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 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Better emcomm than hams handling traffic?  (Read 30250 times)
K6BRN
Member

Posts: 562




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: December 12, 2015, 08:45:27 PM »

The best disaster communications systems I know of are commercial SatCom cellphones.  Iridium phones are large and expensive (as is the service), but get the job done.  The Thuraya SatCom cellphone system that services the middle east, parts of Europe, Africa and more, is very compact, uses ground-based cell nodes when possible and shifts to satellite when needed, carries voice and data very well.  Its a popular phone for Everest climbers due to its size and battery life.  Inmarsat terminals are also SatCom based, fairly large and expensive, but work.

The funny thing is that both Iridium (Motorola) and Thuraya (Hughes) were designed and built in the USA, and provide dependable services under almost any condition.  But they are mainly used outside of the USA.  A Thuraya-like system for the USA was started by Wild Blue, who later lost their use of the required spectrum in some intense political/business maneuvering.  Inmarsat is aimed at the Maritime Mobile market.  Hence no really useful and affordable dual SatCom/cellphone service for the USA.  Even though we developed the technology back in the 90's.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   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!