve are using those products.
Our mission during emergencies is to support those agencies who are actually running the show. WinLink provides them with the ability to use the communications tools they are already familiar with by seamlessly and invisibly routing traffic via either the airwaves or the Internet, depending on the state of the systems in a given situation.
If you disagree with the philosophy behind that then you misunderstand the role and purpose of ARES/RACES.
73 all,
Ken Gross N2OBY
DEC - ENY Southern District
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Echolink is REAL amateur radio, just another mode or extension of it, and it DOES have its place in Emergency's!"
73 de W4LGH
Alan Jones ARES EC St Johns Co. Florida
Uh, just what emission mode might that be, as defined by FCC? Please fill us in. Thanks.
K2WH
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K6BZ on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?
Oh my... LMAO!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink and amateur radio in the same sentence makes me nauseous. I puke on it. I hate it with a passion. It is a corrupting method of communications. Notice I did not say "Amateur Radio Communications" because it is NOT.
It is an abomination, a disgrace, a disservice, a fools tool, a toy, a pet rock, a crutch and is prostituting amateur radio.
I use it all the time :)
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Only kidding. I hate it. Used it once and then removed it from the computer. Have fun with it you airheads.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Oh, only kidding again. Your not airheads.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, I take that back, maybe you are airheads. The users of echolink of course. Not the dedicated ham radio operators.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
A better question might be:
How many unsuspecting victims must be needlessly slaughtered by the cold and chilling hands transmitting thier grip of death brought on by echolink killer terrorists.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AE4XO on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We used an Echolink station in Mobile Alabama to connect to our disaster units in Mississippi. We had HF, VHF, UHF, Winlink, and echolink going all at once. HF was the primary means, until the huge solar flare made it impossible to use HF for a fews days. Winlink and Echolink became the best ways to communicate.
For disasters, echolink is an additional tool. Our moto is "getting the message through." That means use a person walking to town with the message in hand if we have to! A high coverage repeater using echolink can be used many miles from the disaster, just like we did in the gulf.
Chris AE4XO
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by NA4IT on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just a comment to a previous poster on Echolink controls:
Echolink DOES have the ability to limit users, ban users, allow users, and even has a "listen only" mode that a sysop can activate so that outside folks can only listen, and you never know they are there.
And for those who say you can't control it legally over the air...wanna bet? The interface you are supposed to use for linking is "Dual Receive" i.e. cab take two receivers, one for the normal RX audio, and one for control that actually overrides the RX audio. Just like your "legal" repeater control.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by G3SEA on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N5PVL,Charles has certainly stirred up the Ant's nest again :O
The KE6EBA & NA4IT Post's have the correct facts on EchoLink.
1. EchoLink ( & IRLP ) merely reflect the activity or non Activity of Repeaters across the country ( & World ).
2. The Internet was initially ( Arpanet )designed as a completely redundant system. Sure there will be holes in the immediate disaster area as mentioned ( That's where the pure radio comes in ).
3. Those in the immediate disaster area don't care whether you use two cocoa cans and string, Semaphore ( Wot Dat ? )or smoke signals to help them.
The idea is to ' Kokua ' ( help ) your brother hams and fellow Americans in whatever way you can.
Let's have a little more ' Aloha 'amongst the Ham community and on these boards or we might lose both :(
73 & Aloha
KH6/G3SEA
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K3NG on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
When did eHam start requiring article authors to smoke crack?
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG4RUL on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink requires an internet connection which, even in non-emergency conditions, is tenuous at best in my heighborhood. We regularly get 24-72 hours periods of total or partial loss of service and the best Comcast can do is to say that they are working on it and have no predicted restoration timeframe.
They even want customers to move their phone service to them! Yeah, no way to call about your failed internet service because, guess what, your phone is out too.
The internet is truly a web, beautiful but, extremely fragile.
Dennis KG4RUL
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W4LGH on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Echolink is REAL amateur radio, just another mode or extension of it, and it DOES have its place in Emergency's!"
73 de W4LGH
Alan Jones ARES EC St Johns Co. Florida
Uh, just what emission mode might that be, as defined by FCC? Please fill us in. Thanks.
K2WH
Well without trying to make anyone sound STUPID, more times than not it is F3J or FM as defined by the FCC when it is linking 2 meter repeaters together.
Thanks for asking..feel better now?
73
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N4VOX on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
what a bunch of whooey about nothing. This guy that started this needs a hobby to keep him busy.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N5PVL wrote, "Step aside for real hams using ham radio, and stop endangering lives and property with EchoLink during emergencies."
According to the FCC database, you are only a General. When are YOU going to upgrade and become a "real ham" ???
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE5GAE: Click on the link at the top of the screen that says [Add Article]. There is no promise or guarantee that they will post it, but that's where you start.
Good luck!
NØIU
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W2TXB on October 28, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
How much blood.......?
Now there is what Amateur Radio needs - more melodrama.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5PVL on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I object to E-Ham's characterization of my article as " N5PVL warns against using the Internet during a crisis. "
I'm warning about the mis-use of the Internet during a crisis, as they would have comprehended if they had bothered to read and understand the article before posting it.
But many of the responses here indicate a similar lack of comprehension, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised at that.
Some of the responses are thoughtful and intelligent too, demonstrating that human life and property is valued above ego, expediency and personal convenience. Sadly though, these thoughtful, intelligent replies are in the minority.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KD7ZRT on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"The POTS (plain old telephone system) was designed with 64K of bandwidth for the human voice, 8000 samples per second and 8 bits for each sample. Depending how you've got your soundcard setup you can change the sampling rate from 8Kbps all the way up to 44.1Kbps, or higher. Now you've gone from 64K for one second of voice bandwidth to 352K for 1 second of voice. Double that if you use 16 bits per sample.
350K is about 20% of a T1 connection for any given second so you can have at most 5 VoIP conversations going on on a T1 connection simultaniously. This sodesn't even take into acount network overhead and other uses. How about email, video, etc....? "
Your logic here is flawed in a several ways, but mostly because you ignore compression. I know I've ran EchoLink just fine away from my DSL connection, while also "surfing" the web--so 352kbps is out of the question. It will run on a 28.8 modem, but not 14.4--so we can narrow it to that range. A quick Google search reveals some different results from tests people have run, but 20kbps seems to be on the high end.
A standard 24x64k T1 will provide 1,554kbps of usable bandwidth.
1554/20 = 76.8 simultaneous conversations
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W2NSF on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Without getting into a discussion of the relative merits of Echolink as ham radio, I agree with the poster and most repliers that in order to be counted on as real emergency communications, amateur radio must be able to operate "off the grid" and the Internet must be considered as a wired utility in this case. Any other thinking simply invites disaster. Thank you for listening.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5PVL on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One thing that I incorrectly assumed in my article was that everybody started off with an understanding that "listen only" mode for EchoLink involved - precisely the kind of high-bandwidth VOIP links that I was talking about.
It is in fact the "listen only" links that the article primarily refers to.
Are we all on the same page now? - Amazing how many EchoLink users have no conception of how EchoLink (or the Internet) works, but they still feel qualified to diss those who do, and who have noted a situation where amateurs are endangering, not enhancing the ability to communicate during a disaster.
Some of the replies here are from individuals who understand these issues, but who aparrently do not care about that happening. The fact that thier entertainment can very easily end up costing human lives means absolutely nothing to them.
Charles, N5PVL
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ok Charles, I promise that if some sort of catastrophic disaster strikes Lyford, Texas, I will not use EchoLink to summon help for you. I furthermore promise that I will not use EchoLink to pass along H&W traffic regarding your situation to anyone.
Rule #1 of emergency communications -- ANY form of communication is fair game when there is the potential of loss of life or property!
NØIU
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by BHARDIMON on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yeah, Hams are really on the cutting edge. What exactly are majority of Hams contributing to modern communications ? I get a kick out of these brain dead hams who view themselves as "experimenters". Experimenting doing what ? Doing the same experiments that millions of others have done with radio since the 1900's ?
Here's the fact: You old relics have a problems with anything that is new. If it doesn't involve 1960's technology, you have no interest. If you are really modernized, you might have some vintage 80's equipment. Regardless of "Hams save the world in an emergency" propoganda, You guys are nothing more than pathetic old farts and are the sole reason Ham Radio has become nothing but a HOBBY for OLD MEN
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by NA4IT on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Charles,
I'll have to give you credit, your work with packet radio has been great, and I'm sure has added to the functionality of amateur radio during emergency communications. I too enjoy packet radio, and wish there were more of it in my area.
Do you not think there have been trails done with Echolink to make sure it would not impede the use of the internet?
I am afraid there are some well meaning folks that have become convinced if we don't do it their way or use their mode, it just ain't gonna work. We call that the "my 4 and no more" syndrome.
I know of EMA managers who are dealing with amateur operators who are exactly this way. They basicly come across with "I'll play, but if we don't use my ball, I'm going home."
GET OVER IT!
I'm not a promoter of Echolink. I do take care of a system here locally, do know something about it, and do monitor the repeater it is on. Do I use it everyday? Of course not. Do I leave it running on my shack computer? No. Neither do I run PSK31, RTTY, APRS, PACKET, or Winlink all the time. But these are all modes I enjoy, and at the flip of switch or click of the mouse can operate them. Each and everyone of these modes is very useful during EMCOMM, along with SSB and CW, but not everyone has to have all of them.
If we don't get past the bickering, and the idea that we are the only game in town, I can give you a really good idea what is going to happen.
