[arrl-odv:30105] Fwd: ARES Related NTS Test Message
All, This is from W4CMH - South Florida SEC. The section has 2700 members (more than several divisions), includes the Florida Keys to Melbourne, including Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and Fort Myers - population of about 10 million, one of the most vulnerable sections to natural disaster in the US. John is the lead SEC for Florida and is our appointed liaison to the Florida Government. Retired career law enforcement. This is a report where he originated messages and found that NTS is only delivering 50% of originated messages? His conclusion based on his trial messages is that we cannot count on NTS for health and welfare messages in emergencies. What are your thoughts? What QA are we running on this asset to ensure its fitness for function? Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL *“Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” *Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Subject: Fwd: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: Barry Porter <barryp13@mac.com> Cc: Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net> Barry and Mickey, I wanted you to have a copy of my email related to an NTS evaluation that I took upon myself, in case you are asked about it. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:30 PM Subject: Re: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: <wb3kas@aol.com>, <kb9wwm@arrl.net>, <nd0cw@srt.com>, < shane.m.lee@hotmail.com>, <wb8rcr@arrl.net>, Joe C <k2ol@yahoo.com>, < k0rpt@arrl.net>, <n5wvr@arrl.net>, <wa7rf@arrl.net>, <kd7nhc@arrl.net>, < n4tab-public@earthlink.net>, <w5whn@arrl.net>, David Gillespie < dgillespie13@gmail.com>, <ke7ejf@arrl.net>, <ke5fga@arrl.net>, < kd0s@arrl.net> Cc: Dave Sheppard <csxtbonevalley@comcast.net>, Karl Martin < kg4hbn@gmail.com>, Bennie Henley <ben@bhenley.com> Dear Fellow SEC's, I wanted to advise you that I have completed my NTS evaluation that I discussed in my initial email to you. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get messages through to its destination. As I stated before, I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I am also an Official Relay Station for the Southern Florida Section. I have observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages (Handling Instructions HXC on Radiograms) that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I was not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it or if we refer others to utilize it for welfare traffic. My analysis of the evaluation follows as I had promised that I would do in my initial email and I offer it as food for thought on the topic as a way to guide your decisions in future incidents. Between the dates of March 23 and March 26, 2020 I sent each of you a Radiogram via the NTS using the same initial traffic net and operator to move it. In total I sent 16 Radiograms, because I accidentally sent one to a SM in addition to an SEC randomly selected from each Division. I discovered that 50% of the messages ultimately were delivered to the recipients and that means that 50% were never delivered to their destination. The messages were delivered between the day that they were sent on to 12 days later. The average days needed for delivery was 4 days. I received 8 service messages indicating that they had delivered messages, but 2 of those were sent by the recipient via email and not by the delivering station. My opinion of the results follows. I was disappointed with the results based on the fact that I had spread the messages over several days to not overwhelm any one handler and the fact that many people are home due to the COVID-19 stay at home orders. Based on my analysis, there are better options for moving our mission essential messages and even welfare traffic, but welfare traffic is not our primary mission in most incidents until we are no longer needed to move tactical and priority traffic. If the recipient never receives the message that is an obvious problem or if it is delivered well after the incident that is not effective either. I believe that I would consider finding an efficient traffic handler who has access to HF and VHF/UHF Winklink (RMS Express) modes who may not be an ARES member who could help move welfare messages. I also believe that the Red Cross Safe and Well system if active in the area where the incident occurs would be my first choice since it would keep pressure off of our Amateur Radio operations. There are other methods to consider as well. I appreciate your cooperation and I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Fellow SEC's,
I wanted to advise you that I have randomly selected an SEC from each of the 15 Divisions to conduct an evaluation of utilizing the NTS to move messages. If you are receiving this email, then you have been selected. I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I have also observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I am not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get the message through to its destination. This is the process that I have selected to evaluate that function. We utilize many other methods as well and here in Florida we test them regularly, but to my knowledge we have not done an evaluation like this in recent times.
