Note: While you can add postings to this thread, you may wish to start
other threads pertaining to
some aspect of the concept, in order to keep the focus tight and
manageable. When doing so, please
select the "Alternative Communications" category in the text entry area, and
if your want to, you can make your subject line start with
Packet Radio. Example: Packet Radio: Basic Equipment Needed or Packet
Radio: Biggest obstacles, etc.
This started with this email from Cynthia:
Date: Thu, 7 May 1998
From: cabeal cabeal@efn.org
[snip]
In addition to building the Salons on our current track,
1) We use the Salons to create a tool. The tool is a new way to see the
world, similar to how the bar graph and the pie chart emerged to allocate
the numerical relationships of a formal spread sheet in an analogue that
more people could understand and work with.
2) The first tool is a map of the world - a dymaxion Fullerian map that is
a digital databed, over which any number of templates can be loaded, and
the data manipulated to create Terra Graphs, the name I'm using to
describe the planet-wide distributions of anything we can name and locate
and connect to other things.
3) The first template created is the packet-radio grid (Jon Van Oast's
brilliant idea here, that he'll flesh out shortly). The packet radio grid
ensures the transfer of information in all but the worst case scenarios,
provided the operators are known, and each has the bare minimum tool set
to power a short wave radio and send the code. It must use simple
technology - Jon suggests LINUX and 286's. It is as elegant as Pawn Takes
Queen...
4) If we could, in 19 months, put together and test the packet-radio grid
in as broad a distribution as possible, we could share data all over the
world with one another. If we can continue to share data, then wherever
people are in need, we can find out about it, even if we (or they) don't
have power. If one group has extra resources, and another needs them, if
the Packet Grid and The Dymaxion Shared Infrastructure Maps (I'll tell you
about those later - grid comes first) are in place, then we can figure out
the best route to get something to someone, given the fact that anyone
from anywhere should be able to know where the closest things they need
are.
The beauty of this is that, with the right bare bones in place, a huge
number of people will be able to help themselves, without needing to rely
on others to rescue them. They'll have access to information, no matter
which junta gains control. They'll be able to deal with one another as
they see fit, while tapping into the collective information base of the
world, if we can just keep it up.
[snip]
...most importantly, we have a potential project of building the
Packet Radio Grid that Jon could do on line, through the Salon format. The
Salon format would get developed into the collaborative tool that it can
be... The most important thing is to make the Salon software useable -
collaborative - archival - and we do this by using it to explore shared
infrastructure. A collaborative salon can let any group of people work
efficiently together - reference URLS - have written records of
conversations - share data - as loosely or tightly focused as desired.
Perhaps Jon (or someone - Cory's into short wave) does the Packet Grid
forum. Electricity is going (the D-SIM is next for that) already.
We need
to do trains, and ports, and telecom and alternative energy supply nodes,
and potential danger spots (nukes, chem plants, identification of
vulnerable manufacturing and storage areas that may create serious damage
that would be impossible to clean up), and vulnerable bio-systems - we
need to protect animals in factory farms and people in hospitals, etc.
The D-SIMs (dimaxed shared infrastructure maps) are mandatory here...ok,
ok, they're the equivalent of bar graphs or pie
charts to spread sheets, making instantaneous visual representations of
whatever system you want to map in as data. We've got all the tools to do
it, and we just need some people to put them together. It would be a
monumental task without the right people - with the right people (and
I'm thinking of the IT folks that have some money to donate) that
would come with a budget from IT's angels, the Knights of the Chip(ped)
Table, the project could be stupendous. Akin to what Carnegie did when he
grokked public libraries.
I guess I need to convey this in person, with suitable hand waving and
facial expressions and napkin doodles...
I can see it - I don't know if you can - but it's a way for anyone to take
data (eventually) and plug it into a map model and see - and share - their
opinion about the world as a whole, not a part, not a nation - but as a
whole, including land masses and oceans and forests and stuff.
We will not be a planetary species until we see ourselves as a planetary
species. We will not see ourselves that way until we can build holistic
models of ourselves. Our representations will not be accurate until we
understand what we REALLY NEED, and not just what we want. When we can
share our representations of Ourself-As-World with one another, use
other's data, take others' inputs, make corrections, etc. and always share
and improve, we will go a long way toward meeting the challenge of being a
sentient species with the capacity to destroy our world.
