Air Force C-130 Hurricane Hunter [Archive]

ai4ep

08-30-2005, 02:21 AM

I would have seen NO WRONG in saying in your next radio transmission the current conditions of Biloxi, and that would have satisfied the man in the plane. Even though he had no call sign, he is up there risking his life to gether information to help SAVE our lives. You would not have had to confirm his radio transmission, you just could have casually mentioned what he needed to know, thereby keeping from repeating himself. IMHO you would not have broken the rules.

He is up there risking his life in those storms / hurricanes, and what he was asking was NOT beyond reason .

There would have been no need in making him look bad, or asking if any one else heard him....I am sure others will disagree...but if I had been in your shoes at that moment and I had the information he requested ready to read, I would have told him just what he wanted to know and possibly dealt with the PERFECT folks later.

" This is ( call sign ) and just in case any one is interested, here are the current conditions for Biloxi, Mississippi and read them with your call sign / time of day before you unkeyed ".

You would have been legal and read current weather information for your listeners.

wd5kca

08-30-2005, 02:37 AM

Quote[/b] (ve2nsm @ Aug. 29 2005,21:12)]Frequency cop hard at work? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I think I would have been willing to risk an OO card or FCC letter to help them out.

K9STH

08-30-2005, 02:38 AM

Back in the late 1960s this happened all the time. In fact, a couple of times the aircraft operator even wanted a phone patch run. However, since there was not a licensed amateur radio operator on board the aircraft it was definitely illegal to comply with their request.

You did what was legally correct and that was not to engage in a QSO with the aircraft station even though his request was reasonable.

Now, doing what EP suggested, but addressing the comments to one of the stations in the net would have given the information yet allowing you to remain within the letter of the law. If you just gave the information without "aiming" it at another amateur radio station then you would have actually violated at least two provisions of 47 CFR Part 95. The first would be "broadcasting" and the second would be communicating with a station that you were not authorized to communicate.

This might sound really "picky", and the FCC probably wouldn't do anything more than send you a letter telling you not to do it again (if they did anything) if they "overheard" the comments. But, you never know. It is always best to obey the rules by staying within the letter of the law.

However, again, there are "ways" of staying within the "letter of the law" yet being able to comply with reasonable requests.

Glen, K9STH

ae2ny

08-30-2005, 02:48 AM

I offer great thanks to those that have showed character enough to let me know there are other ways. I am new at NCS Operations, and I did what I thought was right at the time.

The Hurricane Hunter pilot was told he could monitor, but not transmit. One of my relay stations about every 10 minutes did read updates specifically having to do with the Biloxi region such as flooding and damage reports. But he never directed the reports at the C-130. They were just read as general updates. Although all of us on the Net knew who they were being directed at. I guess it was our way of being helpful to our boys in blue.

VE2NSM:

I am new at Net operations and still learning as I go. It's people like you that make people such as myself want to give up NCS Operations because of being so judgemental. Give us new guys a break huh? You never know when you'll need someone to give YOU a break.

But to everyone else including AI4EP, who gave such constructive criticism, I thank you. I've been able to learn from all this, and I will never forget the suggestions offered here today.

Best 73

Anthony - W8ANT

ve2nsm

08-30-2005, 02:59 AM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Aug. 29 2005,22:48)]VE2NSM:

I am new at Net operations and still learning as I go. It's people like you that make people such as myself want to give up NCS Operations because of being so judgemental. Give us new guys a break huh? You never know when you'll need someone to give YOU a break.
Best 73

Anthony - W8ANT
Right, I'm sorry about that.
Keep on and forget my comment http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

W5MJL

08-30-2005, 03:04 AM

What's sad about this is we have an fcc who hasn't been able to get k1man off the air for 15 years, yet we have to worry about something like this which is for the common good. Something just isn't right.

wd5kca

08-30-2005, 03:08 AM

Quote[/b] (w5mjl @ Aug. 29 2005,22:04)]What's sad about this is we have an fcc who hasn't been able to get k1man off the air for 15 years, yet we have to worry about something like this which is for the common good. Something just isn't right.
Yup, this would have been a very minor violation of the rules that would have never been noticed except by the pickiest of frequency cops.

W5HTW

08-30-2005, 03:17 AM

I'm a stickler for the rules. Been following them for 49 years. So this surprises me, and you too!

I would "probably" have considered this an emergency. I would have "had to be there" to make that decision, to hear it myself, and judge the content on that particular case.

We have the US Coast Guard frequently on 14300 USB for various maritime emergencies. I would have informed the aircraft that since this was an emergency involving possible loss of life, we can conduct a very minimal inquiry, but we cannot carry on a conversation beyond that. I realize the nature of the question was actually Health and Welfare, but with the hurricane actually in progress at the time, I don't think I would have seen much, if any, difference between that request and the communications we often hear from the Coast Guard on the MMSN.

But, I really would have "had to been there" and heard the context myself.

And I did listen to SATERN for several hours today, so am surprised I missed that.

Ed

ae2ny

08-30-2005, 03:22 AM

W5HTW:

They came on frequency at 1655Z, 5 minutes before I officially took over as NCS for the SATERN Net. Unfortunately, the situation wasn't resolved before time for me to take the Net, so it got dropped on me. HI HI http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

I didn't mind a bit. We also had another EA5 station intentionally interfering with the Net at approximately 1725Z even though he was told several times that it was an emergency Net he was interfering with.

So rather than get touchy with him, I just continued the Net, business as usual and he QSY'd shortly thereafter.

I jumped on the EA5, but I'll admit I was torn in half about the C-130. I knew why they were up there but I also knew the rules. I was torn as to what to do. I made a decision, and I stuck with it, right or wrong. I learned from it, so all is well in the world.

Anthony - W8ANT

ka5s

08-30-2005, 04:56 AM

N8CPA

08-30-2005, 10:09 AM

EES -- Ed echo syndrome.

Though it is strictly illegal to talk to unlicensed stations, any aircraft in a hurricane is a life - death situation, as far as I'm concerned. A legal solution would be to address the requested information TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS: to make it a mere transmission, as opposed to a b'cast, without directly acknowledging the plane. Loop-holing to be sure, but that hurricane was a special situation.

W2LYS

08-30-2005, 01:26 PM

Those folks in the C-130 are in a tough spot, but they aren't in a life or death situation. They're trained for running around in those storms. Plus, they have plenty of radio gear and frequencies available to them in those birds.

That having been said, and knowing what they're up there for and given the conditions of the past few days, I'd cut them a little slack and be kind to them. There's a lot of folks out there with a lot of hard work ahead of them over the next couple of months...

WA2ZDY

08-30-2005, 01:52 PM

Anthony, you did the right thing based on what you knew. No arguments from me. That said, I'm not a lawyer, but I'm going out on a limb here and I'm gonna say 97.111(a)(3) "Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with a United States government station, necessary to providing communications in RACES;" might have covered you. That comma in that sentence makes for a good case that (a)(3) specifies two different situations, and that aircraft was certainly a US government station.

Tough call, but . . . nobody can fault your choice. I'm with ya! Good job.

K4KWH

08-30-2005, 04:19 PM

If you know the FEMA and SHARES frequencies on HF, there is PLENTY of traffic on those frequencies. Military,
MARS, CAP and all! I doubt they would pay much attention if a station "checked in" to their net (I suppose a ham call might raise an eyebrow tho). Plenty of SWL activity above 40 and 20 Meters if you know how to find it!

N3HGB

08-30-2005, 05:25 PM

N3SOZ

08-30-2005, 07:36 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Aug. 30 2005,10:25)]It was interesting, that during the SATERN Net tody, we had a Hurricane Hunter C-130 come on frequency and ask about current conditions in Buloxi, MS. #Most of his crew lives there.

