[FLARES] ARRL BOD Report on ARES

Thu, 14 Aug 2003 18:24:23 -0400

Ron,

To a large extent you are correct.  Most ARES traffic is tactical rather
then formal written traffic.  There is some exceptions, including to the
State EOC.  If you need to send a message to the State EOC, via amateur
radio, it must go as formal written traffic through a NFL gateway station.
Of course, depending on the situation, the State EOC may already be on
3.911, 3.940 or 3.950 and "may" be able to handle tactical traffic directly.
Ideally everyone is on the same frequency and bands and can talk direct but
if we need to "relay" a message NTS, or at least the message pad, may be
useful.

Still, without major changes NTS, as it exists today, does not do ARES that
much good.  Either NTS needs to adapt to handle ARES need or ARES needs to
have it own traffic system/network.

As pointed out what ARES units are doing today is much different then what
they were doing twenty years ago.  In many ways we are being asked to do
much more today then what we have been asked to do in the past.  Sometimes
it has little or nothing to do with amateur radio.  We live in an
information age and the demand for instant communication has never been
higher.  9/11 and Homeland Security has also changed the EComm picture as
well.  ARES units must evolve and change to handle these ever changing
needs.  No longer is ARES/NTS being asked just to let grandma know that all
is well in Florida!  We are being asked, more and more, to handle critical,
time sensitive information.  In the first 24-48 hours we may be it, as far
as communications goes.

This critical, time sensitive, information may be in the form of a Excel
spread sheet.  If an ARES/NTS/Amateur Radio operator is asked to send a
spread sheet from point A to point B and answers "I can not" I will assure
you that too will be the wrong answer!  We must evolve to handle the
information needs of today or we too will find ourselves on the outside
looking in.

I can not tell you today exactly what form an ARES traffic system/network
will take but I can assure you there is a need to do more then what we are
already doing.  I can also assure you that it needs to include computers and
computer networks as well.  What has not been decided, by the ARRL board, is
if NTS can be evolved or enhanced to handle this need or if we need to start
with a clean slate.  At least at the moment the VRC thinks the clean slate
is the way to go.

73,
Dave Armbrust, AE4MR
ARRL WCF Section Manager
3024 Salem Ave
Sarasota, FL 34232-5120
Tel: 941-685-2081
Internet: [email protected]
Web: http://www.wcfarrl.org

ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio.  It is supported by
membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of  publications and
advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more
information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html.  Your
contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur
spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to
learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities
of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you
and future generations to enjoy.

| -----Original Message-----
| From: [email protected]
| [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Ron Wetjen
| Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 10:06 AM
| To: 'Florida ARES'
| Subject: Re: [FLARES] ARRL BOD Report on ARES
|
|
| Evans Mitchell kd4efm / afa2th fl wrote:
|
| >>The job of ARES is not to generate "H&W" traffic (which
| would be the job
| >>of the NTS to forward).  The job of ARES is to support
| and/or supplement
| >>local communications efforts and pass any messages directly between
| >>local or state officials and agencies.
| >
| >
| > might not be but how would you suggest we handle this if we
| do not have an
|  > established nts traffic net on a certain frequency and at a
|  > certain time...??
|
| Why even worry about that?  Any "traffic" ARES generates, is either
| "local" point-to-point traffic (i.e., EOC to Red Cross)
| section-to-section (i.e., SFL to WCF), or statewide traffic
| (i.e., State
| EOC to sections).  We're talking DIRECTLY to who we need to talk to.
| Where is the need for NTS in this situation?
|
| Local ARES "traffic" is usually a status report, request for
| supplies,
| bulletins, etc.  This is handled as everyday talk on the
| radio or simply
| handing the microphone to the Emergency Management director
| to talk with
| the Red Cross director.  No need for NTS here either, since the two
| people who need to talk, are talking DIRECTLY to each other!
|
| Going back to your question, "how would you suggest we handle
| this if we
| do not have an established nts traffic net on a certain
| frequency and at
| a certain time...??"
|
| For what purpose?
|
| If you're worried about how we'll all talk to each other,
| we've already
| got that part covered.  When a section is activated, you can
| find nets
| on the following frequencies:
|
| West Central Florida ARES 3911 or 7281 kHz
| South Florida ARES 3940 kHz
| North Florida ARES 3950 or 7275 kHz
| State RACES 3990.5 or 7253.5 kHz
|
| These nets are well established and well known.  If someone needs to
| talk to Sarasota County, the EOC (and/or Red Cross) is on
| 3911 or 7281
| ... just give us a call!  No need for NTS.
|
| (If you're really worried about sending NTS traffic, Florida
| Midday Net
| 7247 kHz.)
|
|  > I sure I can give the turtle net the H&W and then the intercomm's
|  > would be routed through ARES.
|
| Simply answer this.  What kind of ARES traffic are you
| generating that
| would need NTS?  Look at it this way.  To send NTS traffic,
| you're going
| from point A, to point A1, to point A2, to point A3, to point
| A4, before
| finally getting to point B.  ARES traffic is going directly
| from point A
| to B!  Why add the extra steps (and time) if you don't have to?  It
| makes no sense to operate that way in an ARES situation.
|
| It seems like we have a solution (NTS) ... but no problem (traffic to
| send using NTS).  From what I've read the ARRL wants to know
| ... how can
| we tie ARES into NTS?  If ARES operates as I describe above (which I
| think is the norm), then there is no need for NTS in an ARES
| situation,
| and that's exactly what the ARRL report concludes.  When the
| ARRL asked
| the NTS folks what they can offer ARES ... they couldn't come
| up with an
| answer.  That should tell you plenty.
|
| Ron
|
| _______________________________________________
| FLARES mailing list
| [email protected]
| http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/flares
|