Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steve Bonine" wrote in message wrote: On Mar 14, 5:20 pm, Steve Bonine wrote: I don't object if others choose to participate in parades. I trust that they won't object if I choose not to do so. I certainly don't object. You've described other things that you chose to do. The thing that I object to is the folks who say that they don't have time to participate in training, but "I'll be there if you need me in an emergency." Sorry, but I'm one of those. I *don't* have time, I have a full time job and I volunteer for an animal rescue charity at the weekends, plus all the normal family/household things that most people do. Besides, what training is necessary to pass radio messages..? Don't we already know how to do that..? Or am I missing something..? 73 Ivor G6URP |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ivor Jones wrote:
BTW we now have a lifetime licence here, which means no more renewal fees (I suspect the dwindling numbers mean it's not worth collecting) but you do have to confirm that you are still active every 5 years. I'm just curious . . . How do you accomplish this confirmation? What happens if you don't? I get the impression that this is functionally equivalent to the US license in which we must renew (but every ten years now, instead of five). There's no fee for renewal and it can be accomplished in a few minutes using the FCC web site. 73, Steve KB9X |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ivor Jones wrote:
"Steve Bonine" wrote . . . The thing that I object to is the folks who say that they don't have time to participate in training, but "I'll be there if you need me in an emergency." Sorry, but I'm one of those. I *don't* have time, I have a full time job and I volunteer for an animal rescue charity at the weekends, plus all the normal family/household things that most people do. Besides, what training is necessary to pass radio messages..? Don't we already know how to do that..? Or am I missing something..? My experience in actual disasters suggests both good news and bad news in this regard. Bad news: Yes, you're probably missing something. Knowing how to pass radio messages is a valuable skill, but it doesn't translate directly to the kinds of tactical communications required during a real event. Having trained with your local group can be a big help, both in terms of honing specific skills, getting familiar with the local people so you work better as a team, and forging relationships with the local agencies that you're going to work with in the actual disaster. Good news: During the Katrina operation, I worked with a team of hams who had never met each other until we were thrown together in Mississippi. Experience and training ran the gamut from decades to minutes. We were able to meld into an effective operation and provide a much-needed service. Some in the group had a lot of training and experience that they shared with the rest of us. Most hams are fast learners and the basic experience of using the radio is valuable. So in the best of all worlds, everyone would have had training. In this world we live in, I understand that it's simply not possible for everyone, either because of time constraints or because there's no organized ham radio group in the area. My comment was actually aimed at a tiny minority of hams who show up on site and become a part of the problem rather than a part of the solution. These people do exist, even in the ham radio fraternity. 73, Steve KB9X |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steve Bonine" wrote in message Ivor Jones wrote: BTW we now have a lifetime licence here, which means no more renewal fees (I suspect the dwindling numbers mean it's not worth collecting) but you do have to confirm that you are still active every 5 years. I'm just curious . . . How do you accomplish this confirmation? What happens if you don't? It's only just been introduced this year, I received mine a few weeks ago. It can be renewed in the same way as yours via the web, or of course by post. If you don't, the licence is revoked and the call will be cancelled. I get the impression that this is functionally equivalent to the US license in which we must renew (but every ten years now, instead of five). There's no fee for renewal and it can be accomplished in a few minutes using the FCC web site. 73, Steve KB9X 73 Ivor G6URP |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ivor Jones wrote:
"Steve Bonine" wrote in message wrote: On Mar 14, 5:20 pm, Steve Bonine wrote: [snip] The thing that I object to is the folks who say that they don't have time to participate in training, but "I'll be there if you need me in an emergency." Sorry, but I'm one of those. I *don't* have time, I have a full time job and I volunteer for an animal rescue charity at the weekends, plus all the normal family/household things that most people do. Besides, what training is necessary to pass radio messages..? Don't we already know how to do that..? Or am I missing something..? Ivor, We're all too busy these days: I'd guess that the rest of the world said goodbye to the 40 hour work-week at about the same time as those of us in the U.S. Both parents working, kids in day care, constant juggling: it's a familiar story. But - Drills, especially large ones, are the _ONLY_ way to prepare for the mass confusion, conflicting agendas, egomania, short tempers, long waits, and broken radios that hams must deal with during a deployment. Those who don't prepare _are_ a part of the problem: however well-intentioned an operator might be, (s)he will bring a set of expectations and capabilities to a response which only training can shape. On my first deployment, I brought a massive backpack, which included almost nothing I later needed and almost everything I didn't. The drills that I attended after that did little to hone my radio skills, but a lot to make me ready to use them, quickly and effectively. In short, time is the currency of the realm in disaster response: it's the _only_ item that can't be bought, fabricated, fedex'd or helicoptered into a disaster. However well-intentioned a ham may be, if (s)he's not trained and in practice, then it takes time to get him/her up to speed, and that's time that's better used for other things. Those of us who must choose to spend our time in other activities - there is, of course, nothing wrong with that - can best prepare for disasters by getting ready to help from our own QTH: there are, after all, always two ends to any radio circuit. Bill P.S. There's are a lot of old sayings in the business: here are some I've found inspirational - "Always Arrange Agreement in Advance" "Bring Basics: Bandages, Bedding, Bottles, Batteries, Beans" "Proper Planning and Practice Provides Peak Performance" "Water, Wind, Waves, and Weakness Won't Wait". P.P.S. I'd bet there isn't a single question on any ham exam in the world that asks how much toilet paper to bring to a deployment; Q.E.D. -- 73, Bill W1AC (Remove "73" and change top level domain for direct replies) |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Steve Bonine wrote: I don't object if others choose to participate in parades. I trust that they won't object if I choose not to do so. I certainly don't object. You've described other things that you chose to do. The thing that I object to is the folks who say that they don't have time to participate in training, but "I'll be there if you need me in an emergency." I'm reminded of a comment made by Bart Lee KV6LEE, who happened to be in New York City on 9/11 and served as the night-shift amateur radio communications coordinator for the first few days of the incident. He said, "You may know the saying 'In a crisis, you'll rise to the occasion.' It's not true. You'll sink to the level of your experience." I agree - if you intend to be of real use in a crisis, you need to drill and practice on the skills and techniques that you'll use when the fewmets hit the ventilator, so that they're as close to second nature as possible. Organized comms-and-crisis training is surely the best way to go. Doing comms for public-service events isn't quite the same, but I think it's distinctly better than nothing. Doing _other_ things, like handling parking at public service events, would seem to have little training benefit. That's not to say that hams shouldn't accept such jobs... but they should probably consider themselves to be doing so just as J. Random Volunteer, not as a ham per se, since what they're doing has nothing to do with their particular specialty. What does the group do between the "E"s? How do they build and maintain their expertise? We're fairly unique in this area. The old state prison at Moundsville is now used by national law enforcement for training. There are mock prison riots a couple of times per year in which Marshall County ARES is a participant. There was also a mock plague drill in which all agencies participated throughout the area. Radio amateurs manned positions at various EOC's, local hospitals and at the epicenter of the event. The ARES group also participates in Field Day each year. We've all received training in operating county radio equipment so that we can serve as auxiliary ops in the event that there is a shortage of professional ops. That's impressive. It's just about as opposite from our situation here as it could possibly be. My county (Santa Clara, CA) is fortunate enough to have a very well organized ARES/RACES setup, which is valued by the county and by most of the cities... and I have the good fortune to be in a city with an a topnotch ARES/RACES EC and an excellent relationship between the ARES/RACES hams and the city emergency manager. Lots of training, both within the city, and at the county level (trained and city- nominated hams are signed up by the county as Mutual Aid Communicators, and can be formally activated to provide inter-city support). It's a very impressive setup (to me, at least) with a lot of thought and effort behind it. I