"Terry Spragg" wrote
Has anybody actually done any of this wierd stuff?

It seems to me that some software should be able to predict all
this. Anybody know?

Terry K


http://www.eznec.com/ There is a free demo-version available here.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

Richard Webb wrote:
IF I were at sea (and I am a ham) I'd still want more than one band
capability, especially were I at sea on a boat. One of the distinct
advantages of ham radio over most services is its ability to choose
the right band for prevailing radio conditions and the path one wants
to work. Being that the ability to summon assistance when needed on
freqs such as 2182 is limited these days I'd want multiband capability
for my hf marine gear when away from land.

Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b
active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz

Hi Richard, bravo for your volunteer work for the MMSN. As far as bandwidth
for prevailing conditions, there are quite sufficient bandwidths available
in the Maritime Mobile Service. Below is a little paraphrased version of the
new guard frequencies. Duplex is now history for all hailing and distress
work with the USCG.

Effective January 1, 2005 new guarded calling and distress freq-
uencies for the USCG long range communication stations will now be
Simplex (single channel call and receive). These "new" guard freq-
uencies have always been the voice-associated distress for follow
up to DSC/GMDSS alert system. Now, instead of waiting for a DSC
alert to start listening to the associated voice channel for a
particular DSC frequency, the following associated voice frequencies
will be guarded. Appropriate day/night monitoring will still apply
to the 'new' guard frequencies.

2182 24 HRS Guarded only by USCG Groups

NMN NMF NMG NMC NOJ
4125 2300-1100Z 2300-1100Z 24 HRS
6215 24 HRS 24 HRS 24 HRS
8291 24 HRS 24 HRS
12290 1100-2300Z 24 HRS

16420 is available by request, and in response to 16meg DSC

Effective Jan 01, 2005, the formerly guarded channels (below)
will be used for working frequencies only after initial contact
is made via simplex on the the guarded channels above.

ITU SHIP SHORE Sched (UTC)
NMN NMN/NMF/NMG
424 4134 4426 n/a n/a n/a n/a
601 6200 6501 n/a n/a n/a n/a
816 8240 8764 n/a n/a n/a n/a
1205 12242 13089 n/a n/a n/a n/a
1625 16432 17314 n/a n/a n/a n/a

See http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/cgcomms/call.htm for
details concerning long range HF communications with USCG units.

Jack Painter
"Oceana Radio" USCGAUX
Virginia Beach, Virginia

wrote in message
...

On 2005-01-13 dNxFd.99492$KO5.42998@clgrps13 said:
Thanks to Doug and yourself for confirming this. I'm not
planning on installing one as I have a conventional backstay
arrangement but I was just wondering if anyone actually used this
kind of setup as I'd not seen it discussed. I guess if you are a
Ham and tend to work only one band this might be a good
arrangement for your boat.
IF I were at sea (and I am a ham) I'd still want more than one band
capability, especially were I at sea on a boat. One of the distinct
advantages of ham radio over most services is its ability to choose
the right band for prevailing radio conditions and the path one wants
to work.

The ability to choose bands depending upon conditions is not
distinct to ham radio. Marine SSB supports quite a few different bands
for the exact same reason. Bands are in the 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18,
22, and 28 Mhz regions. All modern Marine SSB rigs support all of these.

Being that the ability to summon assistance when needed on
freqs such as 2182 is limited these days I'd want multiband capability
for my hf marine gear when away from land.

2182 isn't considered a good emergency frequency these days and
isn't relied upon. EPIRBs have pretty much made it obsolete. Matter
of fact, the CG doesn't even reliably monitor it.


Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b
active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

I check into the MMSN on a regular basis. Maybe I'll hear you
there.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista
--

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:WeKFd.16260$B95.1392@lakeread02...

. As far as bandwidth
for prevailing conditions, there are quite sufficient bandwidths available
in the Maritime Mobile Service. Below is a little paraphrased version of
the
new guard frequencies. Duplex is now history for all hailing and distress
work with the USCG.

What does bandwidth have to do with this. The bandwidth of an SSB
signal is the same regardless of the frequency/band used.

Doug, k3qt
s/v CAllista

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:WeKFd.16260$B95.1392@lakeread02...

. As far as bandwidth
for prevailing conditions, there are quite sufficient bandwidths
available
in the Maritime Mobile Service. Below is a little paraphrased version of
the
new guard frequencies. Duplex is now history for all hailing and
distress
work with the USCG.