Amateur radio uses for EMCOMM will stop. No one will want to use it because we will be labeled as a bunch of arrogant cry babies.
Then all the BPL mongers and band threats will become very real, because big intersts will be able to prove that amateur radio serves no viable purpose.
Amateur radio will at least become a group of outlaws operating illegally, or at worst, will die completely.
Not trying to be mean spirited, just the truth.
NA4IT
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W5HTW, on 10-17-2005 couldn't have said it any better (http://www.eham.net/speakout/opinions/390?page=3)
******************************************************
It is a source of constant amazement to realize the number of hams who get a ham license, and then think:
1. Shortcut to being a cop, no certification needed.
2. Shortcut to being an EMT. No certification needed.
3. Shortcut to being a fireman. No certification needed.
4. Shortcut to a degree in:
a. radio; b: communications; c. computer science; d. Emergency Systems Manager; e. Hero; f. all the other things that we seem to think that simple piece of paper, issued after passing a very basic "what is ham radio" test, offers us.
There is no other piece of paper on the entire planet that so inflates the ego and "I can now save the world" attitude, when in reality it does nothing at all except allow a person to talk on certain frequencies. It isn't a short cut to a certified police officer, an EMT, a fireman, a county or municipality emergency manager. It is just a ham license!
Certainly it appears, to those who have recently aquired it, to be the most powerful document in all of society. It's a wonder they don't charge 50K bucks for one. For many, they get here by a one-day class and testing session! Wow? Experts? Never heard of ham radio this morning, now I ARE one. And, yeah, that happens. Experts? You gotta be kidding.
Work for a while with REAL professionals. Sit at the police dispatcher's desk, or go out in lousy weather with the Public Safety repeater technician. Ride in the ambulance, and realize you can't just grab the mike and yell "Hey, MIcky, you got ur ears on?"
Get in touch with the PROFESSIONAL world of communications. Then, get a JOB in it, and do it right.
Ed
******************************************************
73
Dave
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by SFD301 on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Chucky is totally insulting and off base with this post. Just because a ham does not like a particular mode, it is no reason to insult those that do. I admit, the post was okay until he started throwing around school yard insults. It was like questioning someone's manhood!?! I say grow up, and mature as a ham.
I've been a ham for a little less than a year, work the local repeaters, echolink, and 6 meters, and I say any mode that helps attract new hams is a good thing. Any mode that keeps hams active is a good thing. We should be accepting and supportive of new technologies that strengthen the base of ham radio, not speaking out against them to weaken the our foundation.
VoIP is the future. It has a hold on telecommunications and is growing more each month. NYS is spending a great deal of money on wireless communications to integrate RF/VoIP for emergency communications in regards to interoperability. It's time to get use to it, and help ham radio evolve. Now that, is what a "real" ham would do.
73 de KC2NMX
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N3KQX on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AC0H said "The POTS (plain old telephone system) was designed with 64K of bandwidth for the human voice, 8000 samples per second and 8 bits for each sample. Depending how you've got your soundcard setup you can change the sampling rate from 8Kbps all the way up to 44.1Kbps, or higher. Now you've gone from 64K for one second of voice bandwidth to 352K for 1 second of voice. Double that if you use 16 bits per sample. "
That's true. However, the POTS system used minimal compression, mostly to improve the dynamic range of the phone call. Most sound cards do sample at 32KHz, but H.323 codec compresses that data down to about 2.4Kbps (cell phones are even better, getting that data down to about 14.4Kbps, and the digital 2-way systems can run as low as 9600bps!). The beauty of VoIP is the compression factor.
If we really want to get rid of all the Echolink/IRLP complainers, we need to develop modern data links between repeaters. This will eliminate the "not real radio" complaints, and still allow us to utilize the public Internet for filling in the gaps.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N3KQX on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K2WH said "Echolink and amateur radio in the same sentence makes me nauseous. I puke on it. I hate it with a passion. It is a corrupting method of communications. Notice I did not say "Amateur Radio Communications" because it is NOT.
It is an abomination, a disgrace, a disservice, a fools tool, a toy, a pet rock, a crutch and is prostituting amateur radio. "
Wow. Calm down. If you don't like using the public internet to send ham voice traffic to distant places, maybe we could all get together and build our own TCP/IP network, using radio links, that will carry voice traffic long distances. Much more productive than crying about how much we all suck because we don't have space for a 200' tower and an extra $5000 laying around for a kilowatt shack.
I'm getting really tired of all you "old" guys complaining about new methods of communicating. At least we're trying new things.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by WR8D on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Lets just sum all this crap up in good ole red neck hillbilly terms we all can understand no matter where in the world we live. In an emergency all of us will use what ever "means" we have available to get the message through. Echo"link" to me is just that a great linking tool. I have two meter machines linked together via 440 frequencys. I've been out mobile not doing a thing but listening to a squelched two meter freq while running an errand and heard a nice gentleman with a Brit accent calling cq on my machine. I guess no one else was around so i went back to his call and he was just like me running around mobile outside of london looking for a nice qso. Well i tell you, that was one really nice qso we had. Anyone listening would of thought the guy was just here local on vacation or something. The point i'm trying to make is it works great. I've been a amateur over 21 years now and the guy i worked in london had been around longer than me. It did'nt make me feel any less a ham hi hi, and the thought of that never entered my mind untill i read some of these idiot posts. If you don't like it don't use it. That goes for any of our modes. I don't have echolink on my computer but for those that do just wear it out. When would a redneck hillbilly from east ky and westvirginia ever get a chance to work london via 2 meters??? "never without it"!!! Another aspect of it also is those that have been hams all their lives and now are sick or living in little closed in communities, many may be in advanced age or just to sick and not able to keep up a shack and antennas. Echolink to them is their only link to a life long love affair with this wonderful hobby. Shame on any pompous ass looking down their nose at a mode that still allows them a chance to make a contact. 73 John WR8D
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5VFF on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To G3SEA: well said sir!
Let me give my version:
1) The purpose of ham radio operators in an EMCOMM operation is to communicate.
2) We fill our toolbox of communications capabilities with tools that are useful and functional.
3) By ignoring a possibly useful tool we limit our ability to serve our purpose.
4) Like any tool, we need to learn how to most effectively and efficiently use it to accomplish our mission.
5) No one tool is the right answer for every situation. Select a set of tools as needed to accomplish the mission.
73/N5VFF
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0AH on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Echo-link is the most idiotic means of ham radio there is with it's spazoid sysops and clickisk geek squads. Try using the system for emergency international communications and you will be screwed by a long list of what you can do on various links. It is a loser in the states and will be a tird for any emergency communcations. Not just because the vunerable technology, but also because of the culture that it is built around. It really belongs to the CB crowd. Techno Whackos-
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AC0H on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<"
Your logic here is flawed in a several ways, but mostly because you ignore compression">>
What compression scheme does the Echolink software use?
A T1 connection is 24 simultaneous 64K "Channels", 1.544Mbps. If you use 8bit x 8K (64K) you'd have no problem. How many Hams have a T1 connection? How many Hams have a DSL or cable connection?
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC4QH on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Almost do not want to comment due to the ferocity of this entire string - which should be broken into two - Echolink in an emergency and Echolink: like or leave? As a relatively new HAM, I remember in my classes the Extra Class instructors taught to use all modes and amateur frequencies to save human life. Double checked the notes - no Echolink exception. If the infrastructure is up, Echolink is merely one of the modes, as the operator from Texas pointed out. Sometimes HF is out. Do you like echolink or should you leave it? That's up to you. Phone, CW, Digital --pick the mode you like. I use the mode and hope I am doing it "right". Give my call when I log on to a repeater, tell others on the repeater when I am connecting or disconnecting. There are days that I monitor (not transmit) HF, particularly 80 and 40 meters, and heard some of the most unprofessional and illegal transmissions. No call signs, foul language and desparaging remarks about other operators -- and I am supposed to look up to these HAM operators as examples of being a "real" HAM, or feel ashamed when they look down their any-class-higher-than-no-code-tech nose because I am not using a "real" HAM mode? Perhaps it's time to ask whether our hobby should have more than CW and phone modes? If so, are we using them in the most professional and helpful manner as possible? Hope to hear you on a node.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The fact that thier entertainment can very easily end up costing human lives means absolutely nothing to them.
Charles, N5PVL
-------------
Do you have any statistical data you can share?
ie: Current echolink related deathtolls, victims innocently killed by ham operators, fatal paper cuts caused by handling NTS traffic forms etc. etc..
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What I would love to see is wireless VoIP applications in ham radio. Not linking a repeater to another, but VoIP like is being done "in other worlds"...
Where is ham radio's wireless VoIP system? Hardware?
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by WG4RAY on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Apples and oranges - and nuts. The poster seems to imagine that the IP networks run themselves, with no one looking at capacity, available resources, and so on - and that it is up to Ham Radio Operators to police it? Ahem. I can assure you that the folks running the IP networks are quite capable of handling that aspect of life without any help from the Ham Radio Community. They already have priority capabilities, and can manage it quite nicely, thank you.
Besides, while echolink might strain an individual older machine...it's not that much traffic. Really. Not from the perspective of an ISP. And certainly not from the perspective of the backbones.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by BANACEK on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N5PVL and K2WH are nothing but trolls, plain and simple.
