MARS addsWinlink to e-comm arsenal

Why glad you asked.

But not sure what is meant by average?

But an amateur that would desire the best possible and reliable connected state HF protocol would use it.

They could use much free software available to send messages with attachments, or just keyboard and have fun. Connect 2 computers together and transfer data on HF, with free software for file transferring.

They might want to connect to their router and use the Internet, from a remote location, on their laptop.

An Internet Goggle search on Pactor will yield some great studies done for this reliable HF mode. Plus many sites with uses and products to support this fine mode, that WinLink wisely uses.

73…………………….

 

Thank you for calling region 1 unrational

 

Average would be those folks you encounter on the bands everyday ragchewing, chasing DX, county hunting, etc. Not much use for a connected state protocol for those applications.

What free software supports the Pactor-III modems other than Airmail/Winlink2000?

Can you call CQ and expect an answer? What are the Pactor-III calling frequencies?

Is it better for contesting than what is currently used?

Does it support one to many and many to many QSOs?

What advantage does it have for QSOs when I can only type at 1/10th the speed the modem is capable of?

Why would I want to send files over HF when the Internet is 1000s of times faster?

Why would I spend ~$2K just on modems and license fees alone not to mention the additional radio to access the Internet remotely and then have to worry about the content that was being transferred? My entire investment in amateur radio gear from 1965 to present is only a little more than that and I am using one of the best transceivers out there for HF.

For a robust messaging service on fixed channels that can accomodate large amounts of traffic error-free in a single session Pactor-III is the best there is. For the few that need remote, non-commercial, infrequent access to the Internet beyond WiFi hotspots it has some utility.

Beyond that, I do not see any widespread use in the amateur community for the types of communications routinely conducted. The cost-benefit analysis fails.

 

Much to mull over......

Glad that we have a definition of the "average" ham, and that you have insight into what they may or may not wish to do. I think the "average ham", a term you wish to use, not me, is someone that enjoys particular facets of the hobby. He/she may enjoy the things you indicate; they may also have some specialty aspects. Such as satellite work, or weak signal VHF/UHF ssb contacts,  RTTY contesting, slow scan TV, or repeaters and FM only. Perhaps they enjoy microwave long haul dxing and the like.

So that we can move on, what do I think the "average ham" is? It is someone that enjoys the hobby, learns from it, and does with it whatever they feel capable or comfortable with. They will spend money as they deem fit, and may wax or wane from one aspect to another, as time and money, or current vogue pressure dictates.

Not sure that the statement "not much use for connected states" means much, especially since thousands of amateurs used to enjoy packet radio, both FM and HF, when it was in vogue. When it was "cutting edge", and did I forget to mention, "a connected state" mode. Or Amtor, which was also a connected state mode, if one desired to do so.

Free software............

Well a trip to the SCS web site and follow the links, there is a wide range of free and powerful soft are to support the SCS modem, and Pactor 3. That modem has many capabilities I must mention, not just pactor 3. Like, RTTY, PSK31, ASCII, Amtor, CW, HF and FM packet modes up to 19.2.

I would say a lot of bang for the buck for the "average ham", that wants to have fun. This may run the gauntlet from rag chewing, to file transfer, even to to experimentation.

Can you call CQ?    Calling Freq.... Contesting....

Well yes you can, and in Pactor, its done in FEC mode, the the party connects to you, and away you go, fine rag chew QSO, even in very weak signal conditions.

Like any digital mode, its calling frequency is the allowed portions of the band for the bandwidth you wish to use. Like RTTY,  Gtor,  Clover, and Olivia, those that want to call CQ will find a spot to do so. I will agree that it is not the general rag chew digital mode such as PSK31 or Olivia, but does that make it any less fun, or desirable for its use.

Pactor 3 is a more advanced protocol that has great features, such as binary file transfer. I was not aware that calling CQ was a prerequisite for the use of a data mode.

I will also agree it is not the general style of contesting mode, again it has many functional uses, and again I was not aware contesting was a prerequisite.

Would I spend the money on it.......