What does bandwidth have to do with this. The bandwidth of an SSB
signal is the same regardless of the frequency/band used.

Doug, k3qt
s/v CAllista

Doug,

It was a little Freudian slip, sorry. I was describing the more than
sufficient "bands" that are available, and the context of the message surely
was clear to that. I note that you nonetheless repeated pretty much the same
information of my message in your answer. I'm sure glad you cleared that up
before everyone thought bandwidth meant bands! G

As to the comments you actually added, such as 2182 khz not being reliable
or used any longer, 2182 khz is most certainly used as a distress and
hailing frequency to raise the USCG, where it is monitored from every USCG
Group, even in places like the Mississippi River where it has completely
fallen out of use due to cell phones, which are never out of coverage in
that area. Using equipment with considerably longer range capabilities than
USCG Groups have at their disposal, I have never heard a call go unanswered
in over six months of dedicated guard on that frequency. Many MAYDAY calls
were answered by several USCG Groups at once. While I would hope we can
continue to improve the quality of equipment available for this work, it is
in no means incapable of doing the job that is expected of it. It is not
likely, in my opinion, that satellite phone links or vessel and personal
EPIRB's will ever completely replace HF emergency communications. If these
newer and more capable equipments do render the average yachtsman or mariner
less familiar with his HF equipment and capabilities (due to infrequent
usage) then that is an issue that can be addressed in boating safety and
professional standards courses. It would be too bad to see such capable
means of communication lost to just an aging part of the hobby field, do you
agree?

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:MX_Fd.16551$B95.2258@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:WeKFd.16260$B95.1392@lakeread02...

. As far as bandwidth
for prevailing conditions, there are quite sufficient bandwidths
available
in the Maritime Mobile Service. Below is a little paraphrased version
of
the
new guard frequencies. Duplex is now history for all hailing and
distress
work with the USCG.

What does bandwidth have to do with this. The bandwidth of an SSB
signal is the same regardless of the frequency/band used.

Doug, k3qt
s/v CAllista

Doug,

It was a little Freudian slip, sorry. I was describing the more than
sufficient "bands" that are available, and the context of the message
surely
was clear to that. I note that you nonetheless repeated pretty much the
same
information of my message in your answer. I'm sure glad you cleared that
up
before everyone thought bandwidth meant bands! G

In all fairness, I looked up "bandwidth: at www.dictionary.com. To my
surprise, the first definition was what you seemed to be saying. That is,
the difference between the upper and lower freqs of the band. I have
never heard this defintion. The only definition I have even know is that
stated in references like the Handbook.

As to the comments you actually added, such as 2182 khz not being reliable
or used any longer, 2182 khz is most certainly used as a distress and
hailing frequency to raise the USCG, where it is monitored from every USCG
Group, even in places like the Mississippi River where it has completely
fallen out of use due to cell phones, which are never out of coverage in
that area. Using equipment with considerably longer range capabilities
than
USCG Groups have at their disposal, I have never heard a call go
unanswered
in over six months of dedicated guard on that frequency. Many MAYDAY calls
were answered by several USCG Groups at once. While I would hope we can
continue to improve the quality of equipment available for this work, it
is
in no means incapable of doing the job that is expected of it. It is not
likely, in my opinion, that satellite phone links or vessel and personal
EPIRB's will ever completely replace HF emergency communications. If these
newer and more capable equipments do render the average yachtsman or
mariner
less familiar with his HF equipment and capabilities (due to infrequent
usage) then that is an issue that can be addressed in boating safety and
professional standards courses. It would be too bad to see such capable
means of communication lost to just an aging part of the hobby field, do
you
agree?

The means of communications is not the issue.

All I can say is that in the only situation where I have ever had to resort
to
calling for help, there was no answer on 2182. I was eventually able to
acheive very poor contact with CG on VHF. I asked if there was an HF freq
that I could contact them on for more reliable comms. The answer was
NO. They could not help me via HF. I was about to try to contact a ham
to relay a message to CG when another boat closer to shore was able
to provide a relay. I would have contacted MMSN but it was 4am and
the net was not on the air. In short, the CG was not there only time I felt
I needed help. I will NEVER, EVER rely on the CG via Marine SSB as a
reliable means of assistance. I can contact a ham anywhere, anytime and
help is then just a phone call away. If that doesn't work (which is
doubtful)
then the EPIRB is the solution.


Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

All I can say is that in the only situation where I have ever had to
resort
to
calling for help, there was no answer on 2182. I was eventually able to
acheive very poor contact with CG on VHF. I asked if there was an HF freq
that I could contact them on for more reliable comms. The answer was
NO. They could not help me via HF. I was about to try to contact a ham
to relay a message to CG when another boat closer to shore was able
to provide a relay. I would have contacted MMSN but it was 4am and
the net was not on the air. In short, the CG was not there only time I
felt
I needed help. I will NEVER, EVER rely on the CG via Marine SSB as a
reliable means of assistance. I can contact a ham anywhere, anytime and
help is then just a phone call away. If that doesn't work (which is
doubtful)
then the EPIRB is the solution.

Well Doug, much as a Mr. James Herbert had to reply concerning the
definition of radio-horizon earlier, I'm sorry I did not consider your
anecdotal evidence about one single bad experience, in which case we could
neither affirm nor indict the equipment performance of your transmitter nor
any receiving station at that single point in time. You have chosen to not
consider the evidence and opinion that I expressed concerning performance of
nineteen USCG Groups, ten Canadian Coast Guard Radio Stations, and Bermuda
Radio, which I studied specifically for such reasons. This research covered
an area from the Canadian Maritimes to Puerto Rico and back inside the Gulf
of Mexico. This would equate to roughly two-thirds of the maritime AOR of
the coastal-continental United States and her neighbors, and for a period of
six months (summer to winter).

I am an accountant and federal contract auditor by profession, and this
study will include sampling and review of complaints of missed calls and
other communications issues. Your experience was first noted by the way,
when we had this discussion some time ago. As I recall, this one event was
too long ago to be considered relevant for current study, as aggravating and
potentially dangerous as I'm sure it was to you.

In the interest of safe boating, I encourage anyone who is contemplating
coastal cruising to contact their local USCG Group well in advance of the
trip, and ask them for the estimated area of VHF and 2182 khz coverage along
the route that they plan to take. An EPIRB is an important safety device in
any cruising vessels inventory, but it cannot replace vital voice
communications.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, VA

You know Jack, you could just end this discussion by saying that perhaps
the CG operator at the time was wrong. If the CG now provides
reliable monitoring then that is great for the next time I feel I need
them. More below.

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:Un2Gd.17274$B95.422@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

All I can say is that in the only situation where I have ever had to
resort
to
calling for help, there was no answer on 2182. I was eventually able to
acheive very poor contact with CG on VHF. I asked if there was an HF freq
that I could contact them on for more reliable comms. The answer was
NO. They could not help me via HF. I was about to try to contact a ham
to relay a message to CG when another boat closer to shore was able
to provide a relay. I would have contacted MMSN but it was 4am and
the net was not on the air. In short, the CG was not there only time I
felt
I needed help. I will NEVER, EVER rely on the CG via Marine SSB as a
reliable means of assistance. I can contact a ham anywhere, anytime and
help is then just a phone call away. If that doesn't work (which is
doubtful)
then the EPIRB is the solution.

Well Doug, much as a Mr. James Herbert had to reply concerning the
definition of radio-horizon earlier, I'm sorry I did not consider your
anecdotal evidence about one single bad experience, in which case we could
neither affirm nor indict the equipment performance of your transmitter
nor
any receiving station at that single point in time.

You are not listening. The CG told me that there was no way I could
contact them on SSB. I never got the chance to use either my transmitting
equipment or test their receiving equipment.

You have chosen to not
consider the evidence and opinion that I expressed concerning performance
of
nineteen USCG Groups, ten Canadian Coast Guard Radio Stations, and Bermuda
Radio, which I studied specifically for such reasons. This research
covered
an area from the Canadian Maritimes to Puerto Rico and back inside the
Gulf
of Mexico. This would equate to roughly two-thirds of the maritime AOR of
the coastal-continental United States and her neighbors, and for a period
of
six months (summer to winter).

I say again. THE CG TOLD ME I COULD NOT CONTACT THEM
ON SSB! THEY DID NOT SUPPORT SUCH COMMS! It had nothing
to do with equipment, propagation, or any other technical capability. It
had to do with their pollicy as it was announced to me.

I am an accountant and federal contract auditor by profession, and this
study will include sampling and review of complaints of missed calls and
other communications issues. Your experience was first noted by the way,
when we had this discussion some time ago. As I recall, this one event was
too long ago to be considered relevant for current study, as aggravating
and
potentially dangerous as I'm sure it was to you.

It was just under 2 years ago.