The sooner you hams start ignoring them, and getting on the air (including echolink and IRLP) the better our hobby will be.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KR4WM on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
QUOTE: KC4QH As a relatively new HAM, I remember in my classes the Extra Class instructors taught to use all modes and amateur frequencies to save human life. Double checked the notes - no Echolink exception. If the infrastructure is up, Echolink is merely one of the modes, as the operator from Texas pointed out.
NOTE TO SELF: Examine my radio closely and see if I can find the mode button labeled Echolink. It should be adjacent to AM/FM/CW/USB/LSB. If not found, look deep into the menus of the radio to see if it's hidden in there somewhere. Also see the ARRL antenna handbook to see what type of antenna and feedline is best suited for this mode. If I cannot find this mode, it may be a computer chatroom mode, and I need to complain to my ISP because they're charging me to use ham radio chatrooms that are supposed to be free since I'm licensed by the FCC to use them. ;-)
FURTHER NOTE TO SELF: Although no statistical data exists, it's probable that in 85% of all cases, Echolink is used by hams who have not upgraded their license to enable them to HF. Remember not to chastise these hams too severely lest I hurt their feelings. They are as sensitive on this matter as a five year old who is told to pick up their toys! I do not want to make them feel that they would be unwelcome to upgrade by taking and passing the required 5WPM code test. Do not mention the exclusive yet non-existant "secret fraternity" which we all thirst for them to join, but which they steadfastly refuse to take part in because of the licensing barrier known as CW. The members of our secret fraternity suspect that non-members are insanely jealous of it, though none of the non-members will openly admit this. Make sure non-members understand that they are welcome to upgrade their license in much the same manner as members at the frequent test sessions provided all across our nation, and make sure I make a concerted effort to welcome them with honors to HF. Don't forget to congratulate them profusely when they obtain the required upgrade, part of which is the 5WPM code test. Always remember, though, taking the 5WPM code test may have been a cake walk for some, but to others, it was much akin to removing the index finger of their preferred hand because they did it against their will. To some, even after passing it, they are wrongfully indignant of their newly acquired skill. Some day I want to put a poll on eHam.net to find out why. Much like learning a new language, learning code is an accomplishment to be proud of! (It is, after all, just like learning other skills such as electronics theory, one of the other "foreign language fluency tests" required of amateur radio operators.)
LAST NOTE TO SELF: Making amateur radio operators learn CW to get on HF is much like a college student being forced to take a foreign language in order to graduate with an English degree. It may be pointless, but it _IS_ required!
-KR4WM
P.S. Turn flame shields on NOW! ;-)
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Examine my radio closely and see if I can find the mode button labeled Echolink. It should be adjacent to AM/FM/CW/USB/LSB.
----
It's next to the ATV/SSTV/PSK/RTTY selector..
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KD7ZRT on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"A T1 connection is 24 simultaneous 64K "Channels", 1.544Mbps. If you use 8bit x 8K (64K) you'd have no problem. How many Hams have a T1 connection? How many Hams have a DSL or cable connection?"
You're joking, right?
Uncompressed sound, images, and video have been completely obsolete on the internet, since, oh... 1997
Remember when RealAudio was all the rage, back in the days of 28.8kbps modems? Maybe you don't, but we managed just fine.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KR4WM on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It's next to the ATV/SSTV/PSK/RTTY selector..
I did see one labelled RTTY on an Icom rig which I no longer own, but none labelled ATV/SSTV/PSK. I do have one transceiver that says ATV on the front, but it appears to be missing AM/FM/CW/LSB/USB (probably an intentional mistake on that darn pesky manufacturer). But even it connects to an antenna. So does my other radio when I hook up a computer and do SSTV/PSK/RTTY. But I have yet to find an RJ-45 or RJ-11 jack on my radio to plug in the cablemodem or telephone modem.... Are you sure you're not confusing a chat room with amateur radio? -KR4WM
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KV6O on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
LMAO!
"... stop endangering lives and property with EchoLink during emergencies."
ROTFLMAO!
I dunno how much blood has been spilled by Echolink, but this thread is KILLING ME!
KV6O
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC0NYK on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Do ua all a great favor....DON'T TAKE THE TEST.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by WI0T on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
".....How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of
EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed
altogether, I wonder?...."
Hmmm... I didn't think it was a full moon, but the bats
are certainly out on this thread...
WI0T
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
but it appears to be missing AM/FM/CW/LSB/USB (probably an intentional mistake on that darn pesky manufacturer).
------
Yeah, they just don't make them the same as they used to..
Also, there would be a whole lot less blood spillage if they just put all the keys in the correct alphabetical order on my computer keyboard too.
Why do they do that?
73 Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KC8VWM wrote, "Also, there would be a whole lot less blood spillage if they just put all the keys in the correct alphabetical order on my computer keyboard too.
Why do they do that?"
It goes back to the early days of the mechanical typewriter. (It is scary to think that there are people here who have probably never seen one; mechanical or electric!) Many configurations were tried, but it seemed that the typists of the time were smarter than those keyboard and were jamming the mechanism because they were typing so fast. The Qwerty keyboard we have come to know and love was designed in the 1870s to accommodate the slow mechanical movement of those early typewriters. By contrast, the Dvorak keyboard was designed with emphasis on typist comfort, high productivity and ease of learning -- it's much easier to learn!
(Some material is courtesy of http://www.dvorak-keyboard.com/ )
NØIU
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
RE: Alphabetical order:
The next time you are sitting in an A-10 Warthog take a look down and to your right. There is a keyboard there that has keys in alphabetical order. Also, all the keys are useable with one hand.
I have wondered why this method is not used in the rest of the sane world for some time now.
The next time you are in a C-5 Galaxy, please note that sitting just below the keyboard is the control to a Collins HF rig. One of the selector choices is CW.
So that is what is in the old jets of our day....I haven't been in any new ones and was wondering if they had EchoLink or not?
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N4UZZ on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The original post is very long on (apparently) strong opinion but fails miserably in communicating exactly what the problem is. After reading his post I am completely unclear about what it is that the poster wants me to do or not to do with my echolink setup. Is it rubbernecking? How do you "rubberneck" on Echolink? What specific action is the poster objecting to? Are these concerns specific to Echolink?
If the poster could give specific examples of what Echolinkers do that - in the poster's opinion - constitute "rubbernecking" and may in some way hinder or interfere with disaster communications, then the poster would help amateur radio a lot more by providing a list of actions that we all need to refrain from. I think that most of us would be happy to do that.
In the same vein, I am highly curious as to why another poster indicated that Winlink is a bad idea. If this other poster could be more specific, it sould be helpful. Does it waste bandwidth? Is it unreliable? Does it encourage the handling of outdated messages? Exactly what is the problem? Those are questions that need to be answered if we are to make intelligent decisions about modes of communication.
In other words, communication is all about more facts and less opinion.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KR4WM on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
[QUOTE] In the same vein, I am highly curious as to why another poster indicated that Winlink is a bad idea.
The reason I've seen elsewhere is that it carries the possibility of carrying e-mail that does not originate from an amateur station (also possibly commercial SPAM e-mail) over amateur radio frequencies.
I have also seen complaints that the WinLink nodes (is that what they're called?) come on frequency and transmit on top of on-going communications, which is blatantly illegal.
I think it's sort of like packet, but with an internet connection so that it can deliver your private e-mail. Of course, if it's over amateur frequencies and not commands sent to a satellite, it's illegal for the signals to be private (encoded). I don't think I'd want my bank sending account information over an non-encrypted connection!
I believe the entire point of the WinLink system is so that someone can check their home e-mail account. If I'm misunderstanding this, please, someone tell me. The WinLink system sounds neat, but how can you keep non-amateur and commercial messages off of the system?
The WinLink system is supposed to be optimized for HF frequencies too- something about dealing with the static crashes and better error correction....?
It sure would be nice if some neutral party could post an article explaining the pros and cons of WinLink. I know it requires a multi-hundred-dollar controller!
-KR4WM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"If we really want to get rid of all the Echolink/IRLP complainers, we need to develop modern data links between repeaters. This will eliminate the "not real radio" complaints, and still allow us to utilize the public Internet for filling in the gaps."
Modern data links period. What I find so baffling is the author actually believes that AX.25 packet is still a viable mode, 22 years after it was developed. Hardly the case for anyone who follows even consumer level electronics, anywhere in the world, in the last 15 years!
The fact we hams have no VoIP hardware (utilizing true RF links), no data network (WinLink is a joke IMHO), no texting portability is proof enough that no lives are threatened by ham radio as the author cites.
900MHz, 1.2GHz, 2.4GHz, 3.3GHz, etc. are ripe for the picking. Catch my drift? Weak signal work won't keep them & weak technical development will never retain them. This "Saving the World" charade is getting old & nauseating to we who have been licensed a while.
How the author can even get this liability allegation published is beyond my understanding. Should have saved it for April 1st...
k4raf@yahoo.com
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KR4WM on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K4RAF: This "Saving the World" charade is getting old & nauseating to we who have been licensed a while.
Hi OM, just wondering when you were licensed...? Your call only goes back to 2002 in the FCC database. Not really going anywhere with this- don't fear any "wise cracking retort", there's not one. Just curious. I find your ideas of RF VOIP links interesting and refreshing. What equipment would it require? -KR4WM
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K3YT on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Simple solution... Turn off the Echolink on your repeater during a disaster. As I write this, there are still over 300,000 customers without power here in Palm Beach County alone. With the CQ WW DX SSB contest going on right now it is virtually impossible to pass H&W. The eye of Wilma passed right over us here in Boynton Beach (my barometer bottomed out at 28.00"). Echolink is a valuable addition to amateur radio as a VOIP service limited to only hams. But down here, we are smart enough to turn the links off to ensure the available machines necessary for emergency communications are not tied up with rubber neckers. Please use some common sense. I've been a ham since 1977 (28 years) and seen some aspects and additions that are for the better and some for the worse.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KR4WM,
I was licensed in 1982 but was actually interested through an introduction to SWLing 9 years earlier.