Y2K is a moment of opportunity in which to fully see what we really need
from each other - what we use - what we depend upon. If we build the maps
to model this, and distribute resources in a time of need, and prevent
environmental catastrophe - and use this tool to overcome the interrupts
in infrastructure, we'll get beyond this together.
After that, the tool will just evolve into incredible soul-changing art.
In the meantime, we'll know which power plants are likely to fail, which
trade routes and ports are most vulnerable and need protection, which
environmental areas need preparation, which plugs HAVE to be pulled,
because people - whistle blowers and responsible players alike - will be
able to report the data as they find it in their area of the world, and it
will show up in a picture, an analogue, that our intuitions can work with
and our problem solving capacities, different in each unique environment,
will be enabled. Imagine - you're in Chile - you see the red areas and the
green areas on your shipping map; you overlay with utility and telecom;
some communities stand out in November 1999 as being woefully impacted -
instead of fleeing, you send supplies. You pay attention. You get Packet
Grid tools in place. You designate runners and cyclists and agree who will
communicate and how and when. And, when it's time to ship that coffee, you
know when the boat is in port, even though you don't have a phone. You can
get the beans to port, even though you don't have fuel. You can get the
instructions from Westinghouse to repair your generator, even though you
don't have mail or fax or a technician. You can find the parts you need
from the folks in Ecuador who had spares and the same kind of generator
(but it didn't go out) and you knew they were in town and you could
arrange to give them some coffee for the part...
And, with the packet grid in place, no matter where you are, you can still
get the maps. The map is not the territory but it is, after all, the
map...
Best, my dreamer friends...
Cynthia
-- Cynthia (cabeal@efn.org), June 05, 1998
Answers
Jon, Mitch, All, Especially Jon,
I believe you might find the following of particular interest. It was a link on the home page of Diasaster Recovery Journal: http://www.drj.com. This is the URL/link for Intelligent Wireless Solutions Corp: http://www.inwireless.com/iws.htm.
The opening page blurb/list reads as follows:
"Emergency Notification Systems
Business Communications Systems
Web Based Paging Gateways
Wireless Warning Display Signs
GIS Based Community Alerting
Man-Down Monitoring
Intelligent Dispatching"
More about the DRJ web page (soon) in the Contingency Planning forum (which can be reached via the directory which can be reached by clicking the "Millennium Salons" link just under the Construction forum titled at the top of the top level page).
Also Jon: Please consider the stuff under the "Microsoft Community Experiment" thread in your musings about the packet radio stuff. If we can get the community communications software/hardware package figured out (and the phones fall apart), perhaps it could work with packet radio.
Also. If you'd like a volunteer or two to help you research this stuff, let me know. I THINK I'm about to try putting out a request for a volunteer to help research the stuff on this Disaster Recovery Journal site. I've got something at least semi-specific in mind, and I might try to get some help from the efn2000 list.
Bill
-- Bill (billdale@lakesnet.net), June 05, 1998.
That message was followed in the next day or so by one from Jon:
From: Jon jon@kzsu.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: The Millennium Salons & the Knights of the Chip(ped) Table
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 02:03:30 -0700 (PDT)
hello all,
i am glad to be wrapped up in this madness with this
particular group (especially because of what cynthia has told me of
you all -- only good things, dont worry). i am a programmer by
trade, mathematician by birth, and generally more excited than frightened
by january 1. hmmm maybe i will use that as my intro on cynthias
mail list (which i just joined, cynthia. hooray finally)
i have yet to chose my exact role in this play, but i guess this
means i am at least officially leafing through the script...
Cynthia wrote:
1) We use the Salons to create a tool. The tool is a new way to see the
world, similar to how the bar graph and the pie chart emerged to allocate
the numerical relationships of a formal spread sheet in an analogue that
more people could understand and work with.
2) The first tool is a map of the world - a dymaxion Fullerian map that is a digital databed, over which any number of templates can be loaded, and the data manipulated to create Terra Graphs, the name I'm using to describe the planet-wide distributions of anything we can name and locate and connect to other things.
Jon wrote:
zow! and to think i first got introduced to this *while eating*.
once concepts get hammered down (balancing the art side of this
mapping with the technical/scientific, and so forth), i can throw
in SOME support for (presumably web-based) programming and development.