Within the next week, I will be sending a Radiogram to you via the NTS. You could receive it on the air, via email or via phone. I have a simple request from you and that is if you could email me advising that you received the Radiogram, how it was delivered and whom you received it from with their call-sign. Later next week or shortly there after, I will provide all of you with the results of the activity.
I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. I appreciate your assistance with this project and hope that the results will help guide our decisions in future incidents. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section
Mickey — The problem with using this exercise as an evaluation of ARRL’s National Traffic System is that only six of the 15 ARRL Divisions participate (wholly or partially) in the long-haul — or inter-Section — levels of the System (i.e., basically, those Divisions or portions of Divisions whose Section nets operate in sync with Eastern Time). In other words, NTS is not responsible for the end-to-end out-of-Section long-haul paths between Florida and the ten or eleven Divisions that have one or more Sections operating in sync with Central, Mountain, Pacific, or farther west time zones. In those time zones (corresponding to the now-dormant Central and Pacific Areas of NTS), NTS's Region and Area Nets and Transcontinental Corps functions have been replaced by Radio Relay International (RRI) liaison nets, a change that occurred beginning in the 2nd half of 2016. RRI leaders themselves freely admit they have been having staffing problems, so I’m not surprised that there might be some failures in the test W4CMH ran. However, that’s not to say the NTS portions of these relay paths are without blame, as well. Some years back, members of the Eastern Area Staff of NTS (Region and Area Net Managers, TCC-Eastern Directors, and Members-At-Large) discussed reliability and accuracy issues within the System, specifically in response to multiple reports of Sections where Section Managers had not appointed STMs, or had STMs with no experience or interest in NTS routing methodology, or were providing participants in Section and Local NTS nets with no training or incorrect training. I certainly would be interested in the geographical distribution of the entire set of target Sections and especially the locations of the Sections that never received their assigned messages. Many times over the years I and other NTS Staff members argued for strong, level-specific certification requirements for NTS participants — especially those in the upper level nets of the System. We were unsuccessful. So I am not totally surprised by W4CMH’s report. Can the problems be fixed? Yes. Without pain? No. 73 — Bud, W2RU past-Chair, NTS Eastern Area Staff On Apr 9, 2020, at 4:58 PM, Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net<mailto:n4mb@arrl.net>> wrote: All, This is from W4CMH - South Florida SEC. The section has 2700 members (more than several divisions), includes the Florida Keys to Melbourne, including Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and Fort Myers - population of about 10 million, one of the most vulnerable sections to natural disaster in the US. John is the lead SEC for Florida and is our appointed liaison to the Florida Government. Retired career law enforcement. This is a report where he originated messages and found that NTS is only delivering 50% of originated messages? His conclusion based on his trial messages is that we cannot count on NTS for health and welfare messages in emergencies. What are your thoughts? What QA are we running on this asset to ensure its fitness for function? Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL “Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com<mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com>> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Subject: Fwd: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: Barry Porter <barryp13@mac.com<mailto:barryp13@mac.com>> Cc: Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net<mailto:n4mb@arrl.net>> Barry and Mickey, I wanted you to have a copy of my email related to an NTS evaluation that I took upon myself, in case you are asked about it. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com<mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com>> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:30 PM Subject: Re: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: <wb3kas@aol.com<mailto:wb3kas@aol.com>>, <kb9wwm@arrl.net<mailto:kb9wwm@arrl.net>>, <nd0cw@srt.com<mailto:nd0cw@srt.com>>, <shane.m.lee@hotmail.com<mailto:shane.m.lee@hotmail.com>>, <wb8rcr@arrl.net<mailto:wb8rcr@arrl.net>>, Joe C <k2ol@yahoo.com<mailto:k2ol@yahoo.com>>, <k0rpt@arrl.net<mailto:k0rpt@arrl.net>>, <n5wvr@arrl.net<mailto:n5wvr@arrl.net>>, <wa7rf@arrl.net<mailto:wa7rf@arrl.net>>, <kd7nhc@arrl.net<mailto:kd7nhc@arrl.net>>, <n4tab-public@earthlink.net<mailto:n4tab-public@earthlink.net>>, <w5whn@arrl.net<mailto:w5whn@arrl.net>>, David Gillespie <dgillespie13@gmail.com<mailto:dgillespie13@gmail.com>>, <ke7ejf@arrl.net<mailto:ke7ejf@arrl.net>>, <ke5fga@arrl.net<mailto:ke5fga@arrl.net>>, <kd0s@arrl.net<mailto:kd0s@arrl.net>> Cc: Dave Sheppard <csxtbonevalley@comcast.net<mailto:csxtbonevalley@comcast.net>>, Karl Martin <kg4hbn@gmail.com<mailto:kg4hbn@gmail.com>>, Bennie Henley <ben@bhenley.com<mailto:ben@bhenley.com>> Dear Fellow SEC's, I wanted to advise you that I have completed my NTS evaluation that I discussed in my initial email to you. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get messages through to its destination. As I stated before, I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I am also an Official Relay Station for the Southern Florida Section. I have observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages (Handling Instructions HXC on Radiograms) that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I was not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it or if we refer others to utilize it for welfare traffic. My analysis of the evaluation follows as I had promised that I would do in my initial email and I offer it as food for thought on the topic as a way to guide your decisions in future incidents. Between the dates of March 23 and March 26, 2020 I sent each of you a Radiogram via the NTS using the same initial traffic net and operator to move it. In total I sent 16 Radiograms, because I accidentally sent one to a SM in addition to an SEC randomly selected from each Division. I discovered that 50% of the messages ultimately were delivered to the recipients and that means that 50% were never delivered to their destination. The messages were delivered between the day that they were sent on to 12 days later. The average days needed for delivery was 4 days. I received 8 service messages indicating that they had delivered messages, but 2 of those were sent by the recipient via email and not by the delivering station. My opinion of the results follows. I was disappointed with the results based on the fact that I had spread the messages over several days to not overwhelm any one handler and the fact that many people are home due to the COVID-19 stay at home orders. Based on my analysis, there are better options for moving our mission essential messages and even welfare traffic, but welfare traffic is not our primary mission in most incidents until we are no longer needed to move tactical and priority traffic. If the recipient never receives the message that is an obvious problem or if it is delivered well after the incident that is not effective either. I believe that I would consider finding an efficient traffic handler who has access to HF and VHF/UHF Winklink (RMS Express) modes who may not be an ARES member who could help move welfare messages. I also believe that the Red Cross Safe and Well system if active in the area where the incident occurs would be my first choice since it would keep pressure off of our Amateur Radio operations. There are other methods to consider as well. I appreciate your cooperation and I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com<mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Fellow SEC's, I wanted to advise you that I have randomly selected an SEC from each of the 15 Divisions to conduct an evaluation of utilizing the NTS to move messages. If you are receiving this email, then you have been selected. I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I have also observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I am not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get the message through to its destination. This is the process that I have selected to evaluate that function. We utilize many other methods as well and here in Florida we test them regularly, but to my knowledge we have not done an evaluation like this in recent times. Within the next week, I will be sending a Radiogram to you via the NTS. You could receive it on the air, via email or via phone. I have a simple request from you and that is if you could email me advising that you received the Radiogram, how it was delivered and whom you received it from with their call-sign. Later next week or shortly there after, I will provide all of you with the results of the activity. I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. I appreciate your assistance with this project and hope that the results will help guide our decisions in future incidents. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org<mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
I'm thinking that John did a good job of diversifying the traffic. As you can see, he did use different modes, thus different nets. I wrote him and asked him to report origination paths and try to identify what was dropped where. NTS has depended on the integrity of the operator to get messages relayed. Unfortunately, I don't think that all the participants in NTS take the mission seriously enough to use reliably - they've become lackadaisical in their forwarding. I was once a serious NTS guy (cw, check out my traffic totals in 1971 or so QST. I challenge anyone reading this to originate traffic to any other of us (or all of us) via NTS or the other guys to get some idea as to the reliability. (Bud will now originate a book of 30...) In modern times, we can use packet or Winlink that will deliver messages in a few minutes pretty reliably, so I believe we need to start training around more modern tech with tracing and receipt verification. DoD went to an email encapsulated message system for most everything before 9/11. Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL *“Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” *Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying. On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:53 PM Hippisley, George (Bud), W2RU, (Dir, RK) < w2ru@arrl.org> wrote:
Mickey —
The problem with using this exercise as an evaluation of ARRL’s National Traffic System is that only *six* of the 15 ARRL Divisions participate (wholly or partially) in the long-haul — or inter-Section — levels of the System (i.e., basically, those Divisions or portions of Divisions whose Section nets operate in sync with Eastern Time).
