[RTTY] RM-11708, the "other side"

[Peter Laws]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Phil Sussman <psussman at pactor.com> wrote:
> I have some mixed feelings about this whole "emergency" process.

Oh, me too!  There are WAY too many wannabe law
enforcement/firefighter/paramedic/dispatcher wannabes already who
truly believe that when The Big One hits that all the public safety
and commercial communications channels will be dead and they they will
save the day with their HT (or their portable HF station, whichever).
The Big One hit near me last May, 26 (I think) fatalities.  The state
800 system stayed up, the commercial cell providers stayed up.
Problems?  Yep, but all dealt with at the time (though I heard that
there is a new process for battery maintenance at the 800 MHz sites
:-).


> Would operation of P4 in an emergency be legal anyway, by virtue
> of the "anything goes in an emergency" rule?"

Ah, yes.  That old canard. When I help out with licensing classes I
make sure that the candidates understand that there is no such rule.

``§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.''


Proponents of the various "must have" modes cannot, with a straight
face, tell me that if a station operating during an emergency -- and
I'll stipulate that this is an operation by a well-trained and
disciplined ARES- or RACES-type operation, of which there are MANY
examples -- will be unable to perform its duties because it is
restricted by Part 97 to PacTOR 3.  That would be pure BS.



``§97.405   Station in distress.

``(a) No provision of these rules prevents the use by an amateur
station in distress of any means at its disposal to attract attention,
make known its condition and location, and obtain assistance.

``(b) No provision of these rules prevents the use by a station, in
the exceptional circumstances described in paragraph (a) of this
section, of any means of radiocommunications at its disposal to assist
a station in distress.''


There is a little more latitude here BUT note that it applies to an
"amateur station in distress" and a station trying to "assist a
station in distress".  This DOES NOT cover most amateur radio
emergency incidents.


The "we need this for emergencies" is just not credible.  Just as the
recently-dismissed petition to allow encryption was not credible.

Signed,

Dis Gruntled