[PPRAANet] Re: PPARES: RE: DROPPING MORSE

[Craig Maxwell]

There may be hope yet (at least a little):

Morse Code Migrating To The Net
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/29/235254&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=95

By the way, Wes, I thoroughly enjoyed your email.

Craig Maxwell - KD0TS


--- Wes Wilson <wlw@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Mike --
> 
> > RE: DROPPING MORSE
> >
> > WHAT'S SO SECURE ABOUT TRANSMITTING SENSITIVE INFO
> OVER 40 M?
> > ARE THERE ONLY TWO 40 M RIGS IN CO/WORLD, CAPABLE
> OF TRANSMITTING
> > AND RECEIVING?
> 
> Unfortunately, under Part 97 rules & regulations,
> amateur radio operators
> are not allowed any type of encryption on any
> frequency/band -- even for
> security purposes.  Certainly, any amateur
> transmission can be monitored by
> other hams, depending upon
> license/training/equipment capability.
> Generally, sensitive information is routed via
> alternative bands/modes to
> prevent interception by rank-and-file Joe Q. Public
> or the media.  For
> instance, at the Campbell Fire, Red Cross needed to
> discuss with their HQ
> possible shelter locations strictly as a contingency
> for planning purposes
> SHOULD the fire take a turn for the worse.  The
> media gets hold of that
> information and before you know it, they are
> broadcasting that not only is
> there one shelter being opened, but now -- obviously
> -- the fire is much
> worse than anyone is telling them and will require
> multiple shelters with
> multitudes forced out of their homes.
> 
> The danger of this type of rumor mill getting
> started comes from the media
> and others who have scanners monitoring primarily
> our FM repeater systems.
> AND the news media does monitor our FM repeater
> frequencies closely,
> particularly during emergencies and SkyWarn
> operations.
> 
> Most scanners can't monitor HF bands, and SSB and CW
> modes in particular.
> Add to that -- the fact that most news media
> personnel probably aren't
> proficient in 20-25 wpm CW, this provides a 99.9%
> likelihood that sensitive
> messages can be moved discretely (or as discretely
> as amateur radio is
> allowed to do legally) without non-hams
> eavesdropping.  I'm not particularly
> concerned with hams racing to the news media with
> information they've
> gathered on alternative bands -- most know better,
> and any ham that does
> anything like this should be shot (or IS LIKELY to
> be shot).  Also, we were
> extremely discrete in even coordinating the
> alternative frequency
> arrangements.
> 
> > AS FOR PLOPPING DOWN $12 AND GETTING A LICS,
> ANYONE CAN PLOP DOWN
> > $79 AND GET A MORSE DECODER FROM MFJ.
> 
> Sure, but they can't use it at a VE session to pass
> their CW exam, can they?
> And this device certainly isn't standard equipment
> in media news rooms.
> 
> > ALL US MILITARY SERVICE SCHOOLS AND MAJOR SHIP
> COMPANIES, HAVE
> > DROPPED MORES CODE. WONDER WHAT THEY KNOW THAT WE
> EXPERT AMATEURS DON'T.
> 
> Oh, I forgot -- the military and major ship
> companies must know everything!
> [BTW, the correct spelling is MORSE not MORES].  The
> fact is, that we
> "expert" amateurs who use CW know something the
> other
> agencies/organizations/services apparently have long
> since forgotten -- that
> Morse Code is the first digital mode (developed back
> in the wired telegraph
> days of the railroad even before radio) and STILL
> remains one of the most
> simple and reliable radio communication modes on the
> planet.  Morse Code
> hasn't remained a viable communications mode for
> about 150 years just
> because some of us incorrigible die-hards refuse to
> give it up.  For one
> thing, pure simplicity -- no sophisticated
> equipment, satellites, repeaters,
> computers, TNCs, sound cards -- all that is needed
> is a simple transmitter,
> antenna and a keying device (this can even be a
> hastily prepared two pieces
> of bare wire in lieu of a telegraph key).  Oh, I
> almost forgot -- AND, a
> radio operator who probably wouldn't have bothered
> to learn Morse Code had
> s/he not been required to do so.
> 
> AND, while most shipping companies have now gone to
> other digital modes,
> satellite, etc., for the bulk of their communication
> needs, I think you will
> find that most maritime communication engineers
> maintain their CW skills at
> a high level!  Don't think that just because
> shipping companies have become