Well like any specialty aspect of the hobby, its what you wish to do. I know many friends that are avid Collins operators, and spend thousands of dollars and lots of time just to get a station on the air. That is what they wish to do, that is the aspect of the hobby they desire.

I know many who spend a lot of money on ATV or satellite equipment, and its cost is far beyond an SCS modem. But so what?  They are doing of the hobby what they wish to do. If you do not want to buy the modem, then don't. But lets refrain from nit picking questions, designed to create a specific outcome, for the basis of some ambiguous argument.

There are thousands of traveling amateurs that do use the protocol and do send email all over the world. There are many instances where its applied use goes beyond just emergency message handling. My friend has a motor home and spends his life traveling and WinLink and Pactor 3, has kept him in touch with family and friends, for free, after the initial investment.

Cost benefit analysis...

Boy bet you don't spend anytime at the candy store do you? Didn't know I had to apply business economics 1A, to determine if my hobby is going to make me happy, based on some need to justify the purchase. The "average ham", justifies what they spend on what they want to and can. It is a service that is rooted in experimentation, public service, and just having fun. Not sure we can put a cost benefit analysis to that, or want to.

I am happy for you that you operate your station on such a small cost of just a 2K since 1965. Well good for you. Others may do it differently, and since some of us do not adhere to your definition of the "average ham", and is cost analyzing every purchase, don’t infer that makes you better than others. It just means you are frugal and not one to try out a lot of new things. It is what you wish to do, and so be it.

Yes the Internet is faster, so what? This system works when area Internet outages occur, or do not exist at all. It is very cost effective to any satellite based data transfer system.

Winlink2000, pactor 3, and all that goes with advance state connected modes is not for every one. But because a handful seem bent on curbing its use, which is not going to happen, there is no need for it to meet some special criteria.

And a far as its “wide spread use in the amateur community”, try this response………

It has as many users and applications that the “average ham” wants to make of it. Its numbers are as strong as any “specialty” aspect of the hobby, and has as much right to the bands as does CW.  If we all applied your logic to this hobby, we would be 20 years behind the rest of the world, and have lost many more of our bands to commercial interest a long time ago.

I close with this…. Have you used the SCS modem or its many features? Have you downloaded the free software available to look at? Have you used pactor 2 or 3 protocol?

And if you have, and have a subject matter expertise in it, and HF data modes, we will be happy to acknowledge same.

73…

 

Clearly the FCC has always considered the role of the Amateur as licensee in the third party traffic issue. The assumption was that the amateur as licensee would have some ability to control the process as to content lawfulness. The second passage reflects the FCC's understanding that even with an Amateur sitting there, there could be a "slip-up" with what the parties say. Clearly this is intended to be the exception rather than the rule.

What we need from the FCC is clear interpretation of what the Amateur is responsible for in the world of new digital modes where he/she may not have visability into the message content. And secondly, what is considered a "slip-up" versus the possibility of something like email where content that might be considered in violation of the rules (commercial content, language, 3rd party from improper sources, etc) might happen more often.

 

Please, I have had roundtable discussions on packet several times. You just have to put the TNC in unproto mode (i.e. the far end callsign is CQ).

And why do you think Amtor is not used very much any more?

Why do you think Pactor is only used on Winlink 2000? If it wasn't for WL2K do you really think there would be more than one or two users of Pactor on the HF bands?

If so, what would it be used for? Keyboard-to-keyboard? Have YOU ever gotten on the ham bands and called CQ using Pactor? Did anyone answer you?

This is one of the prime reasons so many people are AGAINST IT. Would it surprise you to find out that I tried Winlink for a while over three years ago?

Guess what? How do far end people know that your internet is out and they need to send email for you to your Winlink account?

There are two ways - 1) you can send everyone you normally converse with a message via WL2K saying to use your WL2K address or 2) you can use your WL2K address all the time for your email.

I found out quickly that 1) doesn't work very well. If people don't add you into their address book right then and there and delete your internet address, you will wind up with most of your email going to the internet account. Once your internet is back up they have to change everything back. A few times of this and it just doesn't happen anymore. Besides, trying to get my banks and financial institutions and my yahoo groups and my FCC accounts and all the others changed to use my WL2K account during an internet outage just turned out to be impossible.

