CQ Y2K.....CQ Y2K.....CQ Y2K DE KG4DHJ QRZ?....QRZ?....QRZ?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) Preparation Forum : One Thread |
CQ Y2K.....CQ Y2K.....CQ Y2K DE KG4DHJ QRZ?....QRZ?....QRZ?This is to announce the formation of the "Y2K Net," an amateur radio (ham) alternative communication system for post-Y2K in the event that we lose all telephone service (which includes cellphones and The Internet.) This initial post will focus on preliminary considerations.
There are multiple decisions to make regarding the design of the Y2K Net:
1) what bands (frequencies) to use
2) what net times to schedule
3) what geographic range we should consider
4) in connection with #3 -- should we differentiate between immediate (0 to 5 miles), very local (5 to 30 miles), local (30 to 60-100 miles), regional (100 to 300-500 miles), and continental (500 to 3000 miles?) ----- i.e., should we have nets within nets?
5) how to factor in the solar cycle progression as it affects #s 1 thru 4
5) how to establish 'net control' stations
6) recommended equipment (types of tranceiver, antenna, and station accessories, alternate energy sources)
7) what type of training and support can be provided to participants in the next 4 months prior to 1/1/Oh!Oh!
8) investigating the possibility of developing a 'flea power' receiver design that permits 24-hour broadband monitoring for emergency calls (kind of a homebrew 911 service) -- while not putting too much drain on your storage batteries. I've had a partial design in mind for over a year now -- but no time to implement, what with four relocations in 2 years. It involves a broadly-tuned front end, a double-diode detection stage, very hi-impedance (2000 ohms?) headphones (converted to a small loudspeaker using a large cone), and possibly an IC-based circuit that allows ANY signal coming in over the noise level to trigger an audio amplifier into the speaker circuit.
9) should we establish 'specialty' nets (e.g., medical, vetinary, animal husbandry, gardening/agriculture, water sourcing, electronics consultation, mechanical workshop technology, shelter construction technology, psychological/spiritual counseling?)
10) coordinating, over the next 4 months, our conversations using:
***** a) THIS THREAD ON THE PREP FORUM
***** b) personal email
***** c) personal telephone calls
***** d) ham radio communications (early, informal, networking)
In this connection there is A GREAT DANGER OF LOST INFORMATION --- if instead of using this Forum thread we divert our comm channels to personal ones (email,Telco, radio QSOs.) If we rely on the latter, no one else but the two parties in the comm loop will benefit by the info exchange. Of course I'm not talking about truly confidential info that needs to be passed. SO PLEASE....REFRAIN FROM EMAILING ME WITH ALL YOUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. IF IT'S WORTHWHILE, IT'S WORTH EVERYONE HEARING IT.
11) how to handle the high 'paranoia index' that seems prevalent on this (and ALL y2k forums) regarding revealing personal identities. IOW, can we effectively communicate with people who won't reveal their call sign (which automatically allows easy access to their name and address -- by clicking on various publicly available ham radio Internet databases?)
12) how to handle the dilemma we face in that probably the majority of hams who are 'GI' (i.e., concerned that y2k may be more than a BITR [bump in the road]) are recently-licensed Tech Pluses --- this means they're restricted to voice on 10 meters (28 MHz) or 2 meters (144MHz.) The problem here is that 10 meters is CRUMMY for local, usually crummy for regional, and except for high solar cycle periods crummy for continental ranges. And 2 meters is NON-EXISTENT for anything other than 0 to 20 miles (using simplex, line-of-sight.)
This means they can't participate in the Net drills we have to have during the next 4 months to iron out the details ("In the details lies the Truth.") -- e.g., each ham finding out what are reliable ranges for his location and equipment combination.
Of course, this dilemma dissolves into thin air (pun intended) after Y2K, if the FCC goes down with the rest of the infrastructure. But 'after Y2K' is TOO LATE TO LEARN ALL YOU HAVE TO LEARN --- unless you plan on 'Fix On Failure' -- the same dynamics involved in the 'bugout strategy' so many people are depending on. But that's a subject for another thread.
So, folks, let the music begin. Please report in to this thread with your name, call (unless you haven't sat for your exam yet) and whatever thoughts you have. It would also be convenient if you give your REAL email address. I will act as moderator of this thread for the time being. But I warn you, I've got a LOT of personal preps yet to do -- so I'm looking for co-moderators. Please volunteer (Think of all the money you'll make. Just like all those other moderators like Big Dog, Diane, Chuck and those other 'Y2K profiteers.')
73, Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 06, 1999
i'm interested doc.jim
-- jim allen (jima@fruitbarn.com), September 06, 1999.
i'm interested n6dkw n.e. texas my rig is packed away. last i used it was maritime moble for 4 years i am busy preparing. but it is in the plans to install. kenwood ts120 only have 10, 15 & 20 meter
-- bob (rcrozier@koyote.com), September 06, 1999.
I would like to see nets within nets to include continental ranges. I'm very interested in fleapower ideas and alternate energy sources. KH7VM
-- Anita Gerhard (gerhard@aloha.net), September 06, 1999.
No call sign yet... 5 wpm is the best I can hope for. 10 meters is lousy right now. I have an Atlas 215, 200 watts out. 10-80 mtrs. I guess I can monitor the tests and report my reception via email or this thread until I am licensed. [I sure hate getting permission from our federal handlers to use the public airways! :-)Chuck Noel Tallahassee FL
-- Chuck Noel (chucko@nettally.com), September 06, 1999.
HERE'S AN EMAIL I JUST GOT:">We are hoping to buy basic ham supplies and begin the necessary study within >the next month. Would you please share any advice or recommendations on what >to look for and buy? Since we are beginners, it would naturally be the basic >set-up, but I hope to get a bit beyond that in anticipation of our extremely >intelligent (no bias!) teenage son advancing quickly with it. >Thanks for any and all help!
>Joan Richardson (Poohma7@aol.com)"
ANSWER:
I've posted this info before, but will dig it up again, consolidate it, and re-post it here, where it will be quite timely.
Bill
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 06, 1999.
HERE'S ANOTHER EMAIL:"I am a Tech Plus and interested in joining. WHERE is the prep forum? I also am looking to buy a handi talkie and would like your opinion on 2 meter, 6 meter, 10 meter etc? I have had a ham license for many years (formerly WB2JXY) but VERY rusty. Moved to VA 4 years ago and I currently have NO equipment. Am a 8 doomer and any advice on getting a handheld (know of any used ones around?) would be appreciated. I live rural with mountains so don't know how great the range of a repeater will be. Thanks. Also, I noticed your call letters, are you in VA too? I am also a Registered Nurse and work in homecare.
I still remember a lot of the Ham Radio Biz such as OM and YL but will need to refresh as I go along : ) Thanks for helping. Hope you will have a classified section on your forum so we can buy and sell from each other."
ANSWER:
I have STRONG opinions on using 2, 6, and 10m for y2k nets (as distinct from neighbor-to-neighbor contacts). Other people have equally strong and OPPOSITE opinions. You'll see us duke it out here, and then you can make up your own mind.