Cynthia wrote:
3) The first template created is the packet-radio grid (Jon Van Oast's
brilliant idea here, that he'll flesh out shortly). The packet radio grid ensures the transfer of information in all but the worst case scenarios, provided the operators are known, and each has the bare minimum tool set to power a short wave radio and send the code. It must use simple technology - Jon suggests LINUX and 286's. It is as elegant as Pawn Takes Queen...
Jon wrote:
i have just completed my first draft of a web page on this subject.
view at your leisure -- http://kzsu.stanford.edu/uwi/y2k/packet.html comments welcome, please/thanks.
Cynthia wrote:
4) If we could, in 19 months, put together and test the packet-radio grid in as broad a distribution as possible, we could share data all over the world with one another. If we can continue to share data, then wherever people are in need, we can find out about it, even if we (or they) don't have power. If one group has extra resources, and another needs them, if the Packet Grid and The Dymaxion Shared Infrastructure Maps (I'll tell you about those later - grid comes first) are in place, then we can figure out the best route to get something to someone, given the fact that anyone from anywhere should be able to know where the closest things they need are.
Jon wrote:
once i get a bit "settled", i plan on posting to some ham radio-related
newsgroups about this idea. as i said in my web page, i would be VERY
surprised if my thoughts are novel. however, i think the idea of a dry
run probably is. and if nothing else, it could be interesting and (if
one deems it a good idea?) good publicity (whatever i mean by that).
plus, i think maybe this will help serve as a good introduction between
the ham/packet community and the y2k community.
there are a lot of technical details of packet radio i am unsure of.
but it sure would be a nifty thing if we could have a dozen (or however
many necessary) packet radio operators pull their plugs from existing
relay networks and using only each other (purists can use generators
for power!), act as a backbone for some test communications coast
to coast.
i am especially curious to ping the packet community for ideas on
trans-ocean communication in the event of post-2000 failure in
these systems. (or, for you conspiracy fans, in the case of necessary
by-passing of these sytems!)
Cynthia wrote:
The beauty of this is that, with the right bare bones in place, a huge
number of people will be able to help themselves, without needing to rely
on others to rescue them. They'll have access to information, no matter
which junta gains control. They'll be able to deal with one another as
they see fit, while tapping into the collective information base of the world, if we can just keep it up.
agreed! gosh, i should just cut-n-paste that into my page!
a quick aside, before i forget ... could someone give me a pointer
to some tech pages or faq or something on this "Salon"? i would
(as cynthia suggests) like to set one up regarding packet radio
(and also as a living test of the salon stuff), but i am behind the
rest of the class on learning about it. pointers are very welcomed.
thanks!
a final note about what cynthia refers to as me suggesting
"linux and 286s". for many obvious reasons (especially for
the core of a packet relay network), technically speaking i would
prefer to suggest big, fast machines .. and linux.
what i know cynthia is refering to, however, is the cases when
these machines arent available. and, for all intensive purposes,
you can apply this NOT only to packet radio usage, but computer
usage in general ... specifically in underdeveloped regions where
the idea of spending more than $5 on a computer is out of the question.
what i am talking about is a group (or several groups) within the
linux community which are working on developing a subset of the linux
kernel (its brain) that will work on old (early-mid 1980s) 8086,
8088, and 80286 processors (among others). in a nutshell, what this
means is that worthless trash becomes empowered with most of the
usability of linux. and believe me, these machines are laying in
dumpsters and landfills all around us. how nice it would be to
juice them up with packet network and email support and deliver them
by the truckload to those in need.
the work is far from complete, but i think very worthy of attention.
and, for the optimists among us, linux on these effectively free
machines would have plenty of use in a non-disastrous post- (or pre-)
2000 world!
see http://www.linux.org.uk/ELKS-Home/index.html for more details.
thanks for your time...
-jon
-- Jon (jon@kzsu.Stanford.EDU), June 05, 1998.