It was very difficult to tell them that they had no privileges on frequency unless a)they had a licensed amateur aboard or b)life or death emergency, which the answers to both were "no".

They were told they could monitor but could not transmit. #Sucks we had to tell them that, but what choice did we have?

Anthony - W8ANT

This is just screaming for a rules change. Amateur radio is supposed to provide support for events like this, and someone decides to stick to the letter of the law when a Hurricane Hunter comes up on frequency?? #When it comes to communication with non-amateurs, there should be a clause written into Part 97: During any declared emergency, if assistance is requested from the military, police, or public service officials, it will be provided without regard to the requestors status as a licensed amateur radio operator. What would be so difficult about that?

If I'm not mistaken, the military is not subject to FCC rules, so it was not illegal for the C-130 op to come up on the amateur frequency. This is a rare action to take though, which is all the more reason W8ANT should have cooperated.

KB1DIW

08-31-2005, 04:57 AM

?Quote[/b] ]Those folks in the C-130 are in a tough spot, but they aren't in a life or death situation. They're trained for running around in those storms. Plus, they have plenty of radio gear and frequencies available to them in those birds.

So when is flying into a Cat5 Hurrican not a life and death situation?

I mean sheesh. People here RISKING THEIRS LIVES to help millions of other here.

A simple message of relief is all these guys asked for....what, a total of 1min of airtime and some of you have to go quoting FCC scripture? Sheesh.

If there was nothing going on, yes, block em. Situations like this, you help fellow man. I am sure you would have been pissed off if you called 911looking for simialar information and they told you to go pound sand.

What happened to common sense and common courstsey

ae4fa

08-31-2005, 09:31 AM

Unusual situation, but it does happen. During one of the hurricanes last year a British warship checked in to the Hurricane Watch Net. He was in what is referred to as the affected area and needed a conditions report. He got it.

A few of the net controls debated how to handle it for a moment, but one guy resolved it by stepping up to the plate. He said something on the order of, "If I get a letter over this, I'll just deal with it." Good call.

I don't advocate breaking the rules; just note that there must be some flexibility in dealing with emergencies. I would be surprised if anyone gets gigged over something like that.

ai4ep

08-31-2005, 01:21 PM

.........if I were net control I would have just helped in what ways I could and dealt with the " perfect police " later.

helping others is the key part.

w3jn

08-31-2005, 01:31 PM

This thread is absolutely amazing. That some ham would refuse to provide what might prove to be vital/valuable information in an extreme weather emergency is just beyond appalling. Use some judgement, for God's sake - who is gonna bust your BAs for briefly talking to a hurricane hunter aircraft?

Ya know, ham radio just proves itself less and less valuable in emergencies. And it this sort of attitude that contributes to its decline.

Or so it seems to me.

KI6ABZ

08-31-2005, 03:10 PM

I was under the impresson that Amateur opertions were secondary to the military. In fact, my first radio was a unit that was modified by the military with an encoding device.

KA8NCR

08-31-2005, 03:55 PM

Quote[/b] (w3jn @ Aug. 31 2005,06:31)]This thread is absolutely amazing. That some ham would refuse to provide what might prove to be vital/valuable information in an extreme weather emergency is just beyond appalling. Use some judgement, for God's sake - who is gonna bust your BAs for briefly talking to a hurricane hunter aircraft?

Ya know, ham radio just proves itself less and less valuable in emergencies. And it this sort of attitude that contributes to its decline.

Or so it seems to me.
Post of the day!

The ONLY way it could have been worse is for a spirited or heated argument to break out on frequency over whether or not they could respond to the aircraft.

No one is likely to get any attention from the FCC in this situation considering that the home town of the aircrew is mostly blown off the map. It is not a stretch to consider it emergency communications and as net control, I would have terminated any further discussion on the legality of such communications immediately.

If I were cited in this situation, I'd personally deliver my ticket to 12th Street and eBay off my gear. The latter always remains an increasingly attractive option.

k6pme

08-31-2005, 04:11 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Aug. 29 2005,19:48)]The Hurricane Hunter pilot was told he could monitor, but not transmit. #One of my relay stations about every 10 minutes did read updates specifically having to do with the Biloxi region such as flooding and damage reports. #But he never directed the reports at the C-130. #They were just read as general updates. #Although all of us on the Net knew who they were being directed at. #I guess it was our way of being helpful to our boys in blue.
Under the circumstances, I think that was handled in the most appropriate manner.

I'm not sure what freq. SATERN operates on but maybe Hurricane Hunter crews could be AR licensed.

wb9mya

08-31-2005, 04:25 PM

With all of the contests, jamming, tuning up and general
nonsense on 20 meters, what's wrong with giving some
info to people risking their lives during an emergency?
This is what ham radio is all about. When every other form of communication is down, ham radio always gets through. ALL OF YOU FREQUENCY COPS NEED TO GET YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR ASSES.....

W5JO

08-31-2005, 07:15 PM

Two thing about this discussion is almost unbelievable to me.

First, that there would be a question in anyone's mind about providing the weather information immediately. A hurricane hunter is looking for local weather information. Who, in their right mind would question providing a military aircraft gathering weather data the requested weather information whether he has a ham license of not.

Second, the wide range of different advice concerning the "legal aspects" of the incident. It has been discussed before and when a state of emergency exists, a licensed ham can communicate with anyone on a ham allocation, state, local or federal frequency, even a person without a license can provide necessary and requested information. A state of emergency had been declared Friday prior to the event.

Come on guys, give help and forget the rules when they they are questionable and may not apply. Especially in a perilous situation such as this.

kc5bmj

08-31-2005, 07:58 PM

guys.. this was just dumb.

i read enough of this to get that sicko feeling in my stomach... not providing info to a military a/c on a mission supporting the emergency.

you need a swift kick in the junk, pal.

"ARES - getting in the way since...."

doug

KI4IJQ

08-31-2005, 09:12 PM

Quote[/b] (w3jn @ Aug. 31 2005,06:31)]This thread is absolutely amazing. #That some ham would refuse to provide what might prove to be vital/valuable information in an extreme weather emergency is just beyond appalling. #Use some judgement, for God's sake - who is gonna bust your BAs for briefly talking to a hurricane hunter aircraft?

Ya know, ham radio just proves itself less and less valuable in emergencies. #And it this sort of attitude that contributes to its decline.

Or so it seems to me.
i couldent agree more... i sincerely doubt the FCC would give you a letter for assisting a military aircraft... although im sure some idiot OO would, but those you can just file in the circular file

wa3vjb

08-31-2005, 09:21 PM

Anthony,
I agree with those on here who believe you would have been trusted for using good judgment had you provided any information this crew was requesting.

What puzzled me, and I was listening, is who was "Andrea." My first suspicion was that it may have been Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC, riding on board the plane.

All I could think of was Dan Rather trying to use ham radio to interview the kids in Grenada on HF while the US was invading the place.

In that case, all bets off. I would have declined.

w5alt

08-31-2005, 09:22 PM

Awww, come on now. It's real easy to second guess when you weren't there. Why don't you volunteer for net control instead of complain about someone else doing it?

The information was given, the rules were followed. The only people upset are the ones that complain on the internet.

And that, my friends, is NOT ham radio.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

KI4IJQ

08-31-2005, 09:35 PM

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Aug. 31 2005,14:22)]Awww, come on now. It's real easy to second guess when you weren't there. Why don't you volunteer for net control instead of complain about someone else doing it?

