need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

On Saturday 15 May 2004 2:38 am in rec.boats.electronics Jack Painter wrote:


As one sarcastic poster pointed out in a snide post
earlier, satcom has replaced almost all comms, but the truth is not
everyone will ever be able to afford that. So we try to maintain HF
service in the best manner possible to serve the whole maritime community.

Maybe you were referring to my comments, maybe not.
A fully compliant satcom system such as F77 is expensive, but not
beyond the means of larger cruisers. Smaller and less expensive
systems are available, right down to handhelds costing little more
than a mobile phone. All of these are easier to use and more
dependable than HF radios. As a minimum all vessels, however small,
should at least carry an L-band EPIRB if they venture out of VHF range.

40 years of HF experience tells me that the unpredictable vagiaries
of HF are not the best thing to struggle with in an emergency.
Technology has moved on and modern satellite based communications
are both reliable and simple to use.

In my opinion, for what it is worth, continued support for HF is
only serving to perpetuate a false sense of security and is
costing lives.

--
My real address is crn (at) netunix (dot) com
WARNING all messages containing attachments or html will be silently
deleted. Send only plain text.

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

Jack Painter wrote:
Also, the USCG HC-130's do not monitor
marine band SSB either, although both the ANG and all USCG a/c are capable
of any HF comms that a distressed vessel needed to communicate with.

The USAF HC 130s do monitor VHF ch 16 more than you might think. If they are
doing exercises off the coast and dropping PJs or flares they often listen to
be sure nobody mistakes it for a distress situation. That led to a miraculous
rescue in the late 70s off Pt Reyes CA. A 129th ARS HC 130 on a training flight
(call sign King 81) picked up a desperate very short VHF mayday call from the
fishing vessel Last One that had literally broken apart in heavy seas rounding
Pt Reyes. It was getting dark and chances of finding the crew (no life raft, no
life jackets, no EPIRB everything happened too quick) was appraoching zero as
the sun set. The Herc found the crew in the water and dropped a pair of rafts
way upwind connected by a long line. The crew managed to grab the line as the
rafts drifted downwind on either side of them. In 54 degree water they would
have soon been dead not for the vigilance and skill of the ANG plane crew. The
HC 130 then dropped flares from fairly high up many miles upwind (it was
screaming NW wind) and the flares drifted right over the rafts at low altitude
allowing a USCG helo to locate and lift the survivors long after nightfall. The
aircraft commander was Ted Shindler, a real pro in my book.

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

I have 47 years as a licensed ham on HF and above. Also 20 years in US Navy
communications and I agree it is unrealistic to think 2182 or 4125 would
work for long haul communications from mid-Pacific. There are too many
variables such as time of day, where in the 11 year sunspot cycle, etc. Yes,
there are times when the 80 meter ham band covers thousands of miles, such
as at night in the winter. But for long haul reliable communications 14 Mhz
is much more reliable, such as the 14.300 MHz maritime mobile net. During
the Alaska earthquake in the early 60s, the 80 meter ham band was the only
thing open for many hours to the lower 48. I put in 76 hours without sleep
operating from SE Washington state. But eventually during that period 14 and
21 MHz ham bands became the reliable paths for emergency and health/welfare
message traffic. A basic understanding of daily, seasonal, etc., cycles of
HF propagation is required to intelligently use it. When I was on Diego
Garcia Island, BIOT, VQ9DM, in 79-80, running 2000 watts PEP SSB, and CW, I
never once made a contact on the 3.5 or 7 MHz ham bands. However, 14 Mhz and
usually 21 MHz were open to the US for hours daily.
Don't blame the CG for lack of success, it is where you are, when and how
good your radio systems is that determines what frequencies will work, if at
all. A frequency range may be open where you are, and completely dead where
the CG station is located and vice versa. The more we become dependent on
satellite based systems, the less expertise we have on HF.
I took a tour of a CG Air Station the weekend and the helicopters have some
kind of HF scanning system to automatically select the frequency to use to
talk to a CAMS. I wish the pilot had been knowledgeable about how it works,
but they got the system from the US Customs Service.
I suggest some searching on the web for information on Maximum Useable
frequency and Optimum Useable Frequency (use 2 MHz lower) would be
enlightening to those without HF long haul experience.
73 Doug K7ABX

"Doug Dotson" wrote in message
...
That's an unreasonable expectation to assume the USCG would hear a small
boat between Midway and Japan on HF, which is far from our area of
responsibilty. You're on your own out in waters like that, and 2182 or
4125
are for 20-200 mile coverage. Higher frequencies as you used to call
someone
nearer to your locaton, are certainly better for long haul comms.

