On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:43:39 -0500, "Jack Painter"
wrote:


"Bob" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:45:23 -0500, "Jack Painter"
wrote:


For the rest of the group still following G here is my universe:

1. "Squelch" is NEVER adjusted on any USCG guard receiver, VHF, MF, or
HF.
This applies equally to every Boat Station, Group, Sector, Activity,
Communication Station and Communication Area Master Station. Anyone not
drunk will also understand the following:


i dont understand this, since operation of the squelch is part of the
training for CG radio operator on VHF

i routinely check it to ensure it's not too high.

That sounds a lot like a river-station/inland waters,

it's station sandy hook, at the mouth of NY harbor.

and your boats
probably often resort to cellphones to check in,

now THAT i can't discuss for obvious reasons.


White-noise is guard-noise, and
adjusting the squelch means ensuring it remains "open". If your station is
authorized to do otherwise, I stand corrected about this including all boat
stations. Under the control of LANT, guard receivers make noise 24/7.


there is actually a textbook watchstanders are trained with, and this
states how to adjust the squelch. basically the process is to open it,
turn it just until the noise stops, then back it off a bit.
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

"Bob" wrote
"Jack Painter"
"Bob" wrote in message
"Jack Painter" wrote:

1. "Squelch" is NEVER adjusted on any USCG guard receiver, VHF, MF, or
HF.
This applies equally to every Boat Station, Group, Sector, Activity,
Communication Station and Communication Area Master Station. Anyone
not
drunk will also understand the following:

i dont understand this, since operation of the squelch is part of the
training for CG radio operator on VHF

i routinely check it to ensure it's not too high.

That sounds a lot like a river-station/inland waters,

it's station sandy hook, at the mouth of NY harbor.

White-noise is guard-noise

I stand corrected about this including all boat stations.
Under the control of LANT, guard receivers make noise 24/7.


there is actually a textbook watchstanders are trained with, and this
states how to adjust the squelch. basically the process is to open it,
turn it just until the noise stops, then back it off a bit.

Neither the COMDTINST M2399 Radiotelephone Handbook (referenced) in M16120
series Communications Watchstander Qualification Guide nor COMDTINST M2300
Telecommunications Manual direct squelch as the Station Watchstander Guide
( in COMDTINST M16120, section CWS-02-01) indeed does. I just looked it up,
you are of course correct about Stations setting squelch.

In that watchstander guide, it states in part:

[Groups stand a 24-hour guard on channel-16 and are directly responsible for
all SAR cases in their AOR.]

[Watchstanders at Stations normally stand a day watch, and Stations usually
do not make initial contact with the caller unless the Group is busy or
cannot hear caller's transmission. Their normal responsibility is to
maintain direct communication with their own assets. ]

These are major distinctions between the responsibilities of a
Group/Sector/Activity and a Station, and the responsibility for
communications is the primary difference as this discussion involves. Except
for the need to train with their small boat assets, Stations would not often
be involved in CG Radiotelephone Communications at all, and are not intended
to communicate with the public, except in cases where the Group is busy or
unable. Your mileage might vary but that is the design of the Station-Group
relationship, and it does work that way in LANTAREA.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Well said Doug. Jack, inasmuch as he is not a ham, doesn't really have
a dog in this fight. He clearly lacks knowledge of how the ham
community
works
and very clearly has some sort of bias against the MMSN and other
related
nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista


Doug (of Calista), why would you say such a thing?

It is my experience of operating in this area for 10 years.

You just slandered me and
I expect an apology through the group,

What are your damages as a result of this "slander"?

after you read back through the times
that I highly praised the MMSN and the workers in that net. When you
start
inventing crap like that just because you tire of being corrected for
your
consistently inaccurate statements about the Coast Guard, your
reputation
goes to zero in the eyes of honorable men.

So your implication is that just because you say good things about MMSN
("playing-around" was I believe your complement), I should automatically
say good things about the CG operators. I don't see how that follows.

You sir, give a bad name to hams, by lying on their behalf while you try
to
defend some of the indefensible statements you have made about the CG
and
their radio operations in particular. When you resorted to slander, you
stepped over the line, and that had better stop right now.

When did I lie on someone's else's behalf? I think you have gone
around the bend. You also need to learn the definition of slander, Last I
knew the definition isn't "something that Jack disagrees with". I think
you
better
calm down before your head explodes.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


Doug Dotson you are a liar, and that's much worse than your head full of
misinformation about maritime communications that you portray yourself an
expert on. Someday, you could change your attitude, admit you can be wrong
about things, and act like a man when it happens. But failing that proper
behavior (as others do here occasionally, eg: Chuck's post last night where
he thinks he sets the newsgroup straight about radio checks being allowed,
flouts a URL which he is barely familiar with, and then quotes a line about
exemption of transmission test from the any-station rules. Then, just for me
he impugns that " To some of us, it does matter that your advice and legal
opinions often bear dubious relation to reality." Nice. He was nonetheless
dead wrong about the rules of making radio checks, and yet when I point this
out in a polite manner, he never acknowledges or apologizes, just hides.
What a man! You however, don't even have the decency to hide. You just
author slanderous and untruthful fabrications in order to disguise your self
pity of being mistaken about something.

