Brass Pounders' quarterly An Electronic NEwsletter of the ARRL National Traffic System Richard WEbb, nf5b, editor PUBLISHED BY TRAFFIC HANDLERS FOR TRAFIC HANDLERS NTS resources: http://www.arrl.org/nts Volume IV Issue 3 COpyright 2010 by THe ARRL National Traffic SYstem Contents Editor's corner NTS news briefs From the editor's email inbox NTS Training: International third party traffic: DO you know the rules? BPQ features: modernization: What and how HOw to submit an article Where to get BPQ THIs electronic newsletter is free to all who may wish to receive it. YOu may upload it to bulletin board systems; ftp sites etc. so long as no fees are charged for access to it. INdividual articles retain the copyright of the author. EDITOR'S CORNER Challenges and opportunities I'm feeling more optimistic about the future of NTS than I have for a long time. We're starting to see some forward movement in some important areas, and we're seeing newcomers step up and take responsibility for some key positions, both in field organization leadership and in day to day operations. Newer technologies allow us to offer expanded services to the public after a disaster. SUch techniques as are employed using wl2k really enhance our capabilities, but they point out some challenges as well. AS I see it they present us challenges on two distinct fronts. THe first challenge is the maintenance of traditional phone and cw circuits, which are necessary for provision of basic radiogram services when all other modes are unavailable as well as operator training. Operators need to learn how to conduct themselves on organized networks using phone. Along with this, the techniques used to conduct a disciplined cw net operation should not be lost to us. I've already beat on this drum quite extensively in the editorial section of this publication however, and would be "preaching to the choir" anyway, so we'll move on to the second challenge. THis second challenge is one that we in the amateur community must work to solve by communicating with the regulatory agencies. I'm referring of course to current regulations concerning international third party traffic. I strongly believe that the regulations in this area are obsolete. AFter all, I can pick up my satellite phone, should i have one, anywhere that the footprint of the bird covers and make a call, depriving the local telecom folks of their bit of revenue. So, even though I can't legally ask a station stateside to run that phone patch for me if I'm anchored in the BAhamas you can bet that I can dial out on my satellite phone, and deprive the local telecom entity in the BAhamas their bit of money. YEs I'm paying for that sat phone use, but that isn't going to put money in the coffers of the local telecom providers. Also, if I'm offering radio by email services how can I be sure that I'm not violating international third party agreements? How do I know that the recipient with his gmail address isn't accessing his email from a political entity with which we don't have third party agreements. IF the gmail user recipient is in such a country I've violated FCC rules. It might surprise you to go down a list of political entities with which the United STates has third party agreements to not see some names on it. It might further surprise you to note that others which you'd think restrict third party traffic internationally do not. YOu can bet that folks in these countries use yahoo, hotmail, gmail and other web based email services however. Even using traditional radio communications techniques it's easy to run afoul of the rule book before you know it. A few months ago while sitting at my operating position listening to 14300 khz I heard one of our regular vessels check in and ask for a phone patch. HE did not sign anything after his call sign but "maritime mobile region two" which gave me the impression he was still underway, and in international waters. so, I conducted the phone patch for him. Near the end of his conversation, he mentioned to his sister that he was in port, and where he was anchored. I immediately advised him and the other party that because of his location we were going to need to terminate their communication. I then advised him that when he was again underway, and in international waters I'd be glad to conduct further phone patches or handle traffic for him. But, as long as he was anchored where he was I could not assist him with third party traffic of any kind. THis fellow was a fairly new ham, and didn't really have a good understanding of the relevant sections of the rules. THey're barely touched on in question pools I note, and many U.S. hams have no understanding of them. Along with modern communications tools and techniques this can lead the unwary into trouble, as it potentially did for me. I *am* aware of the international third party traffic rules. Operating in the way that I do I must be. If an operator asks for third party traffic services while within the jurisdiction of another political entity I always consult the third party countries list before proceeding. But, because this new ham didn't have a grasp of such rules, and did not identify his station properly I walked into a potential trap myself. I'm just glad no regulatory folks were