That left 2). I decided right then and there that I didn't believe in turning the amatuer bands into internet email access links bypassing the internet providers and telecom providers.

I believe in following both the letter AND the *spirit* of the law and that would have put me in violation of 97.113 in that I would be making regular use of the amateur bands as a replacement for commercial services provided by radio.

You can pooh-pooh this all you want. Turning the amateur bands into telecom channels is *not* what the vast, VAST majority of the amateur community wants. If that surprises you then you haven't thought the issue through very well.

tim ab0wr

 

I can only conclude that your unidentified EOC must be in Shangrila. Not one of the states with which I am familiar has "relay rack after relay rack of National Guard maintained military HF radios and modems" in their EOC.

I really would like to see the acres and acres of carefully positioned and separated antennas that are required to support the "relay rack after relay rack of National Guard maintained military HF radios and modems", the testing that identified which combinations of radios and antennas could be used simultaneuoulsy on which frequencies, and the operational plan that details the assignment of each radio and antenna to prevent mutual interference. I am unaware of any "state EOC" that has the several acres of land area -- in the center of the state capitol -- that is zoned and/or permitted to support erection of multiple non-interfering antennas.

The two largest states in the lower 48 certainly do not have "relay rack after relay rack of National Guard maintained military HF radios and modems". We account for a VERY large percentage of both the population and the land area.

The simple facts are 1) that you do not need "relay rack after relay rack of National Guard maintained military HF radios and modems" to support effective communication, and 2) that you do not want "relay rack after relay rack of National Guard maintained military HF radios and modems" to have effective communication.

"Racks and racks" of equipment implies old technology, poor system design, unclear operational ideas, and lack of planning. Military equipment is designed for well-trained operators who are familiar with its use. It is poor as an EMCOMM system.

Good EMCOMM equipment is designed to be operated by ANYONE familiar with Volume, Squelch, Channel, and Push-to-Talk. Why? Because that is who will be available to operate it when disaster strikes. Every public safety communicator, police officer, fire fighter, forest ranger, and everyone else -- down to and including the garbage collectors -- can operate that type of radio.

I can also conclude that there is no focus at your "state EOC" on field operations. Exactly WHO is supposed to be in the field? HOW is the state EOC to talk to the field? Are you going to wait 24 hours or longer to get the National Guard activated and deployed?

Where is the required involvement of state RACES in the state disaster plan? Where is the state RACES operating position in the EOC?

I am sorry, but your story doesn't match up with experience. The claimed equipment does not match up with actual EOC requirements.

A reliable state EMCOMM field system must be easily operated by the agency personnel AVAILABLE -- both in the disaster area and in the EOC. In most cases, the only personnel available in the field and at the EOC at "time zero" -- the start of the disaster -- are the public safety communicators. The people to supplement these operators MUST be effectively "already there".

The state or local EMCOMM system can be rapidly supplemented when disaster strikes ONLY by trained and equipped amateur radio volunteers. Our ham radio guys/gals/teams in the field can be operational BEFORE the damage begins, WHILE the damage continues, and AFTER the damage has been done.

We often BEGIN disaster response before many people -- including the local, state, and federal government agencies -- are aware that a disaster has occurred.

Case in point: Lancaster, TX tornado
Called for Dallas ambulance (under mutual aid) on RACES net at request of Lancaster police officer. Ambulance was dispatched within 15 seconds.
Notified Region 1 Division of Emergency Management (DEM) Officer of strike.
Dispatched by DEM Officer to Lancaster City Hall to get needs from city Emergency Manager.
Coordinated state response until the arrival of the assigned DPS trooper / DEM delegate.

Even if some idiot has found and (stupidly) spent funds to supply 1000 "fly away" SATCOM units, they are useless in the first hours of a disaster. I can deploy ZERO of them while the thunderstorms and/or tornado and/or hurricane is still doing the damage. If I am VERY lucky, maybe I can have a (very) few of them deployed (by vehicle) within 12 hours. At 12 hours, the "fog" will not permit me to be well aware of where I actually NEED to deploy the remainder. At 12 hours, road conditions and/or weather may not permit me to deploy anything.

