Integrated Asterisk VoIP & Amateur Radio

Let's brainstorm the hypothetical feasibility of creating a reasonably portable box or kit that integrates a number of widely varying technologies and tools into a single easily useable, robust networked platform that is ideally suitable for disaster recovery and emergency response communication efforts. Such a box would automatically discover and communicate with other identical boxes to form a coordinated and united response network through whatever means of communication is available between each node.

I was reading about a project to integrate the Asterisk VoIP software-based phone PBX switching platform with amateur radio equipment:

http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Radio

Now this has pretty impressive potential. Imagine if we had a rig that could be easily hauled in the cargo area of a minivan with a telescoping antenna mast lying beneath the seats, so as not to reduce seating capacity. A response team could arrive on the scene with two guys setting up the equipment while the others begin preliminary search & rescue efforts, or begin sizing up the situation and making a plan.

The “kit” could include a PC with voice & data communications equipment all integrated together in one carry tote ready to go. It could run software to keep track of what resources members have in the area, using a pretty spiffy mapping system, such as this really cool Emergency Preparedness Database for starts:

http://beta.tech.lds.org/forum/showthre ... 8#post2148http://beta.tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?p=2148#post2148
Additionally there could be a networked database for church members and their families to “check in” to update their status, needs, and where-abouts. This information could get compiled either through a temporary national call center (for those who made it to safety and were able to call an 800 number), or through local nodes on this network. These status updates would be propagated through whatever means available, whether it be IP, amateur packet radio, or even an encrypted data stream received via satellite downlink carried with the church’s satellite channels or perhaps even BYU-TV’s secondary closed captioning signal. (Setting up a DSS dish can be done in less than 3 minutes if you know what you’re doing. I’ve seen my uncle do so when parking his RV all over the place.)

http://beta.tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?t=297http://beta.tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?t=297
Asterisk could be running on the PC at each node, to act as a dynamic telephone switching platform. With some customization, it could be rigged to automatically discover all available communications links and route calls between nodes accordingly. Imagine for example being able to call any node by merely dialing a church unit number. Or, rescue teams could have two way radios with built in DTMF touch tone keypads. They would of course talk to the nearest node rig, but from there Asterisk could figure out who they are trying to reach and how to route their call. With some customization it could query the membership status check-in database to determine the location of the member who’s phone number was dialed. If the database indicates they are staying at another member’s house, then it would forward their call accordingly through the PTSN. If the membership status database says they are in the field serving in relief efforts, it would automatically route their call to the node—or even remote two-way radio that they are nearest to. Calls could hop from node to node either through temporary wifi networks using VoIP, or through amateur radio channels.

There’s a huge potential for this integration of radio communications with VoIP because it reduces the complication factor down to about ziltch. Everybody already knows how to use a telephone, and already knows how to dial a phone number on their ward list. The human interface, with the mere addition of perhaps a push to talk button, would be the same as everyone already is familiar with.
Certainly there are tons of other applications for such a kit.

-Jeff Phillips

One way to do some of what you want to accomplish is with APRS and an auto-patch to your asterisk system.

APRS can be used for position reporting of crews. There are lots of setups for mobile and hand held radios and APRS. I have an iGate running on a Linksys WRT54G with a self modified version of aprsd that works really well hooked to my handheld in my home. I have also been looking into gumstix to make my iGate even smaller (also because its harder to put linux on the WRT's). Gumstix computers have a GPS module so it would be easy enough to have a nice little all in one system. Although most radios with built in TNC's (modems for the non ham) have the ability to just hook up a GPS device and start broadcasting position. The APRS system can be used for text message style messaging also. It seems like I heard that the local hazmat team was setup with APRS capable radios for messaging and position reporting.

As for the auto-patch this is a repeater to phoneline type system. This allows the radio operator to dial an DTMF to access the patch and then dial phone numbers. The down side of this is one phone call per freq at a time. So in the emergence situation it would probably be better for a human relay.

jkarras wrote: As for the auto-patch this is a repeater to phoneline type system. This allows the radio operator to dial an DTMF to access the patch and then dial phone numbers. The down side of this is one phone call per freq at a time. So in the emergence situation it would probably be better for a human relay.

Good point. You would probably want an open channel for all team members to communicate with the whole group. However, calls to specific individuals outside the group would still need to be made. I think we'd need to support at least two seperate simultaneous transmissions within any given unit boundaries.

jeffphil wrote:I was reading about a project to integrate the Asterisk VoIP software-based phone PBX switching platform with armature radio equipment:

Armature Radio? I thought spark-gap was outlawed. :rolleyes:

Oh, Amateur Radio.

What I read on that link there is people phone patching analog Amateur Radio systems to VoIP. Not all that exciting.

It would be interesting to do digital over Amateur Radio, but the hobby seems largely stuck in the early 80s. There isn't a lot of digital bandwidth to be hand. At least not cheaply. $1K/node will get you 128Kbit. And that's just the radio. On the other hand 1200bps and even 9600bps half-duplex is fairly cheap.

Armature Radio? I thought spark-gap was outlawed. :rolleyes:

Oh, Amateur Radio. [/quote]

Darn spell check! Here's a tech idea: Fix it to not "correct" things to the wrong word!

RussellHltn wrote:What I read on that link there is people phone patching analog Amateur Radio systems to VoIP. Not all that exciting.

It would be interesting to do digital over Amateur Radio, but the hobby seems largely stuck in the early 80s. There isn't a lot of digital bandwidth to be hand. At least not cheaply. $1K/node will get you 128Kbit. And that's just the radio. On the other hand 1200bps and even 9600bps half-duplex is fairly cheap.

Oh data would be excellent. The problem we run into is how to get a reliable signal with reasonable bandwidth to any possible location we might need to be. Say we have a rig up at the church building. I can probably get line of site for several miles north east that consists of nothing but flat farms and open fields. However, if I go in any other direction I can't get line of site across town let alone 35 miles away.

We have a couple of wireless ISPs in the area. It is feasible to get a 1 mbps connection setup with coverage pretty much anywhere in the county. However, would their infrastructure work during a widespread blackout? Probably not. We could build a network of WiFi repeaters at member homes, but that's a lot of stuff to maintain. Ideally I want to see a portable kit that can be setup anywhere in the county and be able to relay communication back to the church building, which could then relay it to the neighboring wards.

If anybody has a clue how to get a reasonable data connection out 30 miles with no line of site, and without costing a fortune, let me know.

-Jeff

jeffphil wrote:Darn spell check!

I know the feeling all too well.

jeffphil wrote:If anybody has a clue how to get a reasonable data connection out 30 miles with no line of site, and without costing a fortune, let me know.

