"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I confuse it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy guy in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF capability. In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is trained to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other form of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and if one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both sides to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up to a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the CG that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great Lakes some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station Erie was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we could help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a decision on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of today, on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving lives and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the service, in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this smallest of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

I suspect that military and USCG nets are formal nets. Ham nets
are typically volunteer and are "open" nets. There is no roster of
participants. If you listen to the Coast Guard net which is on just
prior to MMSN on Saturday (or Sunday?) it is operated pretty
much the same way. The same thing with InterCon. Since amateur
radio is a volunteer organization, the nets have to be run differently
than "closed" membership-based nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:GLOGd.18100$B95.15692@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I confuse it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy guy in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF capability.
In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is trained to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other form of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and if one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both sides to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up to a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the CG that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great Lakes some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station Erie was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we could
help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a decision on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of today,
on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving lives
and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the service, in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this smallest of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...
I suspect that military and USCG nets are formal nets. Ham nets
are typically volunteer and are "open" nets. There is no roster of
participants. If you listen to the Coast Guard net which is on just
prior to MMSN on Saturday (or Sunday?) it is operated pretty
much the same way. The same thing with InterCon. Since amateur
radio is a volunteer organization, the nets have to be run differently
than "closed" membership-based nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:GLOGd.18100$B95.15692@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I confuse
it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy guy in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF capability.
In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is trained
to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other form
of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and if
one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both sides to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up to
a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the CG
that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress
communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great Lakes
some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station Erie
was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we could
help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a decision on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of today,
on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving lives
and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the service, in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this smallest
of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia








Although it has been a few years since I was on the 14.300 MMSN, the Pacific
maritime nets, the Southeast Asia marine nets, the Pacific Weather Net, as
VQ9DM from Diego Garcia Island, Chagos Islands, British Indian Ocean
Territory, I know that the "no traffic" calls are valuable when a blue water
vessel is overdue and radio logs are searched for last known contact.
Weather, piracy, etc., are a fact of life in the western Pacific and Indian
Oceans.
I found a regular checkin being a "no show" quite often to be the first sign
of a problem, sometimes as simple as they overslept, but quite often much
more serious. Also weather reports from blue water hams were valuable to
many third world weather services and the US Navy as well. By the way, the
ham net controls often have no boating connection at all, such as 9N1MM (now
a silent key) being a regular control station from a mission in Nepal. They
do the job because they are geographically located where most ships can hear
them and out a sense of public service.
I know of hams who are also military members, passing on the word for a "no
show on net" vessel to local maritime patrol aircraft to check out last
known positions and route of travel on a not to interfere basis with the
military flight mission.. The ham fraternity sticks together on these HF
nets and the practice goes beyond message traffic.
73
Doug K7ABX

"Doug" wrote in message
news

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...
I suspect that military and USCG nets are formal nets. Ham nets
are typically volunteer and are "open" nets. There is no roster of
participants. If you listen to the Coast Guard net which is on just
prior to MMSN on Saturday (or Sunday?) it is operated pretty
much the same way. The same thing with InterCon. Since amateur
radio is a volunteer organization, the nets have to be run differently
than "closed" membership-based nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:GLOGd.18100$B95.15692@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I confuse
it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to
the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy guy
in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an
emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF
capability.
In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is trained
to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other form
of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and if
one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both sides
to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up to
a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the CG
that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still
mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress
communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great Lakes
some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station Erie
was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we could
help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a decision
on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of
today,
on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving lives
and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the service,
in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this smallest
of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia








Although it has been a few years since I was on the 14.300 MMSN, the
Pacific
maritime nets, the Southeast Asia marine nets, the Pacific Weather Net, as
VQ9DM from Diego Garcia Island, Chagos Islands, British Indian Ocean
Territory, I know that the "no traffic" calls are valuable when a blue
water
vessel is overdue and radio logs are searched for last known contact.
Weather, piracy, etc., are a fact of life in the western Pacific and
Indian
Oceans.
I found a regular checkin being a "no show" quite often to be the first
sign
of a problem, sometimes as simple as they overslept, but quite often much
more serious. Also weather reports from blue water hams were valuable to
many third world weather services and the US Navy as well. By the way,
the
ham net controls often have no boating connection at all, such as 9N1MM
(now
a silent key) being a regular control station from a mission in Nepal.
They
do the job because they are geographically located where most ships can
hear
them and out a sense of public service.
I know of hams who are also military members, passing on the word for a
"no
show on net" vessel to local maritime patrol aircraft to check out last
known positions and route of travel on a not to interfere basis with the
military flight mission.. The ham fraternity sticks together on these HF
nets and the practice goes beyond message traffic.
73
Doug K7ABX

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 Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...

"Doug" wrote in message
news

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...
I suspect that military and USCG nets are formal nets. Ham nets
are typically volunteer and are "open" nets. There is no roster of
participants. If you listen to the Coast Guard net which is on just
prior to MMSN on Saturday (or Sunday?) it is operated pretty
much the same way. The same thing with InterCon. Since amateur
radio is a volunteer organization, the nets have to be run differently
than "closed" membership-based nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:GLOGd.18100$B95.15692@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I
confuse
it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl
in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to
the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy guy
in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an
emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF
capability.
In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is
trained
to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other
form
of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and
if
one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The
whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both sides
to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up
to
a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that
your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the CG
that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still
mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress
communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great Lakes
some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station Erie
was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had
to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we
could
help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a decision
on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of
today,
on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving
lives
and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the service,
in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this
smallest
of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia








Although it has been a few years since I was on the 14.300 MMSN, the
Pacific
maritime nets, the Southeast Asia marine nets, the Pacific Weather Net,
as
VQ9DM from Diego Garcia Island, Chagos Islands, British Indian Ocean
Territory, I know that the "no traffic" calls are valuable when a blue
water
vessel is overdue and radio logs are searched for last known contact.
Weather, piracy, etc., are a fact of life in the western Pacific and
Indian
Oceans.
I found a regular checkin being a "no show" quite often to be the first
sign
of a problem, sometimes as simple as they overslept, but quite often
much
more serious. Also weather reports from blue water hams were valuable to
many third world weather services and the US Navy as well. By the way,
the
ham net controls often have no boating connection at all, such as 9N1MM
(now
a silent key) being a regular control station from a mission in Nepal.
They
do the job because they are geographically located where most ships can
hear
them and out a sense of public service.
I know of hams who are also military members, passing on the word for a
"no
show on net" vessel to local maritime patrol aircraft to check out last
known positions and route of travel on a not to interfere basis with the
military flight mission.. The ham fraternity sticks together on these HF
nets and the practice goes beyond message traffic.
73
Doug K7ABX

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

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.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:mImHd.18721$B95.15277@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...

"Doug" wrote in message
news

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in message
...
I suspect that military and USCG nets are formal nets. Ham nets
are typically volunteer and are "open" nets. There is no roster of
participants. If you listen to the Coast Guard net which is on just
prior to MMSN on Saturday (or Sunday?) it is operated pretty
much the same way. The same thing with InterCon. Since amateur
radio is a volunteer organization, the nets have to be run differently
than "closed" membership-based nets.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:GLOGd.18100$B95.15692@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

You clearly have no concept of how a net is operated or maintained.

Sure Doug, that's right. It's hard to figure out play-time if I
confuse
it
with the military and USCG Nets.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia


"Jack Painter" wrote in message
newsbFGd.17550$B95.16031@lakeread02...

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote

Jack, you sound like a company guy towing the company line.

It certainly doesn't
beg the advice of Doug, that some sleepy (or worse) night-owl
in
Missouri
is
much more likely to answer than the USCG, that's just pure BS.

Doug,

I accept that as a compliment, considering the very honorable
organizations
that I represent. The principles of safe boating and emergency
communications that I speak of were first learned as a very young
boater,
and they have not changed in almost forty years. New and better
equipment,
and millions of more boats on the water is all that has changed.


It would seem that you are not a ham or at least don;t listen to
the
ham bands much. When an emergency is declared on the ham bands
the speed at which action is taken is staggering. That sleepy
guy
in
Missouri (not sure why Missouri is your example) wakes up pretty
quick.


No offense to Missouri~ just a place to name.

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.

I do agree that CG channels should be tried first in an
emergency
but
not to rely on them 100%.
Regards
Gary

Even when a CG operator tells you not to bother.

Most likely you raised a Station, and they do not have HF
capability.
In
that case, what he told you was correct, and the operator is
trained
to
work
the vessel if at all possible, not let a vessel pick some other
form
of
communication before vitals are passed. Groups monitor 2182, and
if
one
doesn't answer a Mayday at night, your equipment is broke. The
whole
story
is just so rife with near impossibilities for Groups on both
sides
to
miss
you on VHF, and for you never to even try 2182, it just chalks up
to
a
bad
night for you. I think you have somehow convinced yourself that
your
emergency and lack of good comms and procedures for raising the
CG
that
night are all the CG's fault. It's clear in any case you're still
mad
about
it. But I don't see that as helpful to educating boaters about
the
procedures and capabilities of USCG safety and distress
communications.

I had some bad experiences with USCG assistance on the Great
Lakes
some
twenty five years ago. I had friends who did too. But Station
Erie
was
100
miles between Groups Cleveland or Buffalo, and all permission had
to
come
from Groups before they could make coffee. Friends thought we
could
help
each other faster than the CG could get back to us with a
decision
on
what
they might or might not do for us. But that is not the USCG of
today,
on

the
Great Lakes, or any other place that I am aware of. Yet saving
lives
and
educating boaters still remain the primary purpose of the
service,
in
spite
of scores of other duties now additionally imposed on this
smallest
of
services.

Best regards,

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia








Although it has been a few years since I was on the 14.300 MMSN, the
Pacific
maritime nets, the Southeast Asia marine nets, the Pacific Weather Net,
as
VQ9DM from Diego Garcia Island, Chagos Islands, British Indian Ocean
Territory, I know that the "no traffic" calls are valuable when a blue
water
vessel is overdue and radio logs are searched for last known contact.
Weather, piracy, etc., are a fact of life in the western Pacific and
Indian
Oceans.
I found a regular checkin being a "no show" quite often to be the first
sign
of a problem, sometimes as simple as they overslept, but quite often
much
more serious. Also weather reports from blue water hams were valuable
to
many third world weather services and the US Navy as well. By the way,
the
ham net controls often have no boating connection at all, such as 9N1MM
(now
a silent key) being a regular control station from a mission in Nepal.
They
do the job because they are geographically located where most ships can
hear
them and out a sense of public service.
I know of hams who are also military members, passing on the word for a
"no
show on net" vessel to local maritime patrol aircraft to check out last
known positions and route of travel on a not to interfere basis with
the
military flight mission.. The ham fraternity sticks together on these
HF
nets and the practice goes beyond message traffic.
73
Doug K7ABX

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" 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
news:mImHd.18721$B95.15277@lakeread02:

Doug (of Calista), why would you say such a thing? You just slandered
me and I expect an apology through the group, 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.

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.

Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia



Your ONE comment about useless checkins says volumes about your experience
as an HF communications station, CG or not.....