Some parts of Louisiana were unreachable by vehicle OR aircraft for over 24 hours. Parts of I-10 and I-12 were closed to ALL traffic -- including relief and military vehicles -- for almost 4 days. Several state highways remained impassable for nearly two weeks.

I have NEVER heard a REAL emergency manager ask for a "succession plan". They know that the amateur community that supports them will adopt the technologies and systems that we need to support their needs, and they are not on bit worried about what we call the the system -- now, or in the future. You try to claim knowledge that you clearly do not have by claiming to quote some imaginary "issue" from some imaginary "manager" at a (clearly) imaginary "state EOC".

Not ONE emergency manager or ham views ham radio as "a last mile telcom provider for a governmental emergency agency". That is your "invented" term.

EVERY emergency manager views ham radio as the one and only source of the CRITICAL and IRREPLACEABLE supplementary communications that EVERY city, town, county, parish, and/or state MUST have when a disaster strikes. The FCC has the EXACT same view. The disaster plans of EVERY state are REQUIRED by federal statute and regulations to include amateur radio.

That, sir, is how we KEEP our spectrum.

 

It is a few that must try to tear apart a simple and effective system. Sad that its takes pointless quotes and the reach for application samples, that can have differing results.

Argue the finite details and grab for whatever “straw” is available.

The system will continue to function in its fine fashion. It will continued to be of great value to those that understand its potential.

It violates nothing other than some misguided sense of an ill informed minority.

Pactor 3 will continue to provide a perfect medium for the traveling amateur and those with vision.

We thank the SCS folks and the Winlink team for such a tremendous combined product.

The thousands that use it for “family and friend’ email, along with all the fine relief agencies seeing its true worth, are so thankful for its availability.

It is not robotic since any RF connection has an amateur initiating the connection.

There is plenty of room for us all to enjoy whatever portion of the service we desire.

And we are so pleased to see the ARRL supportive of the network and its adoption by them for ARES use.

It will “live long and prosper”……………………,

 

"with which I am familar"? ROFL!! And just how many is that, Larry?

Well, our EOC is located on a National Guard preserve associated with Engineers. Lot's of big trucks and construction equipment. It covers at least 20 acres, maybe more.

Tell me again just how familar are you with the various state installations?

And what did I tell you earlier about what this means?

Really? *I* want it! It means there is a state emergency crew that is truly interested in providing what is needed.

It only implies it to you, Larry. I was quite impressed. This is NOT old technology.

Really? Assumptions again? Who do you think mans this EOC communication center, Larry? (Hint: they are very well trained)

No focus? They actually have a very GOOD focus. They have provided the equipment and manpower to handle communications with anyone!

There is very little involvement of state RACES in the state disaster plan. We have tried to get inserted but they just really have little need for it. There is an old Kenwood transceiver and a 2m/70cm transceiver on a desk in a corner (the 2m/70cm setup also has a Kantronics TNC available). As far as I know there are only two hams in the whole state who have the credentials to get admitted into the EOC, especially in a disaster situation. Heck, you have to have a state issued ID to even get on the National Guard grounds let alone get through the card swipe door to get into the EOC. The EOC communication center is manned 24/7 by trained National Guard troops with the capability to communicate with anyone. They just don't see the need for an amateur radio auxiliary. And I have to agree with them.

Guess it just shows once again just how much you know, Larry.

And in the EOC that is done by trained Nat'l Guard troops that are there 24/7. They don't depend on hams being able to get to the EOC.

You see, you speak of transportation being impossible in a disaster area yet you seem to expect hams to be able to get to the EOC to provide communications. As usual, you are trying to argue both sides of a issue. I'm not surprised.

And how do hams get to the EOC if as you say: "Some parts of Louisiana were unreachable by vehicle OR aircraft for over 24 hours." How do the hams get to the EOC, Larry?