Well, and that's the hard part. The lower bands that do well with omni-directional signal and a non-line of site don't allow enough bandwidth to have a faster connect speed then 9600bps. The higher bands allow higher speeds, but they start to require directional antennas and line of sight.

At that speed you're looking at applications like text email or text only web pages. That may not be cool tech, but if all other communications is down, that's nothing to sneeze at either. Especially once you reach the edge of the communications hole you can plug into someone's broadband and get the message the rest of the way over the Internet.

And it's still better then playing a variation of the "telephone game" where someone's request gets repeated enough times that it's distorted by the time it reaches it's destination.

RussellHltn wrote:Well, and that's the hard part. The lower bands that do well with omni-directional signal and a non-line of site don't allow enough bandwidth to have a faster connect speed then 9600bps. The higher bands allow higher speeds, but they start to require directional antennas and line of sight.

Ugh, 9600 bps. I remember those days... I really wish we could get better speed than that, but at least it is something. If we put a lot of effort into building higher speed links with directional antennas, I would still want the slow data connection up to keep some underlying operations running in the event that it suddenly quits working... so at least we could communicate what happened (wind knocked over antenna, generator ran out of gas, etc.) so the person on the other end isn't frantically trying to fix something that isn't broken.

At that speed you're looking at applications like text email or text only web pages.

True, and that is indeed a problem. We just don't have the really geeky people we used to have. Today's computer enthusiasts are of course more familier with how their computers operate today. Few of our members remember the terminal windows, command prompts, and gosh-wiz textual interfaces. When the situation comes that we need to use this stuff, it needs to be as familer as possible so that we can quickly adopt it without much learning curve.

Most importantly, I think the people with good leadership and organizational skills are the ones that should operate the communications equipment. They are the ones that are most suitable to coordinate who is doing what, and getting what we need into the right areas. If they can't operate the communications equipment themselves, they are slowed down in their efforts by having to relay all of their needs through an intermediary operator. Likewise having to have an additional man there to operate the equipment reduces the much needed man power out in the field helping those in need during such circumstances.

Perhaps what we can do is build the user interface well in advance and based around the concept of all the image files and associated or relevant information being loaded onto the hard drives in these units well in advance of it actually being put into action. If you could quickly jump around an offline but highly elegant graphical user interface in a web browser, then maybe we could build the functionality in behind the scenes where you'd click a page and jump right to a text box to fill in a message to send to someone else, and have just the message itself sent with all the supporting HTML contained only locally.

That may not be cool tech, but if all other communications is down, that's nothing to sneeze at either. Especially once you reach the edge of the communications hole you can plug into someone's broadband and get the message the rest of the way over the Internet.

That is certainly true. What would be ideal is if we had one of these kits in each community such that we could use walkie-talkie style handhelds to communicate as a team with it and our leaders locally, but have it capable of relaying necessary communications to other communities.

The problem with this is that we don't have a church unit in every community--far from it. And, we don't have line-of-sight between the communities and the church buildings, or even between one church building and the next. Some could be 40+ miles away.

We would have to start making use of towers to get line of site if that were necessary. That means we'd be spending $$$ and I don't see it being worthwhile unless the same communications networks were able to be put to practical use on a daily basis as opposed to the "just in case" needs. Perhaps we could use it for this building-to-building video streaming model as well, but even if we did that doesn't help explain how we'd actually build such a nework cost effectively.

Maybe what we need to look at is partnering with an ISP or some other company that also has needs for infrastructure?

And it's still better then playing a variation of the "telephone game" where someone's request gets repeated enough times that it's distorted by the time it reaches it's destination.

That is certainly a problem with walkie talkies, radios, cell phones, land line phones, and internet connections. In such a situation when certain people's stuff works between A and B, and somebody else's gadget works from B to C, and so on down through the alphabet, by the time it reaches the final destination what you end up with is a mere rumor of there perhaps being someone in need. What we need are specifics. Inaccurate information being passed along results in several messages sent back and forth to confirm or correct what was inquired, which takes time and slows down our ability to respond when time may be most critical. Digital replication of the message ensures accuracy but requires reliable data links. Hmm...

-Jeff

In some of these situations, it might be appropriate to consider sat phones. They'll work anywhere, most people should be able to figure out how to use them, and I believe it's possible to get set up with some sort of pay-as-you-talk vs the monthly recurring deal. It can be expensive, but for some scenarios it may be the appropriate (and cheapest) solution.

gblack wrote:In some of these situations, it might be appropriate to consider sat phones.

There's some pros and cons to that solution. I think the biggest one is that if you don't use the phone, you may find either it won't work or you won't know how to use it when the time comes. Rechargeable batteries don't have that long a life. I think on the order of 2-3 years or so.

Also, at some point I think they may fall victim to their own success. There's only so much capacity up there. A big enough emergency over a wide enough area may saturate the capacity. That's what usually kills cell phone service - not damage to the infrastructure, but the sudden surge in use.

It's not a magic solution, but certainly a viable one.

Don't forget that channels 1-6 of the 802.11 2.4 GHz band are in the Amateur Radio frequency space. With the right equipment, Hams can run up to 1 KW on those channels. With good antennas, 30 miles is easily doable with about 1 watt.

rpyne wrote:Don't forget that channels 1-6 of the 802.11 2.4 GHz band are in the Amateur Radio frequency space.

Last I looked, it was only Channel 1 of 802.11B. All other channels have parts that go outside of the Amateur Radio allocation. I'd also question whether or not Amateur Radio can legally be used for Church "business". Emergency Communications, yes. Stake Conference - highly questionable.

I seem to recall a couple of hams that set a distance record found that once the link was set up, they could drop to power to get back into Part 15 compliance and maintain the link. It takes line-of-sight and directional antennas, but yes, it can be done.

rpyne wrote:Don't forget that channels 1-6 of the 802.11 2.4 GHz band are in the Amateur Radio frequency space. With the right equipment, Hams can run up to 1 KW on those channels. With good antennas, 30 miles is easily doable with about 1 watt.

Hmm I didn't know that... I can just see myself now covering the entire Utah Valley with my own Wireless router signal (Blackflag of course). Though I would have to see if my computer's connection has to identify itself every 10 mins.

RussellHltn wrote:Last I looked, it was only Channel 1 of 802.11B. All other channels have parts that go outside of the Amateur Radio allocation. I'd also question whether or not Amateur Radio can legally be used for Church "business". Emergency Communications, yes. Stake Conference - highly questionable.

Hmm ok so I'll be restricted to channel 1. That's ok. As for stake conference, maybe it could be considered a 2 hour long net?

RussellHltn wrote: I seem to recall a couple of hams that set a distance record found that once the link was set up, they could drop to power to get back into Part 15 compliance and maintain the link. It takes line-of-sight and directional antennas, but yes, it can be done.