In the interest of safe boating, I encourage anyone who is contemplating
coastal cruising to contact their local USCG Group well in advance of the
trip, and ask them for the estimated area of VHF and 2182 khz coverage
along
the route that they plan to take. An EPIRB is an important safety device
in
any cruising vessels inventory, but it cannot replace vital voice
communications.

Agreed.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, VA

Doug
s/v CAllista

Lines: 47
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: pcpocbcnbdmdhgfgdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbohj jkmcljgmnpdpphhboeneagdmedomkfkfnggoekglijhhfofjpj cigpcgdiikbcfdhamcchgdmaielfgpkjepkkpjnfjbodgghbjj foaiemglci
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:11:53 EST
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 04:11:53 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.boats.electronics:58323


On 2005-01-14 dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom said:
IF I were at sea (and I am a ham) I'd still want more than one
band capability, especially were I at sea on a boat. One of the
distinct advantages of ham radio over most services is its
ability to choose the right band for prevailing radio conditions
and the path one wants to work.
The ability to choose bands depending upon conditions is not
distinct to ham radio. Marine SSB supports quite a few different
bands for the exact same reason. Bands are in the 2, 4, 6, 8, 12,
16, 18, 22, and 28 Mhz regions. All modern Marine SSB rigs support
all of these.
WAs aware of all of those, but I've heard plenty of horror stories, in
fact some of those horror stories' participants come up on mmsn sans
ham licenses to get help.

2182 isn't considered a good emergency frequency these days and
isn't relied upon. EPIRBs have pretty much made it obsolete. Matter
of fact, the CG doesn't even reliably monitor it.
so I've heard fro m folks in the know, and this includes folks whose
business it is to work with vessels at sea.
I've herad the stories about the radios sitting with the volume
control clear down on 2182 etc. And the mishaps with gmdss. wEre I
cruising I wouldn't put all my eggs in the maritime ssb basket since I
have a ham license. THe life I save might be my own g.

I check into the MMSN on a regular basis. Maybe I'll hear you
there.
I'm net control operator Fridays at 12:00 P.M. eastern time and do
some relief for other operators when I'm available.

Btw even after hours if you can be heard in NEw Orleans La on 14
megahertz about any hour day or night my rig sits monitoring 14.3 if
I'm not on another net somewhere. I think same is true of other net
regulars. IF you're in need give it a try. IF the band's open you'll
be ehard by someone who is aware of what to do to render assistance to
you.



Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b
active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--

wrote in message
.. .

On 2005-01-14 dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom said:
IF I were at sea (and I am a ham) I'd still want more than one
band capability, especially were I at sea on a boat. One of the
distinct advantages of ham radio over most services is its
ability to choose the right band for prevailing radio conditions
and the path one wants to work.
The ability to choose bands depending upon conditions is not
distinct to ham radio. Marine SSB supports quite a few different
bands for the exact same reason. Bands are in the 2, 4, 6, 8, 12,
16, 18, 22, and 28 Mhz regions. All modern Marine SSB rigs support
all of these.
WAs aware of all of those, but I've heard plenty of horror stories, in
fact some of those horror stories' participants come up on mmsn sans
ham licenses to get help.

There are always plenty of hams listening at any time of day. Much
more reliable than trying to contact the CG.

2182 isn't considered a good emergency frequency these days and
isn't relied upon. EPIRBs have pretty much made it obsolete. Matter
of fact, the CG doesn't even reliably monitor it.
so I've heard fro m folks in the know, and this includes folks whose
business it is to work with vessels at sea.
I've herad the stories about the radios sitting with the volume
control clear down on 2182 etc. And the mishaps with gmdss. wEre I
cruising I wouldn't put all my eggs in the maritime ssb basket since I
have a ham license. THe life I save might be my own g.

Smart move!

I check into the MMSN on a regular basis. Maybe I'll hear you
there.
I'm net control operator Fridays at 12:00 P.M. eastern time and do
some relief for other operators when I'm available.

I'll try to get down to the boat and check in then.

Btw even after hours if you can be heard in NEw Orleans La on 14
megahertz about any hour day or night my rig sits monitoring 14.3 if
I'm not on another net somewhere. I think same is true of other net
regulars. IF you're in need give it a try. IF the band's open you'll
be ehard by someone who is aware of what to do to render assistance to
you.

If I can hear kd4bz in Eight Mile, AL with a 59 then I should have
no trouble getting into New Orleans.



Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b
active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--