There are many things that could be done, on frequencies that could support data rates compatable with VoIP. 900MHz or 2.4GHz@1 Watt building block radios are $99 each in lots. An encode/decode application in linux on a low horsepower PC or pocket PC & voila', ham VoIP on wireless! Even a Cybiko would be an innovation at this late date!!!
AX.25 packet is what took my attention immediately in 1982. My current frustration is knowing the service has lost its' "leading edge" to consumer applications that far outstrip the current experimentation level in amateur radio 2005. What should annoy everyone into acting upon this disparity is the fact that most of AX.25 technique development lead to things like SSIDs, beacons & TCP/IP being adopted into 802.11 & APRS technology being adopted into E911 locatable cellphones.
Ask yourself what has ham radio innovated in the last 20 years that exceeds 1200 or even 9600 baud?
I can't find anything, although I look almost everyday. What I do find is that I can do far 'cooler' things with Part 15 devices, than Part 97. That is not what got me interested in getting licensed 32 years ago! It also was not my actual experience until the mid 1990's either...
Feel free to write me at k4raf@yahoo.com to continue the discussion. I have no problem answering any questions : )
73 KR4WM de K4RAF
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
From N3KQX:
"I'm getting really tired of all you "old" guys "complaining about new methods of communicating. At least we're trying new things."
Here we go again. For the hard of hearing or reading, you like others just don't get it. We older hams are not against echolink, we are against EchoLink advocates, calling it a new "Mode". It is not a mode. Understand?
In addition, EchoLink is NOT A RADIO. Understand?
We are against the description of Echolink as a substitute or alternative to Ham Radio. Understand?
Echolink is a wire line method of communicating to others without a radio in some instances like a telephone. Ham radio, uses a radio. Understand?
Echolink is voice communications over the internet. Understand? Radio is voice without interconnecting wires. Understand?
Oh, whats the friggin use.... You guys will just get it wrong again.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KB7LYM on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
After reading this article carefully and debated it with 6 other hams we came to the conclusion that you don't like Echolink. Therefore you are in line to recieve the TROLL MEDAL !
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by WR8D on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Bill you have just plain killed me plumb out. You know also if we were to get on cw and be in qso most of them would'nt know what the hell we were talking about there either. We have a saying here in ky and wv..."Dumber in the head than a hog is in the ass" hi 73 i enjoyed your post.
John WR8D
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thank you so much. And a troll, never have been never will. My posts are from the heart.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
From KB7LYM:
"After reading this article carefully and debated it with 6 other hams we came to the conclusion that you don't like Echolink."
See, I said you guys would get it all wrong again. What with you? Can't you read?
As I stated before, we don't dislike Echolink, it has its place. We dislike the way people are describing it as a "NEW MODE" or an alternative to "REAL RADIO". It is as much a new mode "NEW MODE" as my whistling out the window. It is as much a "REAL RADIO" as my hair dryer.
UNDERSTAND (for the second time).
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by X-WB1AUW on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
< stop endangering lives and property with EchoLink during emergencies>
Just imagine how many people died because of DSL.
8-)
Bob
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5PVL on October 30, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K4RAF says:
"Modern data links period. What I find so baffling is the author actually believes that AX.25 packet is still a viable mode, 22 years after it was developed. Hardly the case for anyone who follows even consumer level electronics, anywhere in the world, in the last 15 years! "
As you learn more about radio, you will start to understand why you cannot have a T1 connection on UHF, VHF or HF.
The only cheap and easily available SHF stuff ( still not anywhere near T1 class ) is the WIFI stuff, only useful at very short ranges.
As you learn more about radio, perhaps these things will not baffle you so. Start off with a copy of the ARRL Amateur Radio Handbook, you can't go wrong there.
It also appears that you could use a brush-up on basic physics, assuming you have been exposed to this area of knowlege in the past and may simply have forgotten whatever it was you may once have learned.
In any case, don't give up! Thousands of others have come to understand these simple facts of life, and so can you! You should not just throw up your hands and live in fantasy-land, just because you fell off of the learning curve... Get up on that horse again, and ride it!
73 DE Charles N5PVL
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AB6CQ on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Does this "real ham" really know anything about ham radio? If these so called "real hams" will have this mentality, might as well consider the hobby DEAD.It's not really far away with these "real hams" turning off people who think about getting into amateur radio. Not to mention the number of hams that just drop the hobby because it's getting to be so political. It's not going to go forward as often preached.
Hey "real hams", don't be afraid of new technology. You can let go of your old tubes now. It's ok. Whether you like it or not that's where the future is going to take all of us. It's not just Echolink. There'll be more coming.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC4QH on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
KR4WM - no need to turn on flame shields. My point was should a "node" become a "mode". Differing opinions thoughout the thread. It's not radio at least not the entire communication path. Does it allow hams who are in various antenna restricted areas to make a long-distance communication (notice I did not say DX), such as retirees, HAMS on an HT budget, etc? Yes. Did local clubs in my area use Echolink during emergencies, such as relief efforts during hurricaine Isabelle and to pass H/W information duruing Katrina and Rita? Yes. I am sure the non-HAM family members who received the H/W information were grateful. Those are arguments for the node-to-mode conversion. Interesting assumption at the 85%. Obviously, I use Echolink a lot. Checked my log on Echolink contacts -- 68% General Class or higher. Perhaps in some minds, it is a mode. Now -- back to practicing CW.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB6CQ; again we "Real Hams" are not against new technology. God knows I'm not. I have the latest and greatest, I also listen to echolink. I also have the oldest and greatest. See my bio on QRZ. Just don't call Echolink a mode or ham radio. It is neither.
Perhaps you should explore the history of ham radio. You may even become a well rounded and better informed ham. You will learn what is and what is not radio and cease having a myopic view of ham radio as the digital frontier. Why if you try hard, you could even become just like me. But we all know that is not possible.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N5PVL,
Maybe I can tell you something you might understand or even remember: Never ASSume over the internet.
While you seek to degrade my understanding of physics & radio, I dare to retort that perhaps ham radio is just 'play' to me.
Having 25+ years of working experience in most aspects of wireless, there is little someone can 'teach' me, when he himself lives in a fantasy land:
A) Packet is not viable, portable or practical in 2005.
B) There is no need for a T-1 (1.544MBPS up/down) for the minscule utilization ham radio presents.
C) Practical applications are not limited to SHF nor WiFi, as you so ignorantly dismiss it. Look up NLOS or should I say it more clearly Non Line Of Sight.
D) The only limits to wireless coverage is LOS or Line Of Sight & the frequencies used. Your idiotic diatribe should be saved for your 2nd grade packet drones who actually believe AX.25 is viable in 2005.
E) You represent the typical "it can't be done" ham who is quickly becoming the museum piece. Do you need a sidecar for your motorcycle to accompany your attitude?
Some of us read, study & actually do leading edge things outside of ham radio. I caution you on ASSuming anything when I myself do not wear my radio resume' on my sleeve.
k4raf@yahoo.com
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink is voice communications over the internet. Understand? Radio is voice without interconnecting wires. Understand?
Oh, whats the friggin use.... You guys will just get it wrong again.
-----
What you are confusing is modes indicated on your radio equipment and modes of communication.
While Echolink isn't listed next to the AM/CW/SSB switches on your equipment, it is still a "mode of communication"
Also a cell phone is another "mode of communication" TV media is a mode of communication, using your car headlights to send HI is a mode of communication, using a megaphone is a mode of communication,
...UNDERSTAND?
(Oh, whats the friggin use.... How much innocent blood needs to drip from my keyboard before we all get it.)
lol :)
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC0KP on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Yeah, Hams are really on the cutting edge. What
>exactly are majority of Hams contributing to modern
>communications ? I get a kick out of these brain
>dead hams who view themselves as "experimenters".
>Experimenting doing what ? Doing the same
>experiments that millions of others have done with
>radio since the 1900's ?
I don't know why I would reply to someone who cannot even fill out a profile but....
Bull
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"During ...any emergency, Internet connections in the affected area are typically stressed near to or past the point of breakdown. These fragile connections should be preserved as long as possible, as they are essential to preserving lives and property"
Please explain how the internet is "essential to preserving lives and property". Silly me, I thought that Police, Fire and EMS did that. I did not realize that the internet could:
1) Stabilize your life threatening injuries and transport you to the hospital;
2) Suppress looting;
3) Pluck you off a rooftop; or
4) Contain and extinguish a fire.
Good thing we have the internet. Thanks to Al Gore, we no longer need Police, Fire and EMS in an emergency, we have the internet! I feel SOOO much better now, don't you?