Remember, most of the disasters around here are NOT forecast 24 to 48 hours ahead of time like hurricanes. When they happen, they happen suddenly. And there aren't enough hams in the city to man an EOC desk 24/7.

Really? Only hams can rapidly supplement the State level EMCOMM system?

Do you know what the term "hubris" means, Larry?

Again, your experience is quite localized and doesn't deal with most of the US. Most of the rest of the country doesn't get 24-48 hours warning when a disaster is going to occur.

You see? Now you are arguing both sides of the issue again. One time you say travel will be limited and now you are saying that transportation into the disaster area allowed dispatch into the disaster area.
Which is it, Larry?

And with 24/7 Nat'l Guard staffing of the EOC communications center, just exactly what would you expect a ham at the EOC to be able to accomplish that a trained Nat'l Guardsman cannot, Larry? They even have people and transportation available for dispatch into disaster areas. Exactly what do you think a ham could accomplish that a trained military courier could not, Larry?

Now you are back to arguing that dispatching anything is impossible in a disaster area.

Which is it , Larry?

Then it just goes to show how little experience you have with people who actually know how to lay long term plans that will be able to be implemented at some point in the future.

That's pretty apparent from what you are saying. Our EOC *IS* worried, *very* worried about what we call the system. They understand they need to know exactly what capabilities will be available at any point in the future if a plan is to be implemented and depended upon. Apparently your EOC isn't.

No, my claim is backed up by what our state emergency managment organization has implemented.

Really, then why did the letter author in CQ come up with exactly the same view of his emergency management organization? It isn't the "term" that is the problem, it is the reality it describes that is important.

Really? There isn't even a resource code to classify amateur radio operator groups, Larry. How do they then get included in operational plans, Larry. Once again, you are blowing smoke up our butts.

tim ab0wr

 

N6KXB,

I'll admit I haven't looked carefully at the SCS website to see what else is available for supporting software beyond Airmail/Winlink but I am aware the PTC-IIex supports a number of other modes and is a very fine modem. The current price including Pactor-III upgrade and license ($888 from Farallon) makes it worth a look for someone who is interested in a multi-function modem if Pactor-III is among the modes needed.

When comparing Pactor to other digital modes that preceeded it, I think you need to ask why the other modes such as AMTOR, packet, G-TOR, etc declined in use. They were not simply replaced by Pactor-II/III but fell out of use, IMO, because they simply did not fill a need or interest for enough amateurs.

In my local club of 250+ members I know one who uses Pactor-II/III, 2 or 3 who use packet and maybe a couple dozen who use PSK and RTTY on a regular basis. The remainder are all primarily voice/CW operators. I would consider my club members "average" amateurs.

The one member with a PTC-IIex modem has had it disconnected from his rig for 6 or more months now because he has no current use for it. He has even offered me the loan of it to play with but beyond email, I think I would be hard pressed to find someone to commmunicate with in real-time.

I completely disagree with you that an automatic responding PMBO is not a robotic station. It may not inniate a transmission on its own but the licensed control op is not present to oversee the transmission and ensure it does not interfere with communications already present on the frequency. The control op of the client querrying the PMBO is not the control op of the PMBO. It is not the control op of the client who would have to answer to the FCC in the event of a complaint of interference caused by the responding PMBO but the licensee who runs the PMBO. I, personally, would not risk my license by running a PMBO outside of the automatic data station subbands.

If regulation by bandwidth comes to pass without some designated segment for automatic stations, what will prevent the wide bandwidth segment from becoming wall to wall analog voice during peak usage times, especially on 80, 40 and 20M? How will the PMBO operators comply with the non-interference rules in that situation? If you don't think the wide bandwidth segments will ever be that full, just listen to 40 and 20 during a major, world-wide SSB contest.

Voluntary bandplans are unenforcable and unless they are uniform throughout the world, will have built in conflicts between modes. What will you tell Region 1 phone operators who are legally using SSB down to the edge of our wide bandwidth segment where our bandplan places wide bandwidth digital ops for example? Would you advocate the digital ops just fire up on top of the SSB operators?

Anyway, this discussion belongs over in the other trhread and no one has addressed the two questions I posed earlier:

1) who pays for the CMS servers now?