Re the classified buy & sell, that's a tricky issue, especially this late in the Y2K countdown: if you buy a defective rig it will be too late to send it back to the factory to get it repaired. Better you should buy from a used equipment dealer (I've had excellent experience s with Burghardt in S.D. -- you'll get a 90-day warranty with their gear.) Alternatively you can buy from a ham in your neighborhood --- you definitely should join your local ham club. They'll think you're a kook because of your concern for y2k, but they're all good, honest, decent people. And especially the oldtimers, who are probably ready to part with their HF gear, at good prices. As far as accessories go, you'll need a tuner -- buy it new from MFJ, or else used from a local ham. I or others will be giving more details on the specs of what you should buy. If we forget or don't cover all your questions, ask again here.
Bill
Debi KG4DCY
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 06, 1999.
I split off the ID on the email above. The sender is:Debi KG4DCY
Sorry 'bout that,
Bill
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 06, 1999.
HERE'S AN EARLIER EMAIL I SENT TO ANITA GERHARD, KH7VM:"Good luck on your Gen'l ticket code. Key for me was to make sure I tested locally, at a ham club, rather than at a big hamfest, thereby assuring I was tested with ARRL materials, rather the CEVAC (or something like that.) The difference is that ARRL materials include a multiple-choice test (which is what got me thru med school!) rather than fill in the blanks. Also I used the Morse Tutor Gold software to get me up to speed. The advantage of that is their Lesson 12 generates random QSOs -- THE SAME ONES THAT THE ARRL USES. I did enough of those that I pretty soon got to know the patterns, and many of the phrases that the (pseudo)random generator uses in its QSOs. This was a tremendous help during the exam: I missed all kinds of words, even phrases, but got the essential phrases (the only ones they test on.) I couldn't do GOOD copy (less than 4 errors) better than 10 wpm when I took the exam, but still got 9 out of 10 Q's right. A GREAT help was using Gordon West's General Class manual, 4th edition, about $12. Order it from The W5YI Group, 800-669-9594. (I bought the software, but it wasn't necessary.) Read Gordo's section on studying for the code --- it will make a significant difference in shortening your study course. BTW, following his advice I used "Farnsworth" and set my character speed to 18wpm, right from the start. Then slowly cranked up the word speed from 5 to 11. Didn't have but 2 days to go from 11 to 13 (too much time spent on my y2k preps) -- but still made it; I don't advise that kind of last minute rush thing. Also, there's nothing like Gordo's book to get you thru the theory part either. He gives lots of good mnemonic hints. I ended up making up flash cards of my 'trouble' questions, had about 40 of them. BTW, flash cards was the OTHER way I got thru med school (suffered from "Alzheimers" since my mid-teen years!) I will try to send out emails to all the folks who've written me re when the Net will start. But don't count on it --- too much chaos in my life at present. So look for the announcement I'll make on both the Classic forum and the Prep forum --- hopefully in a few weeks. After I make the announcement, I'll want to get the email roster & call roster of everyone --- we'll use email to help us with the details of scheduling (freqs and times.)
Bill
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 06, 1999.
There are multiple decisions to make regarding the design of the Y2K Net:
1) what bands (frequencies) to use
I think we're going to have to have at least two "band plans", one for the Tech Plus operators and one for those with at least a General license. The Tech Plus operators, as you mention, can use voice only on 10 meters, which isn't a very reliable means of communication over any long distance. However, they can use Morse on several other bands, including 80 and 40 meters, which are pretty good at night much of the time. Therefore, to include them in a national or international Y2K net, they'll have to use Morse.
I don't really consider this too much of a disadvantage, though, because CW (Morse) is the low-power mode that is most widely used; in a serious Y2K situation, low power operation will be extremely important.
As for those of us with General or higher licenses, I'm sure we will be busy handling voice traffic on all the bands as conditions permit. However, I, for one, will also take the time to check in on the CW Y2K net for the Tech Plus operators, and will relay messages for them as necessary.
2) what net times to schedule
I'm pretty much available anytime during the day or evening, at the moment. I don't expect this to change, but it could, depending on my job situation. I expect most people will be more available on weekends or during the evening, however.
3) what geographic range we should consider
I think we should try to include as wide a geographic area as possible. This will be especially important right around rollover, as those of us in more westerly time zones can get some advance warning from those to the east. I'm especially thinking of hams in New Zealand and Australia, at least one of who has already contacted me about joining just such a net as the one you propose. As soon as we have some details figured out, I'm going to send email to everyone on my "Y2K net" list, telling them about it so they can join in.
4) in connection with #3 -- should we differentiate between immediate (0 to 5 miles), very local (5 to 30 miles), local (30 to 60-100 miles), regional (100 to 300-500 miles), and continental (500 to 3000 miles?) ----- i.e., should we have nets within nets?
I think it's becoming a little bit too ambitious here. Remember, the A. R. R. L. has had wide coverage nets handling traffic for many years, and it took them quite a while to get everything set up so that it would work. I think we can count on the existing transcontinental nets for general message handling; in any event, I don't think we could duplicate them in the time remaining.
I think we should start out with one voice net and one CW net, the purpose of both of which is to discuss Y2K issues. We can always expand on this as needed later.
5) how to factor in the solar cycle progression as it affects #s 1 thru 4
Again, this is something that the A. R. R. L. has a lot more experience with than we (or at least I) do. I think what we need to do is come up with some suggested frequencies for each band along with an algorithm by which we try to make contact one each band in some sequence. Unfortunately, amateur radio communications involve a significant amount of luck; on the other hand, there is usually some frequency on which is possible to get a message through. Persistence is the key.
5) how to establish 'net control' stations
This is somewhat more difficult for me to answer, because I don't personally have the net control experience that I would need to be the most effective operator. However, I'm willing to give it a try; I suspect it's not all that difficult to do a passable job with some experience. Of course, I would love to have some experienced net control operators participating, and hope to have some. I believe some of the people on my "Y2K net" mailing list do have such experience.
6) recommended equipment (types of tranceiver, antenna, and station accessories, alternate energy sources)
I have some very specific recommendations on my Y2K-ready amateur radio station setup instructions page
7) what type of training and support can be provided to participants in the next 4 months prior to 1/1/Oh!Oh!
I think the most valuable training and support, other than the instructions on how to get their license and get their stations set up, would be a lot of practice in handling messages both via CW and voice (for those who are qualified for the latter). In other words, we should get this started as soon as possible so we can have the maximum possible practice time before the big event.
8) investigating the possibility of developing a 'flea power' receiver design that permits 24-hour broadband monitoring for emergency calls (kind of a homebrew 911 service) -- while not putting too much drain on your storage batteries. I've had a partial design in mind for over a year now -- but no time to implement, what with four relocations in 2 years. It involves a broadly-tuned front end, a double-diode detection stage, very hi-impedance (2000 ohms?) headphones (converted to a small loudspeaker using a large cone), and possibly an IC-based circuit that allows ANY signal coming in over the noise level to trigger an audio amplifier into the speaker circuit.
While that would certainly be a wonderful thing to have, I'm not sure that it's the best use of the time remaining. There are transceivers that take very little power in standby mode, and with sufficient solar powered battery charging capacity, they could be left going most of the time.
9) should we establish 'specialty' nets (e.g., medical, vetinary, animal husbandry, gardening/agriculture, water sourcing, electronics consultation, mechanical workshop technology, shelter construction technology, psychological/spiritual counseling?)