listening on twenty meters at that time . Along with our continued efforts to maintain our readiness with disciplined operators to man phone and cw circuits we need to work with our regulators to promulgate rules and regulations which actually consider modern communications tools and techniques without compromising the basis and purpose of the amateur radio service. YEs, we want intelligent rules and regulations that protect amateur radio from being usurped by commercial interests. ON the other hand, we need intelligently formulated rules and regulations that enable us to provide our services without constantly worrying about rules violations. WIthout them, we cannot safely assume that we are in compliance whenever we interface with the normal telecommunications infrastructure, whether that be conducting a phone patch, or sending that email via radio links. ******** SYSTEM NEWS! Region and area net managers, other Nts leaders, send the editor short items for publication in this space. WElcome those newcomers; especially new net controls and liaisons! send in plain text to nf5b@arrl.net or bpq.editor@116-901.ftn.wpusa.dynip.com for inclusion. Be sure to make it clear in the subject line you wish this included in this space in case I'm too brain dead to figure it out . ON June 7 the area chairs met with Steve Ewald and MIke Corey, the new Emergency PReparedness and response manager. All are probably aware by now that he replaces Dennis Dura in that capacity at hq. At this meeting we discussed the NTSD initiatives and work with the NTS Winlink committee and other NTS capabilities. Also on June 24 Central Area staff used ARRL teleconference bridge facilities to conduct a one hour meeting. We've moved forward on strengthening nts activities in Central area, and the hour spent was felt to be productive by those who attended. One point that was raised at the Central ARea teleconference was the usual discussion regarding bulk book traffic. MOre than one conferee suggested that bulk traffic originators endeavor to change their canned texts frequently, and utilize them so as to provide good training as our tools and techniques evolve. See the feature article later in this issue for an example of techniques that should be emphasized. ### PEte, k5gm our central area tcc director for cycles 3 and 4 is seeking volunteers to fill tcc schedules. This position requires a proficient cw traffic handler. IF the above describes you, please contact him, k5gm@amsat.org and find out what's still available. YOu can also, of course, utilize a radiogram to make contact with him if you don't have email capability. Also, keep an eye on the arrl net directory via the web at arrl hq. Expect to see some changed entries for daytime 5th region net's cycle 2 session, and possibly other updates. NEt managers have been unable to modify their nets' entries recently with the implementation of the new web site at hq, but that issue should be resolved soon. IF you're just becoming active again after an absence of the last few months be sure to check the net directory for nets of interest to you. ### Also, although he's yet to be confirmed by a vote of NTS central area staff, Carl THomas, wb9ybi is acting as central area tcc director for cycles 1 and 2. Carl is seeking volunteers with good phone stations who can handle daytime tcc schedule responsibilities. Contact him via email at renee.thomas@mchsi.com or, of course, send him a radiogram if you don't have internet capability. ******** From the editor's email inbox WE welcome your comments suggestions and items for publication. THe editor reserves the right to edit letters to fit available space. Even though we're an electronic newsletter, we're not trying to write a book. Honest folks . send your comments to elspider@bellsouth.net and please indicate in the subject line that this is a letter to the editor. NOw, on with the mail. STeve, k6jt writes: Thanks for the interesting article on EMP. I am quite familiar with it and the effects, having worked on military communication equipment for most of my engineering career. We are required to use transorbs on all lines in and out of the comm equipment for EMP protection. Something to note is that the former Soviet Union continued to use tube-based communication equipment in their fighter planes and military assets just because of the relative immunity to EMP and, more importantly, nuclear radiation protection. Semiconductor based equipment quickly gets destroyed by a mechanism causing runaway current flow as a result of nuclear radiation. Conducted EMP pulses also cause a similar effect. For those reasons, I still maintain a tube-based receiver and transmitter should the worst occur, as mentioned in your article. The modern transceivers are primarily computer-based and will be quickly put out of service due to EMP (or even a large solar flare as you also mentioned). My old equipment will support only CW operation, which is pretty much all I do anyway. The main problem is how to obtain power to run them. I do have an inverter that can use car batteries, but I fear the inverter, which uses switching transistors, will be destroyed. For that reason, a gasoline powered generator should also be maintained, although it may also be damaged