Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Navy MARS kaput?  (Read 75064 times)

AA4PB

  • Member
  • Posts: 15504
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2009, 07:37:59 AM »

I went through this in Navy MARS many years ago when somebody decided that only HF could count toward the minimum participation requirements. The only HF net occured before I could make it home from work. Even though I checked into the VHF net (later in the evening) almost every day and had an autostart RTTY setup that copied all the traffic while I was still at work, and I was delivering traffic on a regular basis, I was dropped for lack of participation. So, Navy MARS has been kaput for many years as far as I was concerned.

Logged
Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA

CURIOUSHAM

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2009, 07:54:02 AM »

<I saw typed on an Olivia net - half the Pennsylvania members quit earlier this year.

Howard >

__________________________________

Not true.   There were a few (and I mean about a half dozen or so) who were terminated for non-participation....they didn't quit.  These were people who weren't even submitting monthly participation reports, or if they were...they reported NO on-air time.  They had never been active members. It was just cleaning out the deadwood. MARS has minimum participation requirements, and if you can't meet them, you shouldn't join.  If you just want the title of "MARS member", Navy doesn't want you either, because they terminate members for non-participation as well.  From your other posts here on Eham, it appears that you never were active on the ham bands either, except for VHF/UHF. You admit on one post that you had no experience on HF.
It seems that you 'participated' at a customer station and that you thought MARS wouldn't require any committment.  Well, you were wrong.  Any worthwhile activity in life requires committment.  That also includes non-MARS activities such as ARES and RACES.  If you are too busy, or too lazy, to give a few hours per month to MARS, then maybe you should go back to kerchunking your local repeater.
Logged

KB9ZB

  • Member
  • Posts: 113
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2009, 08:40:37 AM »

It seems that you 'participated' at a customer station and that you thought MARS wouldn't require any committment. Well, you were wrong. Any worthwhile activity in life requires committment. That also includes non-MARS activities such as ARES and RACES. If you are too busy, or too lazy, to give a few hours per month to MARS, then maybe you should go back to kerchunking your local repeater.
 
CURIOUSHAM

Now let’s calm down a bit and think. Yes every program requires commitment of one thing or another, however the reality of the world is family income comes first. I remember when VHF counted as participation, the powers to be changed the rules and said HF only. When this happened there were a number of folks who from time constants and other family issues could not make the one or two HF nets. If they were held at a different time, many would still be in the program.
   Here is an example, I was a MARS member when I was active duty (personal MARS call sign) but when deployed I was terminated for participation. Here is the kicker; I was CHOP on board my ship sending an average of 20 NARS grams a day. NON participation. How is this possible? The rules are rules group needs to look at the total picture here, not everyone has the same time and talents, but as a group we can do more with less.
   NOW the real question is no call sign at the end of a post and none in the dada base. The question is how do you know? Were you ever a HAM much less a MARS member? I would like to believe yes, but like the man said, out up of ..
Ron
NNN0VAG
Logged

CURIOUSHAM

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2009, 09:48:56 AM »

Ham: yes.  MARS member: yes (not Navy).

Yes..rules are rules.  What part of that don't you understand?

Yes, family income should come first.  So, if you don't have time for MARS...then don't volunteer (key word)!  There are others who do, or who make time.  Kind of reminds me of all the people without money who thought it was unfair that they couldn't get a mortgage.  They were given one and couldn't make the payments and now they're all crying.  Same mentality...the something for nothing crowd.

Being a MARS operator is not an honorary title.  It has responsibilities that go with it.  What good is a MARS operator who hasn't participated or trained enough to be able to carry out the mission?  MARS is better off without them.

Yes, VHF net participation should count.  I know of ops who check into Army HF nets through VHF nodes and get credit.  Air Force also has the same. That's apparently a Navy problem.

Navy does some other unusual things (at least in some regions), such as giving one hour of participation credit for checking into a net, even if the net is 2 minutes long, and giving NCS two hours of credit for running the net.  Oh yes, don't forget reporting total participation hours and not on-air/off-air time separately.  Easy to get your minimums that way, isn't it?  Maybe that's why Navy MARS is in trouble.