> reliant on satellite-based digital services, that
> they threw their HF
> equipment, microphones and CW keying devices
> overboard in bulk.  You can bet
> that on virtually any commercial maritime vessel
> (and many private ships)
> you will still find a good-old-fashioned HF rig,
> microphone and key in the
> corner.
> 
> Case in point (I know firsthand, because I was
> involved):  About 3-4 years
> ago a Cat. 5 hurricane (don't recall the name right
> offhand) raced westward
> across the Caribbean and the southern Gulf of Mexico
> and slammed Honduras
> and Belize causing extensive widespread death and
> destruction.
> Tens-of-thousands of lives were lost.  As I
> frequently do during such
> storms, I was monitoring the Hurricane Watch Net on
> 14.325 USB (20 meters).
> 
> A Texas station broke in and advised he was hearing
> what he thought was a
> weak SOS on 20 meter CW and thought it might be
> storm-related, but that he
> had extremely poor copy.  Several stations, myself
> included, advised NCS we
> would drop down, listen and advise.  Three of us had
> very marginal copy on
> the signal.  It was indeed an SOS, and it turned out
> to be from a Honduran
> fishing vessel caught in the heart of the storm,
> taking on water and rapidly
> sinking.  We were not able to communicate with the
> ship directly (he
> couldn't hear us due to QRN from the storm).  BUT,
> the operator kept sending
> his SOS, the ship name, and the lat/lon of the
> vessel over and over and
> over.  Collectively, we were able to copy the
> information and coordinates --
> before the signal disappeared.  We compared and
> pieced together what we had
> copied and an AZ station relayed that information
> back to the Hurricane
> Watch Net.  The rest of us continued to monitor the
> CW frequency in case the
> signal returned -- it never did.  The National
> Hurricane Center in FL
> relayed our information to the US Coast Guard which
> in turn relayed the info
> to various naval ships in the area.  I heard in a
> news report a day or two
> later that the ship (I recognized the name) had
> disappeared without a trace,
> however, a few survivors had been rescued by a
> Honduran Navy vessel.  Based
> on the difficult copy of the ship's CW signal, I'm
> convinced no other mode
> available to the vessel would have stood a chance. 
> I've often wondered, and
> sincerely hoped, that the radio operator was amongst
> the survivors.
> 
> Yes, the military and commercial shipping companies
> have abandoned Morse
> Code -- but they have billions of dollars worth of
> our tax payer money tied
> up in sophisticated communication systems (mostly
> digital satellite-based).
> While technologically wonderful and amazing, this
> does not necessary make
> them fail safe -- fast, convenient, flexible,
> secure?  Yes -- fail safe?
> NO.  As we have discovered, both the Office of
> Homeland Security and the
> military (witness PPARES inclusion in Fort Carson
> exercises) recognize our
> skills/capabilities as a vital backup communication
> resource.
> 
> There is an unofficial motto prescribed to amateur
> radio emergency
> communications groups "When All Else Fails" or "When
> All Normal
> Communications Fail."  We're most often asked to
> help do what our agencies
> can't or aren't able to do.  We're the designated
> backup, and one of our
> most dependable, time-tested and reliable "When All
> Else Fails" modes is
> Morse Code, which -- as you point out -- virtually
> everyone else has
> abandoned.  It is a key "Ace-in-the-Hole" that
> amateur radio operators,
> until recently, wisely have maintained despite
> others abandoning it as just
> "too much trouble to bother with."
> 
> There's a small Arctic rodent called the "lemming"
> which reportedly races to
> the sea and drowns itself -- should we, as amateur
> radio operators, follow
> suit simply because all the other lemmings have
> elected to drown themselves?
> I think not.
> 
> 73  Wes K�HBZ
> Former EC
> Pikes Peak ARES
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> 8/10 Race For The Cure (n0oud@arrl.net)
> 8/16-17 Pikes Peak Ascent (n0oud@arrl.net)
> 8/24 Emily Griffith Bike Ride (k0ter@arrl.net)
> ----------------------------------------
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ppares
> PPARES Web Site: http://www.qsl.net/ppares/
> ARESCO Web Site: http://www.qsl.net/aresco/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com