Do the 100+ Hams working the Boston Marathon count as "activated" after the bombs went off.

I agree with the previous poster - nothing wrong with Tactical Calls - they facilitate Situational Awareness by being an aspect of the "plain speech" which is a primary tenet of ICS.

Check out SL-1 - the Army's last attempt at portable nuclear power - not likely they will try again!

I would not place too much faith in this legislation.    As someone mentioned earlier, California has had similar legislation for some time.   I think we all remember the recent case of the California ham who was told he couldn't have a tower because they allowed him to have VHF/UFH antennas on his roof, which constituted "reasonable accommodation".    As I remember the California Supreme Court declined to review it, so it's all over but the crying.    So, this type of legislation is no guarantee - the courts are basically a crap shoot these days.

Your mileage may vary

Dennis

How are Emergency Response and Education alike?

ANS:  both vary significantly throughout the nation and "local control" is a fundamental principle for both.

All emergencies are local - they start local,  they may involve state or national resources if they are large enough, and then they are local again when FEMA departs. 

Each state/county/city/township/etc is generally empowered to handle things differently.   In Ohio, the county is the basic unit for Emergency Response.   Adjoining counties have completely different procedures, requirements and responses.    Thus has it ever been, thus shall it ever be.

Hams are the tail and the local Emergency Response structure is the dog.   We are disorganized and uneven because we have to support a wide variety of "official" Emergency response authorities.

As much as I would like ARES to have a top-down set of uniform requirements and procedures, this is impossible, because they have to mesh with the wildly varying local structure.

your mileage may vary

Dennis

You will need a building permit, most likely.   And that will be when you find out what that all means.   My own municipal zoning code contains an explicit exception - antennas are exempt from all height restrictions.

However, the Building Inspector says the tower is not exempt (antenna support structure is not an antenna), and it can only be 35 feet high.   My sketch of the tower as an antenna did not persuade him. 

So, don't count your chickens before they hatch.

BTW, if you go ahead and build without a building permit, you are clearly in the wrong and they absolutely can make you take it down or they can take it down and charge you for it - get the permit.

Good luck!

Sorry, but I don't see much difference between talking on a phone (perhaps even a hands free cell phone setup) and talking on a CB.   Either one is a distraction - you are listening to the other person talking and formulating a response.   This is exactly the sort of multi-tasking that leads to tunnel vision.

I have seen no studies correlating "care and attentiveness" and a resistance to cognitive distraction. 

As far as concentrating on a QSO in bad conditions - my cell phone transmissions are much clearer than SSB, so I guess I don't understand the example.

OK, I'm confused.

So the cell phone right at your ear is worse why?   Is it that the "evil" sound waves lose their potency when they travel some distance through the air?   Not a very compelling argument.

Duplex vs simplex - a complete red herring.   The studies show clearly that even listening to a recording with the knowledge that you will be asked about it later causes cognitive distraction.   You surely cannot be seriously arguing that needing to press a button to reply is somehow LESS distracting. 

So your theory is that people that pass a test that many 8-year olds have passed are somehow shielded from the cognitive impairment of distracted driving?

Does it protect you against cancer as well?

What I deny is that I (or you) live in Lake Wobegon, where "all the children are above average".

It's called illusory superiority.

KT0DD, I'll take you at your word - I guess you will not be acknowledging this.

As far as my motives, it is always dangerous to speculate on the motives of others.

Maybe I'm just trying to keep you all safe on the highways.

And as far as "testing", read the studies.   Lots of testing has been done.  Distracted driving is not a myth, it is a scientifically establish phenomenon. 

I always chuckle when the "spectrum of ability" comes up.

Translated this means - the speaker is vastly superior in this respect, and only the dummies are subject to distracted driving.

BTW, 2 more votes for the "No".

AI8P

So, that is a "No".

Can you explain to me, in scientific terms, the difference in cognitive distraction between talking on a CB and talking on a cell phone?   Is it the mic cable?

No, they aren't relying "excessively" on the internet, at least not the groups that I work with.

One of the great services of Ham radio during an incident will be to send traffic outside the disaster area, where the "Internet" is still working.   

For example, my group has a major priority on updating the Red Cross Safe & Well website as a form of Health & Welfare traffic handling.   It is very possible that inside the disaster area that will be impossible.  That is why we will be passing H&W traffic outside the area to be used to update the website.  People outside the incident area are getting updates using the Internet everyday.   They are not going to change when they are looking for the status of their loved ones who are in the affected area.  It's a simple case of know your audience.  They will look for status online, so we need to put it there.

On a related issue, I'm not a D-star person, and don't intend to become one, but I understand that hams have always liked to tinker with new technology so I have no problem with that.   I'm just not relying upon it in my county for Emergency Comms.

Dennis

Well, I guess you must think that people should be encouraged to talk on their cell phones while they are driving to

"keep awake, keep their attention sharp and focussed on their driving."

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Dennis

Greg,

I have a 2006 Tacoma with the same plastic bed.    Even stake hole mounts don't work as there are no real stake holes.

I mounted a 2M NMO on the far (back) end of the drivers side bed rail.   This was because the garage wouldn't allow me to put it on the roof and the warning that came with the truck saying any RF in the cab could be a problem.

When I needed to go HF mobile, I just put an adapter on the NMO and put a 40M hamstick on that - no bonding of the fender to the other body parts - just stuck it out there on the end of the bed rail.

It was no world beater but it worked and I actually won a few contests using it as an NVIS on 40M.

  It did require a careful drilling of a hole in the bed rail and the plastic cover of same.    This year I am going to put a separate hamstick mount at the end of the other bed rail so that I don't have to sacrifice my 2M antenna when I want to work HF mobile.

Your mileage may vary.

Dennis