The information was given, the rules were followed. The only people upset are the ones that complain on the internet.

And that, my friends, is NOT ham radio.

73,
Walt, W5ALT
a state of emergency had been declared on friday, well before this took place, which would have made it a perfectly legal contact

W5MJL

08-31-2005, 09:43 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Aug. 29 2005,21:48)]The Hurricane Hunter pilot was told he could monitor, but not transmit. #One of my relay stations about every 10 minutes did read updates specifically having to do with the Biloxi region such as flooding and damage reports. #But he never directed the reports at the C-130. #They were just read as general updates. #Although all of us on the Net knew who they were being directed at. #I guess it was our way of being helpful to our boys in blue.
Has anyone actually read the post that started all of this? Please read the quote above. The information was still given in a roundabout way. He is a new net control and still learning. He did it the way he was trained to do it. Give the guy a break. He may have made a mistake, but the information was still passed.

k3msb

08-31-2005, 09:51 PM

Anthony --

I've had the opportunity to handle emergency traffic in a bonafide emergency situation. #Back in the late 1970s, there was a major flood in Johnstown PA. #There was a public plea for hams, #so my girlfriend and I drove down there. #When they found out she was a senior in the nursing program (we were both college kids), #they gave me some papers to plaster on my windshield to get me past the national guard checkpoints, gave me a map to the hospital, and I thus proceeded to man the only operation hospital in the city; #stayed there for a few days as I recall; #no phones, #only ham radio. #

That was my first time in a "real" emergency situation, and I certainly made mistakes and learned from them. #Sometimes the on the air lessons from more seasoned hams were not as polilte as they should've been, but nevertheless, we all got the job done. #As you've probably learned, #being NCS and handling multiple satellite stations, passing traffic, and just keeping things in line is a lot different in the "real thing" than in training. # #

In my opinion, you made an error in judgement; #if it was me, I'd have said screw the FCC rules and regs and helped the aircrew.

So, yeah, I think you made a mistake, and I suspect you've learned from it. #Keep up the work with NCS.

W7DJM

08-31-2005, 10:00 PM

""""This is just screaming for a rules change. Amateur radio is supposed to provide support for events like this, and someone decides to stick to the letter of the law when a Hurricane Hunter comes up on frequency?? When it comes to communication with non-amateurs, there should be a clause written into Part 97: During any declared emergency, if assistance is requested from the military, police, or public service officials, it will be provided without regard to the requestors status as a licensed amateur radio operator. What would be so difficult about that? """

I certainly agree with all the above. I'd also agree that since the whole area down there is pretty much a declared emergency, that ANY info of that nature should have been given to the aircraft.

This isn't the first time, and won't be the last, that non-amateur operators have shown up in the amateur bands with what SHOULD be a logical communication---regulations or no.

K3BM

09-01-2005, 12:14 AM

Quote[/b] (w5mjl @ Aug. 29 2005,23:04)]What's sad about this is we have an fcc who hasn't been able to get k1man off the air for 15 years, yet we have to worry about something like this which is for the common good. #Something just isn't right.

Amen

W5JO

09-01-2005, 02:52 AM

Quote[/b] (k3msb @ Aug. 31 2005,14:51)]Anthony --

I've had the opportunity to handle emergency traffic in a bonafide emergency situation. Back in the late 1970s, there was a major flood in Johnstown PA. There was a public plea for hams, so my girlfriend and I drove down there. Keep up the work with NCS.
I, too, have served my time in an emergency that stranded hundreds of people in a blizzard. I was on the air continously for over 36 hours and it wears one out.

You did what you thought was the appropriate thing Anthony, and you are to be commended for that approach. I may sound as if I am second guessing, but I do it from having been in a similar situation faced with the same type of requests. I did things differently but that was then. When things calmed down many, many people only remembered the good and respected those of us who did the work.

I can only encourage and suggest you continue and not be discouraged. Few people step up to the mike to work in a voluntary position such as this, and amateur radio needs people such as you.

w5alt

09-01-2005, 03:04 AM

Don't worry about all the critics, Anthony. Thanks for the job you did and continue to do.

I also have served in emergencies before, in fact right there where it's a disaster now, since I lived in New Orleans and Slidell for 15 years and worked right down the street from the Super Dome. You don't know how much it hurts to see the stuff on TV, so thanks for your efforts.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

ve9mp

09-01-2005, 03:33 AM

http://www.hamsexy.com/ARES1.jpg

n4cv

09-01-2005, 04:10 AM

Anthony,

I wanted to commend you on your job well done (so far) during this event. I was interested in the contact with the C130, though I could only gather what I could from your transmissions. Rules or not, you handled it well; you did what you felt comfortable doing. I am also intrigued to hear back about who "Andrea" was.

I remember another station checking in on the WX4NHC Watch Net earlier Monday afternoon who was Aeoronautical Mobile flying from Europe to San Diego (as I recall).

73 Anthony and thank you again for your service to the community.

Ben N4CV

k2jsv

09-01-2005, 10:50 AM

Quote[/b] (n4cv @ Aug. 31 2005,21:10)]73 Anthony and thank you again for your service to the community.
What service? What SERVICE did he provide?!

Cripes this is absolutely ludicris(sp?), it was an emergency net yes? The State of Emergency in those areas are an emergency yes? Was the C130 crew thinking outside the box to get information that they may not have been able to get?

You may as well have kick that person in their nuts and told them to go scratch. I can't beleive the lack of common sense here. There are occasions where you have to sit and say "Screw the rules" and do what is RIGHT!!

VE3ECM

09-01-2005, 01:27 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Sep. 01 2005,06:19)]
A Technician Class who can't even get onto HF radio has the nerve to slam me and what I did?!?

Hey dumba$$ listen up -

YOU get out onto HF radio, run a Net with your infinite knowledge and wisdom about how to run a Net and deal with every single unknown situation that comes up. #UNTIL YOU CAN EVEN LEGALLY TRANSMIT ON HF RADIO, GET OFF MY GODDA** BACK!

Whiny godda** technician class boob who can't even transmit on anything but local repeaters and he has the nerve to attack me in this thread.

I feel sorry for you... but at the same time... Until you've got HF privileges, butt out of my life and my Nets.

Anthony - W8ANT
Wow, a little defensive, perhaps?

All your reply did was show your lack of class.

Did you ever think that there are some of us that don't want to use HF?

I don't use HF, I play a lot at 900 and 1.2.

Attacking someone based on their license is the last bastion of the desperate.

You lose.

ve9mp

09-01-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Sep. 01 2005,06:19)]Quote[/b] (KC2KIT @ Aug. 31 2005,23:50)]Quote[/b] (n4cv @ Aug. 31 2005,21:10)]73 Anthony and thank you again for your service to the community.
What service? What SERVICE did he provide?!

Cripes this is absolutely ludicris(sp?), it was an emergency net yes? The State of Emergency in those areas are an emergency yes? Was the C130 crew thinking outside the box to get information that they may not have been able to get?

You may as well have kick that person in their nuts and told them to go scratch. I can't beleive the lack of common sense here. There are occasions where you have to sit and say "Screw the rules" and do what is RIGHT!!
A Technician Class who can't even get onto HF radio has the nerve to slam me and what I did?!?

Hey dumba$$ listen up -

YOU get out onto HF radio, run a Net with your infinite knowledge and wisdom about how to run a Net and deal with every single unknown situation that comes up. #UNTIL YOU CAN EVEN LEGALLY TRANSMIT ON HF RADIO, GET OFF MY GODDA** BACK!

Whiny godda** technician class boob who can't even transmit on anything but local repeaters and he has the nerve to attack me in this thread.

