[arrl-odv:30776] Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections
Fellow ODV - Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done. MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission. It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening. 73 Ria, N2RJ ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org> Hi Ria, As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation: “Improves We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)” A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable. The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division. Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance. Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community! 73, ---Ken Brown - W2KB W2KB@ARRL.net
Ria — Thanks for sharing that letter from W2KB.. Clearly, we are on the cusp of a completely different approach to collaborating with and supporting other organizations and agencies, and my hope is that we can “step up our game” quickly enough that emcomm decision makers in MARS and other groups will not feel the need in the future to write letters such as Ken’s, below. I believe a response to Ken — and to others throughout the MARS structure — is appropriate — perhaps over the joint signatures of Rick Roderick and Paul Gilbert. Best of all, I believe the ARES and NTS activities described by Ken in his paragraph that begins “A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late … “ are a wonderful near-term opportunity to motivate our field organization leadership and other volunteers. Bud, W2RU
On Aug 24, 2020, at 5:07 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically. In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting. *A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communicationssystems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information. * This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises. 1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not. 2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols. But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program. So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested. Lee Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910 *"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.* On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910 *"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.* On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
With due respect I think that is more local.
MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts.
There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all
organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with
MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status
information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications
systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its
Sections
To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
We have/had an MOU with CAP (of which I remain a pilot member) and used to have one with MARS? Time to update them and reassess? Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Lee Cooper Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 7:49 PM To: rjairam@gmail.com Cc: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30785] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org <mailto:w5lhc@arrl.org> (512) 658-3910 "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PM rjairam@gmail.com <mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> <rjairam@gmail.com <mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> > wrote: With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com <mailto:w5lhc01@gmail.com> > wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org <mailto:w5lhc@arrl.org> (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> <rjairam@gmail.com <mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> > wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net <mailto:W2KB@arrl.net> > Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rjcom <mailto:ria@n2rj.com> >, <n2rj@arrl.org <mailto:n2rj@arrl.org> >
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net <mailto:W2KB@ARRL.net> _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org <mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Hello Bob, I believe there was at one time an MOU, and I don't think thereis now. We should have an MOU, several local Squadron leadersare hams and I am sure that a good relationship would benefitboth groups. Twenty years ago I was a mission pilot and check airman/instructor adult member (Cpt) with the IL Wing, but stopped actively participating in 2000. I remain the POC for the CAP repeater/digipeaterlocated at the 'Lab. 73, Kermit W9XA On Monday, August 24, 2020, 8:49:46 PM CDT, Bob Famiglio, K3RF via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote: We have/had an MOU with CAP (of which I remain a pilot member) and used to have one with MARS? Time to update them and reassess? Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Lee Cooper Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 7:49 PM To: rjairam@gmail.com Cc: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30785] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910 "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rjcom>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ 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
Kermit: I reviewed the list of existing MOUs on our web site and MARS is not included on that list. --Barry, N1VXY From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> On Behalf Of Kermit Carlson via arrl-odv Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 8:51 AM To: Cooper, Lee, W5LHC (VD, GW) <w5lhc01@gmail.com>; Jairam, Ria, N2RJ, (Dir, HD) <rjairam@gmail.com>; Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (VD, AD) <RBFamiglio@verizon.net> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30796] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Hello Bob, I believe there was at one time an MOU, and I don't think there is now. We should have an MOU, several local Squadron leaders are hams and I am sure that a good relationship would benefit both groups. Twenty years ago I was a mission pilot and check airman/instructor adult member (Cpt) with the IL Wing, but stopped actively participating in 2000. I remain the POC for the CAP repeater/digipeater located at the 'Lab. 73, Kermit W9XA On Monday, August 24, 2020, 8:49:46 PM CDT, Bob Famiglio, K3RF via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org<mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org>> wrote: We have/had an MOU with CAP (of which I remain a pilot member) and used to have one with MARS? Time to update them and reassess? Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 [cid:image001.png@01D67ABD.75300FE0] www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF<http://www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF> From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Lee Cooper Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 7:49 PM To: rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> Cc: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org<mailto:arrl-odv@arrl.org>> Subject: [arrl-odv:30785] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org<mailto:w5lhc@arrl.org> (512) 658-3910 "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PM rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> <rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com>> wrote: With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com<mailto:w5lhc01@gmail.com>> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org<mailto:w5lhc@arrl.org> (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com> <rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com>> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net<mailto:W2KB@arrl.net>> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rjcom<mailto:ria@n2rj.com>>, <n2rj@arrl.org<mailto:n2rj@arrl.org>>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net<mailto:W2KB@ARRL.net> _______________________________________________ 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
