| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.06.00 04:10l 194 Lines 7772 Bytes #-9436 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_170F
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/170F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000619/2011Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53020 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_170F
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 00 17:51:21 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_170F>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
>nearest large cities are 200 to 600 miles from Portland, Oregon.
I don't know your particular situation, but I had the impression that
earthquakes usually occur along the borders of tectonic plates and as
such, the disaster area can be quite long, but that the damage does
not extend too far to the sides of the fault line.
Flooding is usually associated with rivers and also in this case the
disaster area is long but usually not very wide.
So in both cases areas of surviving infrastructure will be within VHF
or 3.5 MHz HF communication range. As important as it is to have
operators within the disaster zone, it is also important to have
operators just outside the disaster area who can relay the traffic to
and from existing infrastructure. Thus, these hams should be able to
set up a phone patch or set up a node or BBS that is connected to the
internet. In such situations the store and forward type of operation
of a BBS can be quite useful.
Regarding the situation in a previous message that it took several
weeks to re-establish phone connections after the California
earthquake, nowadays the phone companies would not even try to quickly
repair the broken phone cables, but instead install cellular base
stations on surviving buildings and use radio links to get the traffic
out of the area. Installing a new base station is a quite quick
operation.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:36:49 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Packet Radio
"David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:EGb35.2619$c5.7876@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > Stop dreaming - this is not going to happen. The world is too large to be
> > covered by amateur packet radio networks like it has been covered by the
> > Internet.
> > (the software that is in use mostly could do it, but the hardware simply
> > isn't in place and will never be)
>
> After watching amateur radio newsgroups for a while I can see why. To much
> infighting. Nobody seems to be able to agree on anything!
>
> David Findlay
Seven years ago the world was covered by a store and forward (BBS)
network, and extensive connected networks in many areas. For example,
it was possible, although slow, to obtain a connection from the southernmost
part of California to Vancouver, BC ... 1500 miles ... and to chat with
someone over this connection. That network no longer exists.
See my posts in the "N0ZO" thread for a bit more commentary on the
situation, and how it came to pass. The original store and forward
network was built in less than two years, included over 100 countries,
all linked via HF radio for the long haul link, VHF/UHF for short haul.
For a very short period of time, this network had more nodes than
the internet, but fewer than fidonet.
In this newsgroup you will mostly find hams who have no or little interest
in building or using radio networks. Those that do ... spend their time
on the radio networks (smile). I'm retired, and can afford the time
to do both. You can ask some of the others here about my credentials,
but one clue is that I wrote the software used to build the original
store and forward network, in late 1983 - early 1984. So I've watched
the whole growth and (near) death of it.
--
... Hank - w0rli
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:10:44 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
> Stop dreaming - this is not going to happen. The world is too large to be
> covered by amateur packet radio networks like it has been covered by the
> Internet.
> (the software that is in use mostly could do it, but the hardware simply
> isn't in place and will never be)
After watching amateur radio newsgroups for a while I can see why. To much
infighting. Nobody seems to be able to agree on anything!
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:58:39 -0500
From: Steve Sampson <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: Packet Radio
Hank Oredson wrote:
>
> Seven years ago the world was covered by a store and forward (BBS)
> network, and extensive connected networks in many areas.
98% of the content having no merit. I know, I read the crap. Also
85% of every message (regardless of content) was a header from hell.
I saw 100:1 header to meat ratios. For every 100 bytes transferred,
1 byte was part the message. Hell of a design. And with all that,
you still couldn't get a reply-receipt.
> See my posts in the "N0ZO" thread for a bit more commentary on the
> situation, and how it came to pass. The original store and forward
> network was built in less than two years, included over 100 countries,
> all linked via HF radio for the long haul link, VHF/UHF for short haul.
> For a very short period of time, this network had more nodes than
> the internet, but fewer than fidonet.
There was also a communications revolution which had a significant
effect on the public. So many potential Hams were lost, the ARRL was
forced to back the FCC no-code license to improve the population. We
couldn't get anyone willing to learn Choo-Choo era technology.
> In this newsgroup you will mostly find hams who have no or little interest
> in building or using radio networks.
Networks or store and forward? Most here are very interested in RF
networks. Not many are interested in a BBS or email engine (S&F).
We got that already for free.
> Those that do ... spend their time on the radio networks (smile).
(smile, faint laugh, sheeeit)
> I'm retired, and can afford the time to do both.
The network people will come back, but only if the P-3 gets airborne.
Networking HF is like watching paint dry. Consumes a lot of time,
but there's nothing to show but a dry wall. Networking narrow-band
is worthless, networking with wide-band and a dish will be/is very
exciting.
> You can ask some of the others here about my credentials,
> but one clue is that I wrote the software used to build the original
> store and forward network, in late 1983 - early 1984. So I've watched
> the whole growth and (near) death of it.
Hmm, didn't the Amiga come out in 1984?
For the record, I have a great time with Ham radio. I am excited
by QRP HF, and microwave plumbing for the joy of Doppler audio.
I love going to swap-meets, and I enjoy Unix and C. But I realize
that cheap wide-band technology has made everything about Ham radio
more of a hobby than a service. The stuff from the 80's and 90's
are history, never to return. Stop whining, move on. CP/M is not
going to have a second life.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:31:03 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Packet Radio
"Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote in message
news:394D8C5F.8137B2B9@usa-site.net...
> Hank Oredson wrote:
> >
> > Seven years ago the world was covered by a store and forward (BBS)
> > network, and extensive connected networks in many areas.
>
> 98% of the content having no merit. I know, I read the crap. Also
> 85% of every message (regardless of content) was a header from hell.
> I saw 100:1 header to meat ratios. For every 100 bytes transferred,
> 1 byte was part the message. Hell of a design. And with all that,
> you still couldn't get a reply-receipt.
So you see David, you are exactly correct. There are these folks like
Steve who follow everyone around the ham radio newsgroups to
post stupid negative comments. He has nothing else to do, except
to try an annoy people so he will have yet another post to complain
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_170G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