W9WHE
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by BHARDIMON on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
1) Stabilize your life threatening injuries and transport you to the hospital;
2) Suppress looting;
3) Pluck you off a rooftop; or
4) Contain and extinguish a fire
NO ! These activities are reserved for trained professionals who can do 35 WPM CW, have lightbars on their vehicles and wear aviator sunglasses. The emergency people need to stick with passing Non Urgent welfare messages and relaying messages about cots and canned food for the Red Cross.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Loading up these vital, overstressed Internet links with a sudden rash of high bandwidth VOIP requests is utterly irresponsible, directly endangering the lives and property of persons living in the affected area, to no particular purpose"
Wow....in an emergency, the internet is SO BUSY caring for the injured, suppressing looters and plucking people off rooftops, that the internet must cease those vital emergency tasks in order to carry Echolink transmissions.
OK, I'm convinced.
Given that we have a 12.7% poverty rate, that hundreds are killed on the roads every day, the rate of murder and violent crime, we all need to stop using the internet. That way, AL Gore's internet can go back to what it does best, saving lives and protecting property!
W9WHE
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W9WHE, good answer. I think I like you.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"W9WHE, good answer. I think I like you"
(Blush)
Thanks.
W9WHE
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by WB5SCY on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I just want to make an awareness about offering to send up a portable repeater.
A Cessna C172 burns between 8-10 gallons per hour and most will carry 48 gallons of fuel.
Just keep in mind someone has to have a nice pocket for the price of fuel these days.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Quote from KC8VMW:
"What you are confusing is modes indicated on your radio equipment and modes of communication."
Whoa! I'm the one confused? I think it is the other way around. I know exactly what my radio says. If my radio says "AM Mode" I know I am transmitting AM. If my radio says "SSB" mode, I know I am transmiting SSB. My old radios mode switches or even my new radio mode switches do not have a position for Echolink because, if it did, it would be in error since I cannot transmit in Echolink mode.
I know what you mean, but I am not the one confused. Others on this board are calling Echolink a "NEW Ham Radio Mode" which is it not.
Now if they wanted to be accurate and not have to put up with the likes of me, they should call it:
"Sound Transmissions Utilizing Personal Internet Devices". Or "S.T.U.P.I.D" for short.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I know what you mean, but I am not the one confused. Others on this board are calling Echolink a "NEW Ham Radio Mode" which is it not.
---
I see what you mean.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KF4VGX on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I guess:
1. APRS is not amateur radio either because they use computers for the input and output and another interface to the radio.
2. The radios produced by various manufacturers are not really amateur radios because they have cpus in them and are not made by an amateur.
3. Slow scan TV is not really amateur radio because it is TV.
4. There is no such thing as amateur radio to some of these guys.
5. There are no amateur operators now either, unless they lived in the days of tubes.
6. There are no such things as antennas, only chunks of metal that may or may not radiate properly.
7. And what is a digipeater anyway????
I certainly hope one day these people learn to tolerate each other, as well as themselves.
It’s too bad licencing does not require a basic sense of humour.
Comment by va3igd .
I agree here with VA3IGD ,with respect to his comments on another board.
Respect? This person has self respect! And didn't need to earn it ! It was there all along.
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by 4X1DA on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Motorola's MOTOBRIDGE is a commercial version VoIP softswitch. It's much more robust than EchoLink (no single point of failure and no PC required between Internet connection and radio) and specifically designed for First Responders/Mission Critical networks in mind.
The system was launched early this year in Florida and has since been deployed in 8 other states.
Click here for more info:
http://www.motorola.com/governmentandenterprise/northamerica/en-us/public/functions/browseproduct/productdetailpage.aspx?navigationpath=id_804i/id_2553i
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AB6CQ on October 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I use Echolink and it goes through my repeater. 100% of the time I'm on the radio when I use Echolink. Someone please tell me how that can't be part of amateur radio. I know very well the hobby is not just all digital either.
I wouldn't need to try hard to be like you. The question is why would I? I much better off the way I am.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Others on this board are calling Echolink a "NEW Ham Radio Mode" which is it not."
It's a not so new ham radio connection. The mode used would have to be considered compressed digital which is not new either.
EchoLink is fun. On Wednesday night scholars world wide have a net on IRLP/EchoLink. It is pretty neat to connect a repeater in an adjacent county to the node for the net and use it for voice. Even better is the fact that I can simultaneously contact people on the net through my Internet connection and send text to them while they are talking on the net.
I can see how some of the ripened members of our group feel that Internet is not ham radio. Once I get a reliable Internet connection there is not much more to do but yak. I can't increase my odds of a contact by building a better antenna, having a better computer, etc. while I am always tinkering with my HF and VHF set ups...and doing so happily.
EchoLink may not be ham radio but it is part of ham radio and will likely be around a decent while. To me it is just another toy in the box.
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
I guess:
1. APRS is not amateur radio either because they use computers for the input and output and another interface to the radio.
2. The radios produced by various manufacturers are not really amateur radios because they have cpus in them and are not made by an amateur.
3. Slow scan TV is not really amateur radio because it is TV.
4. There is no such thing as amateur radio to some of these guys.
5. There are no amateur operators now either, unless they lived in the days of tubes.
6. There are no such things as antennas, only chunks of metal that may or may not radiate properly.
7. And what is a digipeater anyway????
Abbreviated Comments by va3igd .
Got it wrong again. All of the above, outlined by VA3IGD, involve the radiation of a signal from the source, are ham radio related and have nothing to do with Echolink. So what's the point?
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KF4VGX on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink sends packets through the internet to an RF point .Evolving the packets of information into RF signal .
From a packet source to an RF Repeater etc, Echolink is "Amateur radio related " or phone,your choice.
You may not enjoy it but others do.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AB0WR on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Echolink sends packets through the internet to an RF point .Evolving the packets of information into RF signal .
From a packet source to an RF Repeater etc, Echolink is "Amateur radio related " or phone,your choice.
You may not enjoy it but others do. "
Folks, this is nothing more than a very long, very involved remote control link. It is not a new radio "mode". It is no more a new radio mode than sending a signal from my D104 into an voice amplifier with a simplexed control lead so I can use a cord to the radio that is over 20 feet long .
As long as that control link is over landline media, it is not radio - it is landline. It may indeed be part of experimenting with techniques in amateur radio operating but don't call it a radio "mode" - it isn't.
And for those who think this is a new "operating mode", it isn't even that. People used to hijack telephone company conference bridges and use them for the same purpose as far back as the late 1960's/early 1970's. You could call into the conference bridges and meet all kinds of new people and have all kinds of conversations. Doing it over the internet to a computer "conference bridge" is just using a different transmission media.
tim ab0wr
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by SFD301 on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey, how about this?
Anything that supports the hobby, brings hams together, and may keep a few "newbies" around can be a GOOD thing.
Right?!?
KC@NMX
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W7TUX on November 1, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No need to comment. He just don't know what he's talking about.
mike
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K3PRN on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I am just so tired of seeing the words, "REAL HAM", suggesting in many cases that these people are the elitist in our ranks. Echolink is but one of the many modes of communications available to amateur radio operators.Ones preference in using any mode of communications is simply a personal one. After all, as another ham mentioned, we are all amateur radio operators.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Anything that supports the hobby, brings hams together, and may keep a few "newbies" around can be a GOOD thing.
Right?!?
----
I suppose you have a good point!
When there are nothing but 2m repeater beacons transmitting on a silent and empty wasteland, Echolink is useful for filling the void and bringing VHF/UHF bands back to life over a wide area.
I don't consider Echolink "ham radio" in itself, but rather a tool that further enhances it. Echolink is not ham radio any differently than DSP, an amplifier, or speakers connected to your radio equipment would be.
Echolink obviously involves transmitting RF at some point along the way, but Echolink is not self contained. It does require an interface to radio equipment for it to function.
I conclude that Echolink is a tool.
Some people feel Echolink is a communication mode however I feel it is a mode of communication.
See the difference?
I agree that anything (mode, equipment, tool or otherwise) that supports the hobby and brings hams together,is probobly worthy of being classified as being a part of ham radio.
73 Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N5PVL writes:
"How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether, I wonder?"
I wonder how many innocent children died because N5PL posted his article on the internet? How many more children went hungry? If N5PVL's theory on the internet saving lives is true, then while the internet was busy handling N5PVL's article, just who was protecting all those innocent children? Nobody!
If N5PLV's assessment is correct, then all you hams that are using the internet have the blood of innocent children on your hands. HOW MANY MORE INNOCENT CHILDREN HAVE TO DIE BEFORE YOU STOP READING AND RESPONDING TO THIS ARTICLE?
W9WHE
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KB7RHI on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Hey, Hey, Hey, nobody is going to take you serious with language like that. Sit down and take a breather for a moment. Now, Ham radio can be pretty creative when it comes to delivering messages. You still do not approve, why are you reading this then, I am using the internet. Because it works.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KB4QLZ on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W5HTW said it best..
RADIO
There is a lot of confusion over radio, ham radio, computers, washing machines, iPods, toasters, bumper jacks, and dogs with curly tails. Let's see if we can help.
Kenwood TS-520, with dipole: Ham radio
Icom 756 Pro with beam on 70 foot tower: Ham radio
Computer: Not ham radio.
Laser printer: Not ham radio
Garage door opener: Radio. Not ham radio
Cordless phone: Radio. Not ham radio.
Collins S-Line: Ham radio.
Microwave oven: Radio. Not ham radio.
Wireless internet: Radio. Not ham radio.
Internet: Not radio, not ham radio.
Audiovox CDM4500: Cell phone. Radio. Not ham radio.
Police communications unit: Radio. Not ham radio.
Fireman with HT on belt: Radio. Not ham radio.
