DST Communications tools
|
Bruce
Red Cross Disaster Service Technology (DST) by definition supplies communications capabilities to our "served agency" which is to Red Cross functions such as Mass Care, Shelter management, Damage Assessment. When "All else fail's" during a disaster, Red Cross functions look to DST for communications to enable them to serve their clients - those who have been affected by the disaster event. The "Technology" part of DST means we are to develop, test, train and use, what ever technology that is possible, to pass accurately and efficiently, disaster message traffic using the communications tool that best meets the current need. If cell phones and the Internet are available then they can be used. But on the front end of a disaster, when ALL normal means of communications are destroyed, just how is message traffic to be passed out of the "Last Mile" in the disaster zone - out to where normal communications path's are available? (including no gateways) Then DST MUST utilize what ever communications tool will meet the need. This can be the use of the obsolete 40 year old slow 1200 baud Packet, or FLDIGI, PACTOR, or High Speed VARA, on HF or VHF. At this morning "Teams" meeting the efficient accurate high speed VARA communications "tool" - was rejected out of hand because it was "controlled" by one person. There are many communications technologies that have been "developed" by "one Person" We should be thankful that these highly skilled software developers have created communications tools that can be used during a disaster! Would I quit using my cell phone because it is "controlled" by Verizon? Should FLDIGI be avoided because is is "controlled" by "Dave W1HJK"? Should I quit using "Winlink, because it is "controlled by "Mike "XE2/N6KZB"? Should PC-ALE be avoided because it is "controlled" by "Steve N2CKH", Should MARS-ALE not be used because it is "controlled' by "Steve N2CKH", Should PACTOR not to be used because it is "controlled" by SCS? Should we not use "Shares" because it is "controlled by "Steve" K4CJX? Should we then also reject Hi Speed VARA because it was developed by "EA5HVK"? Yes VARA is "Controlled" by Jose after all HE WROTE the computer code for it! Who else would you choose to make upgrades to the program?? I have found Jose VERY responsive in making needed upgrades. Just this week, an issue came up when users of VARA-FM had, (when trying to pass VARA traffic thru a FM Voice repeater)- of the VARA HF "time limits" dropping the connection because of the repeater "turn-around" time." Jose was notified of this problem, and in less than one day had changed the computer code to accommodate the transmission of VARA thru voice FM repeaters!!
The other complaint was the "cost" of VARA. Should Jose after hundred of hours of software development and on going maintenance, be deprived a small $69 dollar fee?? Speaking of costs: The "Masters Communications DRA50" modem kit is $50 or fully assembled and tested with case is $95. Would you prefer it yo be free? The "Sgnalink USB" is $114.95. The Packet KPC3 is $199.95. Then there is speed of the traffic flow. If you had a stack of ICS213 and Red Cross 6409 forms to send - as well as H&W message traffic to send - which would you prefer? An Obsolete 1200 baud Packet link with all its overhead "handshaking"? OR would you prefer VARA-FM which can move traffic at over 25,000 bps! The VARA HF can pass traffic at over 4000 bps. VARA also offers high speed traffic using P2P direct or even thru a voice repeater, or on the existing gateway network.! PACTOR can almost match VARA speeds on HF but the cost is $1628! I want to put this to a VOTE! How many DST members would prefer passing disaster traffic on Packet or on VARA?? 73 Bruce WA6DNT@... WA6DNT@...
|
|
|
|
Bob Birch
Bruce understand I’m not against VARA. It’s up to each member to determine if they would be willing to spend around $160 to get that capability. The lack of gateways here in San Diego/Imperial Counties is also an issue if you can’t do P2P. The is a new gateway on Palomar Mtn that came on the available list, I will have to try it when I have time.
As I stated during the meeting, which I will stand by is Jose is one person. Yes he has done a great job of developing software and supporting it. My issue is if god forbid he were to get extremely sick or pass on, who would continue the VARA software.
My other question would be, how many in DST have VARA capabilities?