You dishonestly accused me of expressing a contempt for the Maritime Mobile
Service Net, and the archive record here shows my praise not only for the
good and honorable service MMSN provides to the maritime community, but also
to the dedication of the Net Controllers and operators such as Richard Webb
who I thanked for his good service there, and who was participating in this
thread. Before that, you asserted I had no idea how a HAM Net, or any Net
operates. A playful barb with no specific reference was all that resulted. I
do after all, have the honor of controlling Nets with dozens of USCG Rescue
Aircraft, Cutters, and other services. But that nasty behavior is just
typical of Doug Dotson, and we all have to let your inner-child assert
itself for the sanity of the newsgroup. But your accusations about my
alleged BIAS against the MMSN were both false and malicious, and attempted
to damage my reputation among the marine community who certainly appreciate
the work of the MMSN, as do I. There are certainly damages possible when
your mouth is running (or your fingers are typing) Doug, and that ranges
from insulting people who wish you no harm, to bringing discredit to a
service such as the United States Coast Guard and Maritime Mobile Service
Net, whose work is not in competition, but in service, safety, and goodwill
toward the marine community. What you bring to that table is contempt for
USCG radio operators, their knowledge, commitment and abilities, a very
broad misunderstanding of the basic rules of marine radiotelephony, and then
repeatedly compare HAMS as a much better alternative at every task. We have
many examples of those bitter tirades from you Doug, and you should ask
yourself if even once, that attitude (never mind for now how misplaced and
inaccurate many of your statements were), if that attitude furthered the
goals of either the MMSN or the USCG? Both of which services may your very
life and those of your passenger rely on someday, incidentally. Perhaps
that's your definition of "collateral damage", to hurt individuals and the
services whose mission of lifesaving somehow has components that offend you?
Well forgive us, for not doing all things the way YOUR plan of things looks.
Consider that constructive suggestions, or even pointing out clear
variations from generally accepted procedures, would go so much farther than
just your bitterness, which as I see it, is all you have offered this entire
discussion from the beginning. I'll bet you are SO fun to cruise with!
(that's a joke Doug!)

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:FAIHd.19368$B95.14638@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Well said Doug. Jack, inasmuch as he is not a ham, doesn't really have
a dog in this fight. He clearly lacks knowledge of how the ham
community
works
and very clearly has some sort of bias against the MMSN and other
related
nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista


Doug (of Calista), why would you say such a thing?

It is my experience of operating in this area for 10 years.

You just slandered me and
I expect an apology through the group,

What are your damages as a result of this "slander"?

after you read back through the times
that I highly praised the MMSN and the workers in that net. When you
start
inventing crap like that just because you tire of being corrected for
your
consistently inaccurate statements about the Coast Guard, your
reputation
goes to zero in the eyes of honorable men.

So your implication is that just because you say good things about MMSN
("playing-around" was I believe your complement), I should automatically
say good things about the CG operators. I don't see how that follows.

You sir, give a bad name to hams, by lying on their behalf while you
try
to
defend some of the indefensible statements you have made about the CG
and
their radio operations in particular. When you resorted to slander, you
stepped over the line, and that had better stop right now.

When did I lie on someone's else's behalf? I think you have gone
around the bend. You also need to learn the definition of slander, Last I
knew the definition isn't "something that Jack disagrees with". I think
you
better
calm down before your head explodes.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


Doug Dotson you are a liar, and that's much worse than your head full of
misinformation about maritime communications that you portray yourself an
expert on. Someday, you could change your attitude, admit you can be wrong
about things, and act like a man when it happens. But failing that proper
behavior (as others do here occasionally, eg: Chuck's post last night
where
he thinks he sets the newsgroup straight about radio checks being allowed,
flouts a URL which he is barely familiar with, and then quotes a line
about
exemption of transmission test from the any-station rules. Then, just for
me
he impugns that " To some of us, it does matter that your advice and legal
opinions often bear dubious relation to reality." Nice. He was
nonetheless
dead wrong about the rules of making radio checks, and yet when I point
this
out in a polite manner, he never acknowledges or apologizes, just hides.
What a man! You however, don't even have the decency to hide. You just
author slanderous and untruthful fabrications in order to disguise your
self
pity of being mistaken about something.