VCR remote: Not radio. Not ham radio. It is optical. However, under the rules by some here, since it communicates it is ham radio. No. Not ham radio. Again. Not ham radio.
Toaster: Not ham radio. Not radio.
Wireless toaster: Radio? Not ham radio.
Wireless internet toaster: Radio? Not ham radio.
Laptop: Not radio, not ham radio.
Laptop cat: Not radio, not ham radio.
CB set: Radio. Not ham radio.
HAM goes with EGGS, GRITS, or maybe MUSTARD and BREAD.
"Ham" goes with eggs, grits, or maybe mustard and bread.
"Ham radio" goes with nothing but radios and antennas meant for amateur radio operating.
HAM does not stand for anything. (Except meat to use with EGGS)
Our hobby is "ham radio." Or "amateur radio."
Wireless internet devices are devices used to allow computers to talk to other computers. They are not ham radio. BPL is not ham radio. DSL is not ham radio. Satellite TV is not ham radio.
IMPORTANT POINT:
Computers may be used to assist in ham radio. Ham radio should NOT be used to assist in computers.
Ham radio is not a means to some other hobby. It is a hobby in itself. Other things, such as computers, or the internet, may be used in assisting ham radio, in helping find information about ham radio equipment, operators, rules, procedures.
The internet is not ham radio. Ham radio is not the internet. Those interested in the internet are fine, far as I am concerned. Those who like fishing are also fine. The goal of ham radio, though, is to be interested in ham radio.
Ham radio is not a utility communications service. It is not Ma Bell, Junior Bell, Taco Bell or Liberty Bell.
Things you can operate without a ham radio license:
CB, cordless phone, TV, Nextel, marine radio, aircraft radio, garage door opener, computer, cat, kitchen sink, VCR, motor vehicle, farm tractor, electric toothbrush. MURS, FRS, GMRS, Public Safety radio, AM broadcast station, Television station, taxi radio, laser printer, wireless internet link, Part 15 radio, laptop computer, inkjet printer, microwave oven, wired telephone.
Things you need a ham radio license to operate:
Ham radio.
Things you need a CB license to operate:
(I'm thinking. Hang in there.)
Things you can do with a ham radio license:
Operate ham radio
Things you can do without a ham radio license:
Virtually anything else. Be a fireman, be a cop, get married, drive a tractor, bale alfalfa, bail a boat, drive a truck - I'm sure you can think of more.
Again, there is no HAM. Computers are not ham radio. The internet is not ham radio. Ham radio is not a utility; it is not a cell phone, a police radio, or a garage door opener.
If you are a ham radio operator, welcome! If you are an internet operator, that's fine, do it on the internet. If you are a HAM, change and be a "ham."
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K2WH on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Echolink obviously involves transmitting RF at some point along the way, but Echolink is not self contained. It does require an interface to radio equipment for it to function."
You are wrong there Sherlock. Echolink can also be used computer to computer with no, NO radio or RF involved of any kind.
Just thought you would like to know.
K2WH
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm sure this article will be the number one joke at the FCC's and all the BPL companies Christmas parties this year.
HO! HO!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Echolink obviously involves transmitting RF at some point along the way, but Echolink is not self contained. It does require an interface to radio equipment for it to function."
You are wrong there Sherlock. Echolink can also be used computer to computer with no, NO radio or RF involved of any kind.
Just thought you would like to know.
K2WH
------
It apears you have mistaken me for a Detective of sorts.
Well Watson, here's your c`hance to do a little detective work of your own. Perhaps what you can explain to the rest of us is how it is exactly that one can hear Echolink stations over a common repeater on amateur radio frequencies without any RF involved of any kind.
Inquiring minds want to know...
KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KB4QLZ on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Unless the software has been changed lately, a radio isn't (wasn't) required for VOIP PC to PC contacts. Am I in error?
|
| |
|
Emergency Comms: "Fit & Forget"?
|
|
|
by K4RAF on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NTS? Echolink? Shelter Comms?
http://www.intel.com/technology/magazine/communications/hurricane-relief-1105.htm
"It's a disaster area," pointed out Ballard. "Nobody has the luxury of nursemaiding this technology. You need to configure it, stick it up on the pole, see the lights blinking, and move on to install the next one."
Not only do we hams nursemaid the technology (keeping it on life support), we are also NM'ing the people trying to communicate...
Somehow other guys, without licenses, seem to have run through, over & around us with a better 'just do it & move on' attitude! No glitzy pressers, until months later.
BTW: The new band of 3.65-3.7GHz, used through FCC STA, in under 12 hours... !WHEW! Really close to our (unused) band !!!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Unless the software has been changed lately, a radio isn't (wasn't) required for VOIP PC to PC contacts. Am I in error?
---
The description of connecting 2 PC's with one another over the internet to chat on a VOIP server such as Yahoo, or MSN messenger is really not the primary purpose of Echolink or topic of discussion at hand.
Echolink would be best discribed as similar to establishing a phone patch, but instead of using a phone - they use the voice content recieved through the internet instead.
Apparently, one can use Echolink in real time, to send RF signals over a live repeater, using Amateur Radio frequencies.
This is achieved through a repeater system that is equipped to broadcast Echolink content on regular FM/VHF Amateur Radio Frequencies to stations that in most cases only have radio equipment.
Contrary to popular belief, a PC is not required on both ends, by both parties, in order to establish contact with one another using Echolink.
Are there any other questions I can help answer?
73 Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KB4QLZ on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Maybe I mis-read, but I thought you said.
"Echolink obviously involves transmitting RF at some point along the way, but Echolink is not self contained."
Which is not correct according to my research.
Anyhow, I've got to go. Meeting a few guys on 160M in a few minutes for a quick ragchew. Why don't you join us. We'll be on 1.872MHz + - QRM.
73 and good DX.
KB4QLZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by X-WB1AUW on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yes, there is.
<How much innocent blood must drip from the hands of EchoLink enthusiasts before the "mode" is outlawed altogether,..>
Bob
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KF4VGX on November 2, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This " DUCK " walks into a bar,looks at the bartender
and says " Got any Duck Food ? "
Bartender looks at the Duck and says ,No we don't sell Duck food here .
Duck says "ok" and leaves the bar.
Next day same thing happens, duck walks into the bar and says " Got any duck Food ".
Irritated Bartender says ,No ! I told you yesterday we don't sell duck food here. If you come in here one more time looking for duck food ,I'm going to nail your webbed feet to the bar!
Duck looks around nervously and says " OK " and leaves the bar.
Next day, Duck walks back into the bar. Looks at the bartender and says ,
" Got any nails ? "
Bartender looks at the duck and says , Well no we don't sell nails here .
Duck looks the bartender in the eyes and says
" GOT ANY DUCK FOOOOOOOD "
We " the people " reserve the right not to hold "AFLAC" responsible for previous boring joke!
As well as Amateurs degrading each other .
Or their right to enjoy their hobby ,their way.
- KF4VGX
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by GENEW on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If Echolink is working in the effected area, the Internet is working. It makes much more sense to use one of the many freely available Instant Message programs such as Yahoo or AOL (free and no license required). Turn the logging feature on, and have a hard copy of all traffic passed. Use a cheap $5.00 mic from Best Buy if voice is what you wish. But IMO a hard copy of the text would be better. Just like Echolink, a radio is not required.
Keep in mind, Echolink failed during Katrina, due to no reliable Internet connections were up and running. Now I know some are going to argue this, but the facts are the facts. It was days until a reliable Internet connection was re-established in New Orleans.
One thing I’ve noticed is that the majority of hams (I didn’t say all) who use and promote Echolink, are the ones who do not have HF privileges. If and when the FCC removes the requirement for CW for HF privileges, I feel we will see this Echolink and IRLP usage take a major nose dive.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
GENEW wrote, ""It was days until a reliable Internet connection was re-established in New Orleans."
According to John C. Dvorak in the Nov 8, 2005 issue of PC Magazine, "Two weeks after Hurricane Katrina, it was reported that over 100 Internet networks were still down in Louisiana, as well as another dozen elsewhere that had been in the path of the hurricane."
GENEW goes on to write, "One thing I’ve noticed is that the majority of hams (I didn’t say all) who use and promote Echolink, are the ones who do not have HF privileges. If and when the FCC removes the requirement for CW for HF privileges, I feel we will see this Echolink and IRLP usage take a major nose dive."
This probably won't happen because in order to use those HF privileges, you actually need to shell out the bucks for an HF radio and antenna! Reliability and HF communications have never been two words that you can use in the same sentence. EchoLink users are spoiled by the fact that they do not have to deal with such things as propagation in order to contact someone on the other side of the country or the other side of the globe. Communicating over HF is just waaaaay too hard!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by GENEW on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N0IU states>
"EchoLink users are spoiled by the fact that they do not have to deal with such things as propagation in order to contact someone on the other side of the country or the other side of the globe. Communicating over HF is just waaaaay too hard!"
IOW, you're saying that if it requires a some effort on their part, they will continue to use the Internet for communicating. I'm beginning to understand.... Thank you.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W5MJL on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink is not an amateur radio mode.
Echolink is a tool for people to play "pretend" radio.
Echolink is an absurd attempt to save an over abundance of dying repeaters. It's not working, nor could it be expected to save anything.
Echolink is the internet, plain and simple. The only difference between it and any other instant messenger service is it is the ONLY instant messenger service that requires an amateur radio license. How ludicrous is that concept? You can use voip over the internet at no cost of time or money, or you can get on echolink and be required to have a license.