Next, if you would like to create and coordinate a VARA P2P exercise here in San Diego, I will support you and help anyway I can. I or Jer don’t have to be the individuals that create the exercise/drills
Bob
From: main@ARC2-SDICC.groups.io [mailto:main@ARC2-SDICC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bruce
Red Cross Disaster Service Technology (DST) by definition supplies communications capabilities to our "served agency" which is to Red Cross functions such as Mass Care, Shelter management, Damage Assessment. When "All else fail's" during a disaster, Red Cross functions look to DST for communications to enable them to serve their clients - those who have been affected by the disaster event. The "Technology" part of DST means we are to develop, test, train and use, what ever technology that is possible, to pass accurately and efficiently, disaster message traffic using the communications tool that best meets the current need. If cell phones and the Internet are available then they can be used. But on the front end of a disaster, when ALL normal means of communications are destroyed, just how is message traffic to be passed out of the "Last Mile" in the disaster zone - out to where normal communications path's are available? (including no gateways) Then DST MUST utilize what ever communications tool will meet the need. This can be the use of the obsolete 40 year old slow 1200 baud Packet, or FLDIGI, PACTOR, or High Speed VARA, on HF or VHF. At this morning "Teams" meeting the efficient accurate high speed VARA communications "tool" - was rejected out of hand because it was "controlled" by one person. There are many communications technologies that have been "developed" by "one Person" We should be thankful that these highly skilled software developers have created communications tools that can be used during a disaster! Would I quit using my cell phone because it is "controlled" by Verizon? Should FLDIGI be avoided because is is "controlled" by "Dave W1HJK"? Should I quit using "Winlink, because it is "controlled by "Mike "XE2/N6KZB"? Should PC-ALE be avoided because it is "controlled" by "Steve N2CKH", Should MARS-ALE not be used because it is "controlled' by "Steve N2CKH", Should PACTOR not to be used because it is "controlled" by SCS? Should we not use "Shares" because it is "controlled by "Steve" K4CJX? Should we then also reject Hi Speed VARA because it was developed by "EA5HVK"? Yes VARA is "Controlled" by Jose after all HE WROTE the computer code for it! Who else would you choose to make upgrades to the program?? I have found Jose VERY responsive in making needed upgrades. Just this week, an issue came up when users of VARA-FM had, (when trying to pass VARA traffic thru a FM Voice repeater)- of the VARA HF "time limits" dropping the connection because of the repeater "turn-around" time." Jose was notified of this problem, and in less than one day had changed the computer code to accommodate the transmission of VARA thru voice FM repeaters!!
|
|
|
|
Bruce
Hi Bob
I do not believe you are giving VARA a
fair chance. If you could really experience what it can do on a
good path, you would be convinced of its usefulness.
As for creating a drill - I guess
square one - would be to poll the DST members both in San Diego
and up North, to see who has or would like to get VARA
capabilities. From that list, then some drill or exercise could
be created. If you have the updated VARA program in your computer
then you have P2P capability - It even shows up as a selection in
the Winlink program when VARA is selected. If we can get enough
DST members active on VARA then we should be able to easily pass
message traffic around San Diego County using P2P, on VHF (with no
gateway needed) - which is a skill I would like to practice.
Eventually, I would like to see a regular Red Cross DST digital
net on VHF, where these skills could be learned and practiced.
The Palomar gateway is "N2DDS-10 on
431.070. I gave a listen to it and it was barely breaking squelch,
like 10 % quieting.
This is because it is blocked by "Black
Mt" to my Mira Mesa roof, just like it blocks AREDN. Also it
being on UHF causes a lot of signal attenuation because of foliage
and trees. I keep hoping an AREDN node could be put in at one of
the four Amateur repeater vaults on Black Mt. Lacking that, there
is a tall building next to the I-15 near Mira Mesa Blvd. This
building might be able to "see" Otay - as Red Cross does. Then a
node could be put up there to cover Mira Mesa, and Scripps Ranch,
area. Speaking of AREDN, After the Red Cross building becomes
available, could a AREDN node dish be added pointing towards Mira
Mesa, to see if a path could be established to my roof? After
seeing what was in the chapter radio room and its very high HF
noise floor and the lack of Internet capabilities, I do not see
how you are going to get HF SHARES to work there. There needs to
be Internet available to be able to connect with the "KIWI" SDR
so the radio operator can hear the net stations. Also a computer
is needed to copy the digital traffic that is sent on the HF nets.
lacking that capability, then If a reliable high speed AREDN link
can be established between Red Cross headquarters and my house,
then I could relay SHARES HF radio traffic from my station to the
Red Cross radio room. Speaking of SHARES, I NEED THAT FORM 1
SIGNED! it is been over a year waiting! I cannot access the SHARES
data base files until that Form 1 is signed!! Because of help from
other SHARES members, I am now checking into four HF SHARES nets
representing San Diego Red Cross DST. They hold drills that I have
not been able to participate in - because the drill info is not
available to me - all for the want of getting that form 1 signed!
Also my bruce.haupt@... is
STILL non functional.