Hmm just set up an auto rotating antenna to pin-point my position. Though I feel sorry for anyone who is also using channel 1 between my router and myself.

RussellHltn wrote:Last I looked, it was only Channel 1 of 802.11B. All other channels have parts that go outside of the Amateur Radio allocation. I'd also question whether or not Amateur Radio can legally be used for Church "business". Emergency Communications, yes. Stake Conference - highly questionable.

The Ham band is 2.390-2.450 GHz

802.11b frequencies are:
Ch--Lower--Center--Upper
1 -- 2.401 -- 2.412 -- 2.423
2 -- 2.404 -- 2.417 -- 2.428
3 -- 2.411 -- 2.422 -- 2.433
4 -- 2.416 -- 2.427 -- 2.438
5 -- 2.421 -- 2.432 -- 2.443
6 -- 2.426 -- 2.437 -- 2.448
7 -- 2.431 -- 2.442 -- 2.453
8 -- 2.436 -- 2.447 -- 2.458
9 -- 2.441 -- 2.452 -- 2.463
10 -- 2.446 -- 2.457 -- 2.468
11 -- 2.451 -- 2.462 -- 2.473

As for "Commercial Content", the rules on that changed several years ago:

Sec. 97.113 Prohibited transmissions.
(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
(1) Communications specifically prohibited elsewhere in this part;
(2) Communications for hire or for material compensation, direct or
indirect, paid or promised, except as otherwise provided in these rules;
(3) Communications in which the station licensee or control operator
has a pecuniary interest, including communications on behalf of an
employer. Amateur operators may, however, notify other amateur operators
of the availability for sale or trade of apparatus normally used in an
amateur station, provided that such activity is not conducted on a
regular basis;
(4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided
elsewhere in this section; communications intended to facilitate a
criminal act; messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their
meaning, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words
or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification.
(5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be
furnished alternatively through other radio services.

The only part of a stake conference link that would be questionable is the music and that should be alright because it is a digital transmission.

Since this thread started out with a general direction of emergency communications, the following is also relevant:

Sec. 97.401 Operation during a disaster.

(a) When normal communication systems are overloaded, damaged or
disrupted because a disaster has occurred, or is likely to occur, in an
area where the amateur service is regulated by the FCC, an amateur
station may make transmissions necessary to meet essential communication
needs and facilitate relief actions.
(b) When a disaster disrupts normal communication systems in a
particular area, the FCC may declare a temporary state of communication
emergency.
The declaration will set forth any special conditions and special rules
to be observed by stations during the communication emergency. A request
for a declaration of a temporary state of emergency should be directed
to the EIC in the area concerned.
(c) A station in, or within 92.6 km of, Alaska may transmit
emissions J3E and R3E on the channel at 5.1675 Mhz for emergency
communications. The channel must be shared with stations licensed in the
Alaska-private fixed service. The transmitter power must not exceed 150
W.

Sec. 97.403 Safety of life and protection of property.
No provision of these rules prevents the use by an amateur station
of any means of radiocommunication at its disposal to provide essential
communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human
life and immediate protection of property when normal communication
systems are not available.

I have thought a bit on VOIP for emergency comms and an emergency computer / comm platform for disaster prep.

You would only need an emergency comms system when the standard comms systems are not functioning. This means a SERIOUS interruption of systems built to be very redundant. These emergencies are rare and often widespread. The same disaster that makes existing systems non-functional makes it very difficult to maintain emergency comm systems, since primary providers pay a lot of money to make sure their systems work always.

I do not think that VOIP is a good fit for a number of reasons. The first, VOIP is point-to-point and real-time. In order to complete a call, you need someone on the other end, a working link, and an address for that end. If we compare VOIP to TCP/IP, you need a TCP address.

VOIP technology currently does not have the equvilent of DNS, ROUTED, nor DHCP. These technologies allow quick deployment of TCP networks and easy navigation of them.

You could create a pre-planned set of VOIP routes (dialplans and interconnects), you could even build a lot of redundancy into those networks, but if things do not work out exactly according to the plan, you have chaos until you can reformulate a plan.

As well, in a disaster area, bandwidth, reliability and redundancy are likely limited in the disaster area. It would be much better to off-load large portions of the network services to places off of the disaster area network. This would allow better coverage, since the disaster area would only be responsible for 'last mile' type connectivity, not providing services on the network itself.

Other technologies like Email, IM, Forums and the like are much better suited to emergency situations. Most people already have an IM name and an Email address. These systems are also fault-tolerant, distributed, and available out of most disaster areas. Web mail systems in particular are often HUGELY redundant systems in a geographic large area.

Hurricane Katrina showed some interesting information about emergencies and emergency comms. One project specifically set up wifi and TCP to shelters and staging bases for rescue / recovery teams.
http://www.radioresponse.org/wordpress/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02058.html

Another project is building a Linux based firmware for auto-meshing wifi networks
http://www.cuwin.net/manual

These are great, but I think they work best AFTER the initial few days. Buried in the comments and blogs are things that were needed ASAP.

A few things I think a shelter system should have:

Registration DB: A database of who/when/where people are. Included people last seen, known dead, missing, skills, medical needs, etc.

Resource DB: A database of what you have, what you need, where things are

GIS: A mapping system to show where things were, are and where they are going to be.

Web Server: A local page that shows pertinent info. FEMA numbers, Shelter info, Weather, whatever needs to be available to people coming in.

Anyway, I have an idea for a liveCD type system that would work well for a shelter. I need a place to start organizing my ideas and getting critiques of them. I started a disaster prep area at LDSOSS.org. I will copy this post out there for you to pick apart.

I think this issue is still really young, and needs more of a discussion off of the Tech forums.
http://ldsoss.org/index.php?title=Talk:VOIP&action=edit

As to ID's for "Hams" sending data on the 802.11 channels, you can set your call sign as the SSID broadcast. This should suffice under "Ham" rules.

rpyne wrote:The Ham band is 2.390-2.450 GHz

Dang! I must have slipped a decimal point and was looking at the 24GHz allocation.

Looks like we're good for Channels 1-6.

rpyne wrote:Sec. 97.113 Prohibited transmissions.
(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
(5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be
furnished alternatively through other radio services.

Every 6 months considered "regular"?

Then there's this:

Sec. 97.113

(b) An amateur station shall not engage in any form of broadcasting, nor may an amateur station transmit one-way communications except as specifically provided in these rules; nor shall an amateur station engage in any activity related to program production or news gathering for broadcasting purposes, except that communications directly related to the immediate safety of human life or the protection of property may be provided by amateur stations to broadcasters for dissemination to the public where no other means of communication is reasonably available before or at the time of the event.