I feel sorry for you... but at the same time... Until you've got HF privileges, butt out of my life and my Nets.

Anthony - W8ANT
Funny.......I thought KC2KIT was a 911 Dispatcher and a Paramedic.....

Certainly, I'd imagine he has more "emergency communications" experiance than someone who would not ackowledge a USAF aircraft responding to a disaster that was looking for information about said disaster...

Now let the epic code vs. no-code battle begin.....I don't even know how I can bring myself to read this crap.....Aghhh!

k2jsv

09-01-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Sep. 01 2005,06:19)]Quote[/b] (KC2KIT @ Aug. 31 2005,23:50)]Quote[/b] (n4cv @ Aug. 31 2005,21:10)]73 Anthony and thank you again for your service to the community.
What service? What SERVICE did he provide?!

Cripes this is absolutely ludicris(sp?), it was an emergency net yes? The State of Emergency in those areas are an emergency yes? Was the C130 crew thinking outside the box to get information that they may not have been able to get?

You may as well have kick that person in their nuts and told them to go scratch. I can't beleive the lack of common sense here. There are occasions where you have to sit and say "Screw the rules" and do what is RIGHT!!
A Technician Class who can't even get onto HF radio has the nerve to slam me and what I did?!?

Hey dumba$$ listen up -

YOU get out onto HF radio, run a Net with your infinite knowledge and wisdom about how to run a Net and deal with every single unknown situation that comes up. #UNTIL YOU CAN EVEN LEGALLY TRANSMIT ON HF RADIO, GET OFF MY GODDA** BACK!

Whiny godda** technician class boob who can't even transmit on anything but local repeaters and he has the nerve to attack me in this thread.

I feel sorry for you... but at the same time... Until you've got HF privileges, butt out of my life and my Nets.

Anthony - W8ANT
Wow... touch a nerve did I?

How would you feel if a Woodridge Fire Chief got called to your house and said "Sorry we can't put the fire out because you don't have (INSERT DOCUMENT HERE)"

I may be a lowly no code tech... but I have a lot more dignity and integrity than you do.

And don't think for a minute that you are "the solution" to emergency communications in Sullivan County. We have professionals that take care of that for us.

VE9MP... just clarification. I am not a Paramedic.. I am an EMT-CLI. The CLI stands for Certified Lab Instructor.

ae2ny

09-01-2005, 01:59 PM

Interesting analogy, as I *AM* with Woodridge Fire.

OK so I will apologize for stepping over the line. I crossed the line and I realize that now that I've had the chance to calm down. So I offer my apologies, no strings in the hopes that you accept them.

It's just easy for someone who wasn't there to criticize the operating procedures of someone else. I hate that.

As far as you working for 53 Control? I have only one thing to say to you regarding that...

You're just like us at Woodridge Fire and every other station in Sullivan County... You never hear thank you nearly enough for the job you do. So...

THANK YOU for taking the stress of dispatch upon yourself and telling us where it is we need to go to help someone else. You truly are the first line of defense.

Take care and again, my apologies for having crossed the line.

Anthony - W8ANT

VE3ECM

09-01-2005, 02:12 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Sep. 01 2005,06:59)]
Take care and again, my apologies for having crossed the line.

It's nice to see there are some of us that have the ability to say they're sorry.

(Regardless of whether I think you "did the right thing" - because I don't.)

Kudos.

n4cv

09-01-2005, 02:15 PM

Quote[/b] ]You may as well have kick that person in their nuts and told them to go scratch. I can't beleive the lack of common sense here. There are occasions where you have to sit and say "Screw the rules" and do what is RIGHT!!

To each his own; what is "right" is a personal decision, and when it is your turn to talk to the pilot, you can make that decision for yourself.

Ben N4CV

k2jsv

09-01-2005, 02:22 PM

Now you see what I feel the way I do. Perhaps a lesson can be learned by all with this..

Anthony, perhaps you should go over and take a look at Hamsexy.com though. What you had done is widely considered to be a bad move, Amateur Radio and Emergency Services alike.

kb1fpd

09-01-2005, 02:24 PM

Lets just pretend for a minute that talking to this C130 was actually a violation that anyone would care about on any other day. Does anyone on this forum actually think the federal goverment gives a rats ass anything that happens on a ham radio net right now?? Has anyone turned on the news and seen what's happening down there right now?? You could broadcast Jerry Springer 24/7 and you wouldn't find a single federal, state, or local official that cared.

My opinion on the matter is the same as everyone else who says it was not handled right so I won't repeat what everyone else already said.

ae2ny

09-01-2005, 02:28 PM

I have never once cared what Hamsexy thought about me or anyone else for that matter. And I know quite a few QRZ users feel the same way I do about Hamsexy, so I won't even get into that.

The only things they got right about me, were my First name and my callsign. They couldn't even get my last name right or my city of residence.

Doesn't say much for them. *Shrugs* Everyone is going to have their own opinion about everyone. It goes back to "You can't please all the people all the time" so I don't even try.

It's nice to know however that the apology wasn't accepted. I'll be sure to steer clear of you at Fire functions and SCARS if you're a member.

Anthony - W8ANT

k2jsv

09-01-2005, 02:37 PM

I am letting it go as a difference of opinion. I would lose my job if I did what you did. That is why I feel the way I do.

And as far as SCARS is concerned... I am a VERY inactive member. I don't feel that the people involved with the "emergency communications" there get it. I forget his name and call... but at the SkyWarn training a few months ago at BOCES in Liberty... his statement about SCARS being the "Solution" for emergency communications in Sullivan County turned a lot of people off. Did you know that you had 3 dispatchers, a fire coordinator and the 911 coordinator at that training, all but one were licensed amateurs. So at that point you guys screwed yourselves in the regards of being able to work with the county. For what it's worth... I do accept your apology, mainly because I don't hold a grudge. Not worth my time and aggravation to.

But, it does pay to know who you are slamming before you do. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

PS, Don't steer clear of fire service or SCARS events because of me. I am very active within the county and would hate to limit myself because of a disagreement... so you shouldn't either.

ae2ny

09-01-2005, 02:39 PM

I've only been a member for 2 months, been living here for 4 months, almost 5. So I have no idea what happened before we moved up here. But you are making me think twice about renewing my membership at the beginning of the year.

You aren't the only one who has warned me about being a member.

Anthony - W8ANT

kc2nqk

09-01-2005, 02:43 PM

Quote[/b] (W8ANT @ Aug. 29 2005,18:23)]It was interesting, that during the SATERN Net tody, we had a Hurricane Hunter C-130 come on frequency and ask about current conditions in Buloxi, MS. #Most of his crew lives there.

It was very difficult to tell them that they had no privileges on frequency unless a)they had a licensed amateur aboard or b)life or death emergency, which the answers to both were "no".

They were told they could monitor but could not transmit. #Sucks we had to tell them that, but what choice did we have?

Anthony - W8ANT
Well, you've already been given viable options.. so I won't belabor the "what choice did we have?" bit.

But as both a local and federal emergency services worker, I'd like to ask you a basic question. How would YOU like to be treated if you were out there doing your job and doing your best to focus on that while your family was in harms way? Would you want to hear "sorry Dude, but you're not allowed to talk here"? Or would you rather have the peace of mind that came from having a bit of information how small? The legal issues have been hashed to death already, but there are also moral and ethical sides to this, too.

Better yet, here's another question. At the 911 Center, we consider Chiefs (cars 1,2, or 3) and apparatus to be "authorized" to communicate. If your fire captain or lieutenant has a radio and uses an identifier of 3804 or 3805, should I tell him or her "Sorry, but you need to find a phone, you can't use this frequency because you're not an authorized operator?" Or should I do the right thing and acknowledge their transmission and take their information? (Yep, I'm one of the voices you hear on a regular basis from there, too.)

