| Author |
Message |
    
Kqt5542
New member
Username: Kqt5542
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Friday, November 28, 2008 - 10:48 am: | 
|
Intro: Feel free to look me up, KJ4AJP on QRZ.
Situation: Our area is near the New Madrid Fault and also prone to tornados. During a meeting of representatives from different churches interested in organizing a network of faith-based relief shelters in case of a disaster, a Tech license class through a local ARRL club was discussed so they would have mutual communications. A member of the club told me later they didn't have any response, so the $50 class/test fee must not have been attractive to members of the congregations, who probably aren't that technically inclined to begin with.
Idea: Since if the feces hits the ventilator I (or another of the hams in IT who have their names in the pot) would most likely be at the University anyway, and because any relief supplies will be coming in by truck, I plan to buy a better CB than the Midland I currently have clipped to the rack (but which will probably remain there if only for its 40 AM channel scan function). It seems to me that for these local churches, CB, and more importantly SSB CB, might be an option for their "when no other means of communication are possible" scenario and then anything that needs to go to EMA or NTS relayed from the University's EOC. From my monitoring, I've heard very little local traffic on 11M AM to begin with, and using SSB might be a "best effort" "clear channel" for them. Any radios used would be unmodified. I assume that the "align and tune" Copper offers is simply getting a box stock radio up to spec.
Research: Mobiles with a small power supply look to be a more attractive option over a base station pricewise, and they would take up less space in a closet where these radios would most likely spend the majority of their time stored unused, although I would like to coordinate a net that would meet at least monthly for the churches to check into. The current choices in stock SSB CBs appear to be the Uniden 148GTL, the Galaxy DX949 and the Galaxy DX959. Most reviews/opinions I've found are a few years old so I'm not sure what's current and if quality has improved/diminished in any of these models, or the comments pertain to modifications which have no bearing on this application.
Questions: #1. Have I missed any models other than the 3 mentioned? #2. Am I off base with the "align and tune" assumption? #3. Comments on the above or any other radios for the application?
As for #3, I take it that the 949 is basically the 959 without the frequency counter. Personally I'm leaning toward the 959 for myself because I like that bell & whistle, but the churches don't really need it. I'm just looking for the best recommendation so all of them have the same radio, which will make training them easier if this idea comes to fruition.
Last but not least, the subject of permanently installed antennas. Area of coverage would most likely be 20mi max, some in the city (10K population when school is in), some rural. Aesthetics would be their main concern here I bet, I can't see an IMAX 2000 atop their steeple. The 3' Balcony Antenna Copper offers? Any comments or additional ideas?
Thanks in advance, hope everyone had a great Turkey Day! |
N8fgb
Member
Username: N8fgb
Post Number: 52
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Friday, November 28, 2008 - 12:09 pm: |
|
MURS is the better choice. CB radio will be useless in a year or two for what u want. Once you find the radios, u can use 2 meter ham antennas tuned to the vhf MURS frequencies.
Rich |
Kqt5542
New member
Username: Kqt5542
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2008 - 5:48 am: |
|
I considered that, but MURS has a 2W limit and doesn't allow repeaters. I figure 20' would be the average antenna height at the churches. My station would probably be limited to 20' or 30' because of the aesthetics issue as well. Do you think MURS could obtain 20mi coverage with these power and antenna limits? KNGP280 is simplex on 151.865 w/5W HTs and we can barely get across campus in the open, albeit rubber duck antennas at 6'. Also, the local WalMart uses 154.570, so that's one MURS frequency in use/unavailable.
I appreciate your (and any other) insight into the limits of SSB CB with 12W power and 20' antennas, that's why I'm in a CB forum. 11M is in so little use around here I haven't been able to get a response to a radio check from the mobile in my pickup. |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 16319
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2008 - 10:02 am: |
|
Kqt5542,
Have tou thought about starting a local REACT Team / Chapter?