In another note, sent May 14th, Jon said:
[snip]
2, packet radio. i was very happy to find the packet/y2k site i
have linked from my site (the one you mentioned). it clears up
many issues for me, and, in a big way makes me feel a little safer
that great minds are at work already.
as for the "test circuit" envisioned by cynthia (and me), i, for
my part, envisioned it as a test of hardware/equipment *already
in place*. my assumption (and i still believe this to be true,
but dont know for certain) is that there are enough ham/packet
geeks out there sprinkled around to currently send stuff from
point A to point B. (fyi, i live in portland, despite my deceptive
email address.) well, now that i rethink this, maybe there arent.
i guess the long hauls (over the square states, etc) are relayed
through alternate networks. i dont know for certain....
er, well... lets say there ARE enough to go from A to B. i envisioned
the test being just to actually send something from one end to the
other with complete assuredness that no alternate net was used for
relaying.
to be honest, i was more interested in just investigating the whole
scene (which i am). the test just sounded like a cool idea. but now
that i look at what is involved, i am content to leave it to the pros
which that forum convinced me there are. i think what i might do,
is pose to them the question "where are the gaps?". then, if one
can imagine a rough map of uncovered areas, we non-pro packet people
can start recruiting folks to fill them in. i think this may be a
much better idea. then, ultimately, if enough gaps fill, we can
do a test. it may be a "test" some time in january 2000... but,
still, filling the gaps would be a Good Thing.
so, in other words, i saw "the test" as being something very
simplistic, and relying on the fact the relay points were already
there. i think they are, the question just is if there are enough.
packet radio enthusiasts are all over and doing there thing all the
time. that is promising. we just need to spread it out to get
the coverage, and (where applicable) plant new seeds in communities.
"just".
best,
-jon
-- Jon (jon@kzsu.Stanford.EDU), June 05, 1998.
Also, on Thurday, May 14th, Mitch Barnes wrote:
Hello All -
Just a quickie here re the packet radio idea. Cynthia grooved me into the
idea on Sunday and Monday. During the pre-Monday Harris Hall conferences
Cynthia introduced Jim Lord to packet radio. He went ecstatic.
Stimulated by Jim Lord's question "what is the bandwidth?" I told Cynthia
of the Scientific American article from this spring in which Communications
was a focus and the new digital compression/multiplexing techniques used in
cell phones was discussed. Knowing very little about Ham, perhaps one of
you more knowledgable folks can talk about whether or not any of those
methods could be used to boost the packet bandwidth.
Below are two Ham related posts from ARK-List, it would seem there are Ham
networks in place which could be integrated into a Packet network.
Thanks.
Mitch
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>The word in our Frontier Amateur Radio Society
>is that in the event of an emergency, a really big big
>event, you know, like, when Bubba pulls the plug,
>you need to be RACES certified. If you are not, the
>FCC won't let you power up. (This assumes the
>FCC is still around)
>
>Contact your local County Emergency Management
>Office and ask them about Radio Amateur Civil
>Emergency Services programs.
>
>Or try the ARRL at K6WR@arrl.org
>
>Jack Cook, Clark County Nevada RACES Officer,
>can also provide info
>
>73's David
>Las Vegas, NV
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RACES is just one Emergency service orgainization. Around here Central Ohio
RACES doesnt exsist. Its ARES, Amateur Radio Emergency Services.
The FCC cant control the airwaves now, what makes you think they
can control it after an event.
I hardly doubt the FCC would every restrict radio service as it did in
WWI/WWII.
What use would stopping a 2 meter converstation be? The freq would not
be used by anyone else and since most hams tend to help out with comms
during an emergency anyway the airways would be used for just that to
supliment any goverment comms.
--
Gary W. Sanders gws@n8emr.nitetech.com
packet: N8EMR @ W8CQK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jon followed that up with this note:
hello folks. i just wanted to add in the latest adjustments to my
two cents worth. i have been looking around a bit, mostly on the
y2k-packet radio page/chat i found (it is linked from my tiny rant on
packet radio, a direct offshoot of my conversation with cynthia that
started this all -- http://kzsu.stanford.edu/uwi/y2k/packet.html).
anyway, there seems to be some good things and some bad things i have
found during my preliminary investigation. the good things mostly
center around the fact there seems to be at least *some* discuss of
these issues going on out there, especially around ham radio types.
and the related good news is that i really do believe the planet is
essentially lousy with ham radio types, and a fair amount of them
do the packet thing.
the bad news however, is that (as far as my very recent and puny
knowledge goes) ham radio is pretty much limited to line-of-sight
transmission. there seems to be a couple threads going on the
aforementioned web discussion about the availability and
installability of ridge-top repeater stations that are solar
powered.
i think, as i have said in private conversations, a nice thing
(but likely impossible) would be a map showing weak and missing
coverage areas, and recruiting folks (and ideas) to fill them.
well, its just a thought, anyway. i am still learning.
sorry this is a bit choppy ... i am about to run out the door.