The amateur operators in the county can't quite understand why the emergency services community doesn't call on them to help out more often. Situations like this one are a prime reason; when we're operating (I'm an EMT in the county also, and have been a firefighter as well, altho I'm not active right now) we need to know that we're going to have reliable communications, not have to worry about someone who means well tying things up.

ae2ny

09-01-2005, 03:23 PM

NQK:

I just got off the phone with your husband and let me tell you, WHAT an enjoyable conversation. I thoroughly enjoyed talking to Jim, and we both see things from the other's viewpoints now. I completely understand his view and he understands mine.

As I said earlier, I'm new at NCS and still learning, so I will make mistakes from time to time, but the important thing, is learning about them.

Now we both talked about NHT and his comment during the Skywarn training that completely pushed off county officials from using hams during emergencies. However he and I also talked about another FEMA program called CERT which is Community Emergency Response Team that is sponsored by FEMA & Homeland Security that has nothing to do with ham radio.

Give him a call and ask what we talked about. There were a few things we're keeping under our collective hats for now, but I'm sure he'd be happy to tell you how the two could mix and be one helluva training session.

Good to meet you and I really do hope to get the chance to meet you and your husband for an eyeball. You truly do have a phenomenal husband who in my view, epitomizes what fire services and ems SHOULD be in ANY county.

Best 73

Anthony - W8ANT
Quote[/b] ]
This type of message is better handled via private email or messenger. Please don't use the Forum for 1 to 1 messages. -fred AA7BQ

K9STH

09-01-2005, 03:31 PM

I believe that some people are losing sight of the fact that the question from the aircraft was answered in a timely manner. The situation was handled in a satisfactory manner and was done in a LEGAL manner as well.

Granted that in emergency situations (and the situation was NOT an emergency situation) that all sorts of things can be done. Just the fact that someone in an airplane wants some information does NOT make an emergency situation in 99.99 percent of the cases. Now, if 2 engines were out and the aircraft was needing information so that an emergency landing could be made then that, in my opinion (and I believe in the FCC's opinion as well), would definitely be considered an "emergency" situation.

Providing weather information was a courtesy, NOT a requirement. Now I do realize that the air crew was concerned with what was happening in their "hometown" and they did have the information as to where an amateur radio net was operating. But, the weather information was NOT necessary for the proper completion of their mission.

By referencing the "requested" information NOT to the aircraft but to another amateur radio station two definite things were accomplished: The first is that FCC regulations were observed. The second, and more important, is that the information WAS provided to the aircraft (and to the general amateur radio population and to anyone else who was listening as well).

It is my sincere opinion that the situation WAS handled CORRECTLY. The information got out and no rules were violated. As such, what is the problem? Situations like this can arise in any true emergency situation as well in situations that do not qualify directly as emergencies. All that it takes is some "thinking" on the part of the amateur radio operator and he/she can comply with reasonable requests (that are really against the rules) yet not violate any regulations of the Federal Communications Commission.

Glen, K9STH

nx6d

09-01-2005, 04:59 PM

W8ANT:

By continuing to respond to these guys, you're just contributing to them getting their jollies.

It's obvious your thread is being used by the anti-QRZ crowd to get some attention, and give them something to talk about.

The braggadocio runneth over re: pubserv. Seems like the real heroes don't need to constantly talk about it and get reinforcement.

Dave WX7B

w3jn

09-01-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Sep. 01 2005,08:31)]#Providing weather information was a courtesy, NOT a requirement. #Now I do realize that the air crew was concerned with what was happening in their "hometown" and they did have the information as to where an amateur radio net was operating. #But, the weather information was NOT necessary for the proper completion of their mission.

Glen, K9STH
Glenn, you're a true humanitarian.

Hell, you've convinced me. Those guys should have been with their families thru that hurricane anyway. What business did they have joyriding through a hurricane - at taxpayer's expense no less?!

Who cares that this is an appalling episode that brings huge discredit upon our hobby. What MATTERS here is that the RULES WERE FOLLOWED!!

VE3SXY

09-01-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote[/b] (WX7B @ Sep. 01 2005,09:59)]By continuing to respond to these guys, you're just contributing to them getting their jollies.

It's obvious your thread is being used by the anti-QRZ crowd to get some attention, and give them something to talk about.
Anti-QRZ? Jollies?

I commend ANYONE for volunteering services to the public. With a radio or not.

I find it really disturbing that rules are put forward before life and safety in this case. Bottom line. If it was a civilian plane asking for information... I would not care. People first in emergencies.

Weather? An update on a situation? Who cares?

I just find it ironic how numerous amateurs talk about "keeping amateur radio alive"... This is another instance where it tarnishes the hobby... and why I continually remind myself to be selective in who I tell... "I am an amateur radio operator."

KI4IJQ

09-01-2005, 06:04 PM

Quote[/b] (w3jn @ Sep. 01 2005,10:05)]What MATTERS here is that the RULES WERE FOLLOWED!!
wow... just... wow... #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

W5MJL

09-01-2005, 07:13 PM

I see the hamsexy crowd is all here.

K8TEK

09-01-2005, 07:15 PM

Ok, the man doesn't have a license to operate on that frequency... So what?

What about the fact that many hammys modify their rigs to operate on frequencies located in the public safety pool. #You sure aren't authorized to transmit on that frequency, and the radio is not type accepted for use on those frequencies. The common excuse is it is done "for emergencies only"

I am sure you all heard about cutting a single wire on Alinco rigs. #I am sure a lot have done it for just such emergencies.

W5MEJ

09-01-2005, 07:25 PM

Anthony, don't let the naysayers and the wannabe's get to you. #You volunteered to pull an NCS shift during a real emergency, and it sounds like you did a good job even though you have very little experience. #That's what it is all about. #Decisions are made "on the fly", and the important thing is to maintain order so that traffic can be passed.

I've spent most of my time on the West Gulf ARES net, but I have monitored other nets some this week. #I'm extremely proud of the job that amateurs are doing during this emergency, and it is far from over.

Normal communications still aren't up in many areas, and support from amateurs will remain important for quite some time. #Keep up the good work, and don't let criticism from the peanut gallery stop you...especially when it comes from the folks who have never operated anything more important than the hamsexy net on echolink!

Chuck

K9STH

09-01-2005, 08:48 PM

JN:

The aircraft crew was doing their jobs, what they get paid for. They were in no danger although they did want to know what was going on "back home".

Like it or not, they did not have any legal "right" to the information and responding directly to their request would have been a violation of the FCC regulations. HOWEVER, as I have stated several times in this thread, there are "ways" to get around FCC regulations and supply the information without violating the FCC regulations. This was done in the situation that has caused so much concern by a VERY few individuals.

Frankly, who cares if the aircrew was directly contacted or if someone else was contacted but the information was given. What is the difference? As I said before, and obviously I am going to have to say again and again (until a very few people can understand that it doesn't make a "hill of beans" difference to the aircrew whether someone talks "directly" to them or gives the requested information to someone else and "allows" that information to be "intercepted"), the information was "passed" in a "timely" manner.

Now if someone's feeling got "hurt" because they were not directly addressed, then, again, who cares! I doubt very seriously that the aircrew was offended because their questions got answered in a "legal" manner and not illegally. The final results were the same. The time it took to handle the situation was the same, if not slightly faster then it would have taken to adress the aircrew directly.