Why is it that USCG "monitored" frequencies are not reliable at these
distances, but ham frequencies are pretty reliable. 4125 is just a bit
above
the 80m ham band. I can talk to Australia, Africa, Europe and Asia
fairly reliably.

I think the bottom line is that for whatever reason, the USCG and USCGA do
not do a very good job of monitoring the frequencies that they claim to.
Hams are always on the air somewhere, getting a ham license is the best
insurance for one's safety.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

Doug wrote
I took a tour of a CG Air Station the weekend and the helicopters have
some
kind of HF scanning system to automatically select the frequency to use to
talk to a CAMS. I wish the pilot had been knowledgeable about how it
works,
but they got the system from the US Customs Service.

That system is called COTHEN (Customs Over The Horizon Enforcement Network),
a cellular-concept of HF communications. It uses multiple transmit and
receive locations with ALE (Automatic Link Establishment) among other
technologies. This will completely replace the old guarded frequencies for
all air to ground communications. All CG aircraft are now ALE equipped, or
soon will be.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Va

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

My main beef is that when I needed to talk to the CG and VHF was
marginal, I asked if I could contact them on SSB. They said NO!

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Doug" wrote in message
k.net...
I have 47 years as a licensed ham on HF and above. Also 20 years in US
Navy
communications and I agree it is unrealistic to think 2182 or 4125 would
work for long haul communications from mid-Pacific. There are too many
variables such as time of day, where in the 11 year sunspot cycle, etc.
Yes,
there are times when the 80 meter ham band covers thousands of miles, such
as at night in the winter. But for long haul reliable communications 14
Mhz
is much more reliable, such as the 14.300 MHz maritime mobile net. During
the Alaska earthquake in the early 60s, the 80 meter ham band was the only
thing open for many hours to the lower 48. I put in 76 hours without sleep
operating from SE Washington state. But eventually during that period 14
and
21 MHz ham bands became the reliable paths for emergency and
health/welfare
message traffic. A basic understanding of daily, seasonal, etc., cycles of
HF propagation is required to intelligently use it. When I was on Diego
Garcia Island, BIOT, VQ9DM, in 79-80, running 2000 watts PEP SSB, and CW,
I
never once made a contact on the 3.5 or 7 MHz ham bands. However, 14 Mhz
and
usually 21 MHz were open to the US for hours daily.
Don't blame the CG for lack of success, it is where you are, when and how
good your radio systems is that determines what frequencies will work, if
at
all. A frequency range may be open where you are, and completely dead
where
the CG station is located and vice versa. The more we become dependent on
satellite based systems, the less expertise we have on HF.
I took a tour of a CG Air Station the weekend and the helicopters have
some
kind of HF scanning system to automatically select the frequency to use to
talk to a CAMS. I wish the pilot had been knowledgeable about how it
works,
but they got the system from the US Customs Service.
I suggest some searching on the web for information on Maximum Useable
frequency and Optimum Useable Frequency (use 2 MHz lower) would be
enlightening to those without HF long haul experience.
73 Doug K7ABX

"Doug Dotson" wrote in message
...
That's an unreasonable expectation to assume the USCG would hear a
small
boat between Midway and Japan on HF, which is far from our area of
responsibilty. You're on your own out in waters like that, and 2182 or
4125
are for 20-200 mile coverage. Higher frequencies as you used to call
someone
nearer to your locaton, are certainly better for long haul comms.

Why is it that USCG "monitored" frequencies are not reliable at these
distances, but ham frequencies are pretty reliable. 4125 is just a bit
above
the 80m ham band. I can talk to Australia, Africa, Europe and Asia
fairly reliably.