-jon
Mitch replied:
Hello Jon -
Single Side Band (SSB) transmitters will transmit way beyond LOS (hundreds
or thousands of miles), however they are frowned upon by those who control
the ether. SSB gear is available.
Mitch
In the midst of all this, Gregory Benesch chimed in with the following:
Mitch, this is all very interesting, but I have to ask the really stupid
question:
If we are considering having acess to ham radio technology -- why attempt to
plug it into a computer? Why not just use the VOICE capacity of it?
Greg Benesch
To which Jon replied:
i addressed (slightly) on my page about y2k/packet some ideas why
i thought it might be useful. first off, i should add that i also
say we dont need to eliminate the voice capabilities either.
i just figured if you are talking about a community of hundreds
or thousands of people, and one poor slob with a ham/packet set,
you are dealing with quite a communication bottleneck. i thought
a nice solution might be to (even for only certain periods of time)
allow access to the world via a local net of workstations where
people can access recent news from beyond, send important postings,
etc. there is a value to the duplication and distribution of
digital information as well. bulletins and other emergency-like
postings are much easier to distribute as text than as something
passed along by voice.
in other words, (1) to share the resource among more people, (2) to
allow more flexibility and efficiency in sending and receiving information
to/from the outside world.
if ham radios were as plentiful and usable as phones are now, then i
would agree with you 100%. maybe i am way off base, though??
-jon
Ever the bulldog, Greg responded:
Something just does not wash here.
Spefcifically, what would be the advantage of transferring files over voice? We likely would not be able to print out the files -- it would take up too much juice (printers are power hogs....arent they?) So how would the data serve other people? It would seem to me that it makes far more sense to actually just record a ham radio session with "AA" battery powered cassette recorders. Then you could RECORD the verbal exchanges on the ham radio, and play them latrer for large groups of people--audibly.
If using a computer, how does the data get transferred to large groups of people if printing it is not an option?
I really dont get it yet...
duuuuhhhhhh..
Greg Benesch
And that's where things left off...
Regards,
The (barely) Managing Editor
-- windrow (windrow@mediaweb.gr), June 05, 1998.
15 Minutes 'til Tomorrow, and this comes in from Mitch:
From: Mitchell Barnes
Subject: Re: packet radio & musings
Jon & Greg & all -
Mitch wrote:
Single Side Band (SSB) transmitters will transmit way beyond LOS (hundreds or thousands of miles), however they are frowned upon by those who control the ether. SSB gear is available.
Jon wrote:
a HA! so that is what "ssb" means in all those posts. my learning
process continues!!
so should we switch to using ssb? haha also: will "those who
control the ether" even matter/exist in the implied aftermath?
(is there a packet-radio-like data protocol for ssb, i wonder?)
Mitch again:
SSB should have fewer people crowding the waves. The reach can be around
the planet given the right freqs and power. Shoot with an SSB setup you
can talk thousands of miles with a CB radio.
Advantages of SSB are less interference, and because of the laws of
harmonics the higher side bands are very high freq indeed and that
represents considerable bandwidth. If that were coupled with the new
methods of data compression used in digiphones bandwidth should be no
problem, even for graphics.
I'm not against vox btw. Anywhooo. I'm sure that there should be old
military signal splitters had for cheap which break down the signal into
high harmonics. If the base freq is suppressed the SSB's have a further
clarity and reach. In addition it must be remembered that with a signal
splitter eight different sets of info can be transmitted at once, each
signal freq having a different reach. There are whole military radio
protocol systems manuals which should be relatively accessable thru
survivalist magazines. There is a whole known body of knowledge regarding
frequency use relating to time of day, month, and year, on each frequency.
So I would suggest researching out Suppressed SSB gear and protocol. Since
packeting is no more than the addition of modulation to a frequency I see
no reason why it wouldn't work.
Regarding power consumption of printers. If we treated printing with the
reverence that we should instead of the frivolity we do now, there should
be no reason why schematics, diagrams, blueprints should not be transmitted.