RADIO
EMERGENCY
ASSOCIATED
COMMUNICATIONS
TEAMS
Do a GOOGLE search for:
REACT INTERNATIONAL
Hope this help's,
Lon~Tech808
CEF#0808/HAM#001/CVC#0002
Tech808@copperelectronics.com
|
Kqt5542
New member
Username: Kqt5542
Post Number: 4
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2008 - 10:53 am: |
|
I'm currently in the local ARES group (I was offered the county EC position but turned it down, long story unless you want to hear it), and from monitoring I think the local CB population is less than the ham. Not sure if CBers would be easier to motivate <g>. My ideas are probably more aligned with REACT since they honestly seem to live the phrase "any means of communication at your disposal" rather than some Amateurs I've met. I have to admit that Part 97 offers more latitude than Part 95 in frequencies, power and antenna height. The problem being that a lot of people that would want to help during an incident are not interested in radios as the hobby it is enough to get a tech license (like these church people). GMRS is $85 every five years but rather than a church license, it would be individual/family and their responsibility to pay for "what if" insurance. Of course we all know a plastic radio's unlicensed 1/2W isn't going to reach the advertised 26 miles, so the criteria of unlicensed, relatively inexpensive and fairly easy learning curve seemed to point me toward CB.
So, do you all think that Cycle 24 will actually raise the noise floor so much on 11M that ground wave communications will be impossible? |
Tech237
Moderator
Username: Tech237
Post Number: 1095
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2008 - 9:50 am: |
|
I'd recommend against CB (and no insults ment to anyone here) because of the inablitity to listen to CB fopr more than 20 minutes without some loud foulmouth idiot causing trouble. Add this to the conditions and skip starting to rise, it just doesnt make sense.
Shop around and I am sure you can find another group that would teach the class and do the tests for less.
Here in Salem OR our classes are run free, and the test session cost $6..
Simon
Tech237
N7AUS
|
Caledonia
Member
Username: Caledonia
Post Number: 76
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 30, 2008 - 8:23 am: |
|
You might consider GMRS. You need a license, but no exam, just a fee. You can use as much as 50 watts of power, and using good antennas at reasonable heights, you should be able to cover a 20 mile radius.
If that doesn't get you the coverage you need, you have the option of setting up and using a repeater.
You can use real equipment--you are not limited to the cheap, "bubble-pack" radios that you see at Walmart and such. You can use commercial UHF radios by Motorola, ICOM, Vertex, etc.
As others have said, CB will become all but useless for local comms in another year or two. |
Kqt5542
New member
Username: Kqt5542
Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, November 30, 2008 - 6:22 am: |
|
Thanks for the reply Simon. Looking back at the original email, the cost was "around $45" which was the $25 ARRL Tech manual & shipping plus the $14 test. It's nice the VEs in your area are doing it for less. FWIW, when I did ask the local club (which sponsors the exams) about the church response, one of the VEs stated "some people just shouldn't be in ham radio" (an attitude that is part of the reason I declined their ARES EC position).
At the original church meeting, the Red Cross representative advised the folks to not register their faith-based shelters due to loss of control if/when FEMA takes over. The town would have the local government controlling public shelters (school gyms using V/UTAC I assume), the University would have shelters for the students/faculty/staff (we have 6 IG/PS VHF freqs, 2 are simplex and 4 are repeaters), but these private shelters would have nothing. There's barely enough of an amateur contingent to run three 8-hour shifts at the EOC, hospital and University let alone posted to outlying areas of the county that might be affected. That left MURS, FRS and CB as the unlicensed services available, and it looks like they're all a bust. |
Tech237
Moderator
Username: Tech237
Post Number: 1097
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 01, 2008 - 11:20 am: |
|
Wish I was closer so I could offer to run the classes and tests for you.
Can I pass on your contact details to a friend of mine here in Salem who has set up a similar situation for one of our local churches,as Nate may have some ideas for you??
Simon
Tech237
N7AUS
|
Kqt5542
New member
Username: Kqt5542
Post Number: 6
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 01, 2008 - 7:33 pm: |
|
Sure Simon, I'd appreciate it. If you don't have access to the email addy I used for this forum it's on QRZ under KJ4AJP.
I'm curious if ionospheric conditions are such that skip will be so prevalent during Cycle 24 as to render ground wave transmissions intolerable, would NVIS antennas be plausible on 10-11-12M?
No, I'm not trolling, just tenacious. <g>
--
Roger |
|
