[digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm - a VK perspective
I've found it interesting reading about US Emergency Comms. It seems to me that many of your counties etc are quite small and don't have the critical mass to invest in comprehensive comms networks. Here in Queensland (Australia) the state government has an agency devoted to emergencies (EMQ - Emergency Management Queensland), and the SES (State Emergency Service), a volunteer organisation, sits under it. SES have radio repeaters throughout the state (1,730,648 sq.km/668,207 sq.mi of land, so about 2.5x that of Texas and the same as Alaska), with remote & major locations having HF facilities. All SES members are trained in basic comms which pretty much involves using HTs and mobiles, and procedure is based on the army system. There is a trial underway where ham operators that are a member of WICEN (VK equivalent of ARES) are also members of the SES and form a special Communications Unit, as opposed to the normal geographic (local council based) Unit. This will provide EMQ and SES with a pool of highly trained radio operators, as well as people trained in EOC operation. As far as I can tell, SES have 22 HF frequencies, ranging from 2.0215MHz through to 18.6745MHz. There is a cluster at 3.7MHz, 4.5MHz and 5.1MHz, making them pretty suitable for NVIS (not sure if it is used). There was flooding in October 2007 on the Sunshine Coast, to the north of Brisbane. While not involved personally, I believe that the WICEN guys were activated and provided communications capability to EMQ. I have been involved in the response to recent floods in Beaudesert (to the south of Brisbane) in the field and at the EOC (on comms). Amateur radio was not used as there were two repeaters that covered the affected area & portable repeaters (self powered ones with handhelds inside, as well as land mobile based repeaters) were available to be deployed. EMQ's regional comms officer was on hand to help, and he'd brought two Codan manpack HF radios along for backup incase repeaters failed. Unfortunately there was no sign of anything digital except for the 850MHz UMTS HSDPA wireless internet card in a laptop. As nice as it is for ham operators to assist in emergencies, I quite like the idea that the professionals working for the government, and the emergency response agencies like the SES are self sufficient. I believe that the situation in some states in the US (Kansas might be one) is a little different again in that the National Guard is used to provide communications for the state during disasters. I believe that all states and territories in Australia have a system similar to Queensland where the government has installed the infrastructure and the trained volunteer members use it as need be. Western Australia uses the Q-MAC HF90 manpack, but the idea is much the same. If through practise with ham radio operators are able to use a radio in adverse RF conditions (not full quieting FM), not afraid to speak into a microphone, know how to keep a log, know the phonetic alphabet, can speak properly (not like using a cellphone) into the radio etc, then these people are valuable to emergency service organisations. Added knowledge of digital comms, fault finding etc all helps. Best thing to do would be to join up with a suitable organisation. That what I did, so now I'm an SES member (also comms officer for our group) as well as a ham. Unfortunately WICEN meetings & training are held at the same time as SES training here in Brisbane, so my 'official' WICEN involvement doesn't really exist. I guess some hams want to use their equipment, and operate in their way, and it might suit some communities that don't have much in the way of facilities. Good on you, and hope that you can provide assistance. For those of us that live in areas when the government (national, state, city etc) has installed equipment for emergency use, we shouldn't be too proud to use it. We shouldn't underestimate the significant increase in operating experience and skill that ham radio provides. As digital gets more common (and complicated) this will probably be more apparent. 73s, and hope that there isn't any more need for EmComm this year, David. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI) Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Maidenhead Grid Square: QG62lm Roger J. Buffington wrote: > The strength of ham radio in the context of emergency communications is > not that we are all sitting around all the time just itching to monitor > for that SOS or whatnot. It is that amateur radio provides a reservoir > of private citizens who own and know how to quickly deploy things like > generators, antennas, and SSB/FM transceivers. We can quickly put > together makeshift but effective communications in environments where > all other communications are temporarily down and out. Katrina, the > 1994 California earthquake, are but two examples.