All that is being accomplished by those who keep criticizing the method in which this situation was handled is to make the persons involved "feel guilty" when, in fact, the situation was definitely handled in a correct manner. It may not meet the "approval" of certain individuals, but the matter was definitely "taken care of" to the satisfaction of those involved. That is what really counts.

Glen, K9STH

AA7BQ

09-02-2005, 06:57 PM

Folks,

I don't give a damn about the stupid and irrelavent FCC rules concerning ham radio in the context of this disaster. For crying out loud, people are dying in New Orleans from a variety of causes. How anybody could care in the least about a technical FCC rule violation by a government entity is completely beyond me.

The US Air Force doesn't need permission to transmit on ANY frequency. They are not subject to the FCC in any way. What ever gave any of you the impression that the FCC had domain over this?

I would have talked to the C-130, in the amateur bands, for as long as they remained in contact, and I would have given them any information that they requested. On top of that, I would not care what any of you think, or what the FCC would have to say about it. My only concern would be for the brave men in the aircraft, period.

Somebody please pinch me... I can't believe that we're having this discussion.

-fred, AA7BQ
Capt., USAF Auxillary, Civil Air Patrol

kb1fpd

09-02-2005, 07:54 PM

Quote[/b] ]Somebody please pinch me... I can't believe that we're having this discussion.
You aren't the only one baffled by the fact that this even happened.

VE3SXY

09-02-2005, 08:14 PM

Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Sep. 02 2005,11:57)]I would have talked to the C-130, in the amateur bands, for as long as they remained in contact, and I would have given them any information that they requested. #On top of that, I would not care what any of you think, or what the FCC would have to say about it. #My only concern would be for the brave men in the aircraft, period.
Well said Fred. I agree with you 100%.

In addition, if I owned a repeater in any such area... it would be in use by people that are trying to help with helping other people. Gather some portables up and perhaps, just perhaps make their life a bit easier.

Breaking the rules? Who cares.

KC9ECI

09-02-2005, 08:17 PM

Well said Fred.

K8TEK

09-02-2005, 09:53 PM

Fred, thanks for that response.

I could not agree more with you.

KC7ATO

09-02-2005, 11:28 PM

Fred, as one Pilot to another thanks for your statement.
KC7ATO

W0LPQ

09-03-2005, 12:43 AM

Fred, I have stayed out of this one, but I echo ATO..!

73

Bill, W0LPQ

09-03-2005, 01:58 AM

Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Sep. 02 2005,19:57)]I don't give a damn about the stupid and irrelavent FCC rules concerning ham radio in the context of this disaster. #For crying out loud, people are dying in New Orleans from a variety of causes. #How anybody could care in the least about a technical FCC rule violation by a government entity is completely beyond me.
Hello Sir’s
I have to Agree with Fred, aa7bq

Radio Amateurs the world over hold in high esteem the importance of our service in Emergency situations and the Ability to pass Information.

Now when there is such an Emergency situation instead of Amateur Radio fulfilling that role and being of use to the Emergency Services the very Ability to Pass Emergency Information is Denied??

People are Dead or Dying in a Shameful situation where little Help has been given (According to news reports in the U.K) and i can not believe that Amateur Radio on this occasion has not done all it could.

We Argue (debate) over what’s Best cw/ssb ect to Send that Information? Well Gentlemen i hope this is a wake up call? As it does Not matter how that Emergency information is Sent as long as it IS.
73s de Samantha 2e1dau

k0abe

09-03-2005, 03:02 AM

I would have talked to the C-130, in the amateur bands, for as long as they remained in contact, and I would have given them any information that they requested. #On top of that, I would not care what any of you think, or what the FCC would have to say about it. #My only concern would be for the brave men in the aircraft, period.

Could not have said it better myself.

k4wtf

09-03-2005, 04:35 AM

(1) The C-130 did not need an amateur operator onboard - The military is the PRIMARY user in the spectrum. Amateur is SECONDARY.

(2) It is difficult to see an Extra class operator who knows so little about the allocations that he has the nerve to tell a USAF aircraft that they have "no priviledges on frequency."

If this had happened to me while I was in the military, I would have read you the riot act, dismissed you from the frequency, requested that a COMPETENT NCS take over the net.

With that said, you are admittedly an F.N.G. when it comes to NCS. Being an extra, I can't excuse you for not knowing that Amateur Radio is the SECONDARY user though.

Am I the only one to notice that W8ANT has been canceled?

http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2683969

Things that make you say....

-WTF

N2MWE

09-03-2005, 05:02 AM

Let's put an end to this real quick...OK, W8ANT messed up, it happens. You know why he probably did it? Because we have so many damned ham cops out there who break nuts on people when they make the slight misstep. Maybe this isn't so much Anthony's fault as it is the damned HamCops. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

K8TEK

09-03-2005, 06:19 AM

Quote[/b] (k4wtf @ Sep. 03 2005,00:35)]Am I the only one to notice that W8ANT has been canceled?

http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2683969
Hmm... Interesting.
http://images.tkramer.com/chin0.gif

w8amd

09-03-2005, 06:25 AM

Quote[/b] (k4wtf @ Sep. 03 2005,00:35)]Am I the only one to notice that W8ANT has been canceled?

http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=2683969

Things that make you say....

-WTF.
New call. ex W8ANT is now AE2NY.

KC9ECI

09-03-2005, 10:42 AM

Hindsight is 20/20 guys. Would have, could have, but didn't. That's what all you Monday morning quarterbacks did, you didn't. It was Tony in the hot seat and he called it like he seen it. Right or wrong, it was his decision to make. I'm sure all of you ALWAYS make the right decision. Next time, YOU step up and take the NCS position and then YOU can handle things the way you see fit.
Right decision, wrong decision, it doesn't matter now, it's done. Move on.

WTF-
No, you're not the only one, there is a whole thread devoted to it. It's pretty obvious that Tony had the new vanity call in process way before Katrina was even a moderate breeze over the ocean. Nothing sinister about the old call being cancelled and the new call issued.

w8amd

09-03-2005, 10:56 AM

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 03 2005,06:42)]It was Tony in the hot seat and he called it like he seen it. Right or wrong, it was his decision to make.
Amen! What my call would have been is irrelevant. I was not in the position. He made a judgment. Right or wrong, it was his call. A person who steps up and makes a call, even if the wrong one, is a better leader than those who sit back and debate.

The topic has been dissected, examined and each of us has drawn our conclusions. Nothing can be done to change it now. My post and all of them for a while are just an exercise in futility.

ad4mg

09-03-2005, 12:55 PM

ai4cb:Quote[/b] ]Fred, please relock the thread before any more damage is done.
Please do so Fred. #It doesn't make any difference now who is right or wrong. #Your re-opening the thread, and your post has pretty much declared "open season" on the guy who was volunteering his time to help others.

Do any of you believe now that folks will just step up to the microphone and volunteer their time knowing that EcommCops who know everything will critique their every word?

And a word for the EcommCops ... just because you think you are right doesn't make it so, and the primary reason I say this is that not a dang one of you had your ass sitting in ANT's chair.

Issues like this can be handled in a manner that encourages our volunteers, if they made a mistake. #For the reasons Glen posted, I think the man made a damn good call in the heat of the battle.

And talk about jumping to conclusions ... great work on the callsign issue. #Reminds me of a pack of drooling, starving dogs with fresh, raw meat in front of them. #Very nice indeed.

***** This entire discussion is just wrong. #A decision was made, and it's over. *****

W5MJL

09-03-2005, 02:11 PM

Quote[/b] (k4wtf @ Sep. 03 2005,09:06)]When I saw that it was canceled, I DID say "WTF?!" #Then again, I would change my callsign too if I were him. #If the paperwork were in play already for a change, I'd thank my lucky stars for that.