I think the bottom line is that for whatever reason, the USCG and USCGA
do
not do a very good job of monitoring the frequencies that they claim to.
Hams are always on the air somewhere, getting a ham license is the best
insurance for one's safety.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

In article ,
"Doug Dotson" wrote:

That's an unreasonable expectation to assume the USCG would hear a small
boat between Midway and Japan on HF, which is far from our area of
responsibilty. You're on your own out in waters like that, and 2182 or
4125
are for 20-200 mile coverage. Higher frequencies as you used to call
someone
nearer to your locaton, are certainly better for long haul comms.

Why is it that USCG "monitored" frequencies are not reliable at these
distances, but ham frequencies are pretty reliable. 4125 is just a bit above
the 80m ham band. I can talk to Australia, Africa, Europe and Asia
fairly reliably.

I think the bottom line is that for whatever reason, the USCG and USCGA do
not do a very good job of monitoring the frequencies that they claim to.
Hams are always on the air somewhere, getting a ham license is the best
insurance for one's safety.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista



Just a followup for the group on the above quesations. I had a chat
with the USCG District 17 (Alaska) Admiral, while I was traveling on
vacation. We chatted about the state of the USCG's Radio Systems, and
the lack of congressional funding to impliment the Basic GMDSS Coast
Stations for the US Coasts. Our congress has yet to fund the BASIC
implimentation of GMDSS that was MANDITORY for US Flagged Vessels
back in 1999. He told me he could get funding for as many Armed
Preditor Survalience Craft as he could wanted, but very little for
the Radio System. Not even very much for basic maintainience.
Those of us in the North Pacific know that USCG Kodiak maintains
a very excelent Station that was origanlly a Navy Communications
Operation. This is the lifeline for all North Pacific Mariners,
and they do an excelent job. USCG Hawii is also very good for those
folks out in the mid Pacific. The Regional MF/HF Staions at Ketchikan,
Yakatat, and Cold Bay, are plagued with very old equipment that is ALWAYS
breaking down, and spares are very limited. Consequently the Listening
Watch from these stations is not what it should be, due to the lack
of operational status. I suspect that the same is true for most of the
West Coast Regional USCG Stations. What is needed is for the public
(that's us Maritime Radio Users) to kick some congressional butts, and
get the USCG Radio Systems GMDSS UPGRADE FUNDED, and PROCURRED. Once
that happens things will improve, but if it doesn't, nothing is going to
get better, and most things will get worse.

Bruce in alaska who enjoyed his vacation to the Real World,
but fells a lot safer back in the bush
--
add a 2 before @

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

Bruce in alaska who enjoyed his vacation to the Real World, but fells
a lot safer back in the bush

I talked to a charter company from Alasks a year ago at the Annapolis boat show
to try and find out why anybody who wanted to charter would want to do it in
Alaska.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

In article ,
(SAIL LOCO) wrote:

Bruce in alaska who enjoyed his vacation to the Real World, but
fells
a lot safer back in the bush

I talked to a charter company from Alasks a year ago at the Annapolis boat
show
to try and find out why anybody who wanted to charter would want to do it in
Alaska.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

They do it for the scenery, and the ocassional Grumpy Old ******* with
cool stories, that they find while crusing out in the bush country.....


Bruce in alaska one of the Grumpies, sometimes.......
--
add a 2 before @

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

Part of what's great about chartering in the Carib. is the 78 deg. beautiful
water you can jump into.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

You need to broaden your horizons Mike. The Carib is a very
small sliver of the world. But then again both Carib and Alaska
beat the hell out of Baltimore :)

Doug
s/v Callista

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message
...
Part of what's great about chartering in the Carib. is the 78 deg.
beautiful
water you can jump into.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

"Doug Dotson" wrote in
:


Why is it that USCG "monitored" frequencies are not reliable at these
distances, but ham frequencies are pretty reliable. 4125 is just a bit
above the 80m ham band. I can talk to Australia, Africa, Europe and
Asia fairly reliably.

I think the bottom line is that for whatever reason, the USCG and
USCGA do not do a very good job of monitoring the frequencies that
they claim to. Hams are always on the air somewhere, getting a ham
license is the best insurance for one's safety.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista



While the mechanic in Daytona Beach was working over the Pickled Perkins in
Lionheart's bilge, they were astonished to listen to the emergency comms
handled by the hams on 14.300 MMSN for a Honduran fishing boat captain who
had a crew fight aboard where one guy had a knife stuck into his back 7
inches and needed meds, bad. A VE3, who is one of the net's controllers,
was the contact station with USCG who never showed up on 14.300, at all, to
help or take charge of the situation. The hams were alone handling it.
The boat was doing 7 knots headed towards Honduras from about halfway to
Jamaica.