Re: [digitalradio] The Signalink and psk-31
Bruce, One thing to do, if you are using a varient of MS Windows is to set the default soundcard back to the soundblaster. For XP go into the 'Classic' Control Panel and select "Sound and Audio Devices", then go to the 'Audio' tab. Make sure your soundblaster is selected as the default device. When you go into the digital software (I use MultiPSK, DigiPan and DM780) select the USB Soundcard as the interface to use. By default it will use the soundblaster since that's what the previous step told it to do. I think that Windows defaults to the 'new' USB soundcard because it is usually a set of headphones, speakers or a fancy external 5.1 soundcard. Hope that helps. I've got the SL-USB working on XP and Windows 2000 so far and going to try Linux this weekend. If you still have problems with it please email me direct if you like, or come back to the list for extra suggestions. Cheers, Dave. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI) Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm bruce mallon wrote: > Well after more than 2 months the little box has > arrived. > It hooked up to my TS-2000 without a problem and works > like a champ EXCEPT . > > For some reason it and my SOUND BLASTER card don't > like each other and you have to configure the computer > for the SL-USB or the sound blaster card a > bummer.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400 in ZL
expeditionradio wrote: > The HFLINK organisation corresponded with WIA bandplanners during the > planning of the new Australian bandplan in 2006. As a result, there > are several frequencies on 40m and 80m that were coordinated in the > new Australian bandplan (and IARU Region 3) for ALE -141 and 188-110 > (RFSM2400) activity. There has been activity on these modes in > Australia since the bandplan went into effect. > You can find the frequencies in the list here: > http://hflink.com/channels Silly me, using the bandplan in the WIA Callbook (2007) that I just bought :-) The Jan 2007 update recommends 7180-7190 for unattended stations for digital modes and 7190-7250 for attended stations. Given what Les said about there being activity on 7196 USB, then that might be the best place to play with RFSM2400. Would that keep people happy? Dave. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI) Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm
Re: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400 in ZL
zl1tbg wrote: > Dave, 3580 usb is what I would normally use. Also the digital modes > guys gather at 3560 friday evenings there will be dominoEX there. > Most of my testing has been on the AREC 5 mHz as we have a clear > channel there and its the area where most emergency traffic will be. > i havent thought of a 40m freq. if you have a suitable spot let me > know. I'm starting a 4 day weekend now so could be around. Hi Ralph, 5MHz is still out of bounds here. WICEN have some commercial frequencies that can only be used with type approved equipment and ham calls are banned. I tend to stick to 40m+ because I use a buddipole antenna, and don't have the 80m coil for it. There is a common-ish data frequency on 7035, so narrow modes could go there. Not too sure on the full width modes, but someone else might be able to offer a suggestion for region 3. The VK & ZL band plans have 7030-7040 as Digi (less than 6kHz BW), but I think that is a little crowded. 7080-7100 is used for RTTY, so I'm hoping there is some room for other modes too. Staying under 7100 would allow Japan and other R3 countries that don't have 7100-7300 to play as well. How about 7082 USB for RFSM2400 and 7085 for DominoEX? I might have an opportunity to play on Monday (day off). Feel free to contact me off list to arrange something (best replace 'bulk' with 'dave' on my email address). If anyone disagrees with the frequencies nominated, please shout. Bands in VK and ZL are reasonably quiet, so if this is going to jump on top of something else I'd like to know. Cheers, Dave. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI) Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm
[digitalradio] RFSM2400 in ZL
Hi Ralph, Are there any particular frequencies where you operate RFSM2400? I've recently downloaded it for use with my new soundcard interface, but didn't know where to go. I get the impression that these digital modes work even when you can't hear, so knowing the frequency is important. ZL1/2/4 all received well here in VK4 with phone, and ZL3/4 with PSK. Cheers, Dave. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI & ZL3TDI) Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm zl1tbg wrote: > In ZL we are testing RFSM2400 with good results. > > The program installs easily and operates easily first time. > Operators can see how progress is during a session - not "left in the > dark" > Server PC can be left unattended and autostart on power up.