Oh yes, "dada base"???  is that a Navy term?

Logged

KB9ZB

  • Member
  • Posts: 113
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2009, 10:13:22 AM »

Yes..rules are rules. What part of that don't you understand?

Yes, family income should come first.

So in your estimation a group of 70-80 year olds on a field trip is better then a group in their 40’s or 50’s. The problem with this is simple, in a real disaster where MARS would be needed the most, medications are usually not available. In order to get what you need where you need it there is a compromise, time for talent. If you have a few HG nets at different times and you could check into your next state’s net and have it count as your own, we will have that age group who can and will be there when the chips are down. (but you already know that)  
   
   The real issue here at the end of the day is who died and left you in charge? Or better yet the army who does not have a clue about oceans, or portable airfields. Now we can debate what MARS should or should not be, what missions we should be involved with what roles we should play all day long. The only thing that does matter at the end of the day is simple, IF the NAVY MARS team falls, how long before the rest follow suit.  What ever happens in military branch it comes to all.
Ron
NNN0VAG

PS so what is your call sign? Proof is in the call sign.
Logged

K7VV

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #50 on: May 22, 2009, 11:18:50 AM »

Last time I looked, Army, Navy and Air Force were all preceeded by the letters U.S.

I think that means we are all on the same side.

So, perhaps we should be addressing the common problems facing MARS, rather than busily trashing each others branch of service.

Like the amateur population generally, MARS is getting older, probably less technically competent, maybe less well trained than it should be.  Like amateur radio, MARS is looking for a 'mission' or 'purpose'.  And, like amateur radio, we are having problems recruiting, especially for our EMCOMM activities.  Here in Oregon there are something over 14,000 licenses.  Of that, maybe 5% or 700 are even members of ARES/RACES; and of those maybe a couple of hundred in the state are 'dedicated' or 'well trained' EMCOMM operators.  Applying that to MARS in Oregon, with maybe 200 total members in all three branches, you end up with a small handful of people who would actually be useful in an emergency.

If the above is true, then what EMCOMM function best suits our available 'real' resources?
Logged

CURIOUSHAM

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #51 on: May 22, 2009, 11:28:38 AM »

Have you noticed that when the Navy guys know they are losing the argument, they:

1.  Run away crying like little girls

or

2.  launch personal attacks on anyone questioning their little 'fraternity'


I guess that when you cannot say anything positive about your own service, that becomes your fallback position. That's a pretty sad commentary about Navy MARS, or at least some of their members.



LOL!
Logged

W7TUT

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2009, 12:16:43 PM »

As CURIOUSHAM is listed with eHam forums as a "Chip Brightman", I would guess he's one of the following, probably the one from MA.  Anyone want to check their rosters and verify MARS membership?

BRIGHTMAN, CHARLES S, W7GXW (General)
527 S. E. 3rd St.
Cape Coral, FL 33990

BRIGHTMAN, CHARLES E, NL7BV (General)
173 MAIN ST
MONSON, MA 01057
Logged

K7VV

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2009, 12:24:46 PM »

Randy,
Since he has nothing useful to add to the conversation, and is obviously only trying to get under peoples skins, I'd suggest we simply ignore him and get on with a discussion of MARS.
Logged

CURIOUSHAM

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #54 on: May 22, 2009, 06:33:33 PM »

Yeah, that's right!

We've got to find that guy and silence him!  

You've only proven the point I made above.  

One thing for sure; in six months I'll be a MARS member and you won't be!

LOL!

Close down.  Out
Logged

K3WVU

  • Member
  • Posts: 504
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #55 on: May 22, 2009, 06:46:20 PM »

All MARS members,

It's pretty obvious that this whole thread has become troll-bait.  The original question asked was answered, and the whole discussion has drifted considerably off-topic, so my suggestion is that everyone take a break and enjoy the holiday weekend ahead.  