On 9/4/2021 4:37 PM, Bob Birch wrote:
|
|
|
|
Mark Warrick (KM6ZPO) <mark@...>
Hi Bruce,
I disagree with your assessment that packet is "obsolete". There are currently 1,063 packet FM gateways vs. 349 VARA FM stations. I'm not discounting VARA as a possible future replacement of packet 1200/9600. I am a little concerned that one guy controls the market though. For that reason, I don't see VARA as the future replacement of packet. What i see here instead is a story of VHF vs. BETAMAX. Remember, BETAMAX was better, but VHS ultimately dominated the market as an inferior product because more than one company was able to produce it. Eventually, the DVD kicked both of them to the curb and then streaming took over. If we truly care about the speed of communications, the usefulness of those channels (multi-purpose) and the cost involved in getting up to speed, the AREDN data network is thousands of times faster and costs less to implement. In the same amount of time you can send one VARA FM message at its fastest possible throughput, I could submit hundreds, maybe thousands of the same type of message over AREDN while conducting a video conference call! Currently, there is no technology I'm aware of (aside from the Internet itself) faster than AREDN. AREDN is simple. The adoption of this data network is going to be a lot smoother as the AREDN network develops further. Therefore, I'm not focussing upon trying to convince people to adopt a technology that is, at best, only four times faster than the best packet FM technology available. Packet 1200 is common, reliable, and a lot faster than passing information with your voice. For that reason I strongly recommend that people at least have 1200 baud capabilities. I discourage 9600 baud stations because of the lack of 9600 baud gateways, and the cost of the radios you need to use 9600. I am not going to push VARA. I will, however, push AREDN. See my website http://km6zpo.com for examples of how I have put AREDN to work in EMCOMMs. ---mark KM6ZPO
|
|
|
|
Bruce
Hi Mark
I was impressed with your web site and
the you tube presentation on using AREDN to connect computer
networks!.
I totally agree with you, that AREDN is
VASTLY superior to any of the current Amateur radio digital
message programs currently in use. I also agree that there is a
large number of Packet stations and gateways across the nation.
Packet has been with us for over 30 years, where as VARA is just
getting started. Addressing your concern that VARA has "one guy
controls the market" I have been in communications with the author
of VARA - Jose EA5HVK. I will post his reply - be assured the
source code is safe and would be given to responsible people who
would continue to support the program in the event that Jose could
no longer support the VARA program.
The Los Angeles basin, where most of
the people live is huge, and mostly flat. It is surrounded by
mountain top repeaters sites to the North ,East, and South where
AREDN systems can be set up. Also there is a lot of skilled talent
available to set up AREDN systems. If an 8.0 Earthquake should
ever hit your area, the Em-Comm traffic load would be huge and
AREDN is the only system that could hope to meet the demand! (That
is assuming the earthquake had not misaligned the dish antennas!)
In San Diego it is a totally different
story. San Diego County is by no means flat. It is covered with
hills, canyons, and valleys.
There are relatively few good available
mountaintop sites that have any space in the vault for a lowly
Amateur Radio system. Vault space cost is measured by the square
inch! The cost would be beyond reach for any new technology like
AREDN. The AREDN network was started years ago, and sites on T.J.
- Palomar and Otay Mt were obtained, but that is as far as it
went. Only those who had LOS to these sites could get AREDN. Most
of the Amateur Radio population could not benefit from the AREDN
due to trees, hills, valleys, and canyons, all it takes is a tree
branch to stop the signal. I have been waiting for years for the
AREDN network to deliver a usable signal to my roof in Mira Mesa.
The LOS path from Palomar is blocked by Black Mt - which has 4
Amateur repeaters on it. Since Andre illness has sidelined him,
all development work on AREDN has stopped in San Diego, to my
knowledge.
So what is left for em-com
communications? The ONLY Packet and VARA gate way in the San
Diego, is in T.J. Mexico. (there is a new UHF VARA gateway on
Palomar Mt - but it is in the noise - blocked by Black MT). The
Mexican gateway site is a long reach from North San Diego. From
Mira Mesa, I can get very good VARA speeds on VHF VARA-FM thru
XE2BNC. But what about a real life disaster? There is NO guarantee
that any gateways will be available. AREDN in San Diego, the
backbone works, but signals are too weak for general use. In a
disaster, any communications tool that gives fast, efficient, and
accurate message delivery to the key staff working a disaster,
should be used. When a disaster has destroyed ALL the normal
communications infrastructure, there is a need to get critical
communications out of the "last mile" (During Katrina the "last
mile" was more like 50 miles) out to an area that still has
Internet connectivity. This may require HF PACTOR or HF VARA. I
realize in some rural areas, there may be more Packet gateways
available than VARA, If that is the communications tool available,
then it should be used. But I have noticed that the number of VARA
stations are increasing, especially in the larger cities, while
packet is decreasing. I used to use APRS on 144.39 MHz when I
drove across country, but now there are so few active Packet nodes
left, I have given up on its usefulness.