You dishonestly accused me of expressing a contempt for the Maritime
Mobile
Service Net, and the archive record here shows my praise not only for the
good and honorable service MMSN provides to the maritime community, but
also
to the dedication of the Net Controllers and operators such as Richard
Webb
who I thanked for his good service there, and who was participating in
this
thread. Before that, you asserted I had no idea how a HAM Net, or any Net
operates. A playful barb with no specific reference was all that resulted.
I
do after all, have the honor of controlling Nets with dozens of USCG
Rescue
Aircraft, Cutters, and other services. But that nasty behavior is just
typical of Doug Dotson, and we all have to let your inner-child assert
itself for the sanity of the newsgroup. But your accusations about my
alleged BIAS against the MMSN were both false and malicious, and attempted
to damage my reputation among the marine community who certainly
appreciate
the work of the MMSN, as do I. There are certainly damages possible when
your mouth is running (or your fingers are typing) Doug, and that ranges
from insulting people who wish you no harm, to bringing discredit to a
service such as the United States Coast Guard and Maritime Mobile Service
Net, whose work is not in competition, but in service, safety, and
goodwill
toward the marine community. What you bring to that table is contempt for
USCG radio operators, their knowledge, commitment and abilities, a very
broad misunderstanding of the basic rules of marine radiotelephony, and
then
repeatedly compare HAMS as a much better alternative at every task. We
have
many examples of those bitter tirades from you Doug, and you should ask
yourself if even once, that attitude (never mind for now how misplaced and
inaccurate many of your statements were), if that attitude furthered the
goals of either the MMSN or the USCG? Both of which services may your very
life and those of your passenger rely on someday, incidentally. Perhaps
that's your definition of "collateral damage", to hurt individuals and the
services whose mission of lifesaving somehow has components that offend
you?
Well forgive us, for not doing all things the way YOUR plan of things
looks.
Consider that constructive suggestions, or even pointing out clear
variations from generally accepted procedures, would go so much farther
than
just your bitterness, which as I see it, is all you have offered this
entire
discussion from the beginning. I'll bet you are SO fun to cruise with!
(that's a joke Doug!)

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

I think you need to calm down and get a life.
So long.

Doug

In article FAIHd.19368$B95.14638@lakeread02,
"Jack Painter" wrote:

Doug Dotson you are a liar, ..........

snipped because I figured the bandwidth could be better used
elsewhere....

Geeez Loiuzzzze Jack,

Are you Muslim or what? Martyrdom is a Muslim thing, and we have
enough of those crazy's running around the world already......
Chill out Dude, or get back on your Med's......the world isn't going to
end, just because you nailed yourself to the USCG Cross, and can't find
a nailpuller...... some folks might just get the impression that your
wrapped a little tight these days.......they don't give Purple Hearts
for stroking out in a UseNet NewsGroup, Jack.......

Doug, better that we let Jack cool down, as we wouldn't want him to
have a stroke, or anything......the USCG EasteCoast Comms need HIM
to make everything works right, and only HE knows how the system is put
together, and where the prints are.......


Me who really liked "Bruce in alaska's" post on FCC/USCG stuff

"Me" wrote in message
...
In article FAIHd.19368$B95.14638@lakeread02,
"Jack Painter" wrote:

Doug Dotson you are a liar, ..........

snipped because I figured the bandwidth could be better used
elsewhere....

Geeez Loiuzzzze Jack,

Are you Muslim or what? Martyrdom is a Muslim thing, and we have
enough of those crazy's running around the world already......
Chill out Dude, or get back on your Med's......the world isn't going to
end, just because you nailed yourself to the USCG Cross, and can't find
a nailpuller...... some folks might just get the impression that your
wrapped a little tight these days.......they don't give Purple Hearts
for stroking out in a UseNet NewsGroup, Jack.......

Doug, better that we let Jack cool down, as we wouldn't want him to
have a stroke, or anything......the USCG EasteCoast Comms need HIM
to make everything works right, and only HE knows how the system is put
together, and where the prints are.......

That's for sure.

Me who really liked "Bruce in alaska's" post on FCC/USCG stuff

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:04:32 GMT, Me wrote:

BUT tell
us all, "HOW MANY YEARS BEHIND IS THE USCG IN GMDSS COVERAGE for ALL
US WATERS??????????????????", and compare this with the Wester Europeon's
??????????????

Me

well dont forget the CG budget was starved for years. we have one of
the oldest CG fleets in the world and it's only now being upgraded.
comms is part of that. yes, CG comms are, to put it mildly, antique.

of course, there's always *CG on your cell phone :)
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

"Jack Painter" wrote in
news:7ZAGd.17529$B95.3688@lakeread02:

Two recent cases involved commercial fishing vessels hailing
the USCG on 2182 when they HAD satellite phones on board! Apparently,
these professionals wanted the USCG to answer, not their wives or
friends at the bar.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia




Hmm....not long ago I was monitoring 14.300 Mhz Maritime Mobile Net when a
Nicaraguan captain called in in distress. One of his crew had stuck a 7"
knife in another one of his crew and he had tried all the marine freqs on
his radio to get someone...anyone...to help him. No-go with all that fancy
equipment we buy them. He was about 200 miles from Nicaragua. His radio
worked great because I could hear him plain as day on Lionheart's Icom
M802/AT-130 on the insulated backstay in Charleston, SC, which isn't much
of an antenna in intense noise from a corroded marina electric system.