Everyone have a great Memorial Day, and please remember those who gave it all for America.

73

Dwight
Logged

KD4NUE

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
    • homeURL
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2009, 07:23:24 PM »

I imagine there is a lot of animosity among some Army MARS members.

I feel that the Tri-Service SOP was dominated by Navy influence. and what has transpired since this year's Dayton Hamvention seems to support the belief that Navy again attempted to bulldoze the operation with threats to quit if things weren't written to Navy specs, with the final result being the other branches (and DoD) calling their bluff.

The result has been a very splintered interpretaiton of Voice operations using terms that don't qualify for the plain speak direction we are moving toward with all of the MARS Agency stations and operators joining our ranks.

For those in high places intent on destroying voice operations, Navy's input over the last year must have been a Godsend

Terms like "Close Down, Net call followed by the NCS call and the proword OUT for net check-ins, full calls on initial check-in for branches that actually use full phonetics and adhere to FEMA Region designators, a 12 page Tri-Service SOP, since that is all Navy set aside in thier training materials - where the 55 page written guide which would have adequately outlined the basics of proper NCS operations was scrapped for the abbreviated Reader's Digest Version.

All of this took it's toll on Air Force and Army voice oeprations.  Now, a year later, Navy doesn't dominate Dayton, and decides to "Close Down"

It really takes a lot of restraint to not simply say "Good Riddance", but it is not the rank and file Navy operator that has been driving the Bull Dozer, and all Army and Air Force members should realize that and temper their remarks; myself included....

Bitter; I have to admit that I am somewhat bitter.

After throwing away a year, losing a lot of cohesiveness, introducing so much indecision into how nets should be called, foreign terms introduced that moved us away from plain speak requirements, grossly abbreviated SOP only to meet the arrogance of a space limitation in Navy's training material, first adamantly rejecting Winlink, then acceptance with complete attemtps to dominate it's further development to Navy specifications.....  Yes, I am some others are a bit bitter.

We all could have moved together and provided a well versed and knowledgable communications force, each bringing unique qualifications to the table.

Instead, one branch pulled a basic condensed version of "divide and conquer", then left the arena when the warriors were sufficiently confused as to what procedures to use and policies to adhere to in the execution of their mission.

In Army MARS, one of our training topics has always been "Working through Interference", but it never prepared us for this kind of powerplay QRMing.

I hope it isn't too late to return unity to the Army and Air Force.  We never had any problems between our services.

I also hope that all Navy members wil find nirvana; whether it be in Air Force, Army, or in total defiance of the rest of humanity.  

From what I have seen here, there are some of each represented in the comments.

David (I'll share mine)

KD4NUE  Glynn County ARES EC
AAR4IE  Army MARS / SHARES
AAM4GA  GA ASMD



Logged

K7VV

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2009, 07:41:48 PM »

Dwight,
I think ur right.

Time to give all this a rest.

Request permission to secure.  (former)NNN0BPP, Out.

(The Oregon Navy MARS Director just asked me to resign, again!)
Logged

W7TUT

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2009, 08:33:33 PM »

The Standard Voice SOP was not based on Navy-Marine
Corps MARS procedures, but the ACP-125 that all
nations use for joint communications.

And "CURIUSHAM", its "Request to Close Down", OVER
Logged

WA3MEJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
Navy MARS kaput?
« Reply #59 on: May 22, 2009, 08:54:56 PM »

Well unfortunately Air Force is not in much better shape than Navy it appears.  Air Force in Maryland basically does not exist and I am told by a very reliable source that AF has lost their budget as well but nothing was said at dayton about that.  

As far as ALE.. well it is less than usable as far as I am concerned because I can do manually what it does with automation.  It sucks up extra spectrum when it is not necessary and really is a dumbing down of the operators skills set.  Its primary reason for existance would be that our customers (FEMA, SHARES etc) use it.. again they are NOT operators you have only to listen to their SHARES to see that.  The largest number of stations checking into SHARES & FEMA are Army MARS anyhow.

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Up