by EMP, the likelihood is much less. Lets just hope the use of all these fallback options will never come to pass in our lifetimes. Thanks for the note Steve. As you noted, and others have as well, server farms and other such equipment can be hardened against these issues, but most folks don't go to the trouble and expense, including many who should. As I noted, I've acquired an old Hamarlund hq-129, and plan to find a transmitter to go along with it. Generators, also are a problem, as many are microprocessor controlled. Glad to know somebody out there is reading and paying attention ******** International third party traffic: Do you know the rules? YEs they apply to you. IF you let your nonham buddy speak with a foreign amateur via echolink or irlp they apply to you. Sending that radio email? They apply to you as well. Conducting that phone patch, ditto! Whenever a party without an amateur radio license is involved it is third party traffic. Consider the basics, you and the amateur station with which you communicate are the first and second party. The nonamateur is the "third" party. THat means that if you've sent your grandson an email by radio that he'll access from an internet cafe while backpacking through europe you're conducting third party communications. HEre in the United States, and most other places on this third stone from the sun there are specific rules governing the handling of any third party traffic which is international. Most hams probably have never really looked at them, so let's have a look inside that section of the rule book. First, you may only conduct third party communications when the two countries involved have an agreement permitting such communications. YOu can, for example, conduct third party traffic operations with stations in MExico, or HOnduras. YOu can conduct communications involving third parties with England, but not with many British possessions in the Caribbean or north Atlantic, such as the Bahamas, the Turks and Caicos ISlands, etc. AFter a hurricane or other such disaster often there will be a temporary agreement in place. OFten this is handled informally by U.s. and British diplomats, allowing U.S. amateurs to conduct communications for relief of the folks in the stricken locale. Just in case you're wondering, we have third party agreements in place with Haiti and the DOminican republic. Had we not had such agreements already in place, I'm sure our regulators would have been quickly working to get temporary agreements in place. So, before you proceed, consult a recent listing of countries with which the U.S. has third party agreements. YOu can find such a list on the arrl web, or at 14300.net which you can print out and have handy to your operating position. The second thing to consider when conducting international third party communications is the station identification requirements. THey are a bit more stringent than normal, in in the rule book, but, you must give the call sign of the station with which you are communicating. OF course, if sending that radiogram destined outside the U.S. to another U.s. amateur you do not need to adhere to the third party rules for station identification, but the station transmitting your message for that international hop must do so. There is of course that overarching requirement that the messages transmitted be of a personal nature, and be such that resorting to regular communications infrastructure is not warranted. so, to sum up, be sure that third party communications are permitted with the destination country, or the location of that other amateur before you put your nonham buddy on the mike. THen, while you are engaged in communication on behalf of that third party, identify with your call sign as well as the call sign of the station with which you are commmunicating. ******** modernization: What and how When I listen to people discuss traffic handling in general I hear talk of "modernization" often involving the basic format of a radiogram message. Hmmm, I'm often struck with the thought that it doesn't appear to need it. the radiogram message contains necessary elements to assure delivery and provide instructions for the treatment and handling of that message, including defining its importance, i.e. the hx handling instructions and the precedence. The header also contains the requisite information for such an audit trail, what station originated it, how many groups can be found in the text, the time and date filed, and the place of origin. FOr handling the radiogram using voice or MOrse code its format allows for convenience and error correction. Even in these days of computer networks and wide availability of connections one must assume that a message is going to begin its journey from origination to destination on voice or cw circuits. We all know that some modifications in procedure have been made to permit the easy interface with digital networks. There the message must be sorted and handled automatically according to its destination. We also know that many are advocating the use of formats which don't lend themselves well to providing the necessary information or audit trail for messages that must be relayed. IT's often suggested that we adopt formats designed originally for interoffice