Communications Capabilities

Started by Jerry, March 06, 2006, 01:46:32 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jerry

I was just wondering how many people have antennas in place for frequency Alpha Bravo. This frequency seems to get little use, but I have heard stations on it recently.


Jerry

Ricochet13

MIWG has been experimenting with AA (AB) as a result of poor reception on primary HF frequency.  There are about 8 HF station communicating (some infrequently) on these frequencies.  All are using antenna tuners, some manual, some automatic.  NEWG has also been experimenting with these frequencies.

Jerry

Thanks for the answer! 8)  I recently put up a Cobra Ultralite antenna that gives me that capability. Just looking for people I might find there.  I may mention this to our Wing DOK as well.  :D


Jerry

groundpounder

Quote from: Jerry on March 30, 2006, 02:02:26 AM
Thanks for the answer! 8)  I recently put up a Cobra Ultralite antenna that gives me that capability. Just looking for people I might find there.  I may mention this to our Wing DOK as well.  :D


Jerry

This brings up an interesting point. We have a few people in our Group interested in setting up HF stations but they have limited antenna space. Is anyone out there using any form of vertical HF antenna?

Thanks

lordmonar

Quote from: groundpounder on March 30, 2006, 02:08:03 PM
Quote from: Jerry on March 30, 2006, 02:02:26 AM
Thanks for the answer! 8)  I recently put up a Cobra Ultralite antenna that gives me that capability. Just looking for people I might find there.  I may mention this to our Wing DOK as well.  :D


Jerry

This brings up an interesting point. We have a few people in our Group interested in setting up HF stations but they have limited antenna space. Is anyone out there using any form of vertical HF antenna?

Thanks

I use a AN/FLR-9 at work but it may be a little bigger than you are looking for.  ;D
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/an-flr-9.htm
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

shorning

Quote from: lordmonar on March 30, 2006, 09:48:56 PM
I use a AN/FLR-9 at work but it may be a little bigger than you are looking for.  ;D
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/an-flr-9.htm

So what's your budget for elephant chow?  :D

Jerry

Quote from: groundpounder on March 30, 2006, 02:08:03 PM
Quote from: Jerry on March 30, 2006, 02:02:26 AM
Thanks for the answer! 8)  I recently put up a Cobra Ultralite antenna that gives me that capability. Just looking for people I might find there.  I may mention this to our Wing DOK as well.  :D


Jerry

This brings up an interesting point. We have a few people in our Group interested in setting up HF stations but they have limited antenna space. Is anyone out there using any form of vertical HF antenna?

Thanks

Verticals can be used to good effect. Also, don't give up on the old wire dipole yet, either.  For example, the Cobra I am using is 140 feet long and covers ALL HF bands I need to operate.  There is another version of the Cobra that is only 73 feet long, and covers 80 thru 10 Meters continuously. If it is set up as an inverted Vee, it takes even less room.  The website is
www.k1jek.com if anyone is interested.  And there are  a lot of antenna options to explore in the ARRL handbook as well.

Vertical or wire dipole, you will prolly have to invest in a good tuner such as the LDG Pro100 autotuner.  The price for the entire system comes in a bit under the price of the B & W folded dipole--actually a lot if you are trying to cover down to 160 meters. But the good part of these things is, they are  a bit more stealthy than the B & W (if that is important) and take up less room. Also makes the spouse less upset about the "ugly" antennas! ;D


Jerry

LTCOL

 When is cap going to relize that  members that use hf radio are also hams radio opertors . and should be  able to use their hf  radios  instead of some hi price one  Af mars does it and everthing works just fine. We are losing members.
LTCOl

shorning

Quote from: LTCOL on April 16, 2006, 04:09:12 PM
When is cap going to relize that  members that use hf radio are also hams radio opertors . and should be  able to use their hf  radios  instead of some hi price one  Af mars does it and everthing works just fine. We are losing members.
LTCOl

Well...CAP has nothing to do with it.  It's mandated to us by the AFFMA.  Gone are the days of "anything goes".  We're not operating under the old rules.  If we want to play the game, we need to play by the new rules.  It's only going to get tighter as more users compete for the limited bandwidth.

drcomm

Quote from: LTCOL on April 16, 2006, 04:09:12 PM
When is cap going to relize that  members that use hf radio are also hams radio opertors . and should be  able to use their hf  radios  instead of some hi price one  Af mars does it and everthing works just fine. We are losing members.
LTCOl

If you check the list of compliant HF equipment, I think you will find quite a few "ham" HF radios available.  Some do require additional options such as a TCXO.  I am a ham (KA5OWI) and my Kenwood TS-450S with the SO-2 TCXO is compliant.  This radio can be found used for well under $1000.00.  Many of the Kenwood, Icom, and Yaesu radios on the list are much less expensive than the commercial grade HF's on the list.
David Romere, Maj, CAP
Starbase Composite Squadron, SWR-OK-151
Oil Well 767
Mitchell Award #2536 (May 1981)
Amateur Radio Call Sign: KA5OWI