Has anyone checked with Steve Ewald? I would bet that there are some section level MOU's with MARS. Mike K1TWF -----Original Message----- From: Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org> To: Carlson, Kermit, W9XA (Dir, CD) <W9XA@yahoo.com>; Cooper, Lee, W5LHC (VD, GW) <w5lhc01@gmail.com>; Jairam, Ria, N2RJ, (Dir, HD) <rjairam@gmail.com>; Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (VD, AD) <RBFamiglio@verizon.net> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2020 8:55 am Subject: [arrl-odv:30798] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections #yiv2264684453 #yiv2264684453 -- _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv2264684453 #yiv2264684453 p.yiv2264684453MsoNormal, #yiv2264684453 li.yiv2264684453MsoNormal, #yiv2264684453 div.yiv2264684453MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv2264684453 a:link, #yiv2264684453 span.yiv2264684453MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2264684453 p.yiv2264684453ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal, #yiv2264684453 li.yiv2264684453ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal, #yiv2264684453 div.yiv2264684453ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv2264684453 span.yiv2264684453EmailStyle22 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;}#yiv2264684453 .yiv2264684453MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered {}#yiv2264684453 div.yiv2264684453WordSection1 {}#yiv2264684453 Kermit: I reviewed the list of existing MOUs on our web site and MARS is not included on that list. --Barry, N1VXY From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> On Behalf Of Kermit Carlson via arrl-odv Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 8:51 AM To: Cooper, Lee, W5LHC (VD, GW) <w5lhc01@gmail.com>; Jairam, Ria, N2RJ, (Dir, HD) <rjairam@gmail.com>; Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (VD, AD) <RBFamiglio@verizon.net> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30796] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Hello Bob, I believe there was at one time an MOU, and I don't think there is now. We should have an MOU, several local Squadron leaders are hams and I am sure that a good relationship would benefit both groups. Twenty years ago I was a mission pilot and check airman/instructor adult member (Cpt) with the IL Wing, but stopped actively participating in 2000. I remain the POC for the CAP repeater/digipeater located at the 'Lab. 73, Kermit W9XA On Monday, August 24, 2020, 8:49:46 PM CDT, Bob Famiglio, K3RF via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote: We have/had an MOU with CAP (of which I remain a pilot member) and used to have one with MARS? Time to update them and reassess? Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odvOn Behalf Of Lee Cooper Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 7:49 PM To: rjairam@gmail.com Cc: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30785] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910 "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PMrjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rjcom>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Hello Barry Thank you ! I am not sure what the history of MARS and CAP. MOU’s has been so thanks for checking. These should all be punch-list items for the Board to consider going forward. 73, Kermit 73, Kermit Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Tuesday, August 25, 2020, 07:56, Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org> wrote: #yiv3907832125 #yiv3907832125 -- _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv3907832125 #yiv3907832125 p.yiv3907832125MsoNormal, #yiv3907832125 li.yiv3907832125MsoNormal, #yiv3907832125 div.yiv3907832125MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv3907832125 a:link, #yiv3907832125 span.yiv3907832125MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3907832125 p.yiv3907832125ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal, #yiv3907832125 li.yiv3907832125ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal, #yiv3907832125 div.yiv3907832125ydp86c800c8yiv4612692796msonormal {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv3907832125 span.yiv3907832125EmailStyle22 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;}#yiv3907832125 .yiv3907832125MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered {}#yiv3907832125 div.yiv3907832125WordSection1 {}#yiv3907832125 Kermit: I reviewed the list of existing MOUs on our web site and MARS is not included on that list. --Barry, N1VXY From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> On Behalf Of Kermit Carlson via arrl-odv Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 8:51 AM To: Cooper, Lee, W5LHC (VD, GW) <w5lhc01@gmail.com>; Jairam, Ria, N2RJ, (Dir, HD) <rjairam@gmail.com>; Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (VD, AD) <RBFamiglio@verizon.net> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30796] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Hello Bob, I believe there was at one time an MOU, and I don't think there is now. We should have an MOU, several local Squadron leaders are hams and I am sure that a good relationship would benefit both groups. Twenty years ago I was a mission pilot and check airman/instructor adult member (Cpt) with the IL Wing, but stopped actively participating in 2000. I remain the POC for the CAP repeater/digipeater located at the 'Lab. 73, Kermit W9XA On Monday, August 24, 2020, 8:49:46 PM CDT, Bob Famiglio, K3RF via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote: We have/had an MOU with CAP (of which I remain a pilot member) and used to have one with MARS? Time to update them and reassess? Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odvOn Behalf Of Lee Cooper Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 7:49 PM To: rjairam@gmail.com Cc: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30785] Re: Fwd: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections Well, these are DOD mandates, not local. The local folk are not for these changes but when the word comes down from DC and Fort Huachuca not much they can do about them. Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910 "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:36 PMrjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: With due respect I think that is more local. MARS and CAP up here have been pleading with us for cooperation and they have been great for outreach efforts. There is room for cooperation with them, especially since they have an "in" with Government resources that we may not. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 19:05, Lee Cooper <w5lhc01@gmail.com> wrote:
Although I do believe that we need, of course, to work with any and all organizations when it comes to emergency response I would like to comment on a couple things with MARS specifically.
In our Division we have always had a close working relationship with MARS, most which were not only MARS but also ARES /RACES. For many years we worked side by side on disaster responses, primarily Hurricanes. THEN, the DOD folks decided that MARS needed to get out of the civilian response activities and focus purely on DOD needs. They were told to essentially step back from many of the programs we worked on jointly. Then about 4-5 years ago they approached us with this concept -mentioned in the paragraph below dealing with Infrastructure reporting.