memos, etc. THis is not modernization, this is shooting ourselves in the foot. Ics 213 anyone? ON the face of it then you might think I'm advocating that no modernization is necessary. DOn't make that assumption so quickly however. We know what works, the radiogram has been proven to be reliable. IT provides the means by which to maintain adequate records and provide quality control if used correctly. But, there are some glaring deficiencies.Proposals have been made to overcome some of these, but have either not reached widespread acceptance, or have not been utilized enough within nTS to help educate regular traffic handlers in their use. What needs to be modernized is the way we transfer some pieces of information which might be contained in the parts of the radiogram message. Those component blocks are just fine where they are when it comes to utilizing voice or MOrse to send messages. For digital relaying and handling the systems we have are proven effective as well. WHat we have however is a limitation in the character set, to borrow some terminology from the world of the computer. As we all know, some of these limitations have been imposed upon us by the fact that the radiogram must be able to move between transfer formats easily. That message might travel by voice or digital modes for the majority of its journey from source to destination, but might by necessity need to make a hop in the chain via cw. Because of this necessity some characters cannot be sent reliably, such as the _ underscore character. Until the middle of this last decade the @ (at) symbol fit into this category as well. the morse character has been adopted to indicate the at sign. But, there comes an even bigger limitation when sending such common items as internet addresses using MOrse. Take the simplest of the ways to reach me via email, nf5b@arrl.net and send it on cw. THe sending op would usually send "nf5b at arrl dot net." IN fact, in tutorials on sending such information as part of a radiogram you'll see the @ symbol spelled out as at, as the sign for this character had not yet been developed when they were written. Now consider an address which will cause an email to come to me indicating that it's referencing this publication, i.e. bpq.editor@116-901.ftn.wpusa.dynip.com and try sending that using MOrse. "bpq dot editor 116 dash 901 dot ftn dot wpusa dot dynip dot com." Lots of characters there. THere is no dash character in international Morse. As we all know, punctuation is not used in radiogram messages as well. This makes addresses for email and urls cumbersome to send if that radiogram must be moved using the code. NOte in this example I utilized the character for the @ symbol. What needs modernization is our ability to move characters literally between modes. An operator who might be using a qwerty keyboard to send Morse would need to be assured that as he strikes the @ that the appropriate sign would be sent when converted to MOrse. Devising these additions to the possible International MOrse character set and other possible modernizations of procedure is a necessary part of remaining viable as an actual service. This is only a part of what needs to be done however. Once these conventions are agreed upon those who generrate messages which are of primary value as training tools need to cause these additional characters and procedures to be used when handling them. Let me cite a couple of examples. A few years ago the handling instruction HXI was devised by some operators to indicate that the message should make the transition from radiogram to an email message at the first opportunity. As conceived, hxi would be followed by the internet address of the intended recipient or his/her agent. A kludge in my opinion. THe hxi, like other handling instructions should be able to stand alone, with appropriate provision in the addressee block for the internet address. But, in either case, the hxi handling instruction was never formally recognized. Contrast this with the arrl numbered radiogram 47 which indicates that the referenced message was successfully delivered. soon after its development arl 47 came into widespread use. We can promulgate new signs and procedures until the cows come home, but unless we promote their use in day to day training they won't be widely known or accepted. I'd venture a guess that many occasional cw operators don't know about the sign for sending the @ character. IN our discussions of procedures and buzz words such as "modernization" we must not forget that the radiogram by its nature is designed to: Provide that reliable audit trail from source to destination, and at all relay points in between; be portable between modes; and be easy to learn and use. Anybody can learn to compose a properly formatted radiogram message. It's not difficult. IF the basic format is kept, it's the same format essentially which has served us since the earliest days of radio and needs few if any changes. That means to me that we should be looking at providing a character set for the most basic mode which doesn't force operators to resort to kludges and cumbersome workarounds. ******** How to submit an article Send a file attach of a straight ascii file to the editor at elspider@bellsouth.net