[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Going Digital... Ham Radio?


On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Arthur H Feller wrote:

> Hi, David!
> At 02:26 PM 09-06-00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Well put Art.  I agree with your synopsis on equipment that is not used.
> Glad to hear it.
> >In all cases, there are more than 2 backups to every system.  Is
> >it costly?  Absolutely, but we also know that with that cost, comes the
> >security of knowing we will never go down.
> I'll bet you exercise those backups routinely.  Or, better yet, run on the 
> from time to time.
> >One of the principal focuses of this project (Which I will never claim full
> >ownership of, because that would just be outright arrogant) imho is that we
> >create an entirely wireless network, in which the internet has nothing to do
> >with it.  That is why I described it as a private IP network.
> Makes some sense to me.  It needs to be made clear, I think, that the 
> concept of a completely digital radio network and the protocols, emission 
> types, codes, etc., are all separate topics.  IP is nice.  Maybe there's 
> something better?  Who knows?  Let's not assume at this early time.  OK?
> >my principal concern is that of keeping everything free of current
> >infrastructure, that would go away in the event of any natural or man made
> >disaster.
> Aren't the issued of interconnection and interdependence, in fact, 
> independent of each other?  It's surely possible to make a radio network 
> with separable connections to wire bound systems.
> >The internet is only international, because a great number of countries have
> >allowed it to be so.  At the first sign of disaster, I wouldn't be surprised
> >if all the sudden, countries started falling off.
> Actually, the opposite is the recent experience.  When the phones are 
> failing, sometimes the data nets remain and they have been exploited to 
> great advantage.  Of course, there's no guarantee of end user connectivity 
> when the wires start breaking.....
> >This is also true for anything that we as Ham Radio operators would be 
> >faced with, however, the reality is, we don't work for a government 
> >agency, and we more often than not, take the high road when it comes to 
> >emergency traffic, regardless of what Big Brother wants.
> That's been the history, generally.  Indeed, sometimes hams in other 
> countries with normally strong restrictions see the good things that the 
> hams have been doing on their own and, then, give either tacit or formal 
> approval.  Big Brother really isn't the problem -- it's the monied 
> interests of various kinds which influence the regulatory processes.
> Make sense??
> 73, art.....
> >It has always been easier to apologize than to get permission....
> >
> >With that in mind, remember that the idea here was to create our own Wide
> >Area Network, that would be a viable tool for communications in time of
> >emergency, which is what all Ham Radio operations prepare us for.  When you
> >get past the fact that most of us treat our radios like an over glorified
> >CB, that's what it's purpose truely is.
> >
> >So we chew a little sat time...  The reality is, most of the traffic would
> >be handled by terrestrial networks.  What I'm seeing, is that the reason
> >this hasn't happened so far, is that too many people want throw a wrench in
> >the spokes instead of coming up with creative ways to share our precious
> >resources.  It seems that if we were to utilize our current Pacsat birds,
> >and maybe a little help from P3D, and maybe just a little help from
> >something placed on ISS...  We wouldn't take too much from any one pot, and
> >then it would satisfy everybody.
> >
> >Stepping off of soapbox....
> >
> >
> >Dave, N8KXA
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From:   owner-AMSAT-BB@AMSAT.Org [mailto:owner-AMSAT-BB@AMSAT.Org] On Behalf
> >Of Arthur H Feller
> >Sent:   Friday, June 09, 2000 12:22 PM
> >To:     Bob Bruninga; Tony Langdon
> >Cc:     'David M. Tipton, PhD'; 'sam@tenet.edu'; amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org
> >Subject:        RE: [amsat-bb] Going Digital... Ham Radio?
> >
> >Hi, Bob!!
> >
> >At 11:35 AM 09-06-00 -0400, Bob Bruninga wrote:
> > >In my opinion, We dont want to waste precious P3D bandwidth with
> > >"pipes".  We have free worldwide Internet Pipes everywhere.  We need to
> > >use P3D for live QSO's and unique applications that cannot be done via the
> > >internet.
> > >
> > >Yes, PIPES to serve a critical emergency, but only when needed... etc.
> >
> >Agree completely on the operation of internet pipes.  Incidently, there's
> >an interesting application for operating voice radios by remote control
> >described at http://www.irlp.net.  We're using IRLP here on the NERA linked
> >system with fairly good results.  (Australia, we'd love to hear you here in
> >Virginia!!)
> >
> >And, yes, IRLP may be more amateur telephone than amateur radio.  But, it
> >is one more technique that's handy and we learned from making the interface
> >work.
> >
> >But, emergencies are a different matter.  Experience is that, if a system
> >is not in common use, it won't be available when you need it most.  Two
> >reasons.
> >
> >First, most operators will be too low on the learning curve to be of much
> >help.  Second, equipment not used regularly is equipment not maintained.
> >
> >Keeping people and equipment around on "standby" isn't nearly as dependable
> >as keeping them operating routinely.
> >
> >Also, internet end user access may well NOT be available in a disaster
> >situation even if the rest of the network is "self healing."  We will need
> >ways to jump over the broken part (by radio, of course) to a point on the
> >internet that's still working.  This hop might be short or long depending
> >on the user's location and other factors.
> >
> >Maybe we should encourage some transponder bandwidth/time for bent pipe
> >applications?  It might turn out to be useful and we might learn something
> >along the way.
> >
> >Well, the P3D Program folks will worry about this so we don't have to right
> >now.....
> >
> >In the mean time, keep working on the digital systems!!!
> >
> >73, art.....
> >
> >----
> >Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> >To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org