Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Slow lingering death of MARS.  (Read 730107 times)
KB4QAA
Member

Posts: 3143




Ignore
« Reply #105 on: June 23, 2016, 12:04:09 PM »

May I also point out that in 1992 the Navy and USAF closed their EMP testing facilities, EMPRESS II, and TRESTLE, respectively.

This shows that they are confident that present engineering practices and devices are satisfactory for EMP threat.
Logged
KB0TXC
Member

Posts: 164




Ignore
« Reply #106 on: June 24, 2016, 05:17:06 AM »

I might respectfully reply that there *are* rogue nations that have semi reliable rockets and small nukes... just the thing for EMP. No real damage to the ground or people, just electronics and corneas of the unlucky souls that happen to be looking at the wrong spot and the wrong time...

Best,

Joe KB0TXC
Logged
W0AEW
Member

Posts: 15


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #107 on: June 24, 2016, 07:36:03 AM »

The biggest threat to America is our fatty diet, road accidents, and ignorance of history and other cultures.  Wink
Logged
W3JKS
Member

Posts: 222


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #108 on: July 01, 2016, 10:56:05 AM »

The biggest threat to America is our fatty diet, road accidents, and ignorance of history and other cultures.  Wink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU0d8kpybVg
Logged
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 1280




Ignore
« Reply #109 on: July 03, 2016, 01:39:40 AM »

No the Illuminati and the Lizard Alien race!

The biggest threat to America is our fatty diet, road accidents, and ignorance of history and other cultures.  Wink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU0d8kpybVg

Logged
KB4QAA
Member

Posts: 3143




Ignore
« Reply #110 on: July 18, 2016, 12:08:12 PM »

I might respectfully reply that there *are* rogue nations that have semi reliable rockets and small nukes... just the thing for EMP. No real damage to the ground or people, just electronics and corneas of the unlucky souls that happen to be looking at the wrong spot and the wrong time...

Best,

Joe KB0TXC
Only rogue nation with nukes is N. Korea.   Largest demonstrated yield: 7kt.  Not much EMP more than 5 or 10 miles.   Small bomb = small EMP.  And EMP suffers from LOS and ground attenuation issues just like RF above UHF.

Logged
N2SUB
Member

Posts: 35




Ignore
« Reply #111 on: September 15, 2016, 10:15:53 AM »

I guess I have a unique perspective since I have been away for a while.  In the 90s I was an officer in NJ/DE region of Navy/Marine Corp MARS.  We passed mars grams and ship reports, etc, and I set up and was responsible for the NJ/DE digital switch, which received and sent HF and VHF traffic unattended.  Our mission was to move traffic from here to there, and we were pretty good at it.

At the beginning of the year, I joined Army MARS since I found out NAVMARCOR was no more.  In the basic training manual, it states that one of the main missions of MARS is to act as a means of secure communication in the event of a DOS (Denial of Service) event.  If the internet and/or email communications were lost, MARS would be able to provide a secondary means of secure communication.  Digital comms are generally in a mode that is unique to the military, and messages are encrypted or in some cases double-encrypted.  Passing encrypted traffic serves 2 purposes - it prevents a third party from intercepting the message, and it allows any MARS station to pass classified information without a military clearance (providing it is encrypted with a key that is not known by the station).  To me, that's a pretty important mission.  With all of the hacking in the news these days, MARS can be called into action at any time for no apparent reason in order to pass secure information between government agencies and the military.    MARSGRAMS are a thing of the past, but that doesn't mean MARS is obsolete.  It's a different world, and MARS has a new goal.
Logged
K2CMH
Member

Posts: 319




Ignore
« Reply #112 on: September 15, 2016, 10:46:14 AM »

What is the functional difference between Army Mars (http://www.usarmymars.org) and USAF Mars (https://afmars-msn.org)?
Logged
N1EN
Member

Posts: 108




Ignore
« Reply #113 on: September 16, 2016, 07:26:09 AM »

What is the functional difference between Army Mars (http://www.usarmymars.org) and USAF Mars (https://afmars-msn.org)?

The precise details may vary from region to region, but the differences are small and dwindling.

As a practical matter, the differences are the individuals in the chain of command, callsign prefix and structure, and when/where your "home" nets are.

There is still a difference in "flavor" betwen Army and Air Force MARS, but that's understandable given inertia and having different rosters...and that precise difference might vary in different parts of the country.  A potential member looking closely at the two MARS services might find one or the other more to their own preference because of that.

(Disclaimer: the above assumes that not much has changed in the month or so since I withdrew, due to an impending move taking me off the air.)
Logged
K2CMH
Member

Posts: 319




Ignore
« Reply #114 on: September 16, 2016, 07:40:22 AM »

Thanks for the information.  The Army Mars site has a lot of information, however the USAF site has next to none, so it is hard to compare the two.  

Which one were you a member of?

Logged
N9VMO
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #115 on: September 16, 2016, 11:00:40 PM »

Thanks for the information.  The Army Mars site has a lot of information, however the USAF site has next to none, so it is hard to compare the two.  

Which one were you a member of?



The Army MARS site has more info than the AF site due to the differences in the services.

The AMARS site you provided the link to is the National site and as such has all of the info that a prospective member (and also current members) might be looking for.  Also, AMARS policy is that the site you found, is THE only website for AMARS.  There are no Regional, State or "specialized net" sites to be found.  Sort of a "one stop shop".

On the other hand, the AF site you found, is for the specialized Mission Support Net (MSN) site.  The MSN site is really only for current AFMARS members and for the MSN folks.  AFMARS doesn't have the policy like the AMARS does, so some of the different Regions have their own site where prospective members can get more info and maybe even apply.  Here in Region 5, our website address is http://afmars-5-mil.us/.  There might not be a lot of info on the front page for non-members, but once you become a member, there is a whole host of info.

I hope this has helped clear the air somewhat.  If you have further questions, feel free to contact me.

Joe
AFR5C
AFMARS Region 5 Director
Logged
N1EN
Member

Posts: 108




Ignore
« Reply #116 on: September 17, 2016, 05:27:37 AM »

Thanks for the information.  The Army Mars site has a lot of information, however the USAF site has next to none, so it is hard to compare the two.  

Which one were you a member of?

I was in Navy, and then transitioned to Army when Navy started to sunset.

The decision for me between Army and Air Force was easy: I still work, and the local Army nets were at times that fit better with my schedule, while the Air Force local net I could most often make was on a frequency that was problematic for my station.  While it's OK for stations of one MARS service to check into the other service's nets (and an increasing number of nets are "joint"), there is still an expectation of a certain level of participation in your home nets.
Logged
W8QZ
Member

Posts: 18




Ignore
« Reply #117 on: Yesterday at 05:24:49 AM »

Slightly off-topic: I am disappointed to read several comments in the early part of this thread about messages that never got delivered, nor (apparently) serviced back as 'undeliverable'. Sounds to me like a serious lack of training for one (or some) of the hams involved - that you NEVER dead-end a message. Either deliver it, or send a service message back to the originator!
This needs to be stressed to those few who still handle 'hamgrams', as a basic ethical principle of traffic handling.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!