for inclusion. Brief items for our news section should be sent as a regular plain text email. Again, attachments of plain ascii files preferred. If using MS Word choose the save-as option to save as plain text, possibly called dos text. CHeck your favorite word processor's doccumentation on creating ascii files. NO graphics files, pdf etcetera please! THis electronic newsletter is intended to be machine readable. This newsletter may be distributed on packet and other radio systems where system operators and relay stations wish to closely monitor content of transmissions. IT is intended to be platform independent which is not possible with graphical file formats. Even the operator with the old commodore or Apple II should be able to read this newsletter, or the fellow using the old dumb terminal. Text to speech systems etcetera should have no problems reading this newsletter. IF possible use a file extension of .art for your article. IF it fits one of these categories use the category name as the file name. Regular categories for which we seek articles are as follows: general : articles of general interest to traffic handlers. USE a file name of general.art training : Articles regarding training hints and tips. AS above, use training.art if possible. Outreach : articles on ways to reach out to the public and promote NTS and amateur radio message handling capabilities. AS with the above examples, outreach.art. Using these naming conventions allows your editor to auto- matically process your article. TYpe the title twice, the first time at left margin preceded by a * character. THe second time centered as you'd like it to appear. THe line with the * will be used to automatically build a table of contents and the asterisk removed. YOur article will then appear with title centered. Immediately below the centered title please place your name and call sign so that folks will know who authored the article. If you have an email address please provide it as well. THough often these can be looked up the information provided in call sign databases is often incorrect. IF you are a net manager or hold an aRRL field organization position please provide this information as well. IF possible keep line lengths to 70 characters or fewer. Again remember that we are attempting to be platform independent. Many of our readers will wish to view this on their screens instead of printing it out. IF you cannot save your article as plain text paste the text into an email and send it. Your editor will do his best to format it properly for display on most computer systems. IF you do this state in the subject line that text enclosed in email is an article for BPQ. Although you retain the copyright on your work, submission of any articles implies permission to publish them in BPQ and distribute said work electronically without remuneration to you or BPQ. NO fee may be charged to receive BPQ. WHere to get BPQ http://home.earthlink.net/~bscottmd/ http://home.comcast.net/~wx4j/ Many fine internet connected bulletin boards also carry bPQ in the hamnews file area as a zip file using the same naming conventions as the text files within them. THese files are distributed by the ham-fdn and the International FIlegate Project. Visit www.filegate.net/ Fidonet: Many fine bulletin board systems available via telnet www and dial-up can link to the ham-fdn described above. IF you don't see it on your favorite fido board ask the sysop to link to the hamnews area through his/her regular files link. THe headquarters of the ham-fdn can be accessed as follows: Waldo's place USA. modem (919) 774-5930 telnet://bbs.wpusa.dynip.com http://www.wpusa.dynip.com/ ftp://ftp.wpusa.dynip.com IF you are the system operator of a BBS (either landline or radio) and cannot get BPQ through your regular links it can be sent you via email as either regular email or a file attach. SEnd an email to bpq.distro@116-901.ftn.wpusa.dynip.com Provide your email address in the text and tell us how you'd like to receive BPQ. Also tell us what kind of bbs system you operate, its frequencies of operation if a packet board or its dial-up/telnet info etc. Also, please give us your callsign. we wish to keep the email distribution list fairly small, so look to your favorite internet dial-up or packet connections first if at all possible. Thanks for reading and 73 Richard Webb, nf5b send correspondence to the editor via email using the following email address: elspider@bellsouth.net OR using plaintext only to: bpq.editor@116-901.ftn.wpusa.dynip.com All file attached article submissions should be sent to the bellsouth address . See the earlier section on how to submit an article. Place bpq feedback or similar text in the subject line so that it receives proper attention from the editor. reproduction of articles in club newsletters is permitted so long as BPQ and the original author are credited. FOr more information contact the editor. BRASS POUNDERS' QUARTERLY Published by traffic handlers for traffic handlers COpyright ARRL National Traffic SYstem, electronic distribution encouraged. *** end of file*** Richard Webb, send plain text only to this account, no pdf or jpg files please. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2996 - Release Date: 07/11/10 02:36:00