But back to the realities of a
disaster. If there are NO gateways available for Packet or VARA,
then we must learn how to pass and relay traffic using P2P to
send traffic in the disaster zone. This is where VARA wins the
speed contest, but if packet is all you have, then use it. I am
hoping to get a simplex VHF net going to learn how to pass traffic
using VHF VARA P2P relay. That is a much needed skill to
develop.
Thanks for letting me share my opinions
on this important subject, and I appreciate all you and others
have done in the L.A. area to set up a very reliable
communications network. I am especially impressed with the
VHF-VARA network that Oliver K6OLI and others have set up in N.E.
L.A. to support Hospital communications. I would sure like to see
a network like that in San Diego, but we are hindered by the
topography.
73 Bruce WA6DNT@...
WA6DNT@...
On 9/7/2021 9:12 AM, Mark Warrick
(KM6ZPO) wrote:
Hi Bruce,
|
|
|
|
Mark Warrick (KM6ZPO) <mark@...>
Hi Bruce,
I want to point everyone's attention to the Irvine area of Orange County. See the AREDN map: http://usercontent.arednmesh.org/K/5/K5DLQ/livemap2.html#13/33.7010/-117.7478 http://n6ipd.org IDEC didn't wait around for people to install AREDN access points on mountain tops. They solved a problem for a specific "customer" need. Their high schools are used as evacuation shelters. Every high school already had VHF / UHF radios, but they wanted to be able to dial each other via IP phones, see each location on camera and be able to transfer large data files between each other. The installed their own AREDN mesh network with low-level nodes at each high school to form a mesh network which is all connected back to the main police station, where they have their EOC. IDEC is connected to the "greater AREDN So-Cal mesh" through a long-range link to KE6BXT on Pleasant's Peak. If you scroll around Orange County, you'll notice a whole bunch of nodes in the south county area. Our south county is similar to the San Diego area - lots of low-lying hills. I get the push back a lot that they are waiting for "somebody" to make AREDN available to everyone. That's not how the mesh works. Rather, it works by individuals and organizations filling in the gaps - the valleys, the dead zones. Unlike typical radio comms which require repeaters a high sites covering a wide line of site area, AREDN works best at a range of 5-10 miles. The equipment most people can afford would be in that range. Essentially, if everybody had an AREDN omni antenna their home, we would have a network that covers al of those gaps. I don't think it's important that we cover every area of San Diego county. Rather, we just need to make sure that the EOC is well connected and that anyone in the parking lot of the EOC can get on the local mesh. If there are other "served" clients in the region, they need connections as well. AREDN, like ham radio, can be done in the field. All of my equipment is field ready. We already use WiFI when deploying laptop kits. It's not a huge stretch to add an AREDN node kit. With thoughtful planning, we can predict where AREDN would be needed in the San Diego County region and then plan for where nodes need to be to cover those areas, whether installed permanently are as go-kits. P.S. I live right next door to the 600 Parkcenter Orange County chapter office. I don't have an AREDN RF link because we have not been allowed to put the omni back up on the roof and I cannot install a dish on my apartment roof. The chapter building has AREDN, but I don't have access to the radio room. So essentially, unless "somebody" provides me access, I can only be useful with my field equipment. On the VARA side of things, I agree, the LAX ARES group has led the way for VARA around here. I encourage everyone to join their Groups.IO groups: https://areslax-northeast.groups.io/g/main/messages https://areslax.groups.io/g/main/messages Lastly, I mentioned it a couple times via this group. I know most of you are not able to attend, but we're running a P2P relay exercise this weekend in Orange County. This is organized by the OCRACES group. I am running the south county relay station and my friend Scott is running the north county station. I'm somewhat dismayed that more people don't want to practice P2P. I agree with you Bruce, it's an essential skill to learn and practice and will be the last line of defense for transferring large amounts of information when all the RMS gateways are down. P.S. I'm not in the LA Basin. And the Angels are from Anaheim, not Los Angeles. :) ---mark, KM6ZPO
|
|
|
|
Hello Mark, Like the idea about not waiting around. I would like to set up an Omni AREDN Antenna at my QTH if that all goes well, I’ll consider the mobile. My QTH is 57 degrees to Palomar Mountain and 30 miles away, to which I believe to have a back bone for AREDN.
