G'day to you all

I have been an interested follower of your discussions on survival hardware and skills for sometime now and I am curious that communications hardware never seems to feature on your list of survival tools. I should declare an iterest at this point, I hold the position of "National Voice Communications" with the Department of Conservation (DOC) in New Zealand and I am also a member of the NZ Land Search and Rescue technical subcommitee.

Given that a radio has the ability to mitigate the consequences of ANY accident I am surprised that it is not discussed more. Weight for weight it will probably do more to save a life than a firstaid kit (the life saving features of which can be extemporised from clothing etc...).

By using HF and VHF radio DOC has created a communication system that can raise the alarm withing 15 minutes of an accident, at ANY time and ANY where within North Island and South Island of NZ (I am quite proud of this). DOC personnel also carry PLBs as a "safety net" although I am glad to say no staff member has been in such dire straits as to need to use one. For members of the public there is an organisation called the Mountain Radio Service (MRS) who hire out HF radios and man the base radio at preset "sked" times.

Are such facilities available to the general public (trampers, hunters, etc...) in the USA, Canada, and other parts of the world, and do you have opinions as to which radios and radio types are better than others?

Many thanks
Matthew

For the size and wait of a radio it is not as much of a priority as other things in a survival kit. It would make more sense to place a radio in a larger kit that had items like a gun or large first aid kit, but in something small you just want to have the essentials. But if you want one don't let me stop you. If you did get one you probably should get one that they use in air force survival kits. Those seem to be good, but I really don't know much on the subject. <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Frank

While I can only address the rescues in my area. For the general public, cell phones have been in many cases (locally at least) the primary means of contacting our Emergency Communications Center (911). I would say that close to 80% of the calls we responded to last year in a non-urban setting was initiated by someone in the party or passerby making a 911 call on a cell phone. Pete

Thanks Pete

When I'm teaching staff, I'm at pains to point out that a cellphone is an admin tool not a safety tool. Due to the propagation of UHF it ceases to be reliable after you have crossed the first ridge from civilisation. 80% of the calls received may have come from a cellphone, but what percentage of calls never connected? That said, cellphone is much better than nothing, but people need to recognise how very limited it is.

Matthew

A number of us on the forum are HAM radio operators. I carry a 2m handheld radio everyday in my Urban kit and generally take it along on backcountry trips. This is a good radio for my needs. I have phone patch capabilities and fairly wide range broadcast if I can hit a repeater system.

I am unaware of any organization that rents out radios and monitors to see if people get into trouble.

The major problem we have here in the US is that there is no one standard radio or frequency set that is available for emergency use. We, of course, as individuals have or can obtain the necessary radios, licenses and skills, but the most generally useful frequencies require Federal licenses. This certainly limits the appeal. HF, VHF and UHF bands are split into business, amateur, and military uses. It is generally not easy to cross the lines since available radios cannot transmit to outside their range without modification. While it is legal to transmit into another band in an emergency it is not easy to purchase a handheld radio with this capability, and the complexity of new radios prevents many from even attempting these modifications. It is also not legal to test your modifications should you do them so......

Probably the best system we have in the US is marine radio. One channel (16) is required to be monitored by all boats if they have a radio. The Coast Guard also constantly monitors this channel. These VHF radios also have decent range on the water, and larger boats will assist.

The other good system is the emergency beacons. But again these are beacons not two-way radios.

In the US I would say cell phones are generally taking the place of handheld radios. Coverage is very good in most places even from the backcountry around major urban areas. Their limitations are mostly overshadowed by their apparent and mostly demonstrated usefulness.

Sadly, the interest in HAM radio has been severely negatively impacted by the ease of cell phones.

There are several threads on this forum that discuss radio use in emergency kits, but loads of the threads are concerned with small personal kits which are by definition too small for such items.

I guess the major issue is whether the radio carried will have the ability to contact someone. I know my 2m radio can contact Seattle repeaters from the areas I frequent both in the city and local backcountry. Therefore it works for me. However, I used to live in Montana, and it was highly unlikely that I would be able to contact anyone via my HAM radio or cell phone (if I owned one <img src="images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) from my normal backcountry haunts. So like all things it depends.

It sounds like New Zealand has set up a workable and comprehensive system that would make inclusion of a radio an excellent idea for all larger kits.

The major problem is that we allow anyone to buy a cellphone, but require radio operators to actually understand radio wave propagation, antennas, responsible use, legal transmission frequencies, interference issues, and for some levels of license, Morse Code........

Why then do we not have more licensed HAM's?

Lloyd,

Not sure if you saw this thread last year but it has a fairly long discussion on the use of radios for an emergency situation in a national park. This sort of outlines the difficulties faced by uncoordinated frequencies and divergent opinions on the practical use of radios here.