Absolutely. One of the major things that we're going to need to do with communications after Y2K is share information about what we know. The division of labor today is such that it is impossible for anyone person or small group of people to have all the knowledge that they might need to survive (and hopefully even prosper). If amateur radio is our only means of communication, it will have to fulfill this task. In fact, I would say that is probably the most important function it can perform.
This may seem to contradict my recommendation above to have only one voice net and one CW net. However, I don't think it really does, because one of the primary functions of the "main" Y2K nets will be to facilitate the formation and operation of specialty nets. Someone will have to do the coordination for each of the specialty nets, and people have to be able to find those nets. The "main" Y2K nets will allow both of these vital functions to be performed, as they will be the "town square" of this virtual community.
10) coordinating, over the next 4 months, our conversations using:
***** a) THIS THREAD ON THE PREP FORUM
***** b) personal email
***** c) personal telephone calls
***** d) ham radio communications (early, informal, networking)
In this connection there is A GREAT DANGER OF LOST INFORMATION --- if instead of using this Forum thread we divert our comm channels to personal ones (email,Telco, radio QSOs.) If we rely on the latter, no one else but the two parties in the comm loop will benefit by the info exchange. Of course I'm not talking about truly confidential info that needs to be passed. SO PLEASE....REFRAIN FROM EMAILING ME WITH ALL YOUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. IF IT'S WORTHWHILE, IT'S WORTH EVERYONE HEARING IT.
I agree.
11) how to handle the high 'paranoia index' that seems prevalent on this (and ALL y2k forums) regarding revealing personal identities. IOW, can we effectively communicate with people who won't reveal their call sign (which automatically allows easy access to their name and address -- by clicking on various publicly available ham radio Internet databases?)
I think people should use post office boxes as their addresses for their amateur radio licenses, just on general principles of privacy. That's why I did it, not because of Y2K "paranoia". I don't give out my home address to people unless I have a good reason.
12) how to handle the dilemma we face in that probably the majority of hams who are 'GI' (i.e., concerned that y2k may be more than a BITR [bump in the road]) are recently-licensed Tech Pluses --- this means they're restricted to voice on 10 meters (28 MHz) or 2 meters (144MHz.) The problem here is that 10 meters is CRUMMY for local, usually crummy for regional, and except for high solar cycle periods crummy for continental ranges. And 2 meters is NON-EXISTENT for anything other than 0 to 20 miles (using simplex, line-of-sight.)
This means they can't participate in the Net drills we have to have during the next 4 months to iron out the details ("In the details lies the Truth.") -- e.g., each ham finding out what are reliable ranges for his location and equipment combination.
Of course, this dilemma dissolves into thin air (pun intended) after Y2K, if the FCC goes down with the rest of the infrastructure. But 'after Y2K' is TOO LATE TO LEARN ALL YOU HAVE TO LEARN --- unless you plan on 'Fix On Failure' -- the same dynamics involved in the 'bugout strategy' so many people are depending on. But that's a subject for another thread.
I've already addressed this above, but I think it bears repeating: Tech Plus operators can be very valuable resources within the limits of their band privileges, as long as they're willing to use CW. This has the fortunate side effect of improving their CW skills (and keeping mine as sharp as possible as well, as I intend to participate in the CW net too).
So, folks, let the music begin. Please report in to this thread with your name, call (unless you haven't sat for your exam yet) and whatever thoughts you have. It would also be convenient if you give your REAL email address. I will act as moderator of this thread for the time being. But I warn you, I've got a LOT of personal preps yet to do -- so I'm looking for co-moderators. Please volunteer (Think of all the money you'll make. Just like all those other moderators like Big Dog, Diane, Chuck and those other 'Y2K profiteers.')
I'm willing to help; in fact, I've already made a bit of a start with people who have emailed me personally about the formation of a Y2K net. What exactly do you have in mind for these "volunteers" to do?
-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), September 06, 1999.
WARNING****WARNING**** THE NUMBERS HERE-ATTACHED DO NOT CORRESPOND TO DOC's NUMBERS ****WARNING****WARNING***
and having said that:
1) 6 and 10 meters coverage may be enhanced with an antenna system that Wild Weasel suggested to me, which consists of the typical vertically polarized antenna mounted horizontally, no more than 10 feet from the ground. As I understand the theory, this then bounces the signal off (missed the exact layer in discussion) a layer of the upper atmosphere, and the range is pretty impresive (calculation works feet of altitude into miles of range but I haven't seen the calculation).
2)Net control training can be done via Internet Messaging Chats, as well as on the air. There ain't a whole lot of difference between the two (BTDT seems every idiot with a license and a mike suddenly becomes a weather expert as soon as we put out a severe storm warning..... ;-) ....course they are NOT familiar with the NWS definitions.......)
3)I am looking at the time available, and the money available during thaqt time to complete my preps. I do NOT expect to be able to invest in a good multi-band xcvr. I DO expect to be able to acquire a reasonably good 10/11 meter and PERHAPS a reasonable 6 meter unit. I will NOT be able to get the time to upgrade the license (DAMN) so I will just have to make do with the full featured Tech I own (one of the last true tech tickets issued, as I took the tech test before I had my Novice ticket in hand. And no, I only learned the code for a day), and just have to bootleg the rest.
4) Consider piggybacking on some of the clubs (like the 10-10 on 10 club, etc.) as you start setting up your nets. Also, listen to some of the boot nets (buried on 10, 12 etc meters). I've been tempted to tape a couple of them and play them for our SKYWARN training, as they KNOW how to run a net.
REMEMBER:
The hobby is, for now, primarily self policing. Now, if something goes BUMP in th enight and CRUNCH in the daylight, the folks tend to have a "whatever works" attitude for the duration of the emergency. I see no reason for the practitioners of this art to change during an event such as Y2K, so civility and courtesy will HAVE to rule.
de N8NLL Chuck
PS I'll hang a link to this thread on the other foruum and fix acouple things over there this AM.
Which I why I don't see the time investment in the license upgrade.
C
-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), September 07, 1999.
CHUCK:Tnx for your input even tho it's polar opposite from where I'm coming from. But it's POSSIBLE you're take is valid --- it's just that I've never made a mistake in my life -- except for the one time when I thought I did but I was mistaken about that.
Folks, Chuck is one of our heroes --- does a lot of work sysoping our threads, plus other volunteer stuff. His recommendations should be carefully considered. It may be that we'll go two routes simultaneously, and one can complement the other, with cross-fertilization via this thread.
ANOTHER EMAIL MSG JUST IN:
"I'll have to stick with a handy talkie because I wouldn't know how to put up an antennae and without electricity, what's the use anyway. Don't have a generator." ---- Debi, KG4DCY
ANSWER:
Debi's dilemma is an important one, 'cause a LOT of people are telling the same thing. Here's a fix for it:
1) Put up a NVIS antenna. It's a horizontal plain wire square loop, 67 feet on each leg, and ONLY 10 FEET (OR LESS!) OFF THE GROUND. That means you can put it up with 4 pieces of PVC pipe (and a 5th one to support the "T"-feed (an ordinary dipole feed -- or you can homebrew it) placed in the MIDDLE of one leg (NOT at the corner, as shown in most antenna books.) Feed line? Skip the expensive heavy-duty coax that everybody uses -- and has all kinds of radiation problems, and causes the whole system to be very finicky regards dimension -- 'cause it's a TUNED system. Instead use cheaper "ladder-line" feed -- turns the whole loop plus feed into one system, which does NOT require precise measurements being NON-resonant, is easy to match across all the bandwidths from 80 to 10, and doesn't radiate all over the place. Bring it into the shack with 'twin-coax' leads no longer than 10' (Read about it in "Wirebook III," page 26, $3.00, 800-727-9473. Drive down and visit them in Sandrum, S.C. Talk to Press Jones, N8UG -- owner -- he'll walk you thru lots of technical questions.), hook it to an MFJ-948 antenna tuner (Don't buy the 949E that everyone else including me did --- you don't need the dummy antenna -- it's WORTHLESS 'cause the tuning you end up with has nothing to do with what you'll need when you actually get on the air with your antenna --- entirely different dial positions!)
