John, It is precisely the DHS/FEMA shambles in New Orleans that causes my concern. Part (I say PART) of the problems there were caused by the psuedo-military structure and incident command concepts that were deployed. Adopting a "incident command structure" establishes "order" to a process but often stifles flexibility and improvisation that may be needed. This, applied to amateur radio, overly complicates a system .
I have not been to Oz in a while , so can't speak for your system. Here in the USA the culture is very much hard-hat wearing hams fulfilling a role that is overly dramatized . I am involved in emergency preparedness both professionally and via RACES and know the structures well. I am often involved in drills (just finished a THREE week drill) assigned as a liaison to amateur radio operators. The recent three week drill involved deployment of 4 RACES cells . Each of the cells could not figure out how to activate their digital communications systems and resorted to plain old use of a 2M FM repeater system. Keeping this thread "digital" related, my main point is that the USA system has developed a very good method for transmission of urgent information. However, the use of Pactor and PACKET has added an layer that complicates simple emergency communications. As my recent Field Day demo illustrated, the majority of hams have NO CLUE on how to set up digital modes for use with amateur radio, even for a non-emergency digital rag-chew. And, as a ham involved in a recent drill told me, "I am at least experienced in some digital modes but still had difficulty remembering Flex-Net and Winlink processes. Can you imagine what it would have been like in a real scenario where the hams that turned up were hams with no knowledge of anything other than using a repeater". While their ability to use a simple repeater system may have been all the skills they needed, the drill organizers had deliberately established packet radio as the method for liaison between government officials and RACES. I wonder how many hams actually USE digital modes? I am going to guess that is or probably no more than 15 percent of licensed hams. I think WINLINK and other such systems work wonderfully well, but think the backbone of an emergency communication system should be based on the skills and capabilities of the average ham, not the specialist ham. On 6/30/06, John Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What the DHS has asked makes no difference to us. Rather than a > "secondary" comms role, we have a primary comms role, albeit to support > secondary services such as public works etc etc when the primary systems > become overloaded. This is not theory, this is how we train regularly with > the communities emergency services. The only time that we are "first > responders" is a local situtation where a number of us have cross trained as > Search and rescue team members, and, as such are first responders. > > Frankly , it really pisses me off when someone such as Andy runs down the > efforts of hams who are involved with the community emergency response as > people who "have an obscure obsession with being some type of emergency > responder. It beat the heck out of the response that hams such as you have, > sitting on your soapboxes , with the sole purpose of criticizing others. > > Like anything else, this acceptance into the emergency role we play as > communicators requires more work than showing up with your flip flops and a > handheld when the do-do hits the fan. we are communications volunteers, and > are equally adept at using someone else's system as our own ham gear. No > where does it say that we are limited to ham operations, and often we are > not. > > As an outsider, and witnessing the shambles that DHS/FEMA had for a > response for the hurricanes last year, maybe it's time for the ham community > to start thinking outside the box and making those contacts with the local > emergency services. > > This is the way have in returning something to the community I live in, > I'm proud of what our ARES and SAR teams have done, it beats the heck outta > what I could do in the Lion's club or Rotary, and is far more rewarding. > > Have you done any work with emergency services , Andy, or is this latest > diatribe simply more BS? > > John > VE5MU > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Andrew O'Brien > To: [email protected] <digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:39 PM > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Field Day and PSK31 > > There are varying versions of just what emergency communications are all > about. To some it is the "boat sinking" SOS but to others it is a complex > system of message handling with file attachments, etc There are a > considerable amounts of well intended hams that have an obscure obsession > with playing Firefighter ,Police Officer, EMT, FEMA worker , etc etc. This > manifests itself with hams wearing hardhats and using military lingo for > "traffic" handling, much like kids playing "cowboys and Indians" decades > ago. They have developed very effective software that provides important > communications but it is buried within layers of unnecessary terminology > designed to make it fit their fantasy of being a legit " first responder". > The result is confusion among hams that don't quite "get" the unnecessary > jargon, and dismissive criticism of these hams by the jargon camouflaged > "emcomm" hams . The desire to be important emergency communicators has > produced a system often used as a primary emergency communication system , > however DHS asked only for a system that was secondary or "redundant" > communications. These are unnecessarily complex system to "join" and, as a > result , will likely have limited efficiency when (if?) "ship sinking" > "plane crashed" scenarios present themselves. The PACTOR/Packet system > will > be useful for non-emergency situations, by that I mean " "urgent" but not > "emergency". For example: Logistical information to support emergency > efforts, supplies/hazardous materials instructions, requests for > "push-packs", etc. > > On 6/29/06, ke7iej <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <ke7iej%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > > > -- > > > > > To sum up: Get on the mike and start hollering. SSB voice will be > > > much more likely to be heard and replied to, in my opinion. This > > > could change in the future but for now, that's how I see it. > > > > well in a emergency use any means that works and that will be > > noticed the best! ;P > > > > > > > > -- > Andy K3UK > Fredonia, New York. > Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 > Also available via Echolink > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.0.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.6/378 - Release Date: 6/28/06 > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > -- Andy K3UK Fredonia, New York. Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 Also available via Echolink [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
