Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] APRS Activity in New Orleans

Chris Rose kb8uih at sbcglobal.net
Mon Sep 5 03:14:25 UTC 2005


I will assume that since this is an emergency
situation and since rescues are still being effected
and supplies are being shipped in and refugees are
being shipped out to clean shelters and etc., etc.,
anyway, I would see a prudent effort not to clog the
usable airwaves and packet links with useless "hope
you are alright" messages.  Hence, the request not to
transmit unless you have emergency traffic or a
solution to a problem that is occurring presently. 
Now is still the time to let messages get out of the
effected areas and not send messages in that will only
take resources away from those who are already at
their wits end to do what they have to do.  I would
say its "common sense" and not worth arguing about. 
There are those who may not know what is expected or
demanded at this point in an emergency situation and
the caution not to transmit may educate some that are
inexperienced in how to deal with a disaster
situation.

Respectfully,
Chris 
KB8UIH


--- Ray McKnight <shortsheep at worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> I must respectfully ask by who's authority this "DO
> NOT SEND MESSAGES"
> demand is issued?
> 
> I see no declaration by ARRL, FCC or ARES that
> 144.39 has been
> designated as an emergency frequency.  No matter how
> well intentioned
> this seems, it does ruffle my feathers, as I don't
> need more Big Brothers
> than we already have.
> 
> Being licensed for 30 years, I think I can safely
> use prudent judgement
> and follow accepted operating practice without the
> packet police crawling
> all over my back.
> 
> Hopefully I have used sufficient restraint, my
> initial wording tended to
> be quite a bit more emotional and less diplomatic. 
> If this *is* an official
> request, I apologize, it sure doesn't seem like it
> though.





More information about the aprssig mailing list