2) Buy several hi-power PV panels, and a 30-Amp "LCB" (linear current booster.) You then will be able to DIRECT-drive your 20Amp HF rig, without having to buy and fuss with a large bank of heavy duty lead acid batteries. This will allow you to operate when the sun is shining, and also on partly cloudy days. If you want to operate in low light or at nighttime, you'll need to buy a battery set and a charge controller. But instead of wet cells buy the "dry" gelcell type. The direct-drive setup will cost you about $1500. Adding the batteries and controller will be another $500. I am checking into the details of this system right now. I like to deal with Abraham Solar, Mick Abraham (advice line: 970-731-4675, order line: 800-222-7242.)
If you or other people are interested in this setup, will post the info on this thread as soon as I get it. Let me know (via THIS THREAD.)
BTW, with this setup, when you're not running your rig, you'll have lots of power to run other 12volt appliances, including a 12volt submersible water pump 100 feet down easily.
3) Join your local ham club -- the guys will be friendly and helpful (even tho they will consider your Y2K concerns real kooky.)
4) Buy a used HF rig from Burghardt with a 90-day guarantee (800-927-4261.) Here's the specs on what you need: 80-10meters, 100watts out, 100% solid-state, digital readout, 12v power. IF-shift would be a nice feature (most have it.) You do NOT need 160m, or various 'emergency net' band coverage. You do NOT need a late model fancy bells and whistles computerized this and that, including memories. You do not need a 'general coverage' receiver. What you need is a basic radio that's reliable. I like the earlier model Kenwoods (I bought a TS-120s) but ICOM or Yaesu are good names too. Figure $350 to 500. You'll also have to buy a mike to match your rig (extra $50 to 70.) You'll also need a 10-amp, continuous AC power supply, to use until you get your solar panel system going, and until/if the power grid goes down (extra $120.) Total outlay: $600 to $800.
73, Bill
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 07, 1999.
bill, you commented that 10 meters sucks for local communication. however, that may not be true if you and the other local stations are all using the NVIS horizontal loop. have you tried it yet with a friend? let us all know the results if/when you do, ok?
-- jocelyne slough, WZ9M (jonslough@tln.net), September 07, 1999.
STEVE HELLER:EXcellent comments.
"I think we're going to have to have at least two "band plans", one for the Tech Plus operators and one for those with at least a General license. The Tech Plus operators, as you mention, can use voice only on 10 meters, which isn't a very reliable means of communication over any long distance. However, they can use Morse on several other bands, including 80 and 40 meters, which are pretty good at night much of the time. Therefore, to include them in a national or international Y2K net, they'll have to use Morse.
I don't really consider this too much of a disadvantage, though, because CW (Morse) is the low-power mode that is most widely used; in a serious Y2K situation, low power operation will be extremely important.
As for those of us with General or higher licenses, I'm sure we will be busy handling voice traffic on all the bands as conditions permit. However, I, for one, will also take the time to check in on the CW Y2K net for the Tech Plus operators, and will relay messages for them as necessary."
I think you're right -- we need TWO nets. The TechPluses need the practice NOW, and 80/40 will be fine for propagation: they can use 40 for good daytime coverage, and 80 for good nitetime coverage.
You're also right about the low-power aspect of CW -- it cuts thru all kinds of QRN (noise -- especially summertime noise: lightning static.) For many people post Y2K they won't have access to a 20-amp DC power source (but for those who have the time and money see my comments to Debi, KG4DCY, below) so operating at 10 watts or 20 watts out may be the only way for them to get on the air.
I DO have a major concern however about the information content possible via CW comm. When someone's asking me a medical question about their sick kid 200 miles away, I'll have to use all sorts of cues to get my answers. (For example, I found in 30 years of medical practice that patients have about SIX ways of saying "No" --- they vary in meaning all the way from a definite negative to what really is a clear-cut "Yes!") I believe the same dynamics will hold true for advice given by many others in various fields of expertise.
Plus, a lot of people don't realize the psychological value of being able to hear another human's voice at the other end of the line, especially if we're each cloistered away with our small group of family members, holed up in a valley or up on a ridge post-Y2K, for who knows how long. But it's true, this is 'icing on the cake' and many will not have any cake at all without CW.
Your final point, about volunteering to act as RELAY BETWEEN THE VOICE NET AND THE CW NET just about floored me. I'm impressed. I believe that role will be pivotal. I hereby appoint you as SSB/CW Coordinator. Your check will be in the mail (AFTER the banks fold in a Y2K implosion.)
More thoughts on a separate PRE-y2k CW net. Yes, the TechPluses need the drill and practice before 1/1/00. This will give them that opportunity, to check out their rigs, tuners, antennas, power sources, QSO protocols. If we sched the CW net first, and then right after that the SSB net, the CW guys can monitor the SSB net and you could give them voice answers to some of their questions. If we sched SSB first they can monitor that & then on their own net shortly after, interrogate/comment on some of what transpired on SSB.
"I'm pretty much available anytime during the day or evening, at the moment. I don't expect this to change, but it could, depending on my job situation. I expect most people will be more available on weekends or during the evening, however. "
I'm pretty much in the same situation, Steve, re my time availability. I agree too that evenings and weekends are the way to go.
"I think we should try to include as wide a geographic area as possible. This will be especially important right around rollover, as those of us in more westerly time zones can get some advance warning from those to the east. I'm especially thinking of hams in New Zealand and Australia, at least one of who has already contacted me about joining just such a net as the one you propose. As soon as we have some details figured out, I'm going to send email to everyone on my "Y2K net" list, telling them about it so they can join in."
I agree on designing for the widest possible area for the present, and for the future. Two problems: the first is personal --- I have an NVIS antenna, 9 1/2 feet off the ground. It's a cloudwarmer -- great for regional work (which may turn out to be the bulk of traffic post-Y2K, maybe not -- what do you think?) but not good for DX. If I can't get good continental coverage, I may raise my antenna [or add another identical one] to the 20' level. That will surely get me out all over the map.
The second problem is propagation problems: the contacts that rely on 'skip' are not as reliable in general as those covered by 'ground wave' and 'cloudwarmer'-NVIS propagation. We'll just have to give it a try and see what we come up with.
BTW, all thru this discussion, I'm assuming everybody's going to transmit 'barefoot' (no high-powered linear amplifiers) using 100watt power. It will be hard enough generating that kind of power post-Y2K, let alone finding energy sources to put out 1000 -- 1500 watts of RF.
