[CTSARA] [GNARC] Projects and Activites: An Idea and InformalSurvey

Wed Aug 19 16:39:00 EDT 2009

I am so pleased to have you guys making these types of comments, it 
shows tremendous interest in our 'hobby' and the betterment of our 
communications abilities.  I would welcome the opportunity to discuss 
many possible scenarios with as many of you folks that are truly 
interested, in regard to improving capabilities.   But for thought 
process, there are some trade-offs that need to be considered whenever 
you desire to expand capabilities as you have already mentioned and 
compared to Weca and Limarc.

Some repeaters are set up as 'local' to provide a way for 'locals' to 
communicate with each other somewhat better than simplex operation would 
provide.  Some repeaters are set up for users who commute some distances 
and wish to maintain contact with their 'crowd of friends'.   Some 
repeaters are set up for major areas and are interlinked by various 
methods (separate discussion on methods for this) which provide a user 
to contact someone anywhere over a vast area.   Some repeaters have IRLP 
or Echolink and are for connecting to distance users when desired.   
Some repeaters are set up for emergency priority communications and have 
rather elaborate emergency systems to maintain communications when all 
else fails.  Then there are the APRS and digipeater groups for different 
data modes.....

As can be seen from the above, no one repeater can easily do all of the 
needs unless it is at the sacrifice of some other parameter.  For 
example, if some user is in QSO with a fellow ham a few miles distance 
on a repeater that is linked thruout the entire state, then NO one else 
in the state can use the repeater system unless joining in the first 
QSO, and they may not wish to join in but rather have their own QSO with 
someone else....   Obviously more repeaters could be so located as to 
provide the capability for more than one QSO at a time, but then as you 
pointed out, when no one is using any repeater, then which repeater do 
you monitor....????   

It was agreed when repeaters first came into ham usage many years ago, 
that the primary intent was to provide communications for any emergency 
need, and that emergency had highest priority over any other 
communications.  That established the short transmit times for any and 
all timers on repeaters and some even go to shorter timers during 
commute hours to keep the repeater 'open' for any emergency call.  So 
there has been lots of growth since the first repeaters were established 
and this discussion takes place at virtually all repeater groups as they 
form another repeater system, determining how to utilize their 
particular repeater...  so this is where we have now arriven...   
(arrived).  

SO, where do we go from here?  Linking, has benefits, but has 
responsibilities to all other repeaters on the 'network' and could 
prevent another repeater from serving the public service during a local 
emergency unnecessarily.  It could have the opposite effect by 
preventing more users from using the repeaters as there is another group 
using it most of the time and 'not sharing'..   it happens.....   

I welcome a meeting to discuss pros and cons, but there have to be lots 
of possible combinations evaluated and very easy ways to disconnect from 
any linking situations if other users choose to not be a part of one 
major round table discussion or in the event of an emergency or just 
because someone wants to use their local repeater for local usage....    
Lots to consider..

Keep thinking...  there could be some improvements made, but most of 
these scenarios have already been evaluated some time ago and probably 
could use a 'revisit' to see if modes should be changed..