--WTF
If? Do you know anyone that can change their call in a few days?

k4wtf

09-03-2005, 02:13 PM

Quote[/b] (w5mjl @ Sep. 03 2005,07:11)]Quote[/b] (k4wtf @ Sep. 03 2005,09:06)]When I saw that it was canceled, I DID say "WTF?!" Then again, I would change my callsign too if I were him. If the paperwork were in play already for a change, I'd thank my lucky stars for that.

--WTF
If? Do you know anyone that can change their call in a few days?
It took less than 3 days to go from KC4KGU to K4WTF. Does 3 days count as "a few"?

W5MJL

09-03-2005, 02:15 PM

Well I just changed my call and it took 19 days.

Anthony mentioned he was changing his call quite some time ago.

ad4mg

09-03-2005, 02:29 PM

wtf:Quote[/b] ]I was looking in ULS to find out when he became an Extra class operator so I could go look through the question pool that HElearned/memorized/played multiple-guess with. #I will personally be requesting that questions covering this exact type of interaction be included in the next round of question pools for ALL license classes
Well, shame on you for checking up on a volunteer who is doing his best under difficult conditions. #Did you also run a criminal background check and credit check on him? #Mighty high pedastal you speak from there OM. #Oh yeah, repeating or quoting bits of part 97 regs is redundant ... all licensed amateurs are required to have a copy on hand, but you knew that, didn't you?

Like I said, just because YOU think he made a bad call does NOT necessarily indicate that you are right and I am wrong, but I've noted that none of that matters. #You just didn't read that part of my post, or you are hell bent to continue beating up on a volunteer. #I guess you are a certified EcommCop. #Keep up the good work. #It does wonders for the relief effort and encourages everyone to participate.

ae2ny

09-03-2005, 02:39 PM

Well, decisions have been made. I've been following this thread closely and have made two decisions regarding my future as an emergency communicator.

1) Never again will I volunteer to step up into the NCS chair again.

2) Emergency Communications, I have decided, will now be everyone else's problem and not mine.

Sure, I haven't been an Extra very long but I can say this... I applied for my change of call to an Extra Class callsign on August 15, 2005 which was long before Katrina was even thought to be a problem. So checking up on WHEN I became an Extra just doesn't make sense to me.

Anyway that's all I have to say. This will be my last post regarding this issue, and I will not post again in regards to EmComm.

As I said, EmComm can be everyone else's problem. I will not step up into NCS and I will not take part in the Emergency Nets. Why? Because I just don't give a damn anymore. If this is the way someone is treated for making a mistake, then I want to be nowhere near emergency communications.

Anthony - AE2NY

ad4mg

09-03-2005, 02:54 PM

wtf:Quote[/b] ]I will personally be requesting that questions covering this exact type of interaction be included in the next round of question pools for ALL license classes
And I'm sure that you will post a copy of your correspondence here for all to review when you do, right? #This is a very important matter, and we certainly don't want you to forget to issue your personal request.

w0nka

09-03-2005, 04:29 PM

Quote[/b] (ae2ny @ Sep. 03 2005,07:39)]1) Never again will I volunteer to step up into the NCS chair again.

2) Emergency Communications, I have decided, will now be everyone else's problem and not mine.

Anthony - AE2NY

That is too bad. I would have done the same thing you did. I think you made only one mistake. You posted you actions on this thread. There are people that get off on being a jerk. The 1st reply was a good indicator.

Good luck with what you choose to do.

Shane.

ai4ep

09-03-2005, 04:59 PM

nka...we all should go back to page 1 and read the first REPLY to his opening post ( the one about the frequency cop )...and consider the source.

simple & to the point.

ai4ep

K7FE

09-03-2005, 05:18 PM

This thread has become far too personal with the attacks.

It has been articulately stated by many posts in this thread that Hams should be helpful to Military/Emergency services #in times of need and I agree. #In this case the information requested was indirectly conveyed to our boys in the C-130, so Anthony gets partial credit. #I would have been more direct and asked the C-130 in what other way might the net be of assistance to them. #

Those of you who have read these boards for a while know that W8ANT/AE2NY asks many questions about “how to”. #He is learning and willing to ask questions that others may not know, but are unwilling to ask. #His first post in this topic has a question mark in it. # Don’t forget that Anthony was there on “Ham Radio” trying to be useful operating in an emergency communications net while others were on their computers playing. #Anthony is a “Real Ham”, he operates a radio and tries to be helpful.

Terry, K7FE
One of the QRZ.Com Moderators

WA9SVD

09-05-2005, 11:51 PM

Politically correct or not, right or wrong, Anthony handled the situation as he saw fit, as HE understood the rules. HE was willing to help out. And he used his good sense to handle the situation in a legal manner, yet conveyed the information necessary.
As unpopular as it may seem, or even as inhumane, the situation was not a "dire life and death" situation, as defined by the FCC. So TECHNICALLY, the exchange, once it was realized that the contact was with a non-Amateur station was not permitted.
As was stated previously, the military may indeed have privileges anywhere in the spectrum. But my understanding is that would be MILITARY communications, between military stations. Communications with a non-military station, however, is a different matter. While a military station could probably operate anywhere they wish (and the FCC wouldn't have jurisdiction, it would be a military matter) a civilian station answering WOULD be under FCC rules.

The bottom line is the situation was handled well, and conveyed the information requested, and in a legal manner.

kd7msc

09-06-2005, 12:12 AM

Should have talked to them and let them talk back, unless he was interfering with emergency traffic.

ai4ep

09-06-2005, 12:37 AM

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

you folks that are all so perfect should run it your self.

If you dont like the way things are done..do it your self.

{ I am being nice , see the smiley at the top ? }

AI4EP

K3UD

09-06-2005, 02:06 AM

I see that this thread has come back to life.

I don't fault Anthony for what happened on the net.

Emergency operations are tough and it is very possible to become snared in the web of FCC rules and Regulations and get into a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. It is also tough being a NCS. I did some of it in the 70s with various nets including ECARS and have a feel for how it works. A net like SATERN probably increases the workload by orders of magnitude.

My personal feeling is that if I were the NCS when the crew in the C-130 checked in to ask for information, I would have given it if I had it and waited for the letter from Riley Hollingsworth which probably would have never been written anyway.

Alternatively I might have asked the net if anyone had the info and could pass it on to me, knowing that the C-130 crew would hear it. IMHO the FCC needs to issue some guidelines concerning this type of thing. During an emergency when health, welfare and emergency traffic is the order of the day, all or most bets should be off.

I know that Anthony is not going to post on this subject anymore, but does anyone know if SATERN has any formal training for the post of NCS?

73
George
K3UD

KI6ADA

09-06-2005, 05:49 AM

Quote[/b] (ae2ny @ Aug. 29 2005,18:23)]It was interesting, that during the SATERN Net tody, we had a Hurricane Hunter C-130 come on frequency and ask about current conditions in Buloxi, MS. #Most of his crew lives there.

It was very difficult to tell them that they had no privileges on frequency unless a)they had a licensed amateur aboard or b)life or death emergency, which the answers to both were "no".

They were told they could monitor but could not transmit. #Sucks we had to tell them that, but what choice did we have?