USCG got in touch through some kind of channels with Honduras Air Force
who, eventually, got in touch with the captain of the vessel on VHF several
hours later. A fast boat was dispatched and I heard the hams say they had
heard from the fishing boat captain that the guy had survived the attack
and was safely in a Honduran hospital.

Wonder why CG couldn't get $400M in HF gear I paid for tuned up on 14.300
to talk to the captain, directly? Most interesting. I know their gear
will run on the ham bands because I...er, ah...."operated" on 20 meters
from NMN's great 10KW Harris transmitters into big cone verticals when I
cal'd their test equipment back in the 80's. The transmitters and antenna
systems there can come up on any old frequency you like with serious power.

Larry (No, I didn't run 10KW on 20 meters, but the temptation was
overwhelming!)

need inexpensive marine ssb and ham radio for cruising sailboat.
 

Wonder why CG couldn't get $400M in HF gear I paid for tuned up on 14.300
to talk to the captain, directly? Most interesting. I know their gear
will run on the ham bands...

I guess they couldn't pass the code test to get a license :)

Doug
s/v Callista

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 03:58:15 -0000, Larry W4CSC
wrote:

(BOEING377) wrote in
:

"No
answer to calls to USCG on 2182, 4125 etc."

Did you use the CG's CB "handle" (i.e. "Group Charleston") or their
callsign when you called them? I had a problem here with watchstanders not
knowing what the station callsign of CG Group Charleston was so they
wouldn't answer my calls from the 2nd marina in full view of their antenna.
As soon as I called "Group Charleston" on 2182 he came right up. (I
informed him what his station callsign was after a short discussion of
radio protocol in an international environment.)

Larry WDB6254

generally the 'stations' wait to see if 'activities' will pick up the
call. if activities does not, the station hearing someone calling
'coast guard' will respond on the 2nd or 3rd call.

bob/wf3h


---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

"Bob" wrote

Larry W4CSC wrote:
As soon as I called "Group Charleston" on 2182 he came right up.

generally the 'stations' wait to see if 'activities' will pick up the
call. if activities does not, the station hearing someone calling
'coast guard' will respond on the 2nd or 3rd call.

Bob, there could be exceptions, but Group and Activity are the only USCG
levels manning SSB for 2182 watch. Stations are VHF only. Starting very
soon, there will be no more use of the words Group or Actvities. As the
Marine Safety Office (MSO) merge with existing Groups and Activities, all
future descripton of those units will be "Sector". Each Sector will then
control several Stations as they presently do under the title Group or
Activites, etc.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Va

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

About a month ago Group Portland (MSO Portland, OR) started using Sector
Portland. This went on for a week and then they went back to Group Portland.
I believe they jumped the gun on the switchover to the Sector call sign.
Doug K7ABX
"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:drMxc.14533$1L4.186@okepread02...
"Bob" wrote

Larry W4CSC wrote:
As soon as I called "Group Charleston" on 2182 he came right up.

generally the 'stations' wait to see if 'activities' will pick up the
call. if activities does not, the station hearing someone calling
'coast guard' will respond on the 2nd or 3rd call.

Bob, there could be exceptions, but Group and Activity are the only USCG
levels manning SSB for 2182 watch. Stations are VHF only. Starting very
soon, there will be no more use of the words Group or Actvities. As the
Marine Safety Office (MSO) merge with existing Groups and Activities, all
future descripton of those units will be "Sector". Each Sector will then
control several Stations as they presently do under the title Group or
Activites, etc.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Va

USCG and HF SSB, cannot count on being heard?
 

"Doug" wrote in
.net:

About a month ago Group Portland (MSO Portland, OR) started using
Sector Portland. This went on for a week and then they went back to
Group Portland. I believe they jumped the gun on the switchover to the
Sector call sign. Doug K7ABX

I think this paragraph from the CAMSLANT webpage tells a lot why open calls
are not being answered on HF-SSB at USCG coast stations....

"•Guarding specified international distress frequencies, (High Frequency
Digital Selective Calling) responding to emergency signals and requests for
medical advice."