In other words, NTS is not responsible for the end-to-end out-of-Section long-haul paths between Florida and the ten or eleven Divisions that have one or more Sections operating in sync with Central, Mountain, Pacific, or farther west time zones. In those time zones (corresponding to the now-dormant Central and Pacific Areas of NTS), NTS's Region and Area Nets and Transcontinental Corps functions have been replaced by Radio Relay International (RRI) liaison nets, a change that occurred beginning in the 2nd half of 2016. RRI leaders themselves freely admit they have been having staffing problems, so I’m not surprised that there might be some failures in the test W4CMH ran.
However, that’s not to say the NTS portions of these relay paths are without blame, as well. Some years back, members of the Eastern Area Staff of NTS (Region and Area Net Managers, TCC-Eastern Directors, and Members-At-Large) discussed reliability and accuracy issues within the System, specifically in response to multiple reports of Sections where Section Managers had not appointed STMs, or had STMs with no experience or interest in NTS routing methodology, or were providing participants in Section and Local NTS nets with no training or incorrect training.
I certainly would be interested in the geographical distribution of the entire set of target Sections and *especially* the locations of the Sections that never received their assigned messages.
Many times over the years I and other NTS Staff members argued for strong, level-specific certification requirements for NTS participants — especially those in the upper level nets of the System. We were unsuccessful. So I am not totally surprised by W4CMH’s report. Can the problems be fixed? Yes. Without pain? No.
73 — Bud, W2RU past-Chair, NTS Eastern Area Staff
On Apr 9, 2020, at 4:58 PM, Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net> wrote:
All,
This is from W4CMH - South Florida SEC. The section has 2700 members (more than several divisions), includes the Florida Keys to Melbourne, including Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and Fort Myers - population of about 10 million, one of the most vulnerable sections to natural disaster in the US.
John is the lead SEC for Florida and is our appointed liaison to the Florida Government. Retired career law enforcement.
This is a report where he originated messages and found that NTS is only delivering 50% of originated messages?
His conclusion based on his trial messages is that we cannot count on NTS for health and welfare messages in emergencies.
What are your thoughts?
What QA are we running on this asset to ensure its fitness for function?
Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL *“Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” *Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying.
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Subject: Fwd: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: Barry Porter <barryp13@mac.com> Cc: Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net>
Barry and Mickey,
I wanted you to have a copy of my email related to an NTS evaluation that I took upon myself, in case you are asked about it. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:30 PM Subject: Re: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: <wb3kas@aol.com>, <kb9wwm@arrl.net>, <nd0cw@srt.com>, < shane.m.lee@hotmail.com>, <wb8rcr@arrl.net>, Joe C <k2ol@yahoo.com>, < k0rpt@arrl.net>, <n5wvr@arrl.net>, <wa7rf@arrl.net>, <kd7nhc@arrl.net>, < n4tab-public@earthlink.net>, <w5whn@arrl.net>, David Gillespie < dgillespie13@gmail.com>, <ke7ejf@arrl.net>, <ke5fga@arrl.net>, < kd0s@arrl.net> Cc: Dave Sheppard <csxtbonevalley@comcast.net>, Karl Martin < kg4hbn@gmail.com>, Bennie Henley <ben@bhenley.com>
Dear Fellow SEC's,
I wanted to advise you that I have completed my NTS evaluation that I discussed in my initial email to you. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get messages through to its destination. As I stated before, I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I am also an Official Relay Station for the Southern Florida Section. I have observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages (Handling Instructions HXC on Radiograms) that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I was not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it or if we refer others to utilize it for welfare traffic. My analysis of the evaluation follows as I had promised that I would do in my initial email and I offer it as food for thought on the topic as a way to guide your decisions in future incidents.