Voice will always be important, but it is slow. A better way to do voice
would be to pre-record the voice, compress it, then xmit it. If you wished
two way conversation I would like to suggest that it would be a luxury, if
batteries or fuel or generator time were at a premium, necessary once in a
while but surely not the primary method of long distance communication.
Long distance Ham's now generally use Morse Code, just because it can be
picked up long distance through the howls and whines of the sun and
ionosphere, distances which will probably preclude direct packet transfer,
but wouldn't be a barrier to relay stations.
Printed data would probably be site specific. Only a generator repair team
would really be interested in generator repair schematics.
Most data isn't really necessary for large scale public dissemenation. And
if necessary, local comm networks could easily be instituted. The town
crier had a highly specific job.
We are speculating on various levels of intact society here. All of the
speculations are assuming telecom extended brownout or failure modes. If
that is true, then one may almost bet that electrical utilities are in at
least a prolonged partial failure mode. If that is true, then water,
sewage, food, fuel are all likely to be interrupted on a personal
discomfort level of 4 on a 5 scale - ie. at that level one must assume
quite a few dead from cholera and typhoid, starvation, and exposure,
accompanying fairly large scale social disorders extending throughout the
G20 countries.
Hence my bringing up the triangulation problem. Anyone with a comm station
is vulnerable, as those stations will be considered highly valuable
regional resources.
Re nukes and bio/chem warfare, the probability is too high to ignore.
Areas of highest danger are NW China/Russia border. India/China/Pakistan.
Iraq,Iran,Israel. And any large American city. We should have a fairly
clear idea over the next few months as to the direction this scene will
take, barring suicide commandos in large cities which aren't predictable
(but one would assume would take place more toward y2k itself or just post
y2k). Because the the high potential of the HUD meltdown we also need to
begin thinking, Martial Law by year's end as being a high possibility. The
GPS will go down on 22Aug99 and that will take out most of the smartest of
all the 1st World Weapon systems, including some of the warhead delivery
systems. China is going to be considered a major long term threat by the
US War College and the Pentagon, it is highly probable that we might
pre-emptive strike MIRV's into their largest cities and ports - disabling
their WW2 era Navy and Army. If a war happens in any of the theaters, it
almost by logic has to happen sometime prior to the GPS rollover date if
one is going to include ground troops, if not, then the risk runs from
summer to ever higher till late Jan 2000, after which the risk will receed..
I hope none of this happens. It's All Too Much.
Cheers,
Mitch
-- Mitch (spanda@inreach.com), June 05, 1998.
A look at communications alternatives for 2000 and beyond.
Before I contribute some ideas on packet radio and communications in general
let me introduce myself. In addition to being the computer consultant I
described a few weeks back I'm also a licensed radio amateur. I've held a
license since I was 12 years old in 1953. I've done just about everything in
amateur radio except moon bounce which is just what it sounds like it is. I
am *not* an expert on the absolute, current last-minute state-of-the art in
packet communications.
In addition to my amateur experience I have also held a RadioTelephony
license from the FCC and I was a radio operator while serving with the 82nd
Airborne Division.
With the introductions out of the way let me address a few issues mentioned.
Packet radio requires a computer, a monitor/CRT, a transceiver, a terminal
node controller (TNC), a software program, an antenna, a few cables to
interconnect it all and, of course, electricity to make it all work.
Depending upon the purpose of the packet system, it may or may not be a
viable method of communications.
Packet certainly works. I've communicated with many foreign countries on an
amateur band known as 20 meters, near 14.100 Mhz. Fire up those short wave
receivers you've mentioned and 'listen' to packet communications from around
the world by tuning around that frequency. The signals are high-pitch, rapid
fluttering sounds. And totally meaningless to your ear. You won't 'hear'
anything but 'noise'. In order to convert the sounds you hear on 14.100 into
characters on your computer screen a whole lot of things need to take
place...correctly...but most of all you need a TNC and the software. It
isn't practical to have packet for just listening. Without a license and the
proper transmitting and ancillary equipment you can forget about packet. Too
complex.
Getting packet to work reliably under all conditions is difficult. I can
tell from the comments made in this forum, and a number of others, that few
of you have had to deal with communications on a regular basis. Packet isn't
the internet, folks. There are great similarities but many differences also.