My first exposure to AREDN working with Andre K6AH back 4+ years ago. à (24) AREDN 052717 Workshop - YouTube No further since then.
Please let me know what I need to do OR point me to the right people for further AREDN engagement. I can C++, C#, MS SQL (SSMS), but only in times of need. Well aware of à Amateur Radio Emergency Data Network (arednmesh.org)
73' N6BRV Nat S.
From: main@ARC2-SDICC.groups.io [mailto:main@ARC2-SDICC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mark Warrick (KM6ZPO)
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2021 8:37 AM To: main@ARC2-SDICC.groups.io Subject: Re: [ARC2-SDICC] DST Communications tools
Hi Bruce,
|
|
|
|
Bruce
Hi Mark and DST group.
Thanks for the AREDN-mesh map. I saw
many available nodes in the flat L.A. basin and others down south
to San Clemente.
Further South it gets sparse. I like
the idea of establishing nodes in High Schools which maybe used as
shelters during disasters. Just how was this accomplished ? How
was it funded? How were school districts convinced that AREDN
would be beneficial to them?
For San Diego, schools - most used
during disasters by the Red Cross - are located in the back
country in "radio holes" just how could AREDN work there? Red
Cross never knows which H.S. will be used as this is determined by
conditions on the ground. It would take many relay nodes for AREDN
to be able to reach these locations. Would it take many portable
mobiles with their "Go-Kits" to drive to high locations and on the
top of valleys to relay the AREDN microwave signals, down to the
schools in these radio holes? Could these high locations be even
accessed during a disaster? To establish and maintain these many
portable AREDN nodes, would require that the operators stay at
these locations, for the duration of the disaster event, or
equipment could be stolen. .
As I have mentioned, there is a large
pool of AREDN talent in the L.A. area. There is also the subject
of what I call "Critical Mass" that has been reached in the L.A.
area - that is: many active AREDN nodes attract more nodes and
users. In San Diego, we are way below "Critical Mass" which has
the effect of turning off new participants. The thought is, "if
there are no usable AREDN signals available on my roof why should
I spend the money in setting this up?" Also how can I learn how to
use AREDN with no means of connecting to it? True, I could
purchase AREDN equipment as a "Go-Kit" to deploy, then all we
would need is hundreds more to make a usable Mesh network!
During the 2003, 2007, wildfires in San
Diego County, There were multiple shelter's set up (in radio
holes) and then the fire changed directions and what was a safe
shelter was now threatened, and the shelter occupants had to be
moved, to another H.S. (in a radio hole). Also animal rescue for
horses, goat's to Dogs were sent to the Del Mar Fair grounds
(another radio hole) that needed communications. I also remember
the wild fires burning underneath the H.V. power lines depositing
soot on the insulators causing flash overs!! So the "Sun-link"
line from the East and the "Path 15" from the North had to be shut
down! This left San Diego with not enough power to meet basic
needs! I was in the County EOC that was fully staffed with many in
front of laptop computers "working" the disaster - WHEN THE LIGHTS
WENT OUT"!!! Every thing that was not saved went "poof" and the
911 Sheriff Dispatch on the second floor went down as well. We
were supposed to have the highest priority for power, yet the
place went dark!! There was a collective "gasp" in the room. It
seemed to be a very long time before the diesel generators in the
basement fired up - filling the EOC with Diesel fumes.
So I ask this question, during the
events mentioned above, how would have AREDN met the
communications needs??!!
Using the AREDN-Mesh Map, I noticed
that some nodes were on 3.4 GC - is not the FCC taking that away
from the Amateur service? I scrolled down to my area and I found
a station "K6MRW" in the Scripps Ranch area SE of me in Mira Mesa.
I noted he is on 2.4GC which has MANY users = high noise floor.
Also "tunnel installed" = false. I thought that perhaps this
station could provide me a way to connect to AREDN. I looked this
station up on the FCC data base, and drove to the station
location. Driving out, I went up-up-up the hill past the Miramar
Reservoir. I thought this location above the lake would be perfect
and there would be no trees in the way! But alas, as I continued
my course to the address, I had to travel down-down-down into a
deep radio hole surrounded by a thick stand of trees. I drove to
the address and found "K6MRW" lives in an HOA "Thou-Shalt-Not
zone" - antenna location. I saw no antennas on the house. K6MRW
lives only 5 miles from my house, yet it is a no-go. So that
leaves me again with no way to connect to AREDN.
Again I see P2P VARA on HF or VHF much
more usable.(no gateways needed!)
/8/2021 8:36 AM, Mark Warrick (KM6ZPO) wrote:
Hi Bruce,
|
|
|