Between the dates of March 23 and March 26, 2020 I sent each of you a Radiogram via the NTS using the same initial traffic net and operator to move it. In total I sent 16 Radiograms, because I accidentally sent one to a SM in addition to an SEC randomly selected from each Division. I discovered that 50% of the messages ultimately were delivered to the recipients and that means that 50% were never delivered to their destination. The messages were delivered between the day that they were sent on to 12 days later. The average days needed for delivery was 4 days. I received 8 service messages indicating that they had delivered messages, but 2 of those were sent by the recipient via email and not by the delivering station.
My opinion of the results follows. I was disappointed with the results based on the fact that I had spread the messages over several days to not overwhelm any one handler and the fact that many people are home due to the COVID-19 stay at home orders. Based on my analysis, there are better options for moving our mission essential messages and even welfare traffic, but welfare traffic is not our primary mission in most incidents until we are no longer needed to move tactical and priority traffic. If the recipient never receives the message that is an obvious problem or if it is delivered well after the incident that is not effective either. I believe that I would consider finding an efficient traffic handler who has access to HF and VHF/UHF Winklink (RMS Express) modes who may not be an ARES member who could help move welfare messages. I also believe that the Red Cross Safe and Well system if active in the area where the incident occurs would be my first choice since it would keep pressure off of our Amateur Radio operations. There are other methods to consider as well.
I appreciate your cooperation and I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section
On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Fellow SEC's,
I wanted to advise you that I have randomly selected an SEC from each of the 15 Divisions to conduct an evaluation of utilizing the NTS to move messages. If you are receiving this email, then you have been selected. I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I have also observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I am not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get the message through to its destination. This is the process that I have selected to evaluate that function. We utilize many other methods as well and here in Florida we test them regularly, but to my knowledge we have not done an evaluation like this in recent times.
Within the next week, I will be sending a Radiogram to you via the NTS. You could receive it on the air, via email or via phone. I have a simple request from you and that is if you could email me advising that you received the Radiogram, how it was delivered and whom you received it from with their call-sign. Later next week or shortly there after, I will provide all of you with the results of the activity.
I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. I appreciate your assistance with this project and hope that the results will help guide our decisions in future incidents. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
In thinking about this present apparent failure, I wonder how many on the board know the stellar performance of NTS and the rave review given by FEMA some 4 years ago? I attach a relevant document from the exercise in stark contrast to what seems to have happened here. If anyone is interested, call me but you will need some time. Some know or think they know what happened, but I suspect many board members never saw any of this at the time, I am assuming. I monitored this whole exercise real time and have never seen a more effective NTS. Compare that to where we are 5 years later. The traffic and emcomm professionals creating this exercise and report now work for RRI, which is our doing. That is most unfortunate. Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Mickey Baker Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2020 7:21 PM To: Hippisley, George (Bud), W2RU, (Dir, RK) <w2ru@arrl.org> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30110] Re: ARES Related NTS Test Message I'm thinking that John did a good job of diversifying the traffic. As you can see, he did use different modes, thus different nets. I wrote him and asked him to report origination paths and try to identify what was dropped where. NTS has depended on the integrity of the operator to get messages relayed. Unfortunately, I don't think that all the participants in NTS take the mission seriously enough to use reliably - they've become lackadaisical in their forwarding. I was once a serious NTS guy (cw, check out my traffic totals in 1971 or so QST. I challenge anyone reading this to originate traffic to any other of us (or all of us) via NTS or the other guys to get some idea as to the reliability. (Bud will now originate a book of 30...) In modern times, we can use packet or Winlink that will deliver messages in a few minutes pretty reliably, so I believe we need to start training around more modern tech with tracing and receipt verification. DoD went to an email encapsulated message system for most everything before 9/11. Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL “Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying. On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:53 PM Hippisley, George (Bud), W2RU, (Dir, RK) <w2ru@arrl.org <mailto:w2ru@arrl.org> > wrote: Mickey — The problem with using this exercise as an evaluation of ARRL’s National Traffic System is that only six of the 15 ARRL Divisions participate (wholly or partially) in the long-haul — or inter-Section — levels of the System (i.e., basically, those Divisions or portions of Divisions whose Section nets operate in sync with Eastern Time). In other words, NTS is not responsible for the end-to-end out-of-Section long-haul paths between Florida and the ten or eleven Divisions that have one or more Sections operating in sync with Central, Mountain, Pacific, or farther west time zones. In those time zones (corresponding to the now-dormant Central and Pacific Areas of NTS), NTS's Region and Area Nets and Transcontinental Corps functions have been replaced by Radio Relay International (RRI) liaison nets, a change that occurred beginning in the 2nd half of 2016. RRI leaders themselves freely admit they have been having staffing problems, so I’m not surprised that there might be some failures in the test W4CMH ran. However, that’s not to say the NTS portions of these relay paths are without blame, as well. Some years back, members of the Eastern Area Staff of NTS (Region and Area Net Managers, TCC-Eastern Directors, and Members-At-Large) discussed reliability and accuracy issues within the System, specifically in response to multiple reports of Sections where Section Managers had not appointed STMs, or had STMs with no experience or interest in NTS routing methodology, or were providing participants in Section and Local NTS nets with no training or incorrect training. I certainly would be interested in the geographical distribution of the entire set of target Sections and especially the locations of the Sections that never received their assigned messages. Many times over the years I and other NTS Staff members argued for strong, level-specific certification requirements for NTS participants — especially those in the upper level nets of the System. We were unsuccessful. So I am not totally surprised by W4CMH’s report. Can the problems be fixed? Yes. Without pain? No. 73 — Bud, W2RU past-Chair, NTS Eastern Area Staff On Apr 9, 2020, at 4:58 PM, Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net <mailto:n4mb@arrl.net> > wrote: All, This is from W4CMH - South Florida SEC. The section has 2700 members (more than several divisions), includes the Florida Keys to Melbourne, including Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and Fort Myers - population of about 10 million, one of the most vulnerable sections to natural disaster in the US. John is the lead SEC for Florida and is our appointed liaison to the Florida Government. Retired career law enforcement. This is a report where he originated messages and found that NTS is only delivering 50% of originated messages? His conclusion based on his trial messages is that we cannot count on NTS for health and welfare messages in emergencies. What are your thoughts? What QA are we running on this asset to ensure its fitness for function? Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL “Tell me, and I will listen. Show me, and I will understand. Involve me, and I will learn.” Teton Lakota, American Indian Saying. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com <mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Subject: Fwd: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: Barry Porter <barryp13@mac.com <mailto:barryp13@mac.com> > Cc: Mickey Baker <n4mb@arrl.net <mailto:n4mb@arrl.net> > Barry and Mickey, I wanted you to have a copy of my email related to an NTS evaluation that I took upon myself, in case you are asked about it. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com <mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:30 PM Subject: Re: ARES Related NTS Test Message To: <wb3kas@aol.com <mailto:wb3kas@aol.com> >, <kb9wwm@arrl.net <mailto:kb9wwm@arrl.net> >, <nd0cw@srt.com <mailto:nd0cw@srt.com> >, <shane.m.lee@hotmail.com <mailto:shane.m.lee@hotmail.com> >, <wb8rcr@arrl.net <mailto:wb8rcr@arrl.net> >, Joe C <k2ol@yahoo.com <mailto:k2ol@yahoo.com> >, <k0rpt@arrl.net <mailto:k0rpt@arrl.net> >, <n5wvr@arrl.net <mailto:n5wvr@arrl.net> >, <wa7rf@arrl.net <mailto:wa7rf@arrl.net> >, <kd7nhc@arrl.net <mailto:kd7nhc@arrl.net> >, <n4tab-public@earthlink.net <mailto:n4tab-public@earthlink.net> >, <w5whn@arrl.net <mailto:w5whn@arrl.net> >, David Gillespie <dgillespie13@gmail.com <mailto:dgillespie13@gmail.com> >, <ke7ejf@arrl.net <mailto:ke7ejf@arrl.net> >, <ke5fga@arrl.net <mailto:ke5fga@arrl.net> >, <kd0s@arrl.net <mailto:kd0s@arrl.net> > Cc: Dave Sheppard <csxtbonevalley@comcast.net <mailto:csxtbonevalley@comcast.net> >, Karl Martin <kg4hbn@gmail.com <mailto:kg4hbn@gmail.com> >, Bennie Henley <ben@bhenley.com <mailto:ben@bhenley.com> > Dear Fellow SEC's, I wanted to advise you that I have completed my NTS evaluation that I discussed in my initial email to you. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get messages through to its destination As I stated before, I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I am also an Official Relay Station for the Southern Florida Section. I have observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages (Handling Instructions HXC on Radiograms) that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I was not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it or if we refer others to utilize it for welfare traffic. My analysis of the evaluation follows as I had promised that I would do in my initial email and I offer it as food for thought on the topic as a way to guide your decisions in future incidents. Between the dates of March 23 and March 26, 2020 I sent each of you a Radiogram via the NTS using the same initial traffic net and operator to move it. In total I sent 16 Radiograms, because I accidentally sent one to a SM in addition to an SEC randomly selected from each Division. I discovered that 50% of the messages ultimately were delivered to the recipients and that means that 50% were never delivered to their destination. The messages were delivered between the day that they were sent on to 12 days later. The average days needed for delivery was 4 days. I received 8 service messages indicating that they had delivered messages, but 2 of those were sent by the recipient via email and not by the delivering station. My opinion of the results follows. I was disappointed with the results based on the fact that I had spread the messages over several days to not overwhelm any one handler and the fact that many people are home due to the COVID-19 stay at home orders. Based on my analysis, there are better options for moving our mission essential messages and even welfare traffic, but welfare traffic is not our primary mission in most incidents until we are no longer needed to move tactical and priority traffic. If the recipient never receives the message that is an obvious problem or if it is delivered well after the incident that is not effective either. I believe that I would consider finding an efficient traffic handler who has access to HF and VHF/UHF Winklink (RMS Express) modes who may not be an ARES member who could help move welfare messages. I also believe that the Red Cross Safe and Well system if active in the area where the incident occurs would be my first choice since it would keep pressure off of our Amateur Radio operations. There are other methods to consider as well. I appreciate your cooperation and I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM J Wells <w4cmhae@gmail.com <mailto:w4cmhae@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Fellow SEC's, I wanted to advise you that I have randomly selected an SEC from each of the 15 Divisions to conduct an evaluation of utilizing the NTS to move messages. If you are receiving this email, then you have been selected. I am an NTS traffic handler as well as SEC and I have seen differing opinions on the viability of the NTS during incidents. I have also observed that many times I have not received delivery receipts for messages that I have sent, which is crucial to knowing that the message did or did not make it to its destination. I am not bashing the system, just evaluating its effectiveness for EMCOMM if we would need to utilize it. As you know, we have served agencies that count on us and our members to get the message through to its destination. This is the process that I have selected to evaluate that function. We utilize many other methods as well and here in Florida we test them regularly, but to my knowledge we have not done an evaluation like this in recent times. Within the next week, I will be sending a Radiogram to you via the NTS You could receive it on the air, via email or via phone. I have a simple request from you and that is if you could email me advising that you received the Radiogram, how it was delivered and whom you received it from with their call-sign. Later next week or shortly there after, I will provide all of you with the results of the activity. I hope that all of you, your families and your ARES members are doing well and not infected with the virus that is impacting us all. I appreciate your assistance with this project and hope that the results will help guide our decisions in future incidents. -- John Wells W4CMH Section Emergency Coordinator ARRL Southern Florida Section _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org <mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org <mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
participants (3)
-
Bob Famiglio, K3RF -
Hippisley, George (Bud), W2RU, (Dir, RK) -
Mickey Baker