Re: [digitalradio] Gray Areas of USA Ham Radio Regulations and Rules
Danny Douglas wrote: > I certainly have MY doubts that many hams would live the "goodie" life if > there were no regulations. Just take a look where there ARE regulations; > the US highways, and see how many Americans pay attention to the law. Yes, > the majority would try to do so, but the minority, and I mean a large > minority at that, would NOT. If everyone lived the golden rule, that is the > only law that would be needed. I think one difference is that it is harder to get an amateur radio licence than it is to get a drivers licence :-) The drivers licence is seen as a right, so it can't be too hard. The comments people are making regarding the crowded bands in the US is interesting. Tuning around 40m last night, between 7050 and 7100 there were four conversations that I could hear. These were VK5, VK3 and VK2 loud and clear in VK4 with a 6m squid pole antenna. Plenty of room for digital to squeeze in. I can't quite fathom the 1.5kW outputs that the US permits too. 400W here, and that requires some skill I believe. I say this having not pushed out more the 50W on 2m and 5W on anything else. Australia's restrictions on methods of operating rather than modes of operating are frustrating though. No phone patches, IRLP only recently etc. I enjoyed using a full duplex phone patch in ZL in the early 90s. Cellphones were not common and it was a good way of checking in when hiking (even 150km from the patch). I guess each country has its quirks. It just adds to the challenge of DX. 73s, Dave. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI/ZL3TDI) Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm
[digitalradio] Gray Areas of USA Ham Radio Regulations and Rules
Brad wrote: > It is not surprising Bonnie, but it is INCREDIBLY boring. You guys have > way too many rules, and the surprising thing is that so many hams seem > to think that the problems can be solved by introducing yet more! I agree with this, and would like to suggest that when discussing something as specific as the USA band plan, that the subjects be tagged as such. The rest of the world, or Zone 2, for that matter is not regulated in the same way. We each have our 'special' rules and regs. I find it strange however that the modes are regulated by the government. I've only operated in VK and ZL and as long as the transmission is within the band limits and ITU regs are respected (for things like beacons and satellite) anything goes. Band plans have been developed as agreements on polite operating rather than restrictive regulation. I believe that the posters who suggested that it was the role of amateur radio to push the technology and to experiment with new modes/encoding hit the nail on the head. Once we've had the fun testing it the commercial guys can then go and use it. The power of modern PCs gives DSP power to the amateur, so let's all have some fun and play with the different options. Regards, David. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI) Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm
[digitalradio] Multi Hop NVIS Propagation Delay Interference Re: PSK Modes
(crossposted to NVIS and Digital Radio) The effect of the ionosphere on digital signals was discussed on a webpage that I coincidentally read this morning while looking at soundcard modes. Murray ZL1BPU has created 'DominoEx', with the details at http://www.qsl.net/zl1bpu/DOMINO/Index.htm NVIS is specifically mentioned, with the mode tolerant of multipath signals. Murray writes on the page that the mode was intended for use with NVIS, so it might be worth considering. It was announced to the world December 2005, so there might be some people who have used it. I'd be interested to hear of people's operating experiences with digital modes and NVIS. Cheers, David. -- David Ingram (VK4TDI, ZL3TDI) Brisbane, Queensland, Australia http://www.ingramtech.com/ MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm expeditionradio wrote: > As I understand it... > The path loss for the ground bounce at HF is likely to attenuate the > delayed single-bounce signal, and especially the multi-bounce signal. > This attenuation from the ground bounce signals usually results in a > significantly exalted no-bounce skywave direct signal for NVIS. > > The question then becomes: How much immunity is there with PSK > decoding to the time shifted interfering signal's amplitude? > > Digital decoding of PSK may not be much of a problem, because there is > somewhat of a threshold effect with decoders, but still, phase shift > symbol rate becomes the important factor here. What we need is a > relative figure of merit for comparing PSK at various symbol rates and > various other signal methods in these sort of channel conditions. The > flavor of noise in the channel can often be a factor... especially > impulse noise. > > The RF reflectivity of the earth at the bounce point has a significant > effect on the bounce's attenuation value. So, the attenuated bounce > may be more of a problem on sea water (-3dB to -12dB?), than when the > bounce is on land (-6dB to -30dB?). I'm guessing at these attenuation > values, for the purpose of discussion, rather than looking up the real > data :) > > Also, when operating freq is far below FoF2, or in propagation > conditions that have QSB, with a rapidly varying sharp D layer > absorbtion cutoff frequency knee, the multi-bounce signal may become > larger than the primary NVIS signal when the lower angle incident > skywave signal is attenuated. But, most of the time, this isn't seen > much though, since normally the D layer absorbtion is a rather smooth > curve vs frequency and doesn't have a sharp cutoff at such high angles. > > The bounced multipath interference signals for NVIS can be much > stronger at MF frequencies than at HF, due to sometimes sharper > ionospheric high angle critical incidence at MF and the increased > reflectivity of the ground at MF in some areas. This is a common > problem for AM broadcast DXing where phase cancellations often distort > the signal at night. > > This was a significant factor in LORAN, especially when flying over > the ocean, and if you have ever watched the old LORAN scopes in > aircraft, it can sometimes be rather tricky to discern which is the > real signal to use at certain times of the day... fortunately, most > experienced navigators were pretty good at it! > > Well, enough rambling for now... I gotta get back to work. > > 73 Bonnie BA7/KQ6XA
