Missouri has nothing on Southeastern Ohio and West Virginia as far
as hills and holes. Even in those areas, properly located VHF/UHF
nodes are more than sufficient to link an emergency area to the
nearest backbone terminal. In addition, VHF/UHF is far more stable,
less prone to interference and less prone to unstable propagation
modes or atmospherics that cause wide bandwidth modes to slow down
or fail at HF.
Again, there is no justification for Winlink 2000 at HF - or
demonstrated use/value in the last 25 years - as an emergency
communications system in any wide scale emergency. As a one-off
"safety of life" system with short messages, it's a different story
but those messages are handled adequately (and more reliably) with
the narrow band protocols PACTOR and PACTOR II which have better
SNR/power profiles.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 12/11/2013 4:16 PM, John Becker wrote:
On 12/11/2013 3:07 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
No, that's a *fact*. Show me *one* emergency in the US where
long haul communications was disrupted to the point that more
than one VHF/UHF link was required to reach the nearest working
long haul terminal.
Right here in Missouri with all the hills and holes.
VHF will not cut in to the next town just 11 miles away.
Think very rural areas.
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|