Jerry

Quote from: shorning on April 16, 2006, 04:47:46 PM
Quote from: LTCOL on April 16, 2006, 04:09:12 PM
When is cap going to relize that  members that use hf radio are also hams radio opertors . and should be  able to use their hf  radios  instead of some hi price one  Af mars does it and everthing works just fine. We are losing members.
LTCOl

Well...CAP has nothing to do with it.  It's mandated to us by the AFFMA.  Gone are the days of "anything goes".  We're not operating under the old rules.  If we want to play the game, we need to play by the new rules.  It's only going to get tighter as more users compete for the limited bandwidth.

All of which *I*, for one, fully realize.  The one thing that they are failing to take into account is that we ARE volunteers.  When the requirements become TOO stringent, in their efforts to "improve" CAP, they are actually hurting themselves!  As ES requirements increase, equipment costs increase, uniform jackets begin to cost $200, people simply cannot invest the time OR the funds for such and they simply WON'T!  I am seeing bunches of previously-qualified ES people throwing up their hands and simply letting their 101 cards lapse--sometimes 50 at a time appearing on the 45 day notices while ES  supervisors scratch their heads wondering why.  Time required for qual and re-qual has quadrupled (particularly if their specialty has lapsed and they must do it all over),. and I am seeing people simply choosing to allow their cards to lapse simply because they no longer have the time to invest.  One of my own gripes (but I am not lapsed) is that
there is no consideration given for the simply ingredient of "experience". For example, a person was a Mission Communications Officer, has done this job for 40 years, but simply because he doesn't have a piece of paper, he may NOT participate.  So they simply give it up.  Folks simply have more going on in their lives besides CAP, and if the time required for the training is increased, increased, and increased some more, they simply just don't re-up. It's almost as if there are Walter Mitty would-be, desperately-wanna-be
commandos coming up with all these requirements.

Yes, we must comply with these new regulations, and, yes, times they are always a-changin'. But the point is, it CAN reach the point where the line between "volunteer" and "full-time" are crossed to the detriment of the mission both in time and money required.  Somewhere there has to be a happy medium, and when you forget that the people don't really HAVE to do these things, you gots problems.

Communications is the same way. I have fully complied with the NTIA requirements and all my personal equipment is compliant. I will never exactly "like" it, but I am doing what must be done as many of us are. My opinion is, again, that the "volunteer" aspect of CAP has been completely ignored and, furthermore, they have put the monkey on the backs of the custodial units and members as to responsibility for same. (Just read the safety pledge).  That is why I don't HAVE any corporate assets; I don't want to be made criminally liable should a radio, for example, be stolen. The good side is, there ARE radios out there that are reasonable (particularly for HF), easily transmit on CAP frequencies, and can be made NTIA compliant reasonably cheaply according to the NTIA list. So it's not as bad as all that after all.  Two radios have been mentioned here such as the Kenwood TS-450 and the TS-50 both excellent radios for "dual use" Amateur and CAP comms.  My personal favorite is the Icom 706 MKIIG because there are so many additional things one can do (not VHF compliant) with it.  In fact, it was one of the things that ticked me off about the NTIA requirement. With the 706, I could use ONE radio (and did until the requirements came) for both. ONE control head, ONE radio comprising an HF rig, a VHF radio, aircraft receiver, public service receiver and scanner plus Amateur.  Then we had to have those #@&%$ requirements :'( Oh well, there is still fun to be had!


Heck, all i am waiting around for is my 50th CAP anniversary so I get the free Life membership! ;) ;D It's all good!


Jerry O

Lt/Col, CAP


Old buzzard since 1964  :D ;D


shorning

Quote from: Jerry on April 17, 2006, 01:48:11 AM
 The one thing that they are failing to take into account is that we ARE volunteers.  

You volunteered once...when you joined.  After that, you've already commited yourself to follow the rules.  Otherwise that's just a worn out excuse.

Jerry

#12
Quote from: shorning on April 17, 2006, 02:26:23 AM
Quote from: Jerry on April 17, 2006, 01:48:11 AM
 The one thing that they are failing to take into account is that we ARE volunteers.  

You volunteered once...when you joined.  After that, you've already commited yourself to follow the rules.  Otherwise that's just a worn out excuse.