still participate as a communicator in PSEs, though, both to help keep my skills up and because it's usually a lot of fun. Part of what has forced a degree of formalism (dare I say "professionalism" w/r/t "amateur" radio?) is the whole issue of liability and insurance coverage for hams who have been formally called out by their city or by the county. In order to receive California Disaster Service Worker coverage, the hams must be formally activated by a suitable authority, and *must* be qualified for the duties for which they are being activated. Our county AEC is very clear about the limits: he's instructed his MACs that he does *not* authorize them to perform certain types of duties or to follow officials to which they are assigned into physically dangerous locations, because the MACs have not received adequate training in those areas (e.g. fireline training). He (and the city ECs) have also made it very clear that their ARES/RACES hams are *not* to "self-activate" if they perceive an emergency - they are to contact their EC or other authorized official and await formal activation. One of the responsibilities of almost any professional is to have a clear understanding of his/her "scope of practice", and to be willing to say "What you're asking me to do is outside my scope of practice, and I must decline." Hams who want to help out in emergencies need to be equally professional, I think. As Harry Callahan said, "A man's got to know his limitations." Part of the problem with people who haven't participated in training is a twofold issue: they may not know their limitations, and the people they're working with won't know those limitations either. If a guy you've never seen before shows up in an emergency with a radio and an offer to help, you have no way of knowing whether he's $DEITY's gift to emergency comms, or a loose cannon with a lit fuse. Around here, unaffiliated hams who show up in a crisis will be treated just like any other "convergent volunteer" - they'll be referred to a centralized volunteer center (there are two such in the county), interviewed, and (if apparently qualified enough to be useful) may be signed up as DSWs and put into _supervised_ service (e.g. sent out with another, trained ham). Such convergent-volunteer hams will *not* be put into solo, standalone service as part of an activation until their level of training, behavior under stress, etc. have been evaluated in the field. I seem to recall the word "financial", coupled with the words "background check". Am I mistaken? You're not mistaken about recalling the words. The Red Cross is not doing a financial background check. There is controversy on how the wording reads on the web site that does the background check. I believe that the problem has been worked out, but the last I checked the information on the ARRL web site had not been updated. Yeah, the latest version is still unclear... the Red Cross says that they won't actually *do* such a check, but the private company they've contracted the checking to *does* insist that the person being checked give a very-wide-range authorization for checking which could include financial and "lifestyle" checks. I think I'd have a problem with that. The FCC has issued me an amateur radio license. The FCC knows who I am and where I live. I have other forms of identification. That should be good enough for the American Red Cross. The reason that the Red Cross instituted background checks was to try to prevent the type of fraud that occurred during Katrina. There's no correlation between having an FCC license and passing a background check. I'd like to think that all licensed amateurs are honest upstanding folks, but I know that's not true. Our city, and the county, and many of the other cities here in the county have a background-check requirement for anyone who is going to be granted physical access to secure or sensitive areas. For instance, my city's ARES/RACES hamshack is in the Police and Fire Admin building, literally one (unlocked) door away from the 911 dispatch consoles. The ARES EC and AECs have been given ID cards which unlock the outside building door... we don't even have to pick up the phone and buzz for access. There's no way that the city would authorize access to this sort of area to unescorted hams, without at least a basic background check. Hams can sign up for ARES and participate in the weekly nets without going through such a check, but in order to be listed under RACES and make themselves available for formal activation they have to be checked. In our case, the check is a "Livescan", which includes a "wants and warrants" check and fingerprinting. No financial/lifestyle check. The county's rules are similar. I understand that the county is trying to negotiate an MOU with our local Red Cross organizations, in which the Red Cross would accept any ham who had been through a city or county background check without further huhu. This sort of arrangement would seem to be implied in the original Red Cross announcement, which