"I think it's becoming a little bit too ambitious here [Steve's referring to 'nets within nets.'] Remember, the A. R. R. L. has had wide coverage nets handling traffic for many years, and it took them quite a while to get everything set up so that it would work. I think we can count on the existing transcontinental nets for general message handling; in any event, I don't think we could duplicate them in the time remaining.
I think we should start out with one voice net and one CW net, the purpose of both of which is to discuss Y2K issues. We can always expand on this as needed later."
Right on.
[Referring to addressing solar cycle changes] "Again, this is something that the A. R. R. L. has a lot more experience with than we (or at least I) do. I think what we need to do is come up with some suggested frequencies for each band along with an algorithm by which we try to make contact one each band in some sequence. Unfortunately, amateur radio communications involve a significant amount of luck; on the other hand, there is usually some frequency on which is possible to get a message through. Persistence is the key.
Yep. Maybe the algorithm would be something like:
Evening activitiy: try 40 meters first (with 3 suggested freqs. If there's too much QRM [other stations already occupying the freq] on the 1st freq, go to the second after 1 (3?) minute (s.) If the problem is the same, go to the 3d after 1 (3?) minutes. If no success, go to 80 meters, using the same sequence.
Daytime: try 20 first, then 40, with the same sequence. Or should we try 40 first, and then 20?
"This is somewhat more difficult for me to answer, because I don't personally have the net control experience that I would need to be the most effective operator. However, I'm willing to give it a try; I suspect it's not all that difficult to do a passable job with some experience. Of course, I would love to have some experienced net control operators participating, and hope to have some. I believe some of the people on my "Y2K net" mailing list do have such experience."
I have the same problem: NO net control experience. I have all kinds of ham friends with all kinds of net control experience -- BUT THEY AIN'T Y2K AWARE. (I believe there is a neuro-physiological antipathy between ham radio brain activity and y2k 'Got it' personality profiles.) So unless someone comes in and offers to fill in the positions you and I may become 'the designated drivers.'
[referencing the type of equipment to buy] "I have some very specific recommendations on my Y2K-ready amateur radio station setup instructions page [see Steve's link]"
Your recommendations will help people get their 'shack' up and running pronto, for minimum $$$ and required knowhow. My take however is that our people should immediately buy the equipment that will get them thru no matter what the band conditions are like, using 100watt power max. That means spending considerably more $$$ and more time and more knowhow. Your recos and my recos (see in other posts) thus gives the people two routes to go. That's good.
"I think the most valuable training and support, other than the instructions on how to get their license and get their stations set up, would be a lot of practice in handling messages both via CW and voice (for those who are qualified for the latter). In other words, we should get this started as soon as possible so we can have the maximum possible practice time before the big event."
Agree 110%.
[referencing developing 'fleapower' monitors] "While that would certainly be a wonderful thing to have, I'm not sure that it's the best use of the time remaining. There are transceivers that take very little power in standby mode, and with sufficient solar powered battery charging capacity, they could be left going most of the time."
I agree that we don't have the time to do the full-bore design. On the other hand, leaving a 12volt, 100watt transceiver on continuously, even in receive mode, usually means 700 milliamperes (0.7 Amps) x 24 hours = 17 AmpHours a day. Now that's not a lot of amp hours for the typical American's energy diet. However for those of us who've spent a lot of time in the alternate energy field that's a HORRENDOUS use of power (which for most people in the Y2K period means solar panel-derived energy.) At that rate you'd have to have about $2000 worth of PV panels, a $100-200 charge controller, and a $500 battery set --- just to feed the receiver. And that would leave you NOTHING TO TRANSMIT WITH WHEN YOU TURNED ON YOUR MIKE. And would also assume 365 days a year of sunshine.
A compromise between my fullbore design and the above solution might be to buy a relatively inexpensive SW receiver, but even they draw somewhere between 2 and 8 ampHours in 24 hours. That's still a lot by alternate energy standards. (Like you'd use up the charge of a 12volt pack of "D"-cell nicads in 12 to 48 HOURS.)
But the other problem in using a conventional receiver for monitoring is that it's SO SELECTIVE. In other words you tune it to a specific frequency. Even assuming no temperature drift over a 24 hour period, which could lose the station you're monitoring --- it can only monitor ONE frequency at a time. I'd feel much more comfortable if we could monitor several frequencies (even several BANDS) simultaneously. But it's probably a pipedream, at this late in the Y2K- preparation day. Oh well.
[referencing 'specialty' nets] "Absolutely. One of the major things that we're going to need to do with communications after Y2K is share information about what we know. The division of labor today is such that it is impossible for anyone person or small group of people to have all the knowledge that they might need to survive (and hopefully even prosper). If amateur radio is our only means of communication, it will have to fulfill this task. In fact, I would say that is probably the most important function it can perform.
This may seem to contradict my recommendation above to have only one voice net and one CW net. However, I don't think it really does, because one of the primary functions of the "main" Y2K nets will be to facilitate the formation and operation of specialty nets. Someone will have to do the coordination for each of the specialty nets, and people have to be able to find those nets. The "main" Y2K nets will allow both of these vital functions to be performed, as they will be the "town square" of this virtual community."
Couldn't agree more with you.
"I think people should use post office boxes as their addresses for their amateur radio licenses, just on general principles of privacy. That's why I did it, not because of Y2K "paranoia". I don't give out my home address to people unless I have a good reason."
That's a good point --- that way people can 'come out of the closet' with their call sign while not revealing their physical home address.
[revisiting the 'TechPlus problem'] "I've already addressed this above, but I think it bears repeating: Tech Plus operators can be very valuable resources within the limits of their band privileges, as long as they're willing to use CW. This has the fortunate side effect of improving their CW skills (and keeping mine as sharp as possible as well, as I intend to participate in the CW net too)."
All our references to TechPlus limitations really only applies to PRE-y2k ..... if Y2K is bad enough that we have only ham radio for the comm link, as long as the TechPlus has put in enough 'air time' to feel comfortable on the ether -- then everyone with 100w SSB equipment up and running on his homestead will be on the voice Net. There should no longer be a need for the CW Net. The need for CW is ITS TRAINING VALUE IN THE NEXT 4 MONTHS. If the FCC disappears along with the power grid, all us ex-hams will be just one happy (LOL) SSB family.
"I'm willing to help; in fact, I've already made a bit of a start with people who have emailed me personally about the formation of a Y2K net. What exactly do you have in mind for these "volunteers" to do?"
I didn't have something 'exactly in mind' when I posted my initial thread, but you sure have filled in a lot of the blanks. We're getting closer to what those roles will be and who will fill them. For now it looks like Steve Heller and Bill Schenker are the first two sacrificial victims of the 'Volunteer Roll Call.'
Again, many thanks,
Bill, kg4dhj
P.S. Everybody: Try to get in the habit of signing EACH of your posts with your call sign. (Yeah, I can see it now, the 'Tinfoils' are thinking, "Uh oh, this Schenker guy must be part of the NWO conspiracy ---- 666 here I come!) B.
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 07, 1999.
JOCELYNE:All I've tried is local contacts on 10 --- I come in 5/9 at 10 to 14 miles out. But nobody else has NVIS antennas -- as a matter of fact of course most of them have verticals -- wrong polarization.
But I'm trying to spread the gospel for NVIS. So far no takers. Glamour sells, efficiency doesn't -- so what ELSE is new?!
73,
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 07, 1999.