If you're screaming your head off, waist-deep in seawater, on your Icom HF
radio and THEY are waiting for a DSC call without the speaker making all
those nice, old HF noises.........you ain't gonna git saved.

http://www.uscg.mil/lantarea/camslant/station.htm

"HF DIGITAL SELECTIVE CALLING
Portsmouth/NMN, Boston/NMF, Miami/NMA, New Orleans/NMG, Pt. Reyes/NMC,
Honolulu HI/NMO, Kodiak AK/NOJ

2187.5 kHz Coast Guard will normally respond to DSC test calls if
acknowledgment is requested. Reports of uncancelled or unacknowledged
inadvertently transmitted distress calls will be forwarded to the Federal
Communications Commission.
4207.5
6312
8414.5
12577
16804.5

Note: For radiotelex and digital selective calling,
frequencies listed are assigned. Carrier frequency is
located 1700Hz below the assigned frequency."

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/cgcomms/call.htm

USCG and HF SSB
 

"Larry W4CSC" wrote

If you're screaming your head off, waist-deep in seawater, on your Icom HF
radio and THEY are waiting for a DSC call without the speaker making all
those nice, old HF noises.........you ain't gonna git saved.

Larry, the navcenter website is a bit confusing, I agree.
Here are the guarded (voice) marine channels:

ITU
SHIP SHORE Sched (UTC)
NMN NMN/NMF NMG
424 4134 4426 2300-1100 2230-1030 24 HRS
601 6200 6501 24 HRS 24 HRS 24 HRS
816 8240 8764 24 HRS 24 HRS 24 HRS
1205 12242 13089 1100-2300 1030-2230 24 HRS
1625 16432 17314 ( -- on request only --)

And unofficially only,
2182 is guarded 24 hrs by CG Groups, limited range
2182 is guarded 24 hrs by WLO Moble Radio, long range

The United States does not maintain Sea Area A-2 yet, and will not until
RESCUE-21 is completed. But 2182 continues to be monitored even as DSC was
supposed to replace it. Our coverage of 2187.5 DSC is also somewhat limited
due to multi-purpose antennas not being specifically tailored to that
frequency (yet).

CAMSLANT may hear a general call on those guarded channels (above) and not
be able to respond to it if there is a broadcast marine information
bulletin, weather fax/sitor, etc going out at that time. ALWAYS in the case
of a distress call though, any broadcast would be terminated immediately and
the call answered.

"HF DIGITAL SELECTIVE CALLING
Portsmouth/NMN, Boston/NMF, Miami/NMA, New Orleans/NMG, Pt. Reyes/NMC,
Honolulu HI/NMO, Kodiak AK/NOJ

2187.5 kHz
4207.5
6312
8414.5
12577
16804.5

Note: For radiotelex and digital selective calling,
frequencies listed are assigned. Carrier frequency is
located 1700Hz below the assigned frequency."

No voice is ever guarded there. This is the case worldwide as well. However,
since I asked us to monitor for interference caused by our own transmitters
(HFDX, broadcast wx fax, etc) there are now speakers connected to these
receivers, but there is never voice traffic expected or listened for on DSC.
DSC procedures describe an appropriate voice channel to switch to after a
DSC distress call is sent. The DSC distress channels are overloaded with
safety testing most hours of the day and night since IMO originally required
daily testing. Now the requirement is weekly, but that word is slow in
getting out to the commercial fleets. It hasn't slowed down much!

Hope this helps,

Jack

USCG and HF SSB
 

While I was in Daytona Beach, waiting for the mechanic to show up to work
on the diesel, I monitored 14.300 Maritime Mobile Service Net run by the
"professionals", those retired hams who doggedly keep MMSN running.

The captain of a Honduran fishing vessel half way to Jamaica knew where to
come to get ANSWERED. He got the finest emergency service anyone could ask
for. Eventually, USCG got contact with the Honduran Air Force who located
the boat and sent a boat to intercept him with medical care. The victim,
who had been stabbed with a 7" knife in between his guts in a fight aboard,
actually survived they tell me!

The boat captain wasn't a ham, not licensed. That mattered not. What I
couldn't figure out is why CG didn't come up on 14300 to talk to him,
directly. The hams provided all the comms to the boat. The ham talking to
USCG was in Canada.

