<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thanks Paul</p>
<p>You have made many useful suggestions about things we could do.
I think we need to go deeper. <br>
</p>
<p>I have had WICEN described to me as "a solution in search of a
problem" by a senior agency officer. I think we need to take this
comment very seriously as probably reflecting a widely held view.
<br>
</p>
<p>We need to consider a couple of fundamental questions:</p>
<p>What is it we are trying to achieve, as an organisation? Or to
put it another way, Why do we / should we exist? and</p>
<p>Who are our potential customers, and why would they want to use
us? <br>
</p>
<p>It is very clear that the answers to both questions have
fundamentally changed over the past decade or two. Over this
time, both have become much less clear or have even become
undefined, as other organisations and communications technology
have advanced and evolved. <br>
</p>
<p>Perhaps these questions are a good place to start? <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>To clarify something else, there are two HF data systems approved
by the WICEN COM. These are Winlink and the EMCOM system. <br>
</p>
<p>Any assertion that Winlink is the only endorsed HF data system is
simply wrong. <br>
</p>
<p>There is extensive information already on WICEN record and in
various papers (including IARU submissions) regarding the
characteristics, merits and shortcomings of both and I do not
intend to repeat that information here. Suffice to say the
systems are very different and are designed to achieve different
outcomes, and in doing so have different performance tradeoffs
which affect their utility for emergency comms. <br>
</p>
<p>If we are serious about exploiting HF data, we need both systems,
and this is the position endorsed by COM. I support this position
and I hope other WICEN members do too. And, there is a policy
decision that members using the EMCOM system will be supported
with modems (which carry a steep price tag) via a formal equipment
loan agreement. So there is no suggestion that members should
invest in both systems. <br>
</p>
<p>If we need more resources (such as modems) to support the Winlink
system (or any other WICEN activity), the answer is simple - we
write a submission for funding to DoJ, which is what I did several
years ago. We are not so severely resource-constrained that we
need to degrade one established and functioning system to enhance
another. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I look forward to the discussion on Sunday - I hope we can lay
the foundation for the future. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Cheers, John<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/02/2020 5:55 pm, Paul VK3DPW
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:929aa389-4671-9060-bc86-5d949de1e3d8@dromanadrivein.com.au">Hi
all,
<br>
<br>
An interesting and pertinent discussion...
<br>
<br>
Please find my thoughts attached.
<br>
<br>
Any comments? I can take your thoughts to the CoOrdinators meeting
this Sunday.
<br>
<br>
'73
<br>
<br>
Paul Whitaker.
<br>
VK3DPW
<br>
Central Southern Metropolitan Region CoOrdinator.
<br>
0414314025
<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
wicenvic mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wicenvic@vic.wicen.org.au">wicenvic@vic.wicen.org.au</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vic.wicen.org.au/mailman/listinfo/wicenvic_vic.wicen.org.au">http://vic.wicen.org.au/mailman/listinfo/wicenvic_vic.wicen.org.au</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>