EVERYBODY:Many thanks to Jocelyne and her husband, Jon, for the pep talk and construction details on the NVIS antenna. I'll be talking more about it as I get more experience with it.
BTW, if you use PVC as the antenna posts you'll probably need 2" diam stock to make them sturdy enough.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 07, 1999.
Bill:I think you're right -- we need TWO nets. The TechPluses need the practice NOW, and 80/40 will be fine for propagation: they can use 40 for good daytime coverage, and 80 for good nitetime coverage.
Okay, that's settled.
You're also right about the low-power aspect of CW -- it cuts thru all kinds of QRN (noise -- especially summertime noise: lightning static.) For many people post Y2K they won't have access to a 20-amp DC power source (but for those who have the time and money see my comments to Debi, KG4DCY, below) so operating at 10 watts or 20 watts out may be the only way for them to get on the air.
Although I will have the power to operate at a hundred watts, I don't think it'll be necessary. I've had no trouble making contacts over 1000 miles away on 20 watts out from an aluminum foil antenna, either on voice, CW, or PSK31 (a relatively new digital mode). And this is with all the "big guns" running kilowatts into beam antennas operating on nearby frequencies. They won't be doing that next year, so I think 20 watts will be plenty.
I DO have a major concern however about the information content possible via CW comm. When someone's asking me a medical question about their sick kid 200 miles away, I'll have to use all sorts of cues to get my answers. (For example, I found in 30 years of medical practice that patients have about SIX ways of saying "No" --- they vary in meaning all the way from a definite negative to what really is a clear-cut "Yes!") I believe the same dynamics will hold true for advice given by many others in various fields of expertise.
I have no disagreement with this at all. However, given a choice between getting through on CW and failing to get through on voice, I'll take CW any day. I'm sure you feel the same way.
Plus, a lot of people don't realize the psychological value of being able to hear another human's voice at the other end of the line, especially if we're each cloistered away with our small group of family members, holed up in a valley or up on a ridge post-Y2K, for who knows how long. But it's true, this is 'icing on the cake' and many will not have any cake at all without CW.
Again, I agree with all of this, except that of course many people have made friends on CW whom they have never talked to in person.
Your final point, about volunteering to act as RELAY BETWEEN THE VOICE NET AND THE CW NET just about floored me. I'm impressed. I believe that role will be pivotal. I hereby appoint you as SSB/CW Coordinator. Your check will be in the mail (AFTER the banks fold in a Y2K implosion.)
I hope not have to do this single-handedly. In fact, that will probably be impossible. However, I could certainly use the CW practice, and during the initial stages of setting up the net, I will serve as relay to the extent that I can.
More thoughts on a separate PRE-y2k CW net. Yes, the TechPluses need the drill and practice before 1/1/00. This will give them that opportunity, to check out their rigs, tuners, antennas, power sources, QSO protocols. If we sched the CW net first, and then right after that the SSB net, the CW guys can monitor the SSB net and you could give them voice answers to some of their questions. If we sched SSB first they can monitor that & then on their own net shortly after, interrogate/comment on some of what transpired on SSB.
I think we should schedule the CW net first, as the questions are likely to be shorter than the answers. Thus, asking questions via CW and answering them by SSB is likely to be more efficient.
I'm pretty much in the same situation, Steve, re my time availability. I agree too that evenings and weekends are the way to go.
Okay, evenings and weekends it is.
I agree on designing for the widest possible area for the present, and for the future. Two problems: the first is personal --- I have an NVIS antenna, 9 1/2 feet off the ground. It's a cloudwarmer -- great for regional work (which may turn out to be the bulk of traffic post-Y2K, maybe not -- what do you think?) but not good for DX. If I can't get good continental coverage, I may raise my antenna [or add another identical one] to the 20' level. That will surely get me out all over the map.
I think regional work is the most important. However, as mentioned above, I've made contacts over 1000 miles away with a very simple antenna on 20 watts out. I think that certainly qualifies as "regional" coverage. What I meant about wide coverage was that we should not exclude anyone from joining the net based on their geographical location. If we can't get hold of them for some reason, that's unfortunate, but not terribly surprising given the sporadic nature of amateur radio contacts in general.
The second problem is propagation problems: the contacts that rely on 'skip' are not as reliable in general as those covered by 'ground wave' and 'cloudwarmer'-NVIS propagation. We'll just have to give it a try and see what we come up with.
Yes, I think we'll have to try it out rather than try to figure it out in advance. If we have enough members, we'll be able to get the messages through somehow, no matter what the propagation conditions might be.
BTW, all thru this discussion, I'm assuming everybody's going to transmit 'barefoot' (no high-powered linear amplifiers) using 100watt power. It will be hard enough generating that kind of power post-Y2K, let alone finding energy sources to put out 1000 -- 1500 watts of RF.
I think we should expect that people will be using much less than a hundred watts. Power availability will be the limiting factor for most people, and even a few watts will get through very well in many cases, especially if very few people are on the air. CW also helps, of course, as it is discernible at very low signal to noise ratios.
Yep. Maybe the algorithm would be something like:
Evening activitiy: try 40 meters first (with 3 suggested freqs. If there's too much QRM [other stations already occupying the freq] on the 1st freq, go to the second after 1 (3?) minute (s.) If the problem is the same, go to the 3d after 1 (3?) minutes. If no success, go to 80 meters, using the same sequence.
Daytime: try 20 first, then 40, with the same sequence. Or should we try 40 first, and then 20?
The evening algorithm sounds fine. I think for the daytime, we should try 20 meters first on the SSB net. Of course, the Tech plus CW operators don't have any 20 m privileges, so they will be limited to 40 meters in the daytime.
I have the same problem: NO net control experience. I have all kinds of ham friends with all kinds of net control experience -- BUT THEY AIN'T Y2K AWARE. (I believe there is a neuro-physiological antipathy between ham radio brain activity and y2k 'Got it' personality profiles.) So unless someone comes in and offers to fill in the positions you and I may become 'the designated drivers.'
I have heard from at least one person who is both Y2K aware and has many years of net control experience. I'm sure he will help us get started, but I'm equally sure that we will figure out how to do it well enough with a bit of practice.
Your recommendations will help people get their 'shack' up and running pronto, for minimum $$$ and required knowhow. My take however is that our people should immediately buy the equipment that will get them thru no matter what the band conditions are like, using 100watt power max. That means spending considerably more $$$ and more time and more knowhow. Your recos and my recos (see in other posts) thus gives the people two routes to go. That's good.
I'm having a little bit of difficulty understanding why you recommend a 100 watt transceiver when you have already pointed out that power will be quite difficult to come by. I expect that most people will be running only a few watts output to save power.
I agree that we don't have the time to do the full-bore design. On the other hand, leaving a 12volt, 100watt transceiver on continuously, even in receive mode, usually means 700 milliamperes (0.7 Amps) x 24 hours = 17 AmpHours a day. Now that's not a lot of amp hours for the typical American's energy diet. However for those of us who've spent a lot of time in the alternate energy field that's a HORRENDOUS use of power (which for most people in the Y2K period means solar panel-derived energy.) At that rate you'd have to have about $2000 worth of PV panels, a $100-200 charge controller, and a $500 battery set --- just to feed the receiver. And that would leave you NOTHING TO TRANSMIT WITH WHEN YOU TURNED ON YOUR MIKE. And would also assume 365 days a year of sunshine.
