[Ares-races] Use of HF for local communications

[N4AOF]

George Andrews <gandrews@ntplx.net> wrote:
> Clearly indicating not much experience in emergency communication.

George, I have no interest in playing your baiting game, but if you are
determined to talk about "experience" I think I can put my multiple term
extra class ham ticket, already-expired general radiotelephone operator
ticket, 30 years in emergency communications, 29 years as a Red Cross
disaster services volunteer, over two decades of RACES and ARES
participation in two states, and over a decade as Red Cross
communications officer up against your first term Tech ticket.

As for the little problem in my home town back in September 2001, if you
think that is an example of emergency communications I can only hope you
never face a real need for emergency communications where the distance
isn't measured in blocks and utility services are uninterrupted or
restored in under 24 hours.

Yes, I didn't bother giving you a See-Spot-Run level explanation of the
advantages of NVIS over praying for linked VHF repeaters that stay up
and stay linked as a solution to covering a 50 mile x 100 mile rural
area.  I apologize, but I was too busy laughing at the idea and the
obvious inexperience that leads to ruling out HF just because it isn't
available on your ticket.  As I said originally, VHF has its place; and
so do linked repeaters when they happen to be working; but planning to
have state-wide communications by hoping that none of the repeaters will
ever fail is simply planning to have your plan fail.

>> HF NVIS is the way to go if you want full coverage.
>
> Not a bad idea and has its applications, but not exactly full
coverage.

Far better chance of covering a 50x100 mile area than any readily
available 2 meter approach.

> It suffers greatly in the area of portability.

I don't know why you would think so other than a lack of knowledge.
NVIS has been commonly used for portable and mobile operation by the
militray since at least World War II.

> Perhaps you might explain how this would be setup inside
> a shelter where there is no access to the exterior..

Perhaps you might explain why the station in a shelter needs state-wide
coverage rather than connecting to the local Red Cross chapter or the
local EOC.

Perhaps you might explain how the operator (and the shelterees) got to
the shelter if there is no access to the exterior.  Of the dozens of
shelters where I have been either the radio operator or (more often) the
shelter manager, I have NEVER seen a shelter where there was no "access
to the exterior" -- 99% of the time the radio operator arrived by
vehicle and parked outside before coming in.  Setting up inside might be
more comfortable (but not always) but operating from outside is almost
always an option if needed.  The answer is that you adapt to both the
resources available and the requirements of the situation.  Shelters
rarely require long distance communication, but often do require more
range than is provided by any reasonable portable station that can be
set up inside.  A _planned_ communications station for a _planned_
shelter takes this into consideration -- much of the time the most
practical solution is a portable antenna with base and mast combined
with a mobile VHF or UHF radio, not because that is absolutely the best
answer but because it is often the best compromise of available
equipment and available operator privileges (there are more techs
available than extras, or even generals).

But shelter communications and state-wide coverage are two totally
different situations; as you would know if you had any experience in
emergency communications.

I will admit that you did get one thing right in your reply (when you
reversed your original post) by saying "Flexibility, covenience and
optimal use of resources are the watchwords. For some situations HF may
be the best, sometimes VHF (and up) will be the best. Sometimes it will
be a combination of HF, VHF and UHF. Think and use the best available
tool for the job."  Which goes directly counter to your unthinking
dismissal of HF just because you have a Tech class license and had never
heard of NVIS until several people here told you about it.

73 de N4AOF, WPOL710, ex-DA1NB, etc., etc.