Anthony - W8ANT
I worked on C-130, in Air Force. The plane I worked on came with all the radio equipment for both Aircraft band and Amateur band. However in the radio test checklist, the assigned ground frequency was the only legal transmission allowed from the aircraft. We'd sit there late at nite and listen to the Amateur radio while doing our flightline responsibilities. None of us back than were Amateur radio operators.
As far as the weather bird, I would not have communicated with them. I might break frequency and announce a net update. Broadcasting?? The aircraft should not respond to Amateur transmission. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

k4wtf

09-06-2005, 07:55 AM

Quote[/b] (KI6ADA @ Sep. 05 2005,22:49)]
I worked on C-130, in Air Force. The plane I worked on came with all the radio equipment for both Aircraft band and Amateur band. However in the radio test checklist, the assigned ground frequency was the only legal transmission allowed from the aircraft.

For a checklist procedure, that makes perfect sense. The primary radio was most likely a MIL-1000 (not the actual nomenclature of the radio but rather the manufacturers designation. It's been YEARS since I worked in Military comm-elec!) It will do pretty much DC to Daylight, all modes.

Quote[/b] ]
We'd sit there late at nite and listen to the Amateur radio while doing our flightline responsibilities. None of us back than were Amateur radio operators.

Attention folks... The next time you're on HF and hear someone talking smack about our men and women in uniform and hesitate to offer a rebuttal, remember that the good men and women being smeared might just be listening!

Quote[/b] ]
As far as the weather bird, I would not have communicated with them. I might break frequency and announce a net update. Broadcasting?? The aircraft should not respond to Amateur transmission. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

I agree and disagree at the same time.

Agree: If the R.O. on the C130 is monitoring an amateur net (for whatever reason) it should not respond to an Amateur radio operator hailing "US Air Force C-130"...blah blah blah...

Disagree: The Amateur Radio operator should ALWAYS acknowledge *ANY* United States military station. If I understand correctly, in the situation being discussed here the C-130 actually called NCS, identified and then requested the information.

Anthony acknowledged the station. He then went on to communicate with them (MIS-informing them that they did not have privlidges on the frequency). If he was worried about being in trouble for communicating with a non-Amateur station, he's already screwed the pooch by doing the above.

Asknowledgement of the station - to the letter of the law (regulation in this case) - is enough to be a violation. What makes this different is that the station had every right to be on frequency, every right to communicate with ANYONE AND EVERYONE capable of monitorning and transmitting on the frequency, and beyond that, a state of emergency had ALREADY been declared.

I'm wondering... If the station had said, "SATERN NCS, this is USAF HH C-130 Heavy declaring an in-flight emergency... Our current GPS fix is X lat and Y long, altitude is Z and we're doing AA knots losing altitude at a rate of BB per minute!"... would the response have been any different? How many amateurs on frequency could have/would have copied the information correctly and had the presence of mind to relay the information to the FAA and or the (local?) Military Air Station? Out of 1000, I'm betting on less than 5 and those five probably wouldn't be on frequency.

It's not like the C-130 came on freq and started asking for a repeat of the latest EAM (Emergency Action Message). It's not like the C-130 referred to Anthony as "Mainsail"... The Air Force radio operator followed AMATEUR RADIO net procedure and called NCS.

NCS proceeded to try to "school" a military radio operator about what he/she was permitted to do. Gosh, I wonder why radio operator school is several MONTHS long when all they REALLY need to do is put them in a room with a couple of Kilocycle Cops for 20mins. After 20mins, the K-Cops will have "schooled them" to know exactly what they can do and can't do. After all... Who knows more about military communications regulations than a bunch of pent-up old-fart HAM-Humps?

It is a moot point that the "net" then proceed to give updates about the area that was inquired about... The fact that there was ANY acknowledgement of the Aircraft, then followed by the "you don't belong to our club so, we won't talk to you any more" garbage is what matters. I'm so sorry... I don't care how new or old you are to Amateur Radio, when a station identifies itself as "United States Airforce HH C-130" it is quite obviously NOT an amateur radio operator. If you're so afraid of getting in trouble for communicating with someone who doesn't hold a valid amateur radio license, why in the world would you COMMUNICATE WITH THEM and try to "school" them by saying (quoting Anthony here) "they had no privileges on frequency unless a)they had a licensed amateur aboard or b)life or death emergency"http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Hello... According to your reasoning for giving the above response, you just violated the same rules that led you to give the above response by virtue of GIVING THE RESPONSE AT ALL!

During the next ARRL field day, I think I'm going to have to come up on a random 20m freq and start calling "MAINSAIL, MAINSAIL... This is Amateur Radio station K4WTF." Hopefully, the 1000's of HH C-130's who want to "illegally" use 20m for communications will acknowledge me, exchange QSL cards with me and then, I'll be able to win my WAMAOOAFI (Worked All Military Aircraft Operating On Amateur Frequencies *ILLEGALLY*) award.

How you like THEM apples!

Hell... To make life easier on them, I'll work split. I'll call on random 20m freqs with "MAINSAIL, MAINSAIL... This is Amateur Radio station K4WTF... Please acknowledge on 11.175Mhz..."

Hopefully, the reasonable "can think for themself" crowd can see my point here and those who are borderline will use Anthony's experience as an excuse to grow a set of balls and actually USE them when the time comes that they have to step outside the box and THINK FOR THEMSELF!

Semper Fidelis,

K4WTF

PS: Kudos to the airman I quoted and thank you for your service!

W0LPQ

09-06-2005, 12:16 PM

C-130's used to have the Collins 618T HF system (triple) which is a 400W radio. Do not know what is on the new J models, but up to that point, was 618T's. Which Collins has not made for some years.

Been a while since I'd heard the collective call "Mainsail"..! Collins was active on all the Military HF nets in the early to late 60's.

TAC HF Network used to use that one also.

73

Bill, W0LPQ

ad4mg

09-06-2005, 02:15 PM

Oh good ... this thread is open again. #Now everyone can pound on the net control station for volunteering his time, doing the very best he knew how to do, and actually making a decision and sticking to it.

How dare he take NCS duties and actually make a decision without consulting the "after the fact, I wasn't there but I know better" EcommCops first!

Yes, let all the "hindsight = 20/20" quarterbacks pound his ass right into oblivion. #Great move, opening back up this can of worms. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

k4wtf

09-06-2005, 02:37 PM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Sep. 06 2005,07:15)]Oh good ... this thread is open again. Now everyone can pound on the net control station for volunteering his time, doing the very best he knew how to do, and actually making a decision and sticking to it.

Blah Blah... I'm not pounding on Anthony. I'm trying to stress that the DECISION was wrong so that in the future, others will not make the same mistake.

Quote[/b] ]
How dare he take NCS duties and actually make a decision without consulting the "after the fact, I wasn't there but I know better" EcommCops first!

Don't consult anything but your rulebook.

Quote[/b] ]
Yes, let all the "hindsight = 20/20" quarterbacks pound his ass right into oblivion. Great move, opening back up this can of worms. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

You make the assumption (inaccurately) that anyone is pounding ANYTHING on Anthony. (What's with the fascination with his Ass by the way?) The point is being made that the DECISION was wrong.

Think of it this way. If you saw a young person sitting around saying, "Two plus Two equals FIVE!"... would you not correct them and continue to do so until they realized and acknowledged the CORRECT answer?

The fact of the matter is that it has been pointed out multiple times in this thread that a) the Military has privlidges ANYWHERE they want to transmit, b) a state of emergency had already been declared, c) there are multiple excemptions for instances just like this right in part97.

Sadly however, there are STILL people who say, "I wouldn't talk to them. I don't want to get in trouble!"

"I wouldn't talk to them."
"Two plus Two equals FIVE!"
"I wouldn't talk to them."
"Two plus Two equals FIVE!"
"I wouldn't talk to them."
"Two plus Two equals FIVE!"

-WTF