The transceiver I recommend has an idle current draw of only 400 mA if you turn off the backlight. Also, I'm not sure how you came up with those figures, even at 700 mA. I calculate that comes out to about 200 watt hours a day. One 75 watt solar panel will produce about 375 watt hours on a good day, and 200 watt hours even on a pretty poor day. Such a solar panel costs about $400, not $2000. Even after losses in the system, you wouldn't need more than two panels to produce that much power.
I expect that many users of radios like mine will be running at about 5 W output, which takes approximately one amp of current, not too much more than the idle current of your hundred watt transceiver. That would mean that with a 50 percent key down duty cycle, my rig would use about as much current as your hundred watt transceiver uses while idling. I think the choice is pretty clear in a very limited power situation.
In addition, you wouldn't have to leave the system on 24 hours a day. I would expect that message traffic would be handled during certain prearranged periods at several times during the day. Of course, we would want at least some people monitoring specific frequencies at any given time, but surely some people would have enough power to spare a couple of hundred watt hours a day for that purpose.
A compromise between my fullbore design and the above solution might be to buy a relatively inexpensive SW receiver, but even they draw somewhere between 2 and 8 ampHours in 24 hours. That's still a lot by alternate energy standards. (Like you'd use up the charge of a 12volt pack of "D"-cell nicads in 12 to 48 HOURS.)
What about those "wind up" shortwave receivers like the Baygen? It may not be the best shortwave receiver in the world, but it sure doesn't take very much power to operate.
But the other problem in using a conventional receiver for monitoring is that it's SO SELECTIVE. In other words you tune it to a specific frequency. Even assuming no temperature drift over a 24 hour period, which could lose the station you're monitoring --- it can only monitor ONE frequency at a time. I'd feel much more comfortable if we could monitor several frequencies (even several BANDS) simultaneously. But it's probably a pipedream, at this late in the Y2K- preparation day. Oh well.
I'm not sure what good that would do you. How would you be able to tell what anyone was saying if you are receiving a number of frequencies at once? In any event, I agree that it's too late to worry about this even if it would be a good idea.
All our references to TechPlus limitations really only applies to PRE-y2k ..... if Y2K is bad enough that we have only ham radio for the comm link, as long as the TechPlus has put in enough 'air time' to feel comfortable on the ether -- then everyone with 100w SSB equipment up and running on his homestead will be on the voice Net. There should no longer be a need for the CW Net. The need for CW is ITS TRAINING VALUE IN THE NEXT 4 MONTHS. If the FCC disappears along with the power grid, all us ex-hams will be just one happy (LOL) SSB family.
I don't think so. Remember, power is going to be very difficult to come by. CW can get through when voice can't, and on lower power in the bargain. I think CW is going to make a tremendous comeback next year, as it is the only mode that is widely used that can get through when almost nothing else will. A couple of watts out can produce a perfectly readable CW signal hundreds or thousands of miles away. And a couple of watts out is likely to be all that many people will be able to produce.
One more clarification: we won't be "ex-hams" next year. Amateur radio predates the FCC and will long survive its demise. Some things will change, but we will still be the ones who get the messages through when no one else can.
-- Steve Heller, WA0CPP (stheller@koyote.com), September 08, 1999.
Point 1: Most people will have CB's if they are lucky. Others will have FRS walkies and a few GMRS radios. Ham rigs will be rare, relatively, and reliable means of powering them (Solar) more so still.Point 2: There aren't enough codeheads to take over too much serious traffic. Can you sit in front of a radio all day? Who supports you? If it breaks out badly you will have to spend a lot of time dealing with your own and family's survival scene.
Point 3: Ham rigs are pretty high-tech these days, yet lightning and other mishaps fry them easier than the old tube jobs. Spare parts?
CB will be the mainstay simply because there are so many of them. Hams and CB'ers get along like the guy in the mansion with the butler and the bubba in the trailer park. Yet post y2k commerce could mean talking to the bubbas who have the farms and the deer jerky. And CB is how they will get messages to you. Channel 9 could become more like 911. There is a CB emergency service called REACT, but it is very small.
There are a lot of old busted CB's to scavenge parts from. Also they can be had cheaply, a little Maxon four watt mobile was 34.99 at Wally World last time I looked. Great Christmas stocking stuffers. Also yard sales. No need to liscence or train an operator, just get your brother in law on it and he can talk while you organic farm or fight off looters or what have you. There are lots of CB handhelds out there as well.
With 12 watts sideband you can actually go places, I have talked to Hawaii on skip on a Uniden Grant mobile, and at least 2o miles locally during the day.
Two wires 102 inches long become your antenna, the biggest problem will be finding enough 50 ohm coax.
CB isn't glamorous, but that is the reality of what's out there and will be pressed into service if we get widespread telcom failures. Some twiddling with a terminal node controller and you can packet on it (I DON"T DO THIS but I hear it out there.)
CB is abysmally underpowered, and 40 channels is ridiculous. With a little tweaking....
There is almost nothing between 25.155 and 26.905. There are foreign CB operators between 27.405 and 27.985 (Europeans have many more channels) Skip is very reliable in some of these frequencies, especially with beam antennas and a little juice.
Ther are thirteen gazillion Mexicans and rednecks out there with Galaxy and other export radios. We've all heard them. These modified and technically illegal rigs are everywhere (not illegal to posess or to listen, just to transmit) However I have not heard much about FCC enforcement actions unless the offender was running truly outrageous power or being a butthead in some way. I think they have pretty much given up on 11 meters, kind of like the way society has abandoned ghetto areas. This makes these bands annoying and obnoxious, but fraught with possibility.
Freebanding, anyone?
(Disclaimer: The above post does not advocate violating FCC rules nor does it imply that the author has done so or intends to do so. Discussion purposes only.)
(call sign redacted)
-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), September 08, 1999.
Along the lines of Forrest's post, some of us have had some offline discussions about "levels" of comms, starting with "Family Radio" on up to full-blown ham. Would it be useful to spell out those levels in more detail (maybe in a "refereed" doc that could be passed through email eventually but START it as a separate thread on this forum?).That would do the following:
.... enable everyone to do SOMETHING (ie, if unable to afford ham or too intimidated, get/purchase something useful starting at the locally useful level).
.... begin to support the forming of linkages between folks who have comms at the various levels and
.... start to formalize a community that could find each other across and between all these levels (we could do some real-time chat across my TB2K chat list as well).
The idea would be to have this doc done within the next 10 days, max.
You guys know how dynamically weird Y2K could be, including weirdly different in different areas at different times. I would think that redundancy and different comm types is vital, even though heavy-duty ham may well save the day in a 9-10.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 08, 1999.
Count me in...I take my no-code technician exam at the end of this month...(only given twice yearly on Kauai). I'll probably go with 6 meter SSB because it is my best (almost only!) long distance option. A handheld 2 meter would be a good local option...
-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), September 08, 1999.
BIGDOG:You KNOW there's a law against wiretapping don't you? 'Cause that's what you did with my brain just now. I was just getting ready to post YOUR EXACT TAKE ON THE COMM STRATEGIES, triggered by Forrest's perceptive post. I would have jumped in with my post before yours but I was busy making my first real QSO's since getting my ticket with 3 guys in Waco, TX, until a few minutes ago, on 80 meters, which is supposed to be a mostly local band. I'm an hour north of Birmingham, AL, so that's about 600 miles. The 'rush' comes from the fact that my antenna is only nine FEET off the ground, and I'm not using an amplifier, just 100watts out.