That, sir, does not answer the problem.  I am seeing dozens of quite well-qualified people simply choosing not to continue. That is a FACT!  When we raise the bar beyond that which people are willing or able to do, they will simply drop out and pursue other things. I didn't say anything about BREAKING rules, but I was attempting to show that the requirements, as they have become more demanding, also have a downside. Once you lose qualified people  because they simply do not have the time, OR money, to invest, the mission suffers.  How do you replace these folks when they simply won't "volunteer"? You can scream about rules until you are blue in the face, and if VOLUNTEERS simply choose NOT to volunteer, they can quite literally tell us where to stick it. It is happening in some ES jurisdictions. There should be a BALANCE between the needs of the mission and the needs of those who perform those missions.  Heck, I've had people to tell me--good ES and Comm people--that they dropped out because it wasn't FUN anymore! That may not be a valid "excuse" in the eyes of others who may be more "gung ho", but it is R E A L I T Y, and ,again, WHO is actually qualified to make that determination? Is it evaluation   OR one's own opinion? I've seen plenty of "shooting stars" who plunged headlong into CAP for a year or two, then crashed and burned, falling to earth like a rock never to be heard from again. It just took all the starch of of 'em.

So if we keep on and on, adding more and more requirements, more and more expense, we can scream about "duty", "once you volunteer--blah, blah" until you-know-where freezes shut, it won't change the fact that more and more, Incident Commanders will call out the forces only to find that there are not enough forces to call out! :-\ In order to effective manage
volunteer forces, you must  first recognize that (1) CAP IS first of all V O L U N T E E R. (2) You must not add so much regulation and "training missions" every, or every other weekend. (3) You must recognize that extraordinarily qualified people that would be willing to volunteer--even to the extreme--have lives and families that require their attention, too. (4) You must not replace FUN with drudgery, boring regulations, and repetitive taskings. (5) You must not burn your people out so that their names appear on the 45 day Notices of 101 Card Expiration AND the EXPIRED 101 CARD lists!  Believe it or not there IS a happy medium between the wanna-be Walter Mitty Air Force "officer" and the true volunteer that lives on East Main Street, Anytown, USA  and is also willing to donate *some* of his time  and  $$$ to CAP. He is just not willing to give ALL his time. That is all I am saying. Some CAP folks take themselves WAY too seriously! LOL!

For me, hey, I've got 201 files and Travel Orders, and Mission Participation forms that are 4 inches thick and dating back to the '60s. More missions than you can shake a stick at! :D  So don't lecture *me* on "volunteering", OK? ;D   ;D  I more than paid my dues!!  Remember: this only one man's opinion and it's nothing to get in a wad over!! ;) If we can't discuss issues without making sidelong digs at one another, then these things don't get discussed and you don't find out what people may be thinking.  How many times have you wondered, "Hmmmm, I wonder why James L***** dropped out? I haven't seen him at the meetings in 2 months".  By taking into consideration  such things, you could, perhaps, address an issue with one or more members, keep them digging furiously in the 'ditch" of ES and communications and save their valuable input!  :D


Jerry

BillB

In defense of ________(fill in the blank) many of the training requirements that CAP now has were mandated by the USAF. The same applies to the changeover of comm equipment. My comm equipment consists of one Vertec 150 which shortly can no longer be used for CAP. In that respect I'm lucky since it can still be used on the ham band. But Comm equipment evolves. Can you remember the old VHF AM radios CAP used to have? There is even one listed on eBay, a Gonset Communicator. There are many reasons members are dropping out and granted, the added training time and costs of membership can be included. But have you taken the time to do exit interviews with people that have dropped out and documented the reasons? Just saying the added time and costs are the reason, you need to back that up. I think you'll find there are more reasons and the training and costs are a small percentage.
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104

shorning

Well said, Bill.  That kind of underscores the point I was trying to make.

Jerry

Quote from: BillB on April 17, 2006, 08:52:20 PM
In defense of ________(fill in the blank) many of the training requirements that CAP now has were mandated by the USAF. The same applies to the changeover of comm equipment. My comm equipment consists of one Vertec 150 which shortly can no longer be used for CAP. In that respect I'm lucky since it can still be used on the ham band. But Comm equipment evolves. Can you remember the old VHF AM radios CAP used to have? There is even one listed on eBay, a Gonset Communicator. There are many reasons members are dropping out and granted, the added training time and costs of membership can be included. But have you taken the time to do exit interviews with people that have dropped out and documented the reasons? Just saying the added time and costs are the reason, you need to back that up. I think you'll find there are more reasons and the training and costs are a small percentage.