A lot of bad things happen to ham radio, these days. But, those old guys
who give up their retirement to help the net....made ham radio just shine
like a bright star that day.

Larry

USCG and HF SSB
 

"Larry W4CSC" wrote

While I was in Daytona Beach, waiting for the mechanic to show up to work
on the diesel, I monitored 14.300 Maritime Mobile Service Net run by the
"professionals", those retired hams who doggedly keep MMSN running.

The captain of a Honduran fishing vessel half way to Jamaica knew where to
come to get ANSWERED. He got the finest emergency service anyone could
ask
for. Eventually, USCG got contact with the Honduran Air Force who located
the boat and sent a boat to intercept him with medical care. The victim,
who had been stabbed with a 7" knife in between his guts in a fight
aboard,
actually survived they tell me!

The boat captain wasn't a ham, not licensed. That mattered not. What I
couldn't figure out is why CG didn't come up on 14300 to talk to him,
directly. The hams provided all the comms to the boat. The ham talking
to
USCG was in Canada.

Larry, the good things you said about Mobile Maritime Service Net are
understated, if anything. But none of your assertions about getting answered
or questioning why USCG did/does not come up on 14300 are accurate. Any
service such as MMSN will have success strories to tell, but that does not
diminish the internationally unequaled service provided by the USCG.
Mariners in distress are never so fortunate anywhere in the world as they
are when reachable and assisted by the United States Coast Guard and United
States Navy. It doesn't matter whether the call was answered by or referred
to the USCG or USN. Both services have applauded the dedication and ability
of the MMSN, and both can and do come up with the operators there to assist
in assessment and in many cases rescue of distressed vessels.

Jack


A lot of bad things happen to ham radio, these days. But, those old guys
who give up their retirement to help the net....made ham radio just shine
like a bright star that day.

Larry

USCG and HF SSB
 

"Jack Painter" wrote in
news:9B_yc.799$Jk5.444@lakeread02:


"Larry W4CSC" wrote


Larry, the good things you said about Mobile Maritime Service Net are
understated, if anything. But none of your assertions about getting
answered or questioning why USCG did/does not come up on 14300 are
accurate. Any service such as MMSN will have success strories to tell,
but that does not diminish the internationally unequaled service
provided by the USCG. Mariners in distress are never so fortunate
anywhere in the world as they are when reachable and assisted by the
United States Coast Guard and United States Navy. It doesn't matter
whether the call was answered by or referred to the USCG or USN. Both
services have applauded the dedication and ability of the MMSN, and
both can and do come up with the operators there to assist in
assessment and in many cases rescue of distressed vessels.

Jack


One hopes next time they hear a young boy screaming for his life on the
radio from the Charleston Jetties, in the middle of the night, USCG will
have the appropriate equipment to DF his VHF signal in full view of the
lighthouse.....and have a watchstander so terrified of getting his ass
kicked that he won't DARE to not disturb the boat crews in the middle of
the night......

Larry

Every trip through the Jetties, I can hear those boys screaming from the
water....in my mind.

USCG and HF SSB
 

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:37:03 -0000, Larry W4CSC
wrote:

"Jack Painter" wrote in
news:9B_yc.799$Jk5.444@lakeread02:


"Larry W4CSC" wrote


Larry, the good things you said about Mobile Maritime Service Net are
understated, if anything. But none of your assertions about getting
answered or questioning why USCG did/does not come up on 14300 are
accurate. Any service such as MMSN will have success strories to tell,
but that does not diminish the internationally unequaled service
provided by the USCG. Mariners in distress are never so fortunate
anywhere in the world as they are when reachable and assisted by the
United States Coast Guard and United States Navy. It doesn't matter
whether the call was answered by or referred to the USCG or USN. Both
services have applauded the dedication and ability of the MMSN, and
both can and do come up with the operators there to assist in
assessment and in many cases rescue of distressed vessels.

Jack


One hopes next time they hear a young boy screaming for his life on the
radio from the Charleston Jetties, in the middle of the night, USCG will
have the appropriate equipment to DF his VHF signal in full view of the
lighthouse.....and have a watchstander so terrified of getting his ass
kicked that he won't DARE to not disturb the boat crews in the middle of
the night......

Larry


yes, things have changed since that incident at all CG stations.
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field