Anyway, instead of posting right now, let me give it some more thought and do it on the morrow --- need some shuteye anyway. One point: I prefer to do all my talking out in public in front of the crowd --- that way the lurkers can watch our thought processes better. I prefer that to doing private comm loops, even tho I know it's supposed to be a more efficient way to go. So what r u gonna do with a guy who wants to hang out his dirty laundry in public? So if it's OK with you, I'd like to respond to Forrest's post, weave it in with Steve's latest post, and then yours. Levels of comm --- yeahboy!
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 09, 1999.
Bill -- Sure, great, go ahead. Use this thread and/or create others. We can cross-link as needed.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 09, 1999.
EVERYBODY:This is NOT the big post I'm cooking up (a substantial response to Steve, wa0cpp, or to Forrest.) Just a few details to clean up.
First, I made an error in my rig recommedations to Debi, KG4DCY. I told her she needed an AC power supply with a 10 Amp continuous output. Instead it needs to be EIGHTEEN or TWENTY.
Second, a response to Jocelyne (WZ9M)'s request for feedback on the NVIS antenna's results. Again, it's a full-wave 80 meter horizontal loop (a square with 67 feet on each leg.) I finally got a chance to check it out last nite for something other than local (10-15) miles. Talked to 3 hams in Waco, TX, a distance of 600 miles from north central AL. Had a very readable signal with two of them, before propagation caused QRN problems.
The amazing thing is that this antenna is only 9 FEET off the ground, and is just a wire strung out in a square, using 'ladder-line' as a feedline. This has none of the expensive, finicky, loss-prone, and radiation-prone attributes of what most people use, coax. And with a simple tuner with SWR meter you can tune it anywhere on any ham band. This should help solve the $$$ and knowhow problems of a lot of newbie hams.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 09, 1999.
Forgot one more detail on the NVIS antenna results last nite: the QSOs were on 80 meters (not a DX [long-distance] band like 40 or 20 meters.)Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 09, 1999.
Bill:Forgot one more detail on the NVIS antenna results last nite: the QSOs were on 80 meters (not a DX [long-distance] band like 40 or 20 meters.)
No, that's not correct. 80 meters is a DX band; in fact, it's one of the better bands for that purpose. The longer the wavelength, the longer the propagation distance is, all other things being equal (which they usually aren't). It's true that 80 meters isn't much good for DX in the daytime, but that's because the ionosphere absorbs those low frequencies then; but at night, it's probably the best DX band available most of the time.
-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), September 09, 1999.
STEVE:Tnx for the comment. Here's what I used for my reference, from the '98 ARRL Handbook:
80 meters -- "At night, signals are often propagated halfway around the world. As at 1.8 MHz, atmospheric noise is a nuisance...[in the summer]"
40 meters -- "Atmospheric noise is less troublesome than on...80 m, and 40-m DX are often of sufficient strength to override even high-level summer static. For these reasons, 40 m is the lowest-frequency amateur band considered reliable for DX communications in all seasons. Even during the lowest point in the solar cycle, 40m may be open for worldwide DX throughout the night."
Will be responding at length to your prior, excellent post.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 09, 1999.
Bill:"At night, signals are often propagated halfway around the world."
Doesn't sound very local to me.:) I've had most of my longer-range contacts (~1500 miles) on 80 m, as I recall. Of course, it depends on band conditions, but given good conditions, 80 m can produce excellent contacts even at a long distance.
-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), September 09, 1999.
To further the discussion of Y2K and Amateur Radio topics, I've created a mailing list on the subject. To subscribe to the list, send an e-mail to: cq-y2k-request@mailinglists.org with: subscribe in the BODY.I find mailing lists much easier to follow than web forums...
AlanC -- 73, de KD4JML
-- Alan Clegg [kd4jml] (abc-y2k-projects@firehouse.net), September 10, 1999.
ALAN,kd4jml:Thanks for throwing in with us. I have just joined your email list. If if develops into something worthwhile I'll try to cut/paste the good stuff to the thread here.
I agree this forum's hard to follow. Too bad TB2000 doesn't use the software that (y2k.entrewave.com) does -- it's light years better than ours.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 10, 1999.
STEVE:That post by Forrest Covington and BigDog beg a larger perspective that I feel we need to encompass in our design of the post-y2k comm links. So let me only briefly respond to your points and then go on tackle the larger issue: post-y2k radio comm at different levels of technical knowhow, power output, equipment availability, and licensing.
Essentially we are in agreement on your major points: 1) start the net soon; 2) start each net with CW, followed by SSB; 3)evenings and weekends are the appropriate times; 4) evening protocol: 40m first, sequencing thru 3 frequencies if necessary to find a clear spot on the band; if unsuccessful on 40, same sequence on 80m; 5) daytime protocol: 20m first, then 40m if necessary as a fallback; 6) power output would be lowest necessary for a clear exchange.
I'll go on now to respond briefly to Forrest's post, then cook up a comprehensive plan per BigDog's recommendation. Would appreciate any comments of yours re both those posts.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 11, 1999.
wonderful forum folks. I've been lurking for a while and wanted to add my .02, if you don't mind. A regional Y2k task force located in southern Oregon has a net established along the lines you are talking about. http://www.rv-y2k.org/rvcecom.htm I have CB in each family vehicle. It has gotten me out of a few bad spots as well as my wife ( auto breakdowns on the interstate).I like RV's local CB net connected to the HAM net etc. I just wish I could get some interest in my heighborhood.
Anyway, I will be listening. I have taken the online HAM exam 5 times and my lowest was 71%. I found the club closest to me is in the town where I work so I guess I'd better take the exam. Maybe post Y2k I will be able to barter for a rig?
God Bless all.
RichB
-- Richard Bloom (rfbloom@uswest.net), September 12, 1999.
Bargain 5-watt PV panelsOrdinarily they price at $70 to $100. Just received a flyer from "Electronic Goldmine," 800-445-0697, $19.95 each, limit 4 per order. You can use one to power a 20-watt output ham rig, or use 4 in parallel to drive your 100-watt ham rig (See "Options for post-y2k 2-way radio" thread for details.) I've dealt with E.G. for years -- very reliable.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 13, 1999.
WUPS! Guess us 2-10-11-12 guys get to sit this dance out, huh?chuck
-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), September 14, 1999.
UPDATE ON "DIRECT-DRIVE" SOLAR POWER ISSUE:Talked to Sun Selector, the vendors of the "LCB" unit that permits direct-drive, or array-direct, configurations of solar electric systems, without the need for intervening storage batteries. Unfortunately the LCB's will not work for powering radio equipment: too much electrical 'noise' -- a steady 40KHz buzz from the switching electronics.
I've got a design in my head that uses common IC voltage regulators for the job, but not enough time to implement it. So it's back to a conventional solar system: PV panels --> charge controller --> storage batteries --> radio gear.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 14, 1999.
EVERBODY:Go look at the new thread Steve Heller started, called "The Y2K net is starting.
Bill, kg4dhj
-- William J. Schenker, MD (wjs@linkfast.net), September 15, 1999.