73 to all

Curt W1FSM

As can be

Chris- KB1QXR wrote:
> Hello again and sorry for yet another overly verbose QXR post...
>
>
> >From what I gather the WECA system is using voting receivers, an excellent
> way of providing improved coverage especially to mobile units with low-power
> transmitters.  I don't actually have them programmed in my radio right now
> but I will give them a shot...
>
>
> The basic point with the link though is this- any method of communication is
> only as useful as the number of people you can reach with it.  From what
> I've heard (using my trusty HT) of the Stamford and Norwalk machines, they
> both have great coverage.  The problem is that because they are separate
> machines, John standing by on the Stamford machine won't hear someone
> looking for a QSO on norwalk.  And the lack of use doesn't attract users
> looking for a friendly QSO.
> Take LIMARC (a large long island linked repeater system) for example, around
> here we can get their W2VL machine, 146.850-, 136.5 PL.  Tune in any time
> during the day and more often than not you'll hear at least 2 hams, if not 3
> or more.  Sure they have an impressive network, and they cover more people,
> but their biggest advantage is that they have lots of traffic.
> To make an analogy- Let's say two friends invite you to two parties on the
> same night.  One party has 3-4 guys sitting doing nothing, the other has
> food and music and tons of people having fun.  Which one would you go to?
>
> I'm not saying we should compete with LIMARC.  But in the above situation,
> lets say the only party was the boring one- sitting at home and watching a
> movie now seems like a better option, no?  But if enough people came to the
> boring party (perhaps by combining several boring parties together), it
> wouldn't be boring anymore and **more people would want to come to the
> now-fun party**.
> (and for the record that's just an analogy- I'm not saying anybody is boring
> :) )
>
>
> Links are also good for EMCOMM use, in an emergency situation a linked
> system that covers the whole 'foot' of southwestern CT would surely be quite
> useful.  However I am personally reluctant to trust anything VoIP as
> 'emcomm-ready', look at california a few months back- fiber cuts in 3 places
> and the city's whole infrastructure becomes a headless chicken.  A
> site-to-site RF link seems like a much more reliable idea.
>
> The main downside to the link is that overall capacity goes down (IE a qso
> in stamford ties up the norwalk frequency pair), however from what listening
> experience I have, I don't think the area ever really has so much traffic
> that it would be a problem.
>
>
>
> Lastly, as for getting people together- in my experience with my group of
> friends, the best strategy is to first (2weeks in advance) send out an
> informal survey suggesting 4-6 possible times for an event and/or asking for
> suggestions.  From this, make a hard schedule about 1week in advance, and
> send out a reminder 24hrs before the event...
>
>
> 73's and sorry for the long post....
>
> --Chris KB1QXR
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Solomon [mailto:jonstv at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 9:00 AM
> To: kb1qxr at arrl.net
> Cc: ctsara Mailman
> Subject: Re: [CTSARA] [GNARC] Projects and Activites: An Idea and
> InformalSurvey
>
> Chris-
>
> You bring up some good points.  Frank, you do too.  I'm in, though, right
> now, I'm more passive than I want to be.
>
> Chris, the linked repeaters is an interesting idea.  WECA is already a set
> of linked, or rather tied, repeaters, seeking the strongest signal.
>
> As for the SARA (at least VHF) repeater, John, WB1GRB is often on the  
> side, especially when he's working, and Bill (KB1IFY?) is on as well.   
> But the "problem" is that I'd guess most people who use the repeater aren't
> able to work the repeater during the day.
>
> But it boggles my mind that when I leave work (sometime between 5p and 10p,
> I hardly ever get a QSO.  Rumor has it the GNARC 'NLK repeater is active
> during the rush hours.
>
> Anyway, Frank, I think the best way to get people to join is to be
> definitive... Pick a date, forget about people who can't come (unless it's a
> major day, like the first Monday night football or
> something...) and have the meeting.  Do that enough times and people will
> come.
>
> Perhaps something "regular" like a Sunday breakfast the 2nd or 3rd week of
> the month; something to keep people going between regular club meetings.
> Weather it's official (ie a "club" get together) or unofficial.
>
> Great... now I'm out of change (har har... my $0.02)
>
> Off to work.
> Jon
> W3EIC
>
> On Aug 19, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Chris- KB1QXR wrote:
>
>   
>> Greetings all,
>>
>> I've been licensed for about a year but didn't do much with it until 
>> recently, so forgive me if this is a 'dumb' idea...
>>
>> There are a number of repeaters in this area going up I-95, 
>> westchester, stamford, norwalk, etc.  Why not link them all, or at 
>> least a few of them?
>>
>> I don't know about other machines but it seems there isn't much 
>> daytime activity on the Stamford repeater (at least from my (limited) 
>> experience).
>> In contrast, LIMARC (which as I understand it operates several linked 
>> repeaters on Long Island) almost always has a good conversation going.
>>
>> Let's say you did a 3 way link- WECA (westchester) - SARA (stamford)
>> - GNARC
>> (norwalk)... this would cover a good chunk of southwestern CT, greatly 
>> expanding the number of operators that might be listening at any 
>> point.
>>
>> Ideally this would be done with RF and site-to-site links for optimal 
>> resiliance in emergencies, however that is of course expensive, so if 
>> this were to be tested it would seem like VoIP would be the way to go 
>> at least in the short term.  It seems to me (and of course I could be 
>> way wrong) that it would greatly increase the utility of the area 
>> repeaters for very little effort...
>>
>> Plus which this provides an opportunity for another fun acronym :)   
>> Perhaps
>> SCAN- Southern CT Amateur Network?
>>
>>
>> On another note, I'd also be interested in app_rpt related stuff.  I 
>> figured I was probably the only one that had even heard of Asterisk...
>>
>>
>> just my 2c...
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> CTSARA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ctsara
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:CTSARA at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>   