Echolink is truly a glorified chatroom that gives the little people a false sense of importance.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0IU on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
GENEW wrote, "...you're saying that if it requires a some effort on their part, they will continue to use the Internet for communicating. I'm beginning to understand.... Thank you."
You are most welcome.
Ding Ding Ding Ding!!! I just saw the light bulb go on over your head! Its just like learning Morse Code; if it takes effort, they don't want any part of it!
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by M1RAL on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Surely the maxim is in an emergency, if it works, use it. That has to be the main factor. However, the key is being resourceful enough to use other methods if needs be.
73,
Rick M1RAL
G-QRP No: 11229, RAFARS No: 4564
http://www.m1ral.info
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
However, the key is being resourceful enough to use other methods if needs be.
----
So is virtual symbolic communication methodologies using digits on hand considered to be a form of digital communication?
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by VK3HAG on November 3, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In response to the troll's idiotic dribble from the year 1905, an aussie from today's real world, vk3hag, went forth to show how these anti-voip types are actually not following the amateur's code!
I didn't know that Yahoo, IRC and MSN connected to ham repeaters, you could have fooled me. Where's the ham repeater room on Yahoo please?
It is ridiculous that Echolink is not considered ham radio. True, it uses a computer. So does the DX Cluster, packet, data modes, rig control and much more.
I use echolink both locally and for iDX. I use Echolink or IRLP for arranging DX contacts on HF bands. I also use IRLP to link across town, as the repeater is just out of range, so i use it's IRLP facility to dial from this end of town to that.
I didn't start on Echolink, but VHF/UHF, however I began using Echo and IRLP soon after to make contacts around the world. Since then I have continued along my ham radio path of discovery as I try new modes on HF and VHF/UHF. However, I still use echolink for 'nets', IRLP for connecting across Australia.
VoIP provides many o/t's who have been forced into retirement homes a chance to still operate where antennas are banned. Why should they have to give up their hobby!
It seems those that dislike Echolink, think that you should all be CW (a mode) tested before gaining a licence as well. If that's the case then all the o/t's who want CW tests should also be tested for AM, FM, SSB, VoIP, Packet, PSK, AMTOR, RTTY, APRS, Satellite, Hellscrieber, as these, too, are MODES of operation that should be examined. They should also examine setting up a Windows or Linux PC and how to interface it all, properly, with a radio, before re-issuing licences to o/ts. :) Yes, the o/t who can't dial succesfully into a node or make his radio into a simplex link should have his licence cancelled as they don't know a mode.
Little do you know that here in VK, scrapping the code test has seen a resurgence in CW use and as it's no longer tested for here, there are many more "VK no-coders" learning CW than ever before.
Let's face it younger hams, by the time we are all o/t, if ham radio still exists, computers will be the central hub of all our shacks....many already are.....
Get in the 21st Century. Remember "The Amateur Is Progressive" seems lots have forgotten. Progressive "moves with times"....
In a real world emergency, who dam well cares what bloody mode it is (from CW to Echolink via satellite) in an emergency so long as the message reaches it's destination.
Like anything, you should choose the right tool for the job.
The right mode for the circumstances.
"A bushfire rages through the forest, firefighters arrive and find thier communications cut. ARES is activated and sent in. Ham A, an old timer, first tunes up on a HF fire frequency, but it's summer and the band is too noisy..nothing can be heard, he tries some ham bands, nothing again. Ham B, a young bloke-recently licensed, set-ups his 2.4GHz wi-fi connection and finds that he can get a wireless internet connection going and then use Echolink to link to a ham repeater out of town. Ham A says "Echolink is not a mode and I'm not going to use it...hf is ham radio" he says. Meanwhile, whilst trying to get through the QRN and QRM on HF, people's homes are burning down as the fire crew can't get a back-up crew in. Yet this back-up crew could have been called via Echolink, but becuase some o/t thought it wasn't a mode, Ham A decides to not use what was at the time the best option, prefering instead to keep trying CW without a result, as Ham B wants to use bloody Echolink, even though, in this situation it was the best option.
If your are like-or think like- Ham A then you are a tool, no doubt about it.
If you think like or- are- Ham B-well done-you are a real amateur radio operator who has remembered the word 'progressive' in the Amateur's Code. Well Done.
Ham A can now do the PR interview and tell the people who just lost their homes that "sorry about your house but there's no bloody way I'd let that newbie over their use a perfectly viable option which makes CW look old fashioned"
Anything that the FCC/ACMA/OFFCOMM/IC say a ham can do in their law and what Article 25 lets us do is ham radio plain and simple. Whatever your licence says you can do is ham radio end of story.
Perhaps some of these pro-CW, anti-VoIP, (read closed minded) people need a good debate on Jerry Springer, you seem to be that type of Yank. Perhaps our anti-Foundation Licence, anti-Novice o/t hams could join you...what great partners.....
Some of us aren't pro any mode or anti any mode. I see them all as equally as valuable in their own way.
Cheers & Beers for Down Under, i think this troll has been slightly overfed.....
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by AB0WR on November 4, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
****************************
vk3hag:
"Ham A, an old timer, first tunes up on a HF fire frequency, but it's summer and the band is too noisy..nothing can be heard, he tries some ham bands, nothing again. Ham B, a young bloke-recently licensed, set-ups his 2.4GHz wi-fi connection and finds that he can get a wireless internet connection going and then use Echolink to link to a ham repeater out of town."
**************************************************
ROFL!!! You are kidding, right?
tim ab0wr
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5PVL on November 4, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, he did admit at the end that he was an overfed troll...
Charles, N5PVL
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on November 4, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Ham B, a young bloke-recently licensed, set-ups his 2.4GHz wi-fi connection and finds that he can get a wireless internet connection going and then use Echolink to link to a ham repeater out of town."
I like your way of thinking on this. Is this from experience?
k4raf@yahoo.com
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K4RAF on November 4, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Pretty sure he was referring to you being the troll there packet prophet.
I have to agree since you even complain they posted your troll without the ability of understanding it in the first place...
|
| |
|
EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG6LFN on November 6, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I wouldn’t want this “HI-HI, OF” upset for his next Monday morning quarterback rambling about function always following form when it comes to the personal safety of myself, a loved one or even a complete stranger in need.
I promise I will only use AM or CW if I find myself in a life threatening emergency even if another “mode” of communication is available. I hope this is acceptable to the emergency communication form critics out there.
Give me a break!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG4RRN on November 6, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I hope to have you die-crusted HF'ers in shock when I tell you that I LOVE ECHOLINK !
But, as an emergency communications link- not in the affected area due to POWER going off.
We are not like the public service agencies(ie:police/fire) which have tax-payer supported internet connections.
The system requires back up power supplies, (car batteries, marine batteries or solar power connected to batteries, and what happens when the dreaded night comes--batteries come to the rescue.
I am now exploring digital communications with ICOM's new V-82 HT (by ICOM).
Several other ARES people I know have started exploring ID-1 and the ID-800 mobile both created for hams by ICOM .
Still there are others who wish to convert Motorola 800 and 900 Mhz radios to ham use(hope they have a great program to run them on), and interoperability is no longer connect this jack to that plug type deal.
It is computer based signal processing and transfer.
Once everyone is plugged into the next internet (our PC-brain interface,) there will be no longer a need to push buttons, just think and it happens.
I dread the day elections are held that way, or ordering food from the grocery store.
There will be an overflow buffer, I can assure you.
Until then, explore the next mode of ham radio-voice digital mode on ICOM's ID-1, and ID 800, and V82/U82 HT's.
These were built by the Japanese to forgive us for bombing Pearl Harbor.
There is an auto-shut off mode.
I'll let all know how these do, when two or more converse in the digi mode.
Bob Rice, KG4RRN
Member ARRL,ARES,HCTV-23,and Vienna Wireless Society.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by KG4RRN on November 6, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I hope to have you die-crusted HF'ers in shock when I tell you that I LOVE ECHOLINK !
But, as an emergency communications link- not in the affected area due to POWER going off.
We are not like the public service agencies(ie:police/fire) which have tax-payer supported internet connections.
The system requires back up power supplies, (car batteries, marine batteries or solar power connected to batteries, and what happens when the dreaded night comes--batteries come to the rescue.
I am now exploring digital communications with ICOM's new V-82 HT (by ICOM).
Several other ARES people I know have started exploring ID-1 and the ID-800 mobile both created for hams by ICOM .
Still there are others who wish to convert Motorola 800 and 900 Mhz radios to ham use(hope they have a great program to run them on), and interoperability is no longer connect this jack to that plug type deal.
It is computer based signal processing and transfer.
Once everyone is plugged into the next internet (our PC-brain interface,) there will be no longer a need to push buttons, just think and it happens.
I dread the day elections are held that way, or ordering food from the grocery store.
There will be an overflow buffer, I can assure you.
Until then, explore the next mode of ham radio-voice digital mode on ICOM's ID-1, and ID 800, and V82/U82 HT's.
These were built by the Japanese to forgive us for bombing Pearl Harbor.
There is an auto-shut off mode.
I'll let all know how these do, when two or more converse in the digi mode.
Bob Rice, KG4RRN
Member ARRL,ARES,HCTV-23,and Vienna Wireless Society.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K8MHZ on November 7, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
""Ham B, a young bloke-recently licensed, set-ups his 2.4GHz wi-fi connection and finds that he can get a wireless internet connection going and then use Echolink to link to a ham repeater out of town." "
My first thought is where would there be a WLAN signal in a rural area, remember we are dealing with a woods fire.