spoke of doing background checks for anyone who was coming in from an organization which didn't already do such checks, so with a bit of luck it'll be formalized hereabouts before too long. I think that the big hassle w/r/t the Red Cross announcement, is that they subcontracted the checking out to a company which has (so far) insisted on having only a single level of "OK, check me out!" authorization - one which is rather more invasive than the Red Cross's criteria would require. For one thing, you are likely to be issued Red Cross credentials. This implies a level of responsibility for the Red Cross. Also, you're likely, as a communicator, to be in very sensitive locations like the EOC or in service centers in close proximity to sensitive documents and information. If there's logic for Red Cross volunteers to be required to pass a background check, the same logic applies to the ham radio operators who are shadowing them or assisting them in close quarters. And speaking of close quarters, you're likely to be sharing sleeping quarters with these people; personally I feel better about sleeping with 100 of my new co-workers if I have reason to believe that at least some basic screening has been done on them. Finally, there's the public view of things. The "man on the street" sees two people walking together, both wearing similar credentials, and doing the same job. The ham radio operator will not be distinguished from the Red Cross volunteer. If there's a problem, the Red Cross will take the heat. I don't think it's unreasonable for them to hold ham volunteers to some standard. Yup, all valid concerns. FEMA and the NGOs took a lot of heat for errors made in the Katrina response. One of those errors involved not adequately screening volunteers and suffering fraud because of it. I do not think that those errors will be made again. Will this result in better service to the disaster victims? NO, most certainly, it will not. Every check that is put in place to prevent fraud will make it harder for legitimate victims to obtain the aid that they need. But that will not stop those checks from being made because the taxpayers demand a certain level of assurance that their tax money is being distributed to people with a legitimate need. Agreed. It has become a political necessity... I have to admit that, as little as I like the idea and the invasiveness and the bureaucracy. Yes, I did run into a few radio amateurs during the Katrina operation who were not mentally stable. Fraud? No. Irrational behavior? Yes. Would a background check have had any effect? I don't know. It MIGHT have kept them at home. Or not. Or might, at least, have helped keep them in areas of lower stress where their behavior could do less damage to the disaster work. One more comment, only peripherally related to background checks. This is specifically aimed at _national_ disasters, not local ones where local credentials are used. I am afraid that Katrina was the death knell for just showing up and being put to work. As far as hams go, in a lot of cities, the idea of "just showing up and going to work" fell into disrepute quite some time ago. I've heard several stories about how a few "bad apples" in the ham community, showing up at disasters and getting in the way, were enough of a problem to cause the city to kick *all* the hams out of the area and the process, and (in effect) declare hams to be "persona non grata". This sort of damage can take years, or even decades to repair. A big part of the training and background-check process (and having this be visible to the cities, counties, Red Cross, etc.) is to reassure these organizations that the hams who they're dealing with are going to be assets rather than liabilities. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Ivor Jones wrote: Sorry, but I'm one of those. I *don't* have time, I have a full time job and I volunteer for an animal rescue charity at the weekends, plus all the normal family/household things that most people do. Besides, what training is necessary to pass radio messages..? Don't we already know how to do that..? Some do. Some do not. It does not come naturally. Chatting with someone on the radio, or making HF QSOs, is not necessarily going to prepare you for passing formal or semi-formal message traffic *efficiently* on a busy net, when you and everyone else are under stress in an emergency. Things like "listen before you transmit", "don't read the message faster than you can write it", "pause and drop carrier after every N words", "don't editorialize", "think of what you're going to say before you press PTT", and so forth don't come automatically, and it's disturbingly easy to forget them when under pressure. I believe that's just as true for "quarter century" hams as it is for the newly licensed. A message-net (formal or otherwise) with well-practiced operators can be a joy to observe. Just one or two untrained or out-of-practice ops can slow things to a crawl. My own experience, after five years as a ham and