2) what will ARMY Mars do if the servers go away?

73,
Mike WA3KYY

 

Well Army MARS will have to respond, as we have no inside info on the system roll out.

Pactor 3, since it is a speciality mode, enjoys a different kind of operator, but the numbers are in the thousands, and climbing.

You need a use for it, although I have several that I connect to with the SCS modem, for rag chewing on RTTY, PSK31, and even outdated HF packet.

Any rate, Winlink2000 is here to stay, and grow, as well as pactor 3.

Hope you can get a response to your question.

73..

 

Tim,

Your posts repeatedly prove your lack of knowledge and experience with any sort of emergency management and/or emergency communications. It is quite clear that you are the one "blowing smoke".

It is not necessary to have a "resource code" to be included in the disaster plans. We are included in all levels of disaster plans -- city, county, region, and state. That includes the disaster plan for DFW airport -- the largest airport in the US. (It is actually larger than the island of Manhatten.) We have responded to the only two crashes in the history of the airport (both by Delta, by the way).

In both cases, we had operators in the triage area -- within about 200 yards of the main wreckage -- at the major trauma hospitals, and at the blood bank. Our operators kept track of who (by sex and age) went to which hospital, to ensure optimal care, and to even the load between the hospitals -- exactly according to the hospitals interlinked disaster plan. All of that is covered in the mass-casualty disaster plan. That disaster plan was executed immediately.

Typically, we do not have several hours of notice. If you are lucky, you MIGHT get 45 minutes warning of a really long-lived tornado, but most of the time it is (at most) 15 minutes. For an air crash, there is zero warning. Only a hurricane gives you time to stage -- but that is guesswork. You do not know what is needed where until AFTER the strike.

Your babble: "You see, you speak of transportation being impossible in a disaster area yet you seem to expect hams to be able to get to the EOC to provide communications. As usual, you are trying to argue both sides of a issue. I'm not surprised."

and

"And how do hams get to the EOC if as you say: "Some parts of Louisiana were unreachable by vehicle OR aircraft for over 24 hours." How do the hams get to the EOC, Larry?"

Those statements simply prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not have a clue what you are talking about.

POINT 1: The EOC in every state is covered -- but NOT fully manned -- 24/7. The governor, DEM Manager, commander of the state guard, commander of the state police, state health commissioner, and the heads of the other 30 or so agencies are NOT at the EOC. The coverage is by (in most states) a skeleton crew of public safety communicators.

POINT 2: If state officials can get to the EOC, we can get there. Our hams will be as close as the officials. (In most cases, several members of the EOC staff are hams.)

POINT 3: An EOC cannot function effectively if it is the site of the disaster. That means its communications are severed, people cannot move to get to it, it has limited food, limited water, and it cannot function effectively. The "real" EOC must be moved to an alternate location with communications, transportation, food, and water. That is why we have THREE fully hardened EOC in Texas. If we have to abandon the EOC in Austin, we have two others. (Other than total loss of communications in all of Austin, I really don't want to think of the reason why we would need to abandon a shock mounted, earthquake-proof, fully EMP-shielded structure located at least 50 feet underground that is stocked with food and water -- and has beds and showers for all personnel.)

POINT 4: You, like so many novices, are focused on the EOC. The EOC is a PORTION of the EMCOMM equation, but IF we have a VIABLE disaster plan, we can function quite well if we do not have an EOC. The field team is the most important link. We cannot function without the field team.

POINT 5: I don't care if you have 10,000 guardsmen ready to move. If they are not ON SITE in the disaster area -- with all of their equipment -- when the disaster strikes, they (effectively) do not exist as a resource during the first 24 to 48 hours.

POINT 6: The only trained, equipped, and AVAILABLE IN THE DISASTER AREA resource with communications that can meet both short range ("in area") and long range ("out of area") needs during the critical hours immediately following a disaster is the ham radio operator. We are available because we LIVE there.

POINT 7: Despite all of the resources sent to Louisiana, the effective conduct of hard-hit parish to/from state business was by ham radio for a period of at least 10 days. That includes dispatch of critical supplies and relief personnel to fire and police agencies.