I have been surprised to find open connections in rural areas that I would not have suspected. I just use a WLAN adaptor on top of my vehicle. The antenna is probably unity gain as it is part of the adaptor. Connecting a 15dB Yagi to the system would drastically increase the distance I could be from another WLAN. If I had packet with AirMail I could also send text to other similar stations in the field and bridge them to the Internet via my connected WLAN, enabling email to all the stations.
I think that EchoLink may be able to be tweaked (or would EchoStation be better) to link voice radios to the Internet the same way.
Using HF for such a call out is questionable at best. If a connection could not be made, adjustments to the antenna may be in order. If two HF stations a couple hundred miles apart can't communicate the may need to employ a near vertical incedent skywave antenna. If there is too much noise, there may be static on the bare wire....a good reason to try insulated wire for antennas.
Then, contact is finally made and the wind shifts.
How fast can you get a 40 meter dipole down from a nice dry stand of trees?
Our plan for HF is to have an NVIS antenna as part of our mobile command vehicle. To be as mobile as we wish we will probably have to stay on 20 meters. HF is still used by the military in the field and it can be made to work well and be portable.
Echolink can be set up easily on any repeater. Also, a repeater can be brought into the EchoLink system remotely. Someone with the skill and equipment can bring a repeater on line with a radio that will reliably work the desired repeater. Disconnection after the event is even easier.
EchoLink can provide reliable voice comms to portable radios in many situations. In an emergency it could be used to work clearly from one end of a state to another, farther too, of course.
So why NOT use it?
No valid reason to not use a form of communication that works in an emergency has been posted here.
I do not agree that the majority of EchoLink promoters are NCTs. I know many HF capable folks that don't mind EchoLink at all. I am a general, in my shack there is a straight key, an iambic, and a keyboard. In fact, the iambic sits next to the keyboard in case I want to use the computer to play CW. The BEST thing about using a computer to read CW is that it allows you to take a quick break....the QSO is recorded on the screen. Also, I can have CW running in the background while I am doing something else. The computer records the QSOs so if I hear an interesting QSO I can look at the screen and get caught up.
HF and CW are parts of my daily life. My daughter and I send 'CW' to each other when we need to talk in code. I can also send it to her using the horn in my van....so, we don't need no stinking computer, right?
I guess that depends on if I want to stagnate or move forward with the rest of the world. Myself, I want to move forward with my daughter, as she was kind enough to 'step back' a few years and learn CW with me.
There is a difference between stupidity and ignorance.
Ignorance is intentional.
73,
Mark K8MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N0EYE on November 8, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>> The meter on my flamebait detector is reading about 60 over right now. <<
Ha! Between this article and the "Every IC-706 is going to explode any day now" article, my flamebait meter just melted!
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on November 10, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, if the hams posting here would just heed N5PVL's admonitions, they would stay away from Al Gore's internet, so the internet could focus on what Al Gore invented it to do....
Prevent all those innocent children from bleeding to death.
I think its time for K1ZZ and ARRL to demand that the FCC shut down internet sites, so the internet can go back to saving the lives of children.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N2YPH on December 10, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"The POTS (plain old telephone system) was designed with 64K of bandwidth for the human voice, 8000 samples per second and 8 bits for each sample. Depending how you've got your soundcard setup you can change the sampling rate from 8Kbps all the way up to 44.1Kbps, or higher. Now you've gone from 64K for one second of voice bandwidth to 352K for 1 second of voice. Double that if you use 16 bits per sample.
350K is about 20% of a T1 connection for any given second so you can have at most 5 VoIP conversations going on on a T1 connection simultaniously. This sodesn't even take into acount network overhead and other uses. How about email, video, etc....? "
Someone else has probably addressed this already, but your post makes it painfully clear that you know absolutely nothing about the current state of VoIP.
While sound cards are capable of 48 kHz+ sample rates and 16+ bits of resolution, it doesn't mean that those maximum ratings are always put to use. The most bandwidth inefficient of the current VoIP standards G.711 - uncompressed 8 kHz 8 bit per sample mu-law (logarithmic) audio. (i.e. the same 64 kbps as the digital portions of the PSTN system - and that occurs for a reason. It means that VoIP to PSTN gateways do not have to do any sample rate conversions.) Thus in the worst case situation, 24 VoIP channels can be fit into a T1, which is essentially the exact same number that can be fit through it if that T1 is used for circuit-switched voice. Note that T1s for data access are getting to be increasingly rare - All ISPs have significantly faster backbone connections, and most "last-mile" connection solutions exceed T1s in capability. (for example, OptimumOnline cable modems are capped at 15 Mbps downstream, 1 Mbps upstream, and OOL is rolling out 30/2 service in select areas. RoadRunner's minimum capability is 5/512 - keep in mind this is just the "last mile" solution. Some DSL solutions are also T1 competitive - Speakeasy's top packages are 1.5/768. (Note that when I state uplinks in triple digits, I'm stating it in kbps instead of Mbps).
In any case where the VoIP endpoints have CPU power to spare, G.711 is replaced with more bandwidth efficient codecs such as G.729 (compressed, 8 kilobits per second), GSM (approx. 9-12 kbps I believe), iLBC (13-15 kbps), and in some cases that are entirely limited to software solutions on general purpose computers, Speex (variable from 5.1 kbps to 30+ kbps). Some of the codecs (such as Speex) do have the option to use 16 kHz 16 kilobit audio, but NO ONE uses such high sample rates/bit resolutions in uncompressed form for VoIP. (Speex at 16 kilobits/second sounds AMAZING. Of course there's no reason to use this high bitrate if there are radio links involved anywhere, since they will limit the quality significantly.)
The one reason not to use VoIP might be the fact that it is far more latency and loss sensitive than bulk transfers and will be the first thing to fail if network problems begin occuring, so anyone using VoIP for emergency communications should have a fallback plan. In cases where it does work, there is no reason not to use it. While it is less tolerant of highly loaded networks, in terms of putting loads on a network, it is basically one of the smallest contributors.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by K3ROJ on December 15, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Wireless LAN is not useful in any emergency since they are using our amateur band. I operate an amateur radio television link to two other hams about 4 miles distant using the 2.4 GHz band with wideband FM video and 6.5 MHz adio sub carrier. Recently I discovered that my neighbors have tried wireless LAN using their broadband cable internet. Of course they have no idea why they can't use their part 15 devices even though I am only using about 10 watts and horizontal antennas.
Their only recourse is try the new 811.02a when it becomes popular.
I also have recieved interference from a neighbors part 15 temperature transmitter on 434 MHz making any amateur television impossble there.
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by N5VEI on March 20, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
VK3HAG.. I actually do like the way you think. I have a friend who is doing that exact method of Ham B... linking a remote site to a central access point for wireless with a 2.4 signal. It is a several mile trip through the woods to a high speed point... but it works (ant. Above the tress). Point of all of this is to use whatever means necessary to get help to where it needs to go! I was in Katrina... and let me tell you.. EchoLonk helped us assess what was coming. I certainly helped some people afterwards. If the people who hate Echolink, computers, digital modes, and other modern stuff do not change their ways... ham radio will go by the wayside... the writing is on the wall! Fewer and fewer Americans are coming into the hobby. If we want it to grow, especially in emergency communications, we must change and adapt our foolish stereotypes to fit the situation of the day. God bless those who have the sense to know how to use Echolink and other high tech methods. I think that Eqso and Echolink are a great method for passing traffic over long distances. Say for an instance... Katrina... a message is passed via hf or vhf out to an overcrowded traffic net... takes a while! I heard it and was in that mess after Katrina. Echolink and other VOIP could be used to pass that same traffic from a specific listener or point... static free... to somebody anywhere that needed it... god forbid I mention FEMA... they sure could have learned from this.
Overall.. WE MUST LEARN TO ADAPT AND OVERCOME!
If you don't use it... lose it
Bill Richardson
N5VEI
|
| |
|
RE: EchoLink and Emergency Communications
|
|
|
by VE7TKO on April 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You say, "Let's try and remember that amateur radio is supposed to enhance, not undermine the ability to communicate during an emergency."
I have a question to ask. Is an IP connection provided by two Icom ID-1 D-STAR radios not an IP connection because it uses RF to connect 2 independent networks? I am glad that there are many progressive hams and that we aren’t tied down to using a spark-gap transmitter.
Today there are more than 65 D-STAR repeaters in North America today. At least 50% of these are connected to an IP gateway. The system works and is growing at the rate of 2 to 3 repeaters a week. The membership of our ham radio clubs is growing with Tec-Savvy open-minded new operators.
I am happy that the old boys club is not the group that controls the growth of our hobby. We will continue to experiment with new ideas wile they dream about the way things used be. Ham radio will continue to be a back up to the to the public safety system as long as we continue demonstrating our ability to be independently progressive in what we are willing to learn and do. Have fun and be prepared.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
FCC Launches 'Commision Registration System' (CORES)
Internet Survival Tips -- Viruses, Spyware, Hoaxes, etc.
Are We Hurting Ham Radio?
Doesn't This Look Like Us?
Idea to Help With the BPL Fight:
Other Emergency/Public Service Articles
DHS: Ambitious Multi-Band Radio Project
Heat, Wind, Smoke and Fire
ARES-RACES Support of Inauguration
In Terror Attack, Jam Communications?
Mayday! Mayday! Mayday!
|