Commuter Prepardness that slowly migrat...resting topics

I think that even if you get a cell phone and don't get service you can still make a 911 call. So if you don't want to buy a phone for a kit you might be able to get one from someone you know who as extras that are old and have no service plan. I know I have about four cell phones laying around from when I switched from cingular to verizon. <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Frank

Schwert
Thanks, that was an interesting read. Our field staff use a small HF radio (about 750g, 2-6 MHz) for those areas that are too remote or too wrinkly for VHF repeaters to give adequate coverage in the valley bottoms. The good thing about HF is that it goes EVERYWHERE, however it is not HiFi. If I were to attempt to use this radio in the USA what regulations would need to be satisfied?
Matthew

Schwert:

This could be a whole other topic <img src="images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" />. As you said, the short answer is that cell phones (and the internet) have taken a lot away from radio. The fact that manufacturers of amateur radio equipment are trying put more cell phone like goodies into their products while at the same time they make them less user serviceable.

Additionally, repeater owners and radio clubs are turning into warring factions (at least here in the northeast). More steps are being taken daily to limit access to machines by "outsiders" and less concern is being given to public service.

Chris

Matthew:

A radio that covers 2 - 6 MHz in the US would be operatiing on Amateur, marine, and possibly military allocations. To use it on the amateur bands would require you to pass two written tests and a morse code exam. To use it on the marine band would require the purchase of a license but you could only use it while on the water. Luckily though, if it is an emergency our laws allow you to use any frequency "from DC to Daylight" to call for assistance.

Chris
N1NIQ

Interesting post Matthew. Nice to know that the old country is 'up there' when it comes to backcountry comms.! I have long had an interest in survival comms. and have yet to hear of any integrated, official, public national parks net outside of NZs. [ As a Kiwi, I have tramped many of our national parks, but long before the HF net was available!]
Here in Australia, VHF marine radio is probably the 'last vestige' of an officially backed public accessible emergency radio network, and that is what I use for seakayaking. But this has definite shortcomings of terrain, and outright transmission range, as you know.
The trend in my sport is towards satellite phones, rentable, or bought for around $2000, and big calls costs, both for the transmitting and receiving parties. But people are paying that, rather than turn to radio, which is a pity. That sort of money should be able to buy you a nice portable HF.
And of course, emergency technology is encouraging the use of EPIRBs, with 406s becoming cheaper and smaller.
Schwert, I think the world of ham radio is wonderful, but I am put off by the 'technical' side of the pastime. And I think many younger folk are the same [ judging by the letters in the Ham radio mags ]. Why bother when you have email forums and cellphones/ sat phones?
I have always believed there are many 'fringe' radio folk out there,like myself, who don't go to the trouble of a ham licence because they are not really interested in all the techo talk of hams, but still have a legitimate use for MF/HF.
But the trouble is, short of going to ham gear, and using ham frequencies, there is nothing much PORTABLE on the market for other civilian MF/HF users. I have the relevant marine licence to operate a HF transmitter on marine frequencies, but that doesn't help when you're in a sea kayak!
If anyone knows of a handheld MF/HF marine transceiver for sale, please let me know!
Something like the Tokyo HyPower ham portable would be nice.

My 0.02c worth,
Regards,
Peter Rattenbury, Wollongong, NSW

This was just forwarded to me via email from a friend, don't have access to the original article.

Consumers Reports, Jan 2003 edition.

What's more, consumers who purchase cell phones for security in an emergency
often are shortchanged, he said. In a separate survey of its Web site
subscribers, Consumer Reports found that 15 percent of nearly 1,900 people
who tried to call 911 from a cell phone in the previous year said they had
trouble connecting. Four percent reported never getting through at all.
Nine of 21 test calls failed to connect with emergency dispatchers even
though a strong signal was available from a competitor, Consumers Union
Senior Vice-President for Technical Policy R. David Pittle said.
Those who buy phones with the ability to switch between analog and digital
often find more reliable 911 service, he said. "Phones that work in both of
these modes offer you more chances to get through in an emergency."

Lloyd,

cthompson is absolutely correct. There is a fair amount of the 2-6 MHz range available to amateur operators but the higher class licenses are required. I have very limited operating privileges in these HF bands as I have a Technician class license. At the time I got my license a written radio theory and operation exam and 5 WPM Morse Code exam were required. To get more privileges in these HF bands I would need to go to the next step General Class license at the least.

New operators can receive the same Technician class privileges now with only the written exam, no Morse Code. This is excellent for VHF but limited for HF. For me, VHF has worked well, but like you say once you are really "out there"; it is pretty quiet on VHF.

These rules were designed to make amateur operators responsible etc, but make it a pain to get your ticket so fewer and fewer people are doing so. With the proliferation of alternate easy-to-get communication tools I see a near death of the amateur service. Recent FCC changes to allow operators without code were designed to get more people involved who would then be so excited they would advance into the higher operating classes. I have not seen this happening. Our local VHF repeaters which were very busy 10 years ago are getting very quiet. It is not uncommon to find no one else on a system with very wide range coverage. This is making my original use for VHF less and less useful. Repeater operators are getting fewer contributions and are forced to reduce their services like phone patch and and remote transmitters.

