A radiogram’s number is the first thing we send. If a receiving station has indicated, “ready to copy,” the next word out of our mouths should be “number.” Not “please copy,” not “message follows,” just “number.” It’s what experienced traffic handlers expect to hear.
Next, we say the number itself, one digit at a time. So, if the message number is 12, say “number one two,” not “number twelve.” If the number is 131, we say “number one three one,” not “number one thirty-one” and not “number one hundred and thirty-one.” Finally, we say “zero,” not “oh” in numbers like 101.
(This is the second in a series of short traffic-handling columns I submitted to the Kosciusko County ARES newsletter.)
Category Archives: Traffic handling
NTS traffic handlers can be so picky!
They want you to send everything in just the right order and just the right way. Why? Adhering to standard message transmission procedures helps ensure message accuracy, because the receiving station always knows what to expect, when and how. That’s why the NTS has very specific directions about exactly what you should say when you transmit a radiogram. That includes things like when to say “break” (and when not to), how to transmit an acronym, etc.
This is the first of a series of short columns on traffic handling that I’ve submitted to the weekly Kosciusko County, Ind. ARES newsletter. Kosciusko County Emergency Coordinator AB9ZA invited me to provide the information and I figured I could kill two birds with one stone and post the same article here!
Learned Something New: Book Traffic to Multiple Stations
I’ve been handling traffic since the 1970s but I still learn new things about this aspect of ham radio. While listening to other traffic handlers on a net, I often ask myself, “Is that the right way to do that?” Then I go online to the NTS Methods and Practices Guidelines (MPG). That document provides information about nearly every aspect of traffic handling, in excruciating detail!
Just the other day, I heard one of our fellow traffic handlers check in with “book” traffic for three disparate locations in the section. In my experience, we “book” messages when multiple messages that share common parts (e.g. the same text) will be sent to a single station. It turns out my experience was incorrect.
I went to the MPG and learned something! Chapter Two (section 2.3.4.12) provides a procedure for sending a book of three messages to three different stations on voice. It goes something like this, where W3XZ is sending a book to W3XA, W3XB and W3XC:
W3XZ: “W3XA, ready to copy?”
W3XA: “Ready.”
W3XZ: “XB?”
W3XB: “Ready.”
W3XZ: “XC?”
W3XC: “Ready.”
W3XZ: “Book of three, routine, hotel x-ray golf, whiskey bravo five november kilo delta, two one, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, February 29. Break.” (Pauses for any fill requests and if receiving stations are silent, continues.)
(Note that I’ve written this as you’d say it on the radio, not as it would be written on a radiogram form. Also note that we say, “Book of (number of messages in the book)” where we’d normally say a message number. The receiving stations don’t write that part down. They start writing with the “R” for “routine.”)
W3XZ: “Message relay stations are needed, initial x-ray. Hope you are able to, I spell, tango oscar, help, initial x-ray. Find a local net to, I spell, tango oscar, learn how. Figures seven three. Break. Pat, amateur call whiskey bravo five november kilo delta. Break” (Pauses again for fills, continues if receiving stations are silent.)
(Note that the word “break” does not mean “over,” as it sometimes does in QSOs. In message sending, “break” simply means that one part of a message is finished and the next is about to begin. We pause after some “breaks” (but not all) to allow receiving stations to ask for fills. If receiving stations need no fills, their silence tells the sending station to continue. Note that there is no pause after the “break” before the signature. We assume receiving stations can wait a few more seconds to request fills. Also, note that after the signature, we do not say “end” as we would during a single radiogram. This is just one part of a book, so we say “break” instead. Also note that “to” is spelled phonetically to distinguish it from “two” and “too.”)
W3