"Resource code" my well dispositioned donkey!

 

Larry, I don't even know where to begin. There are people at our EOC 24/7 with the full authority to handle any and all situations. The governor, DEM Mgr, Adjutant General, and other agency heads do NOT have to be there in order to handle a disaster. We had a bio-terrorism exercise 18months ago where the people you speak of were specifically excluded from being there in order to see how things went.

We don't *EXPECT* those people to get there. The people on site handle things.

Finally something that makes sense. But it is irrelevant to the conversation.

Larry, the EOC is what the point of discussion *is*. I'm not surprised you want to try and change the subject.

Again, I'm not surprised to now see you trying to change the subject.

Again, I'm not surprised to see you trying to change the subject.

So far you haven't had a real answer to any of the issues raised. From trying to say that EOC's are not fully staffed 24/7 (our is) to saying that succession plans are not important to emergency planners to saying that EOC's don't have room for antenna farms to all the rest all you've done is demonstrate a emergency operation setup that *I* would not want to be associated with.

If the governor and Adjutant General and all the agency heads have to be onsite at your EOC for things to operate during a disaster I really don't want to be in your state very often.

tim ab0wr

 

Your last post absolutely, totally, and completely PROVES your total inexperience and lack of knowledge.

The governor is the head of the Executive branch. He/she holds the authority for ALL state response. The National Guard cannot move without clearance by him/her. The federal response cannot be cleared without his/her request. All other branches of state government are required to have his/her clearance to use designated funding. The governor MUST be a part of the EOC operation.

The EOC is staffed by the CRITICAL DECISION MAKERS and APPROVERS in EVERY state, EVERY county/parish, and EVERY city. In EVERY case, only minor authority is delegated to minor authorities.

You have obviously never been present in an actual emergency exercise. Typically, someone "stands in" for the senior officials, but NOBODY believes they can operate without the specific approval and authority of the responsible officials. (There is this minor thing called a constitution that controls this.)

The more you post, the more you prove just how little you know.

This discussion was, and is, about Emergency Communications. You tried to deflect it to be about the EOC. On multiple occassions, I pointed out that the EOC was not the issue. When it was solidly demonstrated that you knew nothing about the topic, you tried to pretend that the discussion was about the EOC. Typical.

It sounds to me as if you have confused a communications facility with an actual EOC. Communications facilities handle communications. Supporting this conclusion is the fact that you describe the location as a "National Guard preserve". A real state EOC must be located in or very near the state capitol complex. Of course, in Topeka, Kansas, I guess nothing is THAT far away. (Topeka is roughly 9 miles by 6 miles -- which would fit inside DFW Airport.)

Our capitol city, Austin, Texas (a relatively small city in Texas) measures roughly 21 miles by 21 miles. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex measures about 46 miles by 60 miles.

The city of Topeka has a population of 121,809. The county of Shawnee has a population of 171,716. The largest city (Wichita) has a population of 344,284. The state of Kansas has a polulation of 2,745,502. The total land area is 82,264 square miles. Your worst case communication and response length -- to a probable SMALL (by disaster standards) event -- is about 400 miles. You have 1 city of reasonable size and 2 of small size, plus numerous towns.

My city, Richardson, Texas has a population of just under 100,000. Collin County has a population of 700,000. The Dallas metropolitan area has a population that is 4 times the total population of the state of Kansas. We have 254 counties spread over a 900 mile by 600 mile area. We have 3 cities of over 1 million population. We have several times the number of probable threat types.

Come back when you actually know what you are talking about.

 

Winlink2000 is wonderful to experience and great for the traveling amateur.

It has fantastic served agency applications, as they are finding out.

Those amateurs with knowledge of emergency operations and traffic handling understand its growing importance.

It will continue to expand along with the pactor 3 protocol..

I advise anyone interested in “factual” information, go the WinLink2000 web site.

The vast majority of inaccurate and one-sided “posts” can be clearly seen through.

You may judge for yourself from the boundless information and links.

73..