I am a member of our local Auxiliary Communication Service which is an amateur service connected to the city of Seattle Emergency Response Center. Most of my colleagues are pushing 50+ years old, (Hey, so am I), and we are having trouble getting new younger members.

PeterR,

I also was never interested in some of the traditional HAM stuff. Long distance contacts for points, exchanging contact cards, etc. I was primarily interested in emergency backcountry communications. My climbing friend and I were involved in an accident that sparked my interest. A radio would have saved many hours in contacting SAR and let our friends and family know our fate.

The HAM bands are just about the only compreshensive radio frequencies available....the burden of licensing is the major issue with their use.

We have not yet experienced the issues between radio clubs and repeater owners that cthompson notes for the East Coast, but we are seeing fewer and fewer active repeater members.

I think it would be good to have a National HF band(s) for general population emergency use. I could only see these frequencies being allocated from amateur bands, which would probably cause all sorts of complaints from a dying breed. I think involving people would be better.

The FRS radios are used by tons of people from shopping malls to ski hills. The range allows all kinds of operators but is too limited to be of much service in the backcountry. Interference and poor operation of these radios is common, but at least people are interested.

New Zealand's example may be the future for the US....but I doubt it.

Schwert:

It sounds like things are similar on both coasts.

I was recalling this morning that I once saw a reference to a statewide emergency frequency for Alaska. I think it was in the middle of the 10 meter band and was indicated on an ARRL frequency chart as an anomaly. I think it was open to everyone, licensed or not. I'll have to look some more.


Chris

Is there scope for creating a commercial service to own the licences for the frequencies and hire out the radios to trampers and hunters on an "as required" basis? i.e. reproduce the NZ Mountain Radio Service in the US. This is an idea I've had for a while and would like to discuss further if any business/radio minded person out there is interested (it may not be a suitable topic for this list).

You're thinking of 5167.5 KHz USB, the Alaska Emergency Frequency. I'm not sure who is monitoring it, per se, but it's definitely not in the standard amateur bands. Most newer ham HF rigs have this frequency because of the whole "rendering assistance in an emergency" aspect.
73 -Matt KG4MYD

Thanks Matt. I knew I had seen it on a ARRL allocation chart once but couldn't find it. I wonder what amount of use it gets.

Chris
N1NIQ

Do I understand it that the impetus for change will have to come from WITHIN the HAM fraternity? I understand the necessity for allocation of HF emergency frequencies from within HAM bands, as Schwert and others point out, but won't that take a lot of goodwill, and good old political lobbying on the part of the HAM community, while they still have the numbers?
At the same time I applaud the valuable service 'amateurs' have provided in emergencies - earthquakes, floods etc, in many countries over the years, but to a certain extent even this capability has been short-circuited by the use of satellite telephony.
So the world is a-changing...
BTW, we do have a privately owned VHF/MF/HF outfit, licensed to the Federal Government, operating on the east coast of Australia. For a reasonable members fee, cruising yachtsmen, and folk driving in the Outback, have access to long distance HF comms.
And just repeating my earlier request: has anyone come across a MF/HF marine band portable on the market, anywhere... Alaska, NZ perhaps?

PeterR
Wollongong, Australia

I just heard on the news this morning, that an experienced climbing party of 5 were successfully rescued from Mt Hood. They had planned to make the climb in 1 day, but the weather turned nasty and they decided to hunker down. As a few of the members started to experience early hypothermia, they decided that rescue was the way to proceed. They used their cell phone to contact SAR. Pete

Dear PeterR

I'm aware of the commercial HF service in Australia which is why I see the commercial route as being the way of creating a nationally coherent "Wilderness Personal Radio Service" where people can hire the service and/or hardware as required at a fraction of the price of satellite comms.

Something that NZ has realised is that HF radio does not need power it needs brains. You do not need a 100W radio and a vehicle to charge the battery, you can use a 4W radio and carry it in your pack (750g about 1.6Lb).

I can steer you towards several portable HF radios but not combined with MF below 2MHz.

Yrs aye
Matthew

I agree with Schwert on the Ham radio's reliability. They give me the "biggest bang for my buck". I am also a Seattle area Ham user and find that the 2 meter band has been quite a bit more reliable than the cell phones (3) that I've used in the past. I have been using a 45 watt output mobile radio in my truck. I have as yet had no experience with a handheld, but several Hams in the area I know have found them to be excellent.

The Test wasn't too bad. I studied for just a couple of weeks-- probably 8 solid hours of studying. It does eliminate a lot of the kids chattering that are all too common on the FRS and CB radios.

I got the Ham rig because I needed a reliable form of emergency communication when I was working at my mother in law's property-- which is in a nearby rural area.

The Ham folks I've talked on the radio have been more helpful than I thought possible. They are a professional, pleasant group that have been more than willing to help in local minor and major problems, or just pass the time with each other in a "ragchew" (conversation). I have got as much out of talking to them as I have with the forums. And there is a secure feeling that someone is (often) out there listening for a potential problem.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Tim H., (KD7IZT)