after dozens of training sessions and drills, is simply this: training and regular practice makes a huge difference. I remember reading a comment by Vladimir Horowitz, some years ago, about his piano practice. He said something to the effect of "If I skip my scales practice for a day, I can tell the difference in how well I play. If I skip it for two days, my wife can tell. If I skip it for three days, everybody can tell." -- Dave Platt AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bill Horne, W1AC" wrote in message ... Ivor Jones wrote: "Steve Bonine" wrote in message wrote: On Mar 14, 5:20 pm, Steve Bonine wrote: [snip] [snipped] P.P.S. I'd bet there isn't a single question on any ham exam in the world that asks how much toilet paper to bring to a deployment; Q.E.D. [snipped] Most hams won't even think to put it in there go kit. Another clue, if going on a long deployment (subjective) take twice as many socks as you think you will need and you will probably have enough. |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Platt wrote:
I've heard several stories about how a few "bad apples" in the ham community, showing up at disasters and getting in the way, were enough of a problem to cause the city to kick *all* the hams out of the area and the process, and (in effect) declare hams to be "persona non grata". This sort of damage can take years, or even decades to repair. Indeed, this is exactly the situation we're in right now. Once someone in charge gets it in their head that hams are a problem, it is almost impossible to change their mind. In fact, the only reason we're now beginning to mend fences is that the personalities involved have changed. Bill Horne, W1AC wrote: On my first deployment, I brought a massive backpack, which included almost nothing I later needed and almost everything I didn't. I went to the Katrina effort with another ham from the area. We drove down in his Suburban, and the vehicles was completely full. We used almost nothing that we brought. On the other hand, one of the other hams drove down in a similarly-sized vehicle that he had equipped after years of experience with disaster operations. It was almost uncanny how he had exactly what he, and the rest of us, needed. If we came up short, the answer was "Ask Al." and he invariably had what we needed and the knowledge to use it. That's the difference that training and experience makes. Newby wrote: "Bill Horne, W1AC" wrote: P.P.S. I'd bet there isn't a single question on any ham exam in the world that asks how much toilet paper to bring to a deployment; Q.E.D. Most hams won't even think to put it in there go kit. I wonder how many hams even _have_ a go-kit. Or even a list to create one when needed. I forgot a particularly important item during a training exercise and realized that I needed to make an actual checklist for my go-kit. I was astounded to discover that it contained over 100 items. No, that's not a Suburban-full; it's one carry-on bag and a small rolling suitcase. |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:58:07 CST, "Ivor Jones"
wrote: Besides, what training is necessary to pass radio messages..? Don't we already know how to do that..? If "passing radio messages" was all that was required it wouldn't be a problem. I am a co-station-manager of an emergency radio unit at a major medical center EOC served by the county ARES/RACES unit. Over the five years there, we have had regular training exercises as well as several actual call-outs. Our position handles three (yes, three) voice circuits and two data (packet) circuits to two counties' EOCs and to the regional hospital dispatch center. It involves handling traffic in three different systems, using message forms particular to those systems -- remember that we support them and their operations, and do what they ask us to do for that support. Each operator (we usually have two per shift) has to know the functioning of each component of the EOC and how to navigate through them - they don't have time to teach us when "things happen". We may also be called on to operate the "regular" radio equipment that the med center uses on a day-to-day basis, and we have trained and licensed some of the emergency room support personnel to operate some ham radio equipment located in the ER which is on a specific inter-hospital system. In other words, we are an integral part of the EOC's operation. You cannot drop an untrained "I know how to pass radio messages" amateur operator into that mix and hope that it will function properly. What we do with such volunteers is to direct them to a resource net (the radio equivalent of the hospital's "labor pool" assignment system) for placement in positions that do not require that level of training. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Public Service - NWS | Antenna | |||
Public Service | CB | |||
Public service | CB | |||
This is Public Service | Shortwave | |||
Seattle Public Service Frequencies in .P95 File for Use With Radio Shack Pro-95 | Scanner |