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

Wed May 20 00:00:45 EDT 2009

All:

Something confuses me.  It appears that some members of MRIC believe that
just because the group voted on a topic and approved it (or voted it down
for that matter), that we should not be able to bring that topic up for new
discussions at some point in the future.  Why is that?

The technologies that make Amateur Radio what it is are a blend of the very
old (CW for example), the middle-aged (as an example SSB), and the cutting
edge (WSJT, P25, D-STAR or digital HF voice) for instance.  Hence, things
change.  And since nothing is cast into stone or concrete then pretty much
anything and everything MRIC discusses or votes upon at any time, including
"original plans", should be considered fair game to revisit as technologies
change, our missions change, or we discover that what we initially decided
upon at an earlier date does not work as well as something else.  We are not
to remain stagnant if we are to missions properly.  

Responsible, yes.  Stagnant no.

Just a thought.

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 12:15 PM
To: mric at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [MRIC] Fwd: 2009-04-25 MRIC Meeting

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