Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: No-code and HF traffic nets?  (Read 603 times)

W5SU

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
No-code and HF traffic nets?
« on: November 14, 2021, 08:47:36 AM »

I was recently listening to one of the popular HF traffic nets that prides itself in handling emergency communications.  The net control sounded almost annoyed as he heard a CW station sharing the frequency, then ignored it and continued to call the net.  I couldn't hear that station, but had to consider the possibility it was compromised and in need of the net's assistance.  CW is obviously no longer required for obtaining a license, other services have abandoned it, and I have nothing against "no-code" licensees.  But am I the only one who's uneasy that a published net intended for emergency communications wouldn't require the net control or someone else on the frequency to have at least some proficiency in CW?

Carl - W5SU
Dallas TX

Logged

K7LZR

  • Posts: 395
    • HomeURL
Re: No-code and HF traffic nets?
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2021, 12:12:23 PM »

You're not the only one who is uneasy. There was a time when most operators were at least somewhat proficient  in CW and could possibly recognize a station in distress but no more.

I've argued many times that CW is still by far the only mode which requires an absolute minimum of equipment in times of emergency i.e. you can even tap it out or use a light if needed no radio required. One person actually argued with me that the best mode for emergencies is PSK31 LOL. I patiently explained that such digital modes require as minimum a transceiver, computer, software, power source etc. vs CW which in an all-out emergency can be accomplished with none of those things, or very minimal radio gear and power only. He still didn't get it. Makes me sad. I don't think that I would entrust comms to save my life to any of the ham radio nets these days.

Be grateful for those who still know CW these days. It could save your life.

Logged

K6SDW

  • Posts: 527
    • HomeURL
Re: No-code and HF traffic nets?
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2021, 02:43:53 PM »

KE0OG, QST's newest columnist, says FT8 is by far the most popular mode on HF now....so, soon you won't need the mic anymore, just a keyboard and el cheapo laptop. I haven't looked at the specs but a popular QRp maker just came out with a digital-only transceiver, no CW key or mic required. I've been playing FT8 since its inception, but lately have grown bored and gone back to continuous wave and the challenge since I'm QRS at the moment.

At a Pacificon forum on emergency services, the fellow was saying emergency groups prefer keyboard communications sending traffic over either voice or CW which makes sense to me. Almost (but not 100%) impossible to misinterpret a message appearing on your screen....

GL/73
« Last Edit: November 14, 2021, 02:49:18 PM by K6SDW »
Logged

W5SU

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
Re: No-code and HF traffic nets?
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2021, 04:07:19 PM »

OK, me again.  My intent in passing along the following information isn't to demean the use of CW, which I still wholeheartedly believe can be a life-saving alternative when communications are compromised. 

While you're on the subject of QST columns, check out the article in QST, September 2017 titled:  "Supporting the Department of Defense following a Very Bad Day".   

It describes drills  "...that exercise communications interoperability across a wide variety of entities, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); the Department of Homeland Security SHAred RESources (SHARES) HF program; active duty, reserve, and National Guard units; state, county, and local emergency management officials and first responders; and civilian partners, including MARS and local Amateur Radio operators..."

So HERE'S the best part, and you can look it up for yourself.  Under "Lessons Learned" (pg. 70), their conclusions included the following:

Referring to voice communications "There are no special message formats or digital protocols required; using a voice channel was the most effective way to exchange the needed information from the county level..."

"...Voice communication is the most effective method to pass information during a crisis because all Amateur Radio operators can operate voice.  Therefore, it is quick and easy, and there is less room for miscommunication"

So it doesn't matter to me that FT8 is becoming more popular and a QRp manufacturer may be coming out with a digital-only transceiver.  I'll put my faith in the Department of Defense when it comes to which mode is best during a real emergency.

Carl - W5SU
Dallas TX
 
« Last Edit: November 14, 2021, 04:09:35 PM by W5SU »
Logged

W6BP

  • Member
  • Posts: 629
Re: No-code and HF traffic nets?
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2021, 08:53:01 PM »

FT8 has got to be near or at the bottom of the list of modes you'd use in an emergency. That and SSTV.
Logged

AE0Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 414
    • AE0Q Amateur Radio
Re: No-code and HF traffic nets?
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2021, 09:33:44 PM »

I haven't looked at the specs but a popular QRp maker just came out with a digital-only transceiver, no CW key or mic required.

That's an old theme.  Dave Benson K1SWL (Small Wonder Labs) released the PSK-20 transceiver in the late 90's when PSK-31 came out, a single-band radio with serial port and audio connections to radio, no mic or key.  There were models for various bands, the number was the band..  He's the one behind the new Phaser-II FT8 radio.

Glenn AE0Q
Logged
NSGA Edzell 1974-77  CTM2  GM5BKC : NSGA Rota 1972-74   ZB2WZ, SV0WY
https://radioandtravels.blogspot.com/
http://www.qsl.net/ae0q/
Pages: [1]   Go Up