All points well taken and understood.  And, yes, much or most of the newer mandated regulations ARE from USAF and, that *could* be part of the problem!  Their whole perspective is not from the point of view of "volunteers" and  they *may* not grasp what, exactly, that entails. The difference is USAF can "volunteer" people by fiat and they are used to being able to just grab someone and say, "This is the job, DO it". If Airman so-n-so, or Sergeant Shultz fails to comply, or just bungles the job, they can
severely punish, reduce rank/pay, even court marshal the poor slob! :o  But with CAP, it is different. It is where LEADERSHIP and skill is far important than it is in the military. And its because we cannot "order" someone to do something he doesn't want to do--at least, in the same sense the military can. Whuddya gonna do? Send him home?  2B him?  Right! ;D He might just tell us  what we can do with our "authority" ! ;D ;D

I have seen regular military officers retire from the military, jump over to CAP and fall FLAT on their faces as leaders simply because they cannot grasp the volunteer part of CAP. Again, they were accustomed to "leading" by fiat, demanding that something be done a certain way, as opposed to
using management skills that truly "lead" the forces to a goal--such as causing volunteers to WANT to advance to the objective.  Thus, when USAF comes up with a directive it *may* be without considering the "volunteer" who is supposedly going to carry out the mission. "You must now carry your
3 day pack", or, in order to sign in at a SAR, you must have this signed, that
noted in triplicate, the I's dotted, the "T's" crossed" and a whole passel of other thing that *may* not be truly necessary.  So the volunteer CAP member looks at all this and thinks "(censored), I ain't gonna do all that--think I'll go up to the lake for the weekend".

Where's ---------------? I thought ----------- was coming to the SAR. What happened to so-n-so?  But no one really knows WHY ----------- didn't show, and he may not even TELL you unless coerced: he just doesn't show up!

So that that is what I am saying about all this.  Are we shooting ourselves in the foot with unnecessary regulations and red tape?  Or could *some* of the additional regulations be excess baggage?  Believe me, I am not trying to stir up angst, but I DO hear from many members who simply say, "Hey, I don't CARE what Colonel Who says, I AIN'T gonna do this anymore"  Where does that leave us?  Sure!  Fewer and fewer to do more and more! When will somebody jerk awake and ask, Where'd everybody go?"

shorning

More and more?  Like what?  We don't exactly have the HLS mission that we were trying to sell people...

arajca

Two more problems that affect this issue:
1. Lawyers
2. CAP's instance on doing things 'their' way.

If we actually had a system that integrated with other agencies, we probably would find more missions. CAP's version of ICS doesn't jib with national standards and CAP doesn't want to change anything for fear of alienating volunteers. I believe if we had the real missions, many volunteers would put up with more than they would just to maintain a qual that doesn't get used. In most states, CAP doesn't do GSAR in a meaningful way. We have reputation of not playing well with others. As stated on the KB, CAP discussing with FEMA ways to fit the NIMS program to our system. Well, it ain't happening. NIMS is established, and while not as 'mature' as CAP's version of ICS, NIMS has the force of law, and more importantly, MONEY, to encourage compliance. IIRC, CAP had boost in membership after 9/11, but most of those folks joined to help and CAP didn't have anything they could do and, viewed from the trenches, we weren't getting any, so they left.

The training CAP had for anything above the line level in operations doesn't come close to meeting the requirements for nationally accepted standards, even though they use the same title.

One complaint I read about from CAP forces in Katrina was they were asking for specific personnel (Logistics) but were getting IC's who, while they may have been excellent aircrew or GTL's, didn't know squat about logistics.

lordmonar

Quote from: shorning on March 30, 2006, 11:41:37 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on March 30, 2006, 09:48:56 PM
I use a AN/FLR-9 at work but it may be a little bigger than you are looking for.  ;D
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/an-flr-9.htm

So what's your budget for elephant chow?  :D

Now Steve.....you know that sort of stuff is classified.  >:D
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Nick

#19
Quote from: Jerry on April 17, 2006, 01:48:11 AM
The one thing that they are failing to take into account is that we ARE volunteers.  When the requirements become TOO stringent, in their efforts to "improve" CAP, they are actually hurting themselves!

This is a lot bigger than the Air Force saying "let's reband our frequencies and require CAP to buy new equipment".  NTIA is mandating every Federal agency to transition to narrowband compliance in conjunction with the FCC's narrowband transition.  That impacts the Air Force (which saw it coming and had almost all their stuff converted to P25 well in advance anyway), which in turn has no choice but to impact CAP.  It's very unfortunate that we're the end-users that are being affected by this, but this is a Federal government-wide transition, and if we want to keep our toys, we have to play along.  The problem with the cost comes down to manufacturers finding a cheaper way to build tighter transmitters to work on 12.5kHz spacing.  Once they do that, we'll be back to normal. 

Of course, that being said, since everything is still so expensive... we can't find anyone willing to drop the bills for an adequate amount of compliant radios.  What, about every squadron has one portable and one mobile right now?  [Edit:] Unfortunately, I know of a lot of radios the Air Force disposed of when they transitioned to P25 that were narrowband compliant.  What a crazy thought for them to hand those down to CAP. :|
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy Emeritus

Jerry

 :D   Great Imput from ALL!  I read some truly insightful comments here!  That is what I was trying to achieve!  8)



Jerry