The Postman Scenario

Started by ConfederateColonel, September 03, 2012, 09:52:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

ConfederateColonel

This thread is an offshoot from another one. Here's the question for discussion:

Assume a scenario where there is a total collapse of some sort (pick a reason, doesn't matter for this discussion) and not only is there no internet or phone system, there is no postal service or any other reliable and efficient means of passing communications locally, regionally, nationally, or internationally. How could ham radio provide communications that would serve that need?

Here are some parameters to consider:

1) Volume of data. While it would start small, it would quickly increase in usage. It must be a scalable system.
2) Equipment and power availability.
3) It must handle everything from long-haul to delivery to an individual, but these will almost certainly be different systems that are linked together.

Something to consider before making proposals: Have you ever handled traffic using the ARRL NTS system using either voice or CW? How long did it take to receive, process, and then relay a message that was long enough to be genuinely useful (i.e., NOT a numbered greeting).

ConfederateColonel

Now that I have posed the question, I'll add my thoughts on it.

The current NTS system is grossly inadequate for something like this. I have done enough formal traffic handling to know just how incredibly slow it is. It is not scalable. Using voice or CW works great for a small quantity of short messages. It works great for simple comms that virtually any station can handle. That, however, is not what we're looking at here.

It is my contention that the use of digital modes (and I am not including CW even though that technically is a digital mode) is the only way that such a system could be built for all but the originating stations and the destination stations. All of the long-haul traffic, and regional and down to anything within 2-meter simplex range would have enough traffic that a computer system must be used.

Years ago, I remember copying RTTY traffic going into or out of Gitmo in Cuba. It was just a steady stream of messages streaming across the computer screen. I was struck by how much information was being passed - and how long it would have taken to have that same traffic passed using the NTS in voice or CW.

gil

Hello colonel, and thank you for starting this thread here. My vote is for CW, but I trust your experience here when you say it is too slow. Maybe a good start though. I do think CW (Morse Code) is something all preppers should know. See the new Morse Code board I created last night...

I am not against data modes, but when you start adding computer, modems and such, we are leaving the realm of simple communications in dire emergencies. There might not be many working computers around.. Transporting a station composed of many devices would also not be easy, the the need arose. That said, I know some PSK31 transceivers can have everything built-in. That, I agree would be an excellent mode of forwarding messages. I guess one could build a small data station with one of those tiny PCs that cost less than $300 and a small radio... It would indeed be interesting.
Dave Benson of Small Wonder Labs used to offer a PSK31 transceiver. It is no longer there, but a replacement might be in the works...: http://www.smallwonderlabs.com/psk31_main.htm

Another thing to consider would be the Winlink system where messages are passed as emails and no operator needs to be present to copy a message. Speaking about copying, I don't think printers and their ink cartridges would be widely available in a large scale disaster, not to mention paper...

I am curious as to what ideas will pop-up here...

ConfederateColonel

No question about it - CW is a VERY valuable skill that (despite the FCC rule changes) every ham should have. It is unquestionably one of the most reliable ways to communicate over radio in poor conditions. For low volume usage, CW is perfectly capable of handling traffic. With that said, it just falls way behind when it comes to reliable and efficient passing of high volumes of radio traffic - and that's what would be needed in a case as described.

What we're talking about is not the classic ham radio example of "2 INJURIES. SEND HELP" type of disaster message. What we're talking about here is the volume and complexity of communications that would be required to efficiently restore basic commerce and services and regional security. This is building a new infrastructure based on a different technology - ham radio.

CW is something that I have been trying to brush up on when I find the time. I passed the 13 wpm test and did reasonably well on the 20 wpm test (not enough to pass though), but that was about 23 years ago. I've seen some excellent advice here on the forum, and folks would do well to heed it. The key to any method is a fast send with spacing between letters, and learning to "hear" the letters as a sound rather than trying to break it down into "dits" and "dahs".

I used to think the same way regarding the complexity added with computers and modems. Then as I gave it more thought, I realized that ham radio and computers are on close to the same level of technology and complexity. Anything that would make computers (not the internet, but stand-alone PCs) unusable would likely do the same to radios. Both have similar power requirements. As for paper and printers - one spare laser cartridge and a stack of paper bought on sale at Office Depot would last you a looong time.

I am advocating the use of digital modes for this with the full knowledge that I am unable to use them myself at this point. I used to be big into AMTOR, but that has fallen out of favor and my TNC is hopelessly out of date. I do have a SignaLink USB attached to my radio, but so far I haven't gotten everything working together.

It's my hope that this forum would serve as a way to get folks (like me) up to speed on this sort of thing so that we would be able to step in and help put things back together once they've fallen apart.

gil

Well, Colonel, I have been looking into digital modes and they have my attention now. I connected my Mac to My K2 and ran fldigi.. Heard some PSK31 signals and was amazed at how well they decoded, even though I could barely hear the signal. I read the Olivia mode is even better and can decode signals deep in the static, that you can't even hear! I can see now, thanks to your post, that a digital mode would be great to send news bulletins. Cut-and-paste your text, set your software to behave as a beacon... It's a bit more involved than CW for sure, but with the abundance of cheap sub-$300 laptops, still a viable option. I will be looking into Olivia 16/500 on the K2. The problem with digital modes is that there are so many. We need a prepping standard!

Gil.