The ham responded, immediately. An American ham contacted someone in the
State Department who acted as liason with Nicaraguan Air Force to start
things going ashore. A Canadian ham contacted the USCG bureaucrats and
acted as relay station for the boat to get all the usual form-filler-outer
data to them.

I listened for over 2 hours while pouring over a DC wiring nightmare in our
boat. Not ONCE did USCG come on 14.300 Mhz to talk to this fishing boat,
directly, or did any other government bureaucracy in any country. Why? CG
tried to get him to go to one of the marine HF SSB freqs, but he ended up
back on 20 meters after hearing nothing in reply to his calls there on the
same radio. Any CG can commandeer 14.300 for emergencies. Are their
frequency dials stuck?

Anyway, I talked to one of the guys I know on the net the next day in email
and he said Nicaraguan Air Force got a doctor on a boat and met them
offshore to treat the victim while Nicaraguan Police bound and gagged the
perp. The guy lost a lot of blood but survived the attack to fish again.

Damned good thing HAM RADIO was monitoring 14.300 that day.......(c;

AR

"Jack Painter" wrote in
news:pbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02:

I am not a Ham. When I can spare a receiver, it is often on 14.300
MMSN. I followed various amateur hurricane emergency nets in Florida
during the hurricanes this summer. 100% of the traffic was a waste of
bandwidth with stations checking in from their homes with no traffic
(This is still not quite as ridiculous as someone checking in to the
MMSN with no traffic from their BOAT). Then there were the unfounded
rumours passed about damage (all the while telephone service
remained). Of course the only place they were ever needed in Florida
was as backups at the EOC's and various shelters for local repeater
work. But few hams roll up their sleeves and actually go to work in
this intended fashion, instead opting to let everyone in the
HF-hemishpere know that "I'm here at home if you need me". "Oh yea
thanks for telling us", the real workers think.


You missed the point of the net, entirely. The net is a SERVICE net.
Traffic is passed or phone patches can be connected between ham boaters and
home. Ham radio is a HOBBY. No bandwidth has ever been "wasted".
Stations check into the net with no traffic TO LET NET CONTROL KNOW THEY
ARE THERE, ON FREQ, AND AVAILABLE TO RECEIVE TRAFFIC.....unlike you
Coasties who noone ever knows whether they are listening, HAVE PROPAGATION
TO LISTEN, or not!

You boys have some fun with CG's wonderful communicators where you live.
Call 'em by their official call letters some day. See if they recognize
the call. Ours have no idea what CG Group Charleston's callsign is on HF
or VHF. Don't seem to be any RADIOMEN left.

Now, let me polish this ax off a little more....

I'm sure you've gotten a little flack from the Charleston "Morning Dew"
debacle. Remember the complete idiot with 3 boys aboard crashing into the
UNLIGHTED Charleston Jetties? Need I post the tape of the boys screaming
for help? Oh, I forgot, his "Radio Procedures" weren't "correct".

IF THOSE BOYS HAD SCREAMED FOR HELP ON ANY CHARLESTON SC HAM RADIO REPEATER
FREQUENCY.....THEY'D STILL BE ALIVE TODAY!! If I had heard them, I'd have
got the Goddamned BASE COMMANDER out of his rack!

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 01:59:01 GMT, Larry W4CSC wrote:

The ham responded, immediately. An American ham contacted someone in the
State Department who acted as liason with Nicaraguan Air Force to start
things going ashore. A Canadian ham contacted the USCG bureaucrats and
acted as relay station for the boat to get all the usual form-filler-outer
data to them.

you miss the point. there is a reason we ask the questions we do.
being both a ham who's handled distress calls, and a CG radio operator
at station sandy hook, the hostility to both camps is unwarranted.


I listened for over 2 hours while pouring over a DC wiring nightmare in our
boat. Not ONCE did USCG come on 14.300 Mhz to talk to this fishing boat,
directly, or did any other government bureaucracy in any country. Why? CG
tried to get him to go to one of the marine HF SSB freqs, but he ended up
back on 20 meters after hearing nothing in reply to his calls there on the
same radio. Any CG can commandeer 14.300 for emergencies. Are their
frequency dials stuck?

i've heard the CG on 14.3 many times.

the CG handles many, many more distress calls than ham radio does. and
the difference is the CG is the ones to go get the folks.

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