It certainly isn't my mode of choice for reliable communications. Voice first!
Most of the folks posting here are spoiled by our fantastic
telecommunications network. Your reliable, internet connection is clouding
your minds into thinking you have a 'net'...you don't. You certainly don't
have a network which will function post 2000 if conditions get as bad as
most of you seem to at least consider...if not are planning for. Carrying
the analogy of the Web/Internet to a packet radio network under post-2000
conditions is unrealistic, I hate to tell you. Packet will, in my not so
humble opinion, offer nothing to communications and create a situation
requiring considerable skill, if not hassle, to operate. What you need is
something very simple. Such as: Tune and talk.
I fully support amateur, or CB, radio as a method of communications between
families, clans or what ever we have after 2000. But...believe me, getting a
message through on packet is a royal pain. Too many things have to
work--just so. The system is too complicated and requires too many spares to
be a long-term method of communication.
Packet speeds are *very* slow compared to what everyone's modems are
operating to access the Web. Baud rates of 1200, 2400 and 9600 are more
common with packet radio. Frequency is a factor for distance of reliable
communications and the communications speed.
If the intent is to use repeaters to communicate on VHF or UHF frequencies
then the repeater must be considered for power and maintenance within the
whole network.
Anyone seriously considering amateur radio as a method of communications who
doesn't already have a license had better start studying. Not just for the
required exam but to acquire the necessary knowledge to make everything work.
If you have difficulty using your computer without a mouse then you will
have one devil of a time acquiring the technical knowledge and skills
required to set up, tune and operate a ham station...let alone a ham station
with packet! If you can't take your PC apart and replace a hard-drive or
install a controller card you'd better not consider ham radio as a means of
communications. If you can't modify an autoexec.bat or config.sys your
chances of operating packet are nil. If you don't know what an RS-232 cable
is.....
Answer a few questions...
What do you want the communications for?
What will digital communications (packet) offer that voice communications
will not?
What is your power source?
Do you have solar charging capability?
Have you considered the power drain for monitor and a computer in addition
to the transciever and TNC?
Are you using an inverter?
Do you have the desire to learn a technical skill, pass a comprehensive exam
and apply the knowledge to make and keep things working?
Can you use a soldering iron to install a coax connector on an antenna cable?
If you can't answer these kinds of questions knowledgably...find someone who
can.
Remember that purchasing amateur transmitting equipment requires the
presentation of a valid license.
Bernie Sayers/
WB2ZTE
-- Bernie Sayers (sayers@y2koncepts.com), June 05, 1998.
Hello there...
The following answers were posted in Deja News to a question
Brian Bahr wrote in the csy2k Newsgroup:
>It has been a long time since I have been involved in HAM radios, but...I remember somthing called "PACKET RADIO" I think. You hooked up your commie64 (commedor 64K computer) to yout Kenwood and then you sent (very slow) digital data on shortwave. Now could a replacement internet (slow, text for news and to replace the to be destroyed U.S. mail) via modern laptop computers and HAM radios be setup using TCP/IP protocals to make a replacemet "RADIO INTERNET"?
These were the answers:
...1...
...2...
...3...
...4...
I've invited a couple of these fellows into the Packet Radio Forum, and hope they come.
As I research the current state of Packet Radio, I can see that the capacity to do what is needed is probably present.
I think the trick is going to be to have a network in place before y2k in which there are agreed upon protocols, shared software, hardware kinks worked out, tests done, etc. to minimize confusion. Given the current level of connectedness, a couple of devoted packet radio enthusiasts with a well-developed appreciation for y2k could probably have a nation-to-nation test within months, and country-to-country by the end of the year.
Judging from the commentary about the impact the failure Galaxy IV had on HF Packet Networks, I'm sure the system will be useful. The question is whether or not the people we need to communicate with will have access; whether or not adequate back-up power exists, and whether the Network will be available in an emergency. Obviously, if it's not beefed up enough beforehand, there won't be much capacity, and so access could be very limited or expensive.
Let's see where this goes. I'm hoping some new enthusiasts take the ball and run with it. The Packet Radio Network could be an alternative that may even mean the difference between no communication and freedom in smaller countries that may suffer severe disruptions due to y2k.
Best,
Cynthia
-- cynthia (cabeal@efn.org), June 05, 1998.
Moderation questions? read the FAQ