Shifting back to emergency communications, the most overlooked aspect (IMO) is power. Many emergencies involve power failure. All our fancy tech is only good as good as our power plans. Once you start talking about a computer, you just about have to be talking about a generator too. (Just try power a computer for 3 days on battery power alone - and not counting on full sun.)

RussellHltn wrote:Shifting back to emergency communications, the most overlooked aspect (IMO) is power. Many emergencies involve power failure. All our fancy tech is only good as good as our power plans. Once you start talking about a computer, you just about have to be talking about a generator too. (Just try power a computer for 3 days on battery power alone - and not counting on full sun.)

You have the supplies for 3 days of computer power? (Mine will run out after about 15 mins (on a UPS)) (Of course my PDA will run for about a week without recharge)

Theda's wrote:You have the supplies for 3 days of computer power?

I wish. But if I had this puppy, 3 days of power would be quite do-able. Take a look at the fuel burn rate.

But my point is we have to consider what our power options are. If our tech is only usable when the power stays on, then we're not really equipped for an emergency. Even if we get a large car-sized battery, that's still doesn't give us a good run time. Not if we're powering a notebook computer. Good point o the PDA.

I agree, and for an example, last winter in Western Washington there was a great windstorm in the King County area which just destroyed power lines and put everyone into darkeness. During the first 3 days nobody minded too much because they''re use to power outages. It was when it moved into the 4th and 5thdays that all the stores were sold out of generators and those that had generators and had they're power return were loaning them out so that people could heat their houses. Most of the emergency communications were cell phones and Ham Radio. Nothing really that fancy.

This is a very interesting topic. I believe there is products/solutions out there that resolve this issue much better than others. Using VoIP or Radio over IP (RoIP) is a very useful and powerful tool, but whomever manufactures the solution must be an expert in both VoIP and Two-way radio communications.
I have had experience working with the Church in helping them to develop and create emergency preparedness plans - especially dealing with communications. There are some particular scenarios that need to be addressed.
Consider this:
The Presiding Bishopric sent out a directive a couple years ago detailing that each stake needs to have an emergency preparedness plan and an emergency communications system that is wireless. Money was allocated to each stake and they went forward and procured the necessary licensing from the FCC and they also procured their radio equipment. The troubling factor here is: that directive didn’t specify what format/frequency range each stake or area should use, nor did it setup interoperability between stakes. Therefore, in one area, you could easily find a different stakes with different formats and/or brands of radios. The typical available formats (frequency categories) in the U.S. are VHF, UHF or HAM. Even if two adjacent stakes are on the same frequency range, (i.e.: UHF) unless their radios are programmed with each other’s frequencies, they still cannot talk/coordinate with each other. The only exception to this is HAM. Yet with HAM, it requires each individual to be licensed to operate the equipment and legally, if you don’t have a license, you aren’t able to talk. Also, what is the solution for stakes/areas that may have a new emergency coordinator that has never been trained? There are very few people out there who have not only had the training necessary to handle a minor, medium or major event, but they haven’t experienced one either. How do we help them by getting them information or assistance?
There are two solutions that are needed here: a radio interoperability module that allows disparate radio systems to talk to each other. The other would be radio over IP back to a location with subject-matter experts.
I deal with several interoperability products and the solution I have found that covers both of these scenarios very well is Motorola’s Motobridge. With Motobridge, you can connect up to eight disparate radio systems and allow them to talk to one another by creating patches between the different radio systems. This would allow multiple VHF, UHF or HAM radio systems to be able to communicate with each other as needed. You may also link in Nextel/IDEN phones as well as PSTN lines. That same gateway can also be linked to either other gateway modules for interoperability with them or back to Church Headquarters. Communications with the field personnel can be handled at either Ops Comm, welfare or both. With this type of system, a general authority, an area authority, a stake president that is out of the area or anyone else necessary could call into the system and be patched into the scenario to provide scenario command and control. This also opens up some amazing possibilities and resources for responders at the scenario. Motobridge opens the possibility up for subject-matter experts to be patched in from anywhere as long as they have a telephone to assist an emergency coordinator, stake president, bishops or any other person/entity requiring additional assistance or resources.
Motobridge gateways are small and take up very little room and use very little power. The scenario listed above with a gateway being in a van or truck could easily be done. Even better – I think – would be to have a Motobridge located at each area of the Church and have it sent upon need to scenarios as they happen. You could easily mount a Motobridge into a NEMA enclosure that could easily be loaded and deployed via pick-up truck or van.
Motobridge is also very scalable. You can go from one to thousands of gateways with no central point of failure. I find myself leaning towards Motorola for this type of solution because there isn’t a better company out there that knows or does two-way radios better. Motobridge is also build with 99.99999% reliability. Also, during any type of scenario, information can be very valuable and important to keep in the right hands. (ears….) Motobridge offers encryption on the data stream as well as extended encryption to radio systems that all ready have it.
I can be contacted for any additional information about Motobridge @ gregs@mcintoshcomm.com.

Unfortunately, it is illegal for other radio services to interconnect with Amateur bands. A better solution is for Salt Lake to mandate the use of MURS-service VHF radios, an unlicensed service allowing two watts of power on relatively inexpensive handheld radios, as well as higher power on fixed stations. The current craze of buying FRS and GMRS radios (GMRS requires a license) for wards and stakes is wasteful, since the allowable power is generally insufficient. Using MURS, entire units (ward and/or stake) can have fairly reliable communication, and do so legally. Post an Amateur operator at each ward and stake building to funnel the local information up the ladder of communication to areas and regions.

Greg@mcintoshcomm wrote:Motorola Motobridge

DISCLAIMER: The Church has no affiliation with Motorola nor it's product Motobridge. The Church does not endorse the use of this product in anyway. Please consult with your local Church authorities about which solution is or should be implemented for your unit(s).

The post on the Motorola Motobridge was very informative and helpful. I would just add as a caution that we should avoid posts that promote the product to the point of advertisement. This post was pretty tasteful, but somewhat borderline.

Greg@mcintoshcomm wrote:The typical available formats (frequency categories) in the U.S. are VHF, UHF or HAM. Even if two adjacent stakes are on the same frequency range, (i.e.: UHF) unless their radios are programmed with each other’s frequencies, they still cannot talk/coordinate with each other. The only exception to this is HAM.

Even with Ham. If one stake bought 2 meter (144MHz) and the other bought 70cm (440MHz) the two won't talk. Not unless someone sets up a cross-band repeater or someone has a dual band radio.

There are significant legal issues with connecting other services to ham. During a real emergency, that's not a big issue, but it does affect testing. I think it's far better that stakes have in interoperability plan. The Moto bridge sounds interesting, but it also sounds like a plan that begins to rely on infrastructure which is not a good idea. Probably cheaper to make sure some key people in the adjoining stake have compatible radios.

k0nod541 wrote:The current craze of buying FRS and GMRS radios (GMRS requires a license) for wards and stakes is wasteful, since the allowable power is generally insufficient.

FRS is 1/2W. GMRS can run up to 5W (for a HT. I think mobile can run up to 50W), but the blister pack radios tend to be 1W or 2W if you look hard. The problem with MURS is that it seems to have died off. Not easy to find those radios any more. GMRS is expensinve with a license something like $80/family for 5 years.

A bigger issue is the topology of the stake itself. What may work in the flatlands won't work in the hills, and what works in the dense member areas of Utah may not work in the stakes of the midwest that cover hundreds of miles. That's probably why the church didn't specify the technology.

What is needed is for the stakes to devise their own plans and then the region to devise a way for the stakes to talk with each other and then the church give instructions on how the regions will talk with headquarters. I believe the last part is already completed and in some stakes the first part is completed. In my old stake the plan has everyone with a FRS/GMRS radio that all communicate with their local HAM operator (who also has a FRS/GMRS radio) the local ham then talks to the ward emergency person (who happens to be amateur licensed) who then communicates to the stake.

They have run a few disaster simulations on this and it has been pretty effective though the FRS radios were so so.

As the link for stake to region I think that each stake could designate a ham operator with HF priviledges to communicate with the regional emergency rep who then communicates to SLC.

thedqs wrote:HF priviledges

A lot easier now that the code requirement has been eliminated.

Yes it is though now it is job of finding time to study the questions so that I can upgrade.

RussellHltn wrote:... GMRS is expensinve with a license something like $80/family for 5 years.

Are you sure that's per family? When I read the license application, I understood it was per person/individual. (I had bought a pair of FRS/GMRS units at Wal-Mart, expecting the license to be priced more like the old CB station license I got years ago. My units have never been powered up and sit in a plastic bag until an emergency requires/allows their use.)

rmrichesjr wrote:Are you sure that's per family?

Yes.

Wikpedia link

From the link:
"adult individual who possesses a valid GMRS license, as well his or her immediate family members, including a spouse, children, parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, and in-laws (47 CFR 95.179)"

http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index. ... ral_mobile

... is the source of info. on GMRS. (See below.) Get each related family together and pool your funds for a license. Don't count on finding a lot of repeaters - they are few and far between.

The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) is a land-mobile radio service available for short-distance two-way communications to facilitate the activities of an adult individual and his or her immediate family members, including a spouse, children, parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, and in-laws (47 CFR 95.179). Normally, as a GMRS system licensee, you and your family members would communicate among yourselves over the general area of your residence or during recreational group outings, such as camping or hiking.
The FCC grants five-year renewable licenses for GMRS Systems. The individual licensee is responsible for the proper operations of the licensed GMRS system at all times.

rmrichesjr wrote:Are you sure that's per family? When I read the license application, I understood it was per person/individual. (I had bought a pair of FRS/GMRS units at Wal-Mart, expecting the license to be priced more like the old CB station license I got years ago. My units have never been powered up and sit in a plastic bag until an emergency requires/allows their use.)

According to the FCC that license is per individual. The FCC states:

Available to an individual (one man or one woman) for two-way voice communication service to facilitate the activities of the individual's intermediate family members.

Now who can operate under that license is the entire family. Again from the FCC's site:

The General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) is a land-mobile radio service available for short-distance two-way communications to facilitate the activities of an adult individual and his or her immediate family members, including a spouse, children, parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, and in-laws.

Since the license is for a system run by a single individual I deduced that your family members, under this license, can use the system after the $85 fee.

If you like the formal law set before you then in the FCC 47 CFR 95.179 we have who can operate the GMRS:

Subpart A_General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS)Sec. 95.179 Individuals who may be station operators.
(a) An individual GMRS system licensee may permit immediate family members to be station operators in his or her GMRS system. Immediate family members are the:
(1) Licensee;
(2) Licensee's spouse;
(3) Licensee's children, grandchildren, stepchildren;
(4) Licensee's parents, grandparents, stepparents;
(5) Licensee's brothers, sisters;
(6) Licensee's aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews; and
(7) Licensee's in-laws.

Hope this clarifies the situation.

k0nod541 wrote:Don't count on finding a lot of repeaters - they are few and far between.

Not to mention:

1) The repeater owner may not appreciate your use without coordinating with them first.

2) Those radios you find at the mega-mart blister packs are not repeater capable. For that you'd probably have to track down a business class grade unit. (Typically a radio solid and heavy enough to double as a club in an emergency.)

Most blister pack radios are FRS / GMRS combo, and can be used on the FRS licensed bands w/o an $85 license.

I have some of these, and I wonder if their power is such that they always work under FRS regs.

Anyone have a line on the above mentioned repeater-capable clubs?

Thanks

Many thanks to all who clarified that a licensee's family (rather precisely defined) may operate a GMRS system. I guess I had missed that part of the fine print.

The Earl wrote:I have some of these, and I wonder if their power is such that they always work under FRS regs.

It depends on the radio, but most of them follow this pattern:

Channels 8-14 are FRS only. You should be safe here.
Channels 15-22 are GMRS only. You have to have a license to be there.
Channels 1-7 are shared FRS/GMRS channels. This is where it gets interesting. FRS allows up to 0.5W. GMRS allows up to 5W in a handheld (most cheap radios are at best 1W and rarely 2W.)

Some radios have a low power setting that limits the power to 1/2W. The question is, are you legal at low power in channels 1-7 without a license? Good question. The output may be FRS legal, but how is anyone going to prove that you weren't running high power? It's an enforcement nightmare.

Reading the FCC regs, it appears that simply operating a radio certified for GMRS use without a license is an infraction. (The regs do not address FRS/GMRS combo units. GMRS was before FRS. When the GMRS regs were written, if you used GMRS without a license, you were guilty - period.) Unfortunately, enforcement of GMRS license is non-existent so the question of unlicensed operation of FRS/GMRS radios has not been definitively settled. At least not as far as I've been able to find out.

I didn't mean for the post to push Motorola's Motorbridge, but rather, I was attempting to explain that there's a product that has the capability to give the Church some real power and ability to respond and mobilize inspite of the disparate communication systems and exist throughout the Church. Actually, there are several different products out there made by different manufacturers. I used Motobridge because it was the easiest to explain. Cisco has a solution like this as does JPS, EF Johnson, MACOM, Thales and many more.

In reply to the inability or illegal nature of being able to link a HAM radio to a patched system - we're talking about using these systems for emergency usage. The FCC has specified and it has been documented that in the event of an emergency, the rules go by the wayside in light of taking care of the safety of the public. I wouldn't plan on a practice of interconnecting a HAM radio to patched system, but I would definitely plan to at least have the ability to.

I also was recommending a solution that could serve the Church worldwide, rather than just the Utah areas. Keeping in mind that if we have a consistent solution that can work anywhere in the world, there's less training and more power to the end users and emergency coordinators at headquarters or at other areas in the world to actually do coordination and response rather than worrying about how they're going to get communications to the first and second responders as well as the direct people who are affected.

Also, because of the potentially small bandwidth abilities of some of these systems, even satellite data radios such as the magellian and others could be used to get a link into very remote areas to get command and control to the areas needing communications.

There are a few HAM repeaters out there owned by HAM clubs. As for conventional repeaters in the VHF (150-170 MHz) or UHF (450-470 MHz), there are a few out there, but 90% of them are trunking repeater systems that require a trunking radio that has been programmed to that system to access them. The conventional repeaters that are out there are primarily used locally at a business with a large area or a specific indoor area to cover. (ie: hotels, airport support, airlines, malls, industrial, schools etc)

To use a radios on a repeater that's not a HAM repeater, you have to have the repeater owner's permission and have your radio programmed up to those frequencies. Any GPRS radios that are out there are pre-programmed up with only the freqs for GPRS. You cannot add the frequencies at will.

I wouldn't use GPRS radios as part of my emergency plan. There are too many people that have them that will be using them within their families for their own communications. The likelihood of requiring them not to talk so you can do your coordination is very slim. It is in the best interests of everyone that emergency radios be either a commercial VHF or UHF radio that has a license and can easily communicate without congestion at will.

There are radios made that are front panel programmable. These can be used in an emergency use to talk to different radios with different frequencies. Motorola, Kenwood, King, and several other manufacturers make them. Having one or two of these located in a region could prove to be very helpful with giving centralized coordinators the ability to talk to everyone they need to.

I agree. "Blister-pack" radios will be a nightmare in a disaster. Amateur is the best of all worlds, but MURS is a close second. Another thought... If a stake with a large geographical area were to go with the licensed GMRS solution, convincing a few families in each ward to get the license, they could build a mobile repeater to remedy the distance problem.

Equally important !!! It's not enough to have a quiver full of radios. We need to train the members on a regular basis how to respond in an emergency situation. Ask the local Ham Radio Club to share their educational resources, and in the process, learn what the local radio folk already have planned. When the local "Hams" learn about the LDS emphasis on preparedness, friendships and cooperation will naturally follow.

The Utah Amateur Radio Club, serving the greater Salt Lake City area is meeting this Thurs at 7:00 for new members an 7:30 for the general meeting.

UARC web page:
http://www.xmission.com/~uarc/

Disclaimer:

I am not a member of the AARL, or UARC. I do not represent them. I also do not represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This message is not an endorsement of any of the above organizations. It is for your information only.

Let's see if this helps:

CB
Pro: No license, cheap equipment
Cons: 27MHz isn't always a good band to use. Expected to be congested. I've never seen a viable emergency plan that uses CB, but there's nothing wrong with it in a area where the users are known and use it regularly (such as a remote small community.)

FRS:
Pro: No license, cheap equipment. Can talk to GMRS on some channels.
Cons: Low power, limited range. Usable for short range (on-site) communications.

GMRS:
Pro: Cheap equipment. Higher power, longer range then FRS. Can talk with FRS users.
Cons: License $85/family. Questionable usability due to easy access by the general public, although I'm not sure this has been proven out in actual events.

Amateur Radio:
Pros: Reasonably priced equipment. High power. Multiple bands available to deal with local conditions. Multiple modes available. Used by other emergency groups.
Cons: Each individual user must study and pass a test to get a license. Two tests if you want access to the longer range frequency bands.

Business Radio:
Pros: License applies to group. Reasonable power/range.
Cons: Range may not cover a stake without a repeater. Equipment is costly. Frequencies may require a license. Equipment is more likely to sit idle (no regular use unless the church runs a monthly net) and may not be functional when needed. Lack of use would also create problems for operators due to lack of training.

Repeaters: (All services)
Repeaters are privately owned, even if open for public use and may already be spoken for in an emergency. Anyone wanting to use one in an emergency should have a written agreement with the owner to assure access. Also, repeaters are "infrastructure" much like cell towers and may be damaged or loose power. The site's ability to withstand expected disasters must be carefully evaluated. Not just ability to operate immediately after but the ability to re-fuel and be operational for the duration of the disaster.


Other: As touched on one needs to make sure equipment is operational by regular use and testing. Operators also need to be trained in proper operation and net control. In a simplex radio system (no repeater) not everyone can hear everyone else. There must be a level of radio discipline to prevent users from jamming up each other.


Rant: Something to be careful of is if local leaders get a "go it alone" mentality. A careful reading of church's PR suggests that outside of "helping hands" (which is usually organized several days later for clean-up) most of what the Church does is done in conjunction with another groups, such as the Red Cross. If local leaders fail to develop a relationship with other groups, they might find themselves as spectators in the next event when they can't get past roadblocks because they are unknown to the local authorities. An excellent start is to send someone as spectator to the next VOAID (Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters) meeting. The church has relationships with other organizations nationally, it would be a good idea to develop those relationships locally as well.

http://www.arrl.org/qst/2003/02/VoIP.pdf

The above article details the current state of the art with VOIP and HAM. None of these systems use SIP, or another Asterisk compatible VOIP protocol, but they do solve some problems that SIP would introduce.

The article appeared in QST, an AARL publication. It was written by Steve Ford, WB8IMY.

Thanks
Barrie

Lets take this idea into a real disaster area, the gulf coast after Katrina. We had two jump teams from our stake (The Huntsville Alabama Stake of Zion) that arrived within hours after the storm had passed through. There was no power, no phone, no internet, no cell phones, no running water, no street signs, big tree limbs covering the roads, you get the picture. The skies were very overcast so sat phones were marginal especially since the people who had them had not used them in so long the could not remember how.

During these few days before local communications were restored to some level the church spearhead units arrived at the Gulfport Stake center. Generators and fuel was plentiful, but thanks to amateur radio HF and 2M orders to the Slidel LA Storehouse were passed on quickly. There is a point during disasters when everything else has failed and amateur radio keeps communications open until the phones come back on.

The kit would be nice if all of the connecting technologies were available and functional. What we have been working is the PSK31 mode in HF Radio, can be used to send text messages through amateur radio when all other systems have gone down. Amateur radio has some neat digital technologies, like D-Star, Wires and Echolink, if supporting infrastructure is functional. Echolink is actually a VOIP system that links amateur radio repeaters all over the world using the internet. We have checkins to our North Alabama net from member hams all over the country using echolink. We have an active ERS HF net every Saturday Morning on 75 and 40 meters.

To really be ready for emergencies it would not be a bad Idea to have a Ham License, since you will find no way to have access to so much RF bandwidth, and the new ham licenses do no require a morse code test. PSK31 is taking ham radio by storm as a digital mode that takes less bandwidth than morse code.

APRS is good, so is having a gps to find your way around cities that have no street signs and debris all over the roads.

To truely be useful, this kit would need to operate when all connecting infrastructure is unavailable.

Some new info I have found:

Asterisk Repeater plugin:
http://www.zapatatelephony.org/app_rpt.html
Uses linux ham interface:
http://svxlink.sourceforge.net/

A bit of a hack, but in fact, VOIP, Asterisk and HAM Radio.SvxLink also can talk Echolink, and IRLP (through EchoIRLP) and a few other VOIP protocols.

It turns out that the Corp. of the Presiding Bishopric has a GMRS license. This is a bit strange, since commercial entities grandfathered into GMRS are being pushed to license true commercial bands. It may be that this is specifically an emergency communication license. That said, GMRS licensing in Utah is a joke, so maybe nobody has complained.

And, i got my license. You can call me KE7NZC.

In talking to a lot of friends, coworkers and family, they had no idea how simple the test(s) are, or how to get licensed. I think I may have pushed a few of them in that direction.

Utah D-Star Users
http://groups.google.com/group/utah-d-star-users

I will be presenting a pretty complete review of D-Star at the Utah Amateur Radio Club (probably the September 6th meeting) and at Oquirrh Lake Radio Club (Daybreak - South Jordan, UT, maybe Aug. 11th). If you want to learn about this new technology.

It is particularly powerful for emergency communications. It provides a combination of voice, data, and GPS tracking simultaneously, along with a callsign routed system for connecting resources radio-to-radio regardless of geography (if both are in range of a repeater with a gateway) -- this is not like IRLP or Echolink... if I want to talk to KU7LDS, I don't need to know which repeater he is near, which band he is on, or what city he is in -- I just tell the radio/gateway I want to talk to him and it finds him.

The gateway software will soon have an Open Source version to replace Icom's product. (Watch http://opendstar.org) Once it is available a number of new functions and applications can be added. One that I would like to see is a marriage of D-Star and telephony using Asterisk ... at that point if you have your radio off, you could receive a call via telephone/cell from a D-Star radio, based on your callsign, and a call to a telephone number (using DIDs) could ring multiple telephone numbers plus alert you on your D-Star radio. A piece of hardware needs to be built that contains the AMBE2020 chip, to be attached to a gateway/asterisk computer, then the rest is just a matter of software.

Asterisk can also act as an autodialer to deliver a message to a list of phone numbers, a quick way to get the word out in an emergency (if the phones are up) -- add this D-Star capability and callouts can happen very rapidly.

John - K7VE
http://k7ve.ampr.org
sip:100@trixbox.hays.org

SquireJohn wrote: I will be presenting a pretty complete review of D-Star at the Utah Amateur Radio Club (probably the September 6th meeting) and at Oquirrh Lake Radio Club (Daybreak - South Jordan, UT, maybe Aug. 11th). If you want to learn about this new technology.

I will be at the UARC meeting. This is INCREDIBLE. I have a long-winded, nasty post, unrelated to this forum that INCREDIBLE does not begin to describe. I might find a place and send you a link.

You will find my request to join the Utah D-STAR group, but my Extra call came, so I am now AD7PE.

I am afraid I may have to buy a new radio. And an ICOM at that, but this is the COOLEST thing I have seen since I have looked into HAM.

Thanks

SquireJohn wrote:
John - K7VE
http://k7ve.ampr.org
sip:100@trixbox.hays.org

Anyone that posts their SIP info to a public forum is SERIOUS about VOIP

Barrie

Welllll, Speaking for myself, I see D-Star as a big step forward, but I'm not sure but what it will become the next "Betamax". (For those of you who don't remember, Betamax was the first affordable VCR - but when VHS came out they clobbered Betamax with marketing.) So far, no one else is jumping on the bandwagon and the radios aren't cheap.

I talked to Kenwood at Dayton and they had no interest in it. The guy in charge I talked to said the buzz word today is "interoperability". There's no interoperability between D-Star and Public Service stuff. So I don't know where that leaves hams. Maybe waiting for the first generation APCO 25 stuff to turn up in the surplus market.

My main interest in D-Star is the high speed data. Still expensive and only seems to be for point-to-point, not a wide area network.

I really wish there was a clearer direction in the market. At least to get one other major radio manufacturer to start producing D-Star.

I am not sold on the idea of a proprietary digital format. I am not sold on the idea of a single manufacturer spec for digital.

That said, it seems that D-Star has a few answers for that. D-Star appears to be an open protocol. This might allow home-brew and novel implementations that are not tied to a vendor.

And your Kenwood rep was mis-informed:
http://hamradio.netfreehost.com/hamradio-ftopic82.html

That said, come to the Utah D-Star group and we can chat there. I don't think there is much relevance to this forum to get into a discussion about it.

Anyway

The Earl wrote:And your Kenwood rep was mis-informed:

Yes, Kenwood Japan has them. Kenwood USA isn't going to import them.

Though still not "full up" a D-STAR homebrew radio has been built. See: http://www.moetronix.com/dstar/

There are other projects underway, including Open Source software and hardware designs.

Hams are not Public Safety ... there are several aspects of APCO25 that I find incompatible with the main purposes of Amateur Radio (e.g. central authority to issue radio ids) --- D-Star is growing much more rapidly in Amateur Radio circles than APCO25, though there are APCO25 repeaters and radios on the amateur bands.

-- John K7VE

kc4rzw wrote:Lets take this idea into a real disaster area, the gulf coast after Katrina. We had two jump teams from our stake (The Huntsville Alabama Stake of Zion) that arrived within hours after the storm had passed through. There was no power, no phone, no internet, no cell phones, no running water, no street signs, big tree limbs covering the roads, you get the picture. The skies were very overcast so sat phones were marginal especially since the people who had them had not used them in so long the could not remember how.

To truely be useful, this kit would need to operate when all connecting infrastructure is unavailable.

Post Katrina, Alabama has become the most D-STAR active region in North America (mostly in the last year), if not the world. They have provisioned a significant number of D-STAR systems, including portable repeaters with Satellite earth stations. See http://www.arrl-al.org/Alabama_link.htm

Southern Baptist Disaster Relief is part of this system. Just think if the stakes were tied into this system and SLC had systems online for the field relief teams to use for ordering supplies and personnel ... plus as supplies and personnel were moved around, the DGPS system could keep everyone updated.

If you are anywhere near Huntsville, there is a great opportunity to learn more next month. "The International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) has announced that Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2007 (GAREC-07) will take place in August in conjunction with the 2007 ARRL National Convention at the Huntsville Hamfest." See: http://www.hamfest.org/

-- John

rpyne wrote: The only part of a stake conference link that would be questionable is the music and that should be alright because it is a digital transmission.

Ithink this one has been addressed and the fact that the music is digitally encoded does not permit it to be sent over amateur radio. Using Amateur Radio to broadcast Stake conference would not be in line with the basis and purpose and would certainly cause the Church[font=&quot]embarrassment and potentially cause loss of licenses if a complaint was filed.

Let's keep the use of Amateur Radio to emergency preparedness, public service, and personal hobby/recreational activities.

Also the use of "digital techniques" e.g. digital voice does not permit them to be used in the digital (e.g morse code, rtty, packet, psk31) portions of the bands. Some new Techs have messed up on this one.

-- John
[/font]

The Earl wrote:I am not sold on the idea of a proprietary digital format. I am not sold on the idea of a single manufacturer spec for digital.

You might enjoy:
Thoughts on Open Source vs. Proprietary Techonology and D-STAR


http://k7ve.ampr.org/index.php?option=c ... &Itemid=26

SquireJohn wrote: incompatible with the main purposes of Amateur Radio (e.g. central authority to issue radio ids)
-- John K7VE

Interesting dilemma.

On the one hand, all amateurs have an FCC ID that is required when they are on the air. On the other hand, D-Star users are finding that if they have multiple radios, or more importantly, a radio and a repeater, the one call will not work for them and they need a unique id for each.

Bottom line, you can't route traffic without an address, and addresses must be unique if you don't include the routing information with the traffic.

You and I need to get together sometime to chat about some of this stuff. I will be at the Sept UARC meeting, or you can PM me to set up a time.

AD7PE

The Earl wrote:Interesting dilemma.

On the one hand, all amateurs have an FCC ID that is required when they are on the air. On the other hand, D-Star users are finding that if they have multiple radios, or more importantly, a radio and a repeater, the one call will not work for them and they need a unique id for each.

Bottom line, you can't route traffic without an address, and addresses must be unique if you don't include the routing information with the traffic.

You and I need to get together sometime to chat about some of this stuff. I will be at the Sept UARC meeting, or you can PM me to set up a time.

AD7PE

All correct. The main difference being APCO25 needs a central authority to generate a radio ID that is not the legal callsign ID and generally requires special programming software from a vendor. On the other hand, on D-Star, users can create their own IDs based on their callsign that are unique for addressing and can be more or less ad hoc. The repeater callsign issue is an artifact of the Icom implementation that may or may not be an issue in future versions of the controller/gateway software, but getting a "club" callsign is not a big deal.

-- John, K7VE
http://k7ve.ampr.org
http://groups.google.com/group/utah-d-star-users

SquireJohn wrote: Post Katrina, Alabama has become the most D-STAR active region in North America (mostly in the last year), if not the world. They have provisioned a significant number of D-STAR systems, including portable repeaters with Satellite earth stations. See http://www.arrl-al.org/Alabama_link.htm

Southern Baptist Disaster Relief is part of this system. Just think if the stakes were tied into this system and SLC had systems online for the field relief teams to use for ordering supplies and personnel ... plus as supplies and personnel were moved around, the DGPS system could keep everyone updated.

If you are anywhere near Huntsville, there is a great opportunity to learn more next month. "The International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) has announced that Global Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Conference 2007 (GAREC-07) will take place in August in conjunction with the 2007 ARRL National Convention at the Huntsville Hamfest." See: http://www.hamfest.org/

-- John

Any info on how this has developed?

DarrellBray wrote:Any info on how this has developed?

Hi Darrell. You quoted a few different developments. Which one did you have in mind?

The potential for the stakes to get tied into the system. Did it ever move beyond the 'idea' stage?

DarrellBray wrote:The potential for the stakes to get tied into the system. Did it ever move beyond the 'idea' stage?

In order for stakes to use d-star systems, all they would need is a d-star capable radio.

If you are talking about more integration than that, I doubt the church would invest the money. I am not aware of the church funding or sponsoring repeaters of any kind.

I do not know if there are plans to get d-star capable radios at bishop storehouses, or roll d-star equipment out to ERC groups.

I speculate that the church is having enough trouble getting good-old-fashion 2m FM and HF in all the places it wants it, and is not concerned about staying at the cutting edge of the technology curve.

The Earl

The Earl wrote:If you are talking about more integration than that, I doubt the church would invest the money. I am not aware of the church funding or sponsoring repeaters of any kind.

And you probably wont. Amateur radios and/or repeaters used for ERC are to be owned and maintained by the individual operators, not the church.

The Earl wrote:I do not know if there are plans to get d-star capable radios at bishop storehouses, or roll d-star equipment out to ERC groups.

The state of Utah has purchased 10 full D-Star repeater "stacks" and are currently making plans to install them in strategic locations throughout the state. Of course, these will have to be coordinated with existing repeaters and possibly over time a new local band-plan may need to be hammered out in order to take advantage of D-Star's slightly narrower bandwidth requirements. Many of the ARES Emergency Communication Centers in the state are starting to look at installing at least one D-Star capable radio, as funds permit. D-Star comes at a premium cost over an equivalent radio without it, so I believe that will be a big factor in determining how well it will be received by the ham community in general.

None of this has direct involvement with ERC, especially outside of Utah. I mention it just to illustrate how difficult it is to jump-start a new technology in the world of amateur radio. Especially one that carries a pretty hefty price tag with it. At least for this area, it makes little sense to equip Bishop Storehouses with D-Star radios without the infrastructure in place first and that may take quite a few years.

Mikerowaved wrote:At least for this area, it makes little sense to equip Bishop Storehouses with D-Star radios without the infrastructure in place first and that may take quite a few years.

I have to wonder long-term how this will play out. It's been out a few years now and only Icom is doing D-Star. When I talked to the Kenwood rep at Dayton, he said he had no plans to bring in D-Star into the US. He indicated that it was a interoperability issue with other services.

The public service sector is going with APCO 25. At some point that equipment will become surplus. That could drive hams into adopting that standard instead.

With products like www.dvdongle.com and other similar projects brewing, D-Star might have a future outside of the Icom brand. Especially if/when more infrastructure gets put into place. Like many things of this nature, only time will tell.