| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.06.00 04:07l 175 Lines 7768 Bytes #-9436 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_170E
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/170E
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000619/2010Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53019 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_170E
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 00 17:51:18 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_170E>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
>2. Regional. The example here was flooding in the coast mountains
Portable phone repeaters are good for such situations as would
portable digital nodes or portable BBS stations, especially if the
users have some kind of integrated HT+TNC+display functionality as the
Kenwood radio.
However, there is not much use for fixed, point to point forwarding
VHF/UHF networks or digital HF links.
>3. Major. The example here has not (yet) happened, but will some day.
>The PNW is subject to rare periodic large earthquakes. Magnitudes
>usually between 7.5 and 8.5, but larger quakes are possible. The last
>quake occured MORE than one repeat interval ago, so the probability
>of a quake is higher than "usual". Repeat interval is 200-300 years.
>The expectation is that there will be no remaining communication,
>power, or travel infrastructure. Cell towers and power line towers
>will be on the ground.
The problem is, why would the hams and ham equipment have a better
survivability in such a situations. Ham towers would come down as well
and fixed stations will be destroyed when buildings collapse. Only
equipment that was in the car has better chances of surviving and this
also requires that some ad hoc antenna must be constructed in order to
be able to communicate on HF.
> What hams can do is
provide
>HF communications out of area to get the intial assesment to the agencies
>that can help. HF because the places we would need to communicate
>with are state capitols of nearby states (200-600 miles) and to Washington,
>DC (1700 miles).
I don't see the point why you would need the ability to communicate
coast to coast over HF, it should be sufficient to be able to
communicate with hams who live outside the disaster and who can
communicate to other places (such as the other coast) over land line
connections. The goal should be that any amateur living in places in
which the land line network works, should be able to connect the radio
to the land line network.
One part of the Field Day drill could be installing some BBS software
to a computer that has already been connected to internet and forward
traffic between Field Day operators over radio and say, ARRL HQ over
internet.
Paul OH3LWR
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:11:25 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: N0ZO no longer supports Keyboard inputs!
"Paul Keinanen" <keinanen@sci.fi> wrote in message
news:66cqks4d4e1c52om1aia1vdc3606q0tbea@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 19:02:51 GMT, "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >1. Local. The example here is a train derailment in a remote area,
>
> >2. Regional. The example here was flooding in the coast mountains
>
> Portable phone repeaters are good for such situations as would
> portable digital nodes or portable BBS stations, especially if the
> users have some kind of integrated HT+TNC+display functionality as the
> Kenwood radio.
>
> However, there is not much use for fixed, point to point forwarding
> VHF/UHF networks or digital HF links.
Portable nodes and BBS systems were used extensivly during the 1987-
1988 forest fire season in California. Nodes heli-dropped to ridge top,
BBS in laptop placed at the staging areas. Allowed printed situation
summaries to be automatically forwarded to state government in Sacramento
on an hourly basis. These were in areas with no cell coverage, and very
little other radio coverage. There is a lot of VERY remote wilderness here
in the western US. Hams got a lot of good press from this. We also lost
a couple portable node boxes (two tncs and radios plus gel cells) when
the fires moved across the ridges they were placed on ...
> >3. Major. The example here has not (yet) happened, but will some day.
> >The PNW is subject to rare periodic large earthquakes. Magnitudes
> >usually between 7.5 and 8.5, but larger quakes are possible. The last
> >quake occured MORE than one repeat interval ago, so the probability
> >of a quake is higher than "usual". Repeat interval is 200-300 years.
> >The expectation is that there will be no remaining communication,
> >power, or travel infrastructure. Cell towers and power line towers
> >will be on the ground.
>
> The problem is, why would the hams and ham equipment have a better
> survivability in such a situations. Ham towers would come down as well
> and fixed stations will be destroyed when buildings collapse. Only
> equipment that was in the car has better chances of surviving and this
> also requires that some ad hoc antenna must be constructed in order to
> be able to communicate on HF.
Ham gear does NOT have better survivability. However, hams know
how to put together working stations from what can be salvaged, combined
from several different stations, etc. We even know how to make antennas
out of downed telephone cables (smile). It is the trained people that are
important, not the fixed location radio systems. That's the whole point.
> > What hams can do is
provide
> >HF communications out of area to get the intial assesment to the agencies
> >that can help. HF because the places we would need to communicate
> >with are state capitols of nearby states (200-600 miles) and to Washington,
> >DC (1700 miles).
>
> I don't see the point why you would need the ability to communicate
> coast to coast over HF, it should be sufficient to be able to
> communicate with hams who live outside the disaster and who can
> communicate to other places (such as the other coast) over land line
> connections. The goal should be that any amateur living in places in
> which the land line network works, should be able to connect the radio
> to the land line network.
But that is exactly what I said above "... nearby states ...". This level of
earthquake produces major damage for several hundreds of miles. The
nearest large cities are 200 to 600 miles from Portland, Oregon.
To make the point a bit more clear, if a quake like this happened in
Finland near Helsinki, the damage would be nearly total for all of
Finland except the far north, and would extend into most of Estonia,
most of Latvia, and well into Russia. The tidal effects would cause
serious damage to all the Baltic ports, most would be useless until
rebuilt. A very few well-sheltered ports (perhaps Riga) might remain
operational. 10% of the population would be dead and 30% injured.
Before someone asks where these numbers came from, they are from
analyses done by consultants using the USGS survey data plus historical
earthquake information for NW Oregon. We would have much more
damage than, for example, Anchorage sustained in their large quake.
> One part of the Field Day drill could be installing some BBS software
> to a computer that has already been connected to internet and forward
> traffic between Field Day operators over radio and say, ARRL HQ over
> internet.
Why not forward to ARRL HQ via radio? We were able to do that
easily from all 50 states only ten years ago, and in fact did so. It is
no longer possible, since the network no longer exists.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:48:23 +0300
From: Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi>
Subject: N0ZO no longer supports Keyboard inputs!
On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:11:25 GMT, "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
wrote:
>But that is exactly what I said above "... nearby states ...". This level of
>earthquake produces major damage for several hundreds of miles. The
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_170F
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