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistanceresources based upon that information.
This sounded good to us and felt like a good fit between the two organizations and we even did a few exercises to test. Two things came out of those exercises.
1. IF we were not on 60 meters they would not talk to us. They required ARES, which here on HF is primarily 40/80 meters to change. They would not.
2. At one time we could have updated them via Winlink but they have now walked away from that and are using more "secure" protocols.
But the biggie was when Hurricane Harvey came through and I asked them if they wanted us to send them SITREPS with Infrastructure updates and I was told that a hurricane was not a "big enough event" for them to activate the program we had tested. I asked "What is a big enough event?" and was told that essentially DOD did not care unless there was a mushroom cloud as part of the event. Thus essentially ended this program.
So, while I appreciate the gentlemen's concern about communications between ARES and MARS the reality is that DOD/ MARS is not really interested. (Well to be honest I think many of its members are but DOD has told them to stand down). I, therefore, do not see this as a failure on the part of ARES. We have offered. DOD is not interested.
Lee
Lee H. Cooper, PMP, CKM, CKF, CSM, ITILv3, LSSGB, W5LHC Vice Director, West Gulf Division ARRL - National Association of Amateur Radio w5lhc@arrl.org (512) 658-3910
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat" - N.B.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:07 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow ODV -
Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done.
MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission.
It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening.
73 Ria, N2RJ
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rjcom>, <n2rj@arrl.org>
Hi Ria,
As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation:
“Improves
We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)”
A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable.
The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division.
Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance.
Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community!
73,
---Ken Brown - W2KB
W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Hello Ria, Thank you for forwarding the letter from Ken Brown W2KB. I do believe that the League does need to foster permanent relationships with both CAP and MARS. It is time tomove forward, reach out to both organizations and create formal intra-organizational contacts. 73, Kermit W9XA AAR5CT IL Army Mars Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Monday, August 24, 2020, 16:07, rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: Fellow ODV - Please see the note below concerning MARS. I have been trying over the last year and a half to get some traction on this, but between leadership changes we haven't gotten much done. I am hoping since we now have a new emcomm director AND a new permanent CEO starting next month that we can finally get something done. MARS' mission is closely aligned with ours and those that I know in this area are very dedicated to their mission. It is definitely an alliance worth strengthening. 73 Ria, N2RJ ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Brown <W2KB@arrl.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 17:02 Subject: MARS Region concern with ARRL HQ Communications with its Sections To: <ria@n2rj.com>, <n2rj@arrl.org> Hi Ria, As the NJ Air Force MARS commander, I wish to make you aware of a concern expressed by one of the MARS region (Army) or wing (Air Force) leaders which arose the other day during a webinar reviewing the results of the recent emergency drill COMEX 20-3, which among other things interfaced with ARES and other ham groups. The comment was made in reply to the below item in Chief Army MARS’ presentation: “Improves We still need to work on liaising better with ARS community (more advanced notice, simplified instruction, read ahead of 60 meter TTP manual, working with state-level ARRL and other leadership; consider MARS MOUs at HQ to HQ level with ARRL, SATERN, RACES, etc.)” A significant part of MARS’ emphasis of late has been to obtain status information on local, county and state systems (utilities, airports, roads and transportation, public health facilities, etc.), and consolidating into MARS message format and forwarding same to federal officials whom in a real event where conventional communications systems failed would then be best positioned to deploy assistance resources based upon that information. Ham radio in general, with emphasis on ARES and NTS operators, is viewed as a significant source of obtaining such information for MARS members to acquire and forward to the federal concerned federal agencies, simulating the complete failure of other means of communication. Hence is why the MARS Chiefs feel that an MOU with ARRL to gain a better understanding of the mutual needs and benefits would be advisable. The region leader commented to the effect that ARRL HQ does not appear to have much communication with or provide sufficient guidance and direction to the Section level appointees, and in particular ARES and NTS Section leaders. It appears that the commentator did not think that entering into a memorandum of understanding between MARS and the League would be of much benefit for that reason. I am not certain from which region or wing the comment was made, and so far a link to a recording has not been made available, so I cannot review it to determine the origin of the concern. I am reasonably certain that the comment was not made by a representative of MARS Region 2 / Wing 2 which includes the Hudson Division. Here in NNJ the communication by and with W2VTV concerning the MARS COMEXs has been exemplary, but if the commentator’s assertion has any validity in other Sections or Divisions, it is something to keep in mind should the MARS Chiefs pursue the MOI with the League. I’ll keep you informed should I learn of any further developments. Please feel free to ask me any questions, and especially so should this matter be presented to the ARRL Board if I may be of assistance. Thank you for your outstanding efforts on behalf of the Amateur Radio community! 73, ---Ken Brown - W2KB W2KB@ARRL.net _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
participants (7)
-
Bob Famiglio, K3RF -
Kermit Carlson -
Lee Cooper -
Mike Raisbeck -
rjairam＠gmail.com -
Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) -
W2RU - ARRL