[MRIC] Fwd: 2009-04-25 MRIC Meeting

Tue May 19 19:43:43 EDT 2009

As I recall at the April 2008 MRIC meeting, the question regarding what each
jurisdiction would ideally like for their "ultimate Winlink2000 setup" was
asked in such a way that at least on of the RACES Officers, the Frederick RO
if I recall correctly, asked the Chairman something along the lines of, and
I am paraphrasing here, "...so you mean you want us to give you an ideal
list of what we would like if money was no problem..."

Therefore, the list of each jurisdictions desired Winlink2000 equipment must
be evaluated in the context with which it was solicited.  That context is
one of each jurisdiction having an unlimited amount of funding for RACES
amateur radio equipment and each jurisdiction having both locations for the
equipment and the antennas for the equipment.

While some might say there is nothing wrong with that context, some,
including myself, find developing a "wish list" of amateur radio goodies
under a blank check frame of mind to be irresponsible.  What we should have
done was to revisit the Winlink2000 issue at the November 2008 meeting and
discussed it further in terms of funding and installation realities.

Brett, I find it difficult to accept your reasoning of "I do not want to
list the equipment I use because I do not want others to make the same
mistakes I did." to be nonsense based upon your rhetoric at multiple MRIC
meetings where you state that you desire new installations to be like yours
so you can troubleshoot any problems that might come up in operation of the
new Winlink2000 systems when those people come to you and ask for your help
in troubleshooting.

Also, by all of us posting our Winlink2000 and non-Winlink2000 equipment
lists on the MRIC website as agreed to at the Aril 2009 meeting, those
interested in seeing what the other jurisdictions are running would be
better served than by a single equipment list in a document that would need
to be revised every couple of years as equipment is discontinued or
introduced to the marketplace.  Also, by having all the jurisdictions post
their equipment lists as was agreed to, then as questions come up, all one
has to do is look at the MRIC website, see who has what and then either call
or e-mail the appropriate person.

Additionally, why not share your mistakes with the rest of us??  Think of it
as a learning process.  We all make mistakes and more importantly, we all
LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES.  Share the knowledge and be a mentor rather than
hiding it from the rest of us!  Believe me, it will be appreciated!  I'll be
the first to say that I have made many, many mistakes in Amateur Radio both
technically and operationally, and because of those mistakes, I learned a
great deal.  I was not ridiculed, nor was I chastised.  I was welcomed even
more into the fraternity.

Pat Scolla, wb0egr

-----Original Message-----
From: mric-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:mric-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of brettham at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:17 PM
To: mric at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [MRIC] Fwd: 2009-04-25 MRIC Meeting

Dan,

I do not want to list the equipment I use because I do not want others 
to make the same mistakes I did. I think it would be more useful for 
new stations to have a list of equipment that incorporates those 
lessons learned, and lessons of others.

I am "fixated" with HF Winlink, because that is what almost every 
jurisdiction said they wanted to start with as a first step (HF Airmail 
 from the EOC). Each jurisdiction provided this input during the April 
2008 meeting. Also, why HF? because of the reasons listed in the 
document we approved a few weeks ago (i.e. greater overall bandwidth 
out of the affected area, not dependant on other stations, etc.).

Brett

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Blasberg <ka8ypy at verizon.net>
To: BrettHam at aol.com
Cc: mric at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Tue, 19 May 2009 1:11 pm
Subject: Re: [MRIC] Fwd: 2009-04-25 MRIC Meeting

Brett,

Let's be clear on the terms here, as winlink equipment can be anything
from an VHF or HF Airmail station to and RMS packet Gateway to a
Paclink station, etc.

Winlink is the overall network that includes four upper level CMS
nodes that control the flow of messages through the network and to/
from the internet. From there, are the RMS packet gateways, as of
today, May 19, there are currently 412 RMS gateways online, this
number is in flux based on active gateways. You then have the user
level, airmail (e-mail) stations of which there are thousands.

The three items I have gotten questions on have been:

VHF/UHF Airmail - Alinco DR-135, KPC3+ TNC, Laptop Computer running XP
and Airmail
HF Airmail - Icom IC706MkIIg, SCS USB Pactor II TNC, Desktop running
XP and Airmail
RMS Packet Node - I am currently responsible for two:
RMS 1: Yaesu FT-90, KAM XL TNC, Desktop running XP and RMS software
suite. (soon to have a UHF frequency added)
RMS 2: Alinco DR-135, KPC9612+ TNC, Desktop running XP and RMS
software suite. (soon to have a UHF frequency added)

You seem to be fixated on the HF portion of the system and the
settings required for it's use. That is all well and good, but with
all of the available frequencies for VHF and UHF there is more
bandwidth and more data rates available in the event of an emergency
compared to HF. There is also a quicker clear time of messages using
VHF and UHF as opposed to HF. Not to mention that RMS can handle
traffic from multiple stations in the field at the same time with
minimal lag time.

So why don't you list your equipment st-up for everyone to see.

As a matter of fact, would anyone and everyone using any form of
winlink/airmail please post their equipment set-ups?

Dan Blasberg
KA8YPY
Prince George's County RACES RO
Prince George's County ARES EC

On May 19, 2009, at 12:14 PM, BrettHam at aol.com wrote:

> Bill and Dan,
>
> Creating a generic equipment list was not the original plan. The
> reason
> we, as a group, decided a long time ago, and during many meetings
> since
> then, to create a list of specific equipment, was so that
> jurisdictions
> that wanted to set up a Winlink station would know what equipment to
> buy. Those of us that have been through setting up a Winlink station,
> spent many, many hours figuring out what we needed, what worked well
> for a Winlink application, and still got it wrong. Then many, many
> more
> hours figuring out what settings to use for our particular equipment
> set, and software configuration to get it working. For example,
> different radios require different modulation levels for a good
> signal.
> If you purchase the USB version of the Pactor III modem, rather than
> the serial version, you can remotely control your radio and tuner from
> your PC, whereas you cannot with the serial version. These are just a
> few of many examples I can give you of lessons I learned, and which
> those of us that have been through it wanted to incorporate into a
> document to make it easy for others to setup a station.
>
> Also, for those stations that choose to follow the MRIC recommended
> equipment list, we would provide configuration files, radio and modem
> settings and step-by-step online videos to get you up and running very
> quickly with no Winlink experience. This is now no longer possible
> since we don't know what equipment a station will be using. Clearly,
> deleting the recommended equipment list has made life much more
> difficult for those jurisdictions that want to set up a Winlink
> station. Now they will either be on their own, get advice from someone
> outside MRIC, or struggle through someone helping them that is not
> familiar with their equipment, and which may not be appropriate
> equipment to use for a Winlink station anyway.
>
> No one ever requested from me a generic list of equipment (i.e. VHF
> radio, antenna, etc.). That stuff is pretty much a no-brainer for any
> ham to figure out from the first part of the document that describes
> our nets. However, I have been asked personally, by at least half a
> dozen people for an equipment list they can use to purchase equipment
> for a Winlink station, so they don't have to go through the same
> struggle I did.
>
> Keep in mind, none of this is binding on anyone. It was just intended
> to be used as guidance material for anyone interested.
>
> Because there is so much interest in such a list, I suspect the
> subject
> will come up again at our next meeting where we hopefully will have
> enough attendance for the desires of the group to be fulfilled. I just
> hope that those that have made their intentions clear that they do not
> intend to use Winlink, will allow those of us who do, to assist those
> that want to.
>
> Brett
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Blasberg <ka8ypy at verizon.net>
> To: K3UEZ at aol.com; RACES MRIC LIST <mric at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Sun, 10 May 2009 1:34 pm
> Subject: Re: [MRIC] Fwd: 2009-04-25 MRIC Meeting
>
>
>
> Bill,
>
> I think that is what we ultimately wanted for the final product,
> besides the fact that we now do not have to revisit that appendix
> every couple of years and update manufacturer and model numbers.
>
> Dan
> KA8YPY
>
>
> On May 10, 2009, at 12:58 PM, K3UEZ at aol.com wrote:
>
>> Dan,
>>
>> Yeah... I sort of lean toward speking in generic terms when it comes
>> to equipment... and then if we need examples we can ask around and
>> say, "for instance...." Moreover, some EM's have deals struck with
>> certain suppliers for their commercial gear. They might also get a
>> break on the amateur side of it under that same brand. Don't know...
>> just guessing. Also, some jurisdictions like ours are going through
>> changes of buildings, communications gear ... all sorts of stuff...
>> that makes flexibility desirable. I think one of the main
>> considerations is whether the bulk of the operators who will be
>> using it are comfortable with it.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> The Average US Credit Score is 692. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MRIC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MRIC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
MRIC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
MRIC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html