I like to think that we need to have a robust amateur radio network and I believe that many hams support the general concept, even if not particularly interested in participating. But one of the things we don't need is yet another real time network. By having semi-automatic server type systems, we can time shift the network so that participants can poll a server and find out if there is anything they need to handle.
RTTY is totally unacceptable to me. That is why I got out of tfc handling twenty years ago. Too unprofessional. Much of it appeared to be due to MARS traffic that came in via garbled RTTY forwarding in large blocks. No one cared about accuracy, correct phone numbers, much less correct spelling of names (sometimes not even close). The system was doomed as it could not compete against packet and certainly not the internet. Normally, we no longer need much in the way of traffic nets since the internet has made them nearly obsolete. But not totally obsolete, as there are RV/blue water boaters/remote hams who could use connections in normal times. Most of that now goes through the Winlink 2000 system since it works most of the time and since it is primarily internet e-mail, can often deliver in seconds. The main reason for having amateur radio traffic networks is for emergency communications over wider areas or even cross country. Ideally, we would just set this up when needed. But this ideal can not work well in the real world because we need to have the network in place and at least somewhat lubricated to have it ready when needed. This is the theory of the NTS. You have the structure set up so that it can quickly operate, or even expand when conditions require it. But we have not seen much need for NTS during emergencies since most of the traffic is local tactical traffic and special ad hoc nets such as SATERN, ARES/RACES, SHARES, etc. that are put in place as needed. It may be that we are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist or doesn't really have a practical amateur radio solution. Look at what the new government findings have shown (once again) with the "lessons learned" with communication (or lack thereof). We can expect much improved government communications that will further make it less likely to depend upon amateur radio networks. Still, I would support some traffic handling, if a need could be shown, and was highly professional and insured accuracy and timeliness in delivery of messages. If someone originates a message and that message can be delivered via e-mail, it should immediately go into the e-mail system if it can. Same thing with telephone calls since with cell phones now, a call to anyplace in the U.S. is no different than a local call. If it can not, or if it has no e-mail or telephone number, then it may have to be delivered closer to the recipient's location. (I have personally hand delivered Radiograms to such people). The idea that we have to send traffic via multiple transfers to finally get it delivered locally seems to me to be obsolete except in desperate emergency conditions. 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: > > What do you think? Would you be interested in being net control? I > can't be net control every day, because I will be busy on some days, > and I am already responsible for being net control of another net I > started 3 evenings per week. > > > It would be fun to see more activity on that band. I'm not so > sure about the traffic passing aspect, do we really need a net to > pass routine traffic? The RTTY traffic net that meets on 80M has > hardly any traffic, aside from net reports. RTTY is a terrible > mode for traffic passing, so I would hope you pick something like > Olivia, MFSK16, or PSK31. > > > > Andy K3UK > > 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/
