It doesn't sound like you have spent much time with public safety types. I have never met one that wouldn't rather try something free, even if it is obvious it wouldn't work. Jamie asked the question of PS types, not vendors.
But, your evaluation of the issues involved in system failure doesn't seem to be based on any real familiarity with the systems, their users, or the process by which they procure them. I am really confused. There seems to be some disconnect between the WISP profession and every other one. By the logic presented to date, every WISP here is not nearly as good as a bunch of people who take no money for their service and just do this part time from whatever they cobble together from Best Buy. Obviously nobody should ever pay Brian to map anything since being paid to do a job obviously precludes him from doing it well. You damn sure should never buy a product from somebody like Chuck who spends great amounts of time engineering and testing them and is obviously qualified. Oh wait, he gets paid, damn, and I thought his stuff was so good till I realized he got paid for them. I just don't get it. Are your professions exempt or maybe you don't understand the problems like you think you do? On Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 7:18 PM Brian Webster <[email protected]> wrote: > One of the big reasons amateur radio systems tend to stay on line when all > others fail is due to the simple fact that the amateur radio operators > build and maintain their own networks. Public Safety Systems rely on > commercial contractors to maintain and repair their systems. The agencies > rarely have any good understanding of their systems when there is an outage > and therefore they don’t have ways to overcome the problems. They deal with > this by pouring a lot of money in to redundant and backup systems. In large > scale disasters these commercial repair contracts get spread thin real fast > and have soo many problems to fix all at the same time. > > > > Amateur radio systems have been put together with more creative solutions > that cost little to nothing because it’s an all-volunteer effort. When > things break they don’t just throw money at the problem to fix it. > > > > Jamie, the reason you don’t hear talk of amateur radio systems as shows > like you are at is because they provide services for almost free, that does > not sell equipment and services for the commercial vendors. I am not saying > public safety systems should not have backup systems in place mind you, > just stating the obvious that may not be so obvious to most. If you were > selling stuff to make a living would you tell a potential client how to not > purchase what you are offering? Do you see the cable companies showing > consumers how to get free off the air TV? > > > > Thank You, > > Brian Webster > > www.wirelessmapping.com > > www.Broadband-Mapping.com > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jaime Solorza > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 24, 2016 11:34 PM > *To:* Animal Farm > > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tessco Show > > > > Yes as in anything we have good and not so good...my point was that HAM > folks have had systems operating when no one else did and it makes sense > that emergency agencies have knowledge and relationship with local folks > just in case your state of the art system fails. Look at how thinking out > of the box saved astronauts way back then...or poor analogy...when UFC > first came out...all these high rank black belts got whooped by skinny > juijitsu guy....now they have adapted and evolved...same thing to me...fuck > the politics... make it work. Period > > On Feb 24, 2016 8:46 PM, "Colin Stanners" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well it's true there's a huge variety of people and experience in the ham > community, it's certain there will be some that suck, and so it's a risk > getting involved without good research first. > > But in general, they - or I should say us hams- have a very nice > combination of tower sites, active hardware, spare hardware, RF knowledge > and eagerness for community service so as to respond rapidly in any > situation. > > I just hope more hams will evolve from old voice / kilobit-speed packet > networks to new 2.3 / 5.9ghz IP systems so as to keep pushing boundaries > and advancing the hobby. > > On Feb 24, 2016 9:00 PM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm guessing Lewis and one or two others have had some sort of bad dealing > with a HAM and now hate the all forever for any impractical reason. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Wednesday, February 24, 2016 8:33:56 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Tessco Show > > FirstNet is a joke. Hardly anyone has reached DHS' level 6 > interoperability and they are going to replace all that hardware at a cost > by some estimates of over $10 billion.There have been several hair brained > schemes to pay for it but nobody has proposed a plan that is likely to > succeed. The only viable option seems to let the carriers do it. Great, > just what we need: a public safety system with all the reliability of our > cell systems. > > Back on the HAM topic huh? The reason they don't like running exercises > with them is that they are a crap shoot. Some are great, some are complete > jokes. Nobody wants to be graded with the wildcard in the mix. > > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:34 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> > wrote: > > well I attended some interesting sessions. The Public safety one had > several speakers from industry , gov't and academia... > > Learned allot and will share some important items later but I asked a > question that really caught them off guard.....there was no mention of any > testing or work on their disaster scenarios which involved HAM radio guys. > One of the members acknowledged that during Katrina and Bastrop > emergencies...the HAM radio network was the only available in many places > and then asked why they never mentioned using 4.9 GHz but only 2.4 and > 5GHz...mu ch more to come about First Net and testing to be done on > dangerous border.....Canada and US is April. > > Lots of stuff to share and some new antenna players I never saw before. > > Met Sakid Ahmed from Cambium and chatted for an hour ...learned some cool > things.. > > Well late lunch and Tecate beckons....chime in later,,,,,talk amongst > yourselves..topic is LMR over IP and IoT.... > > laters > > > Jaime Solorza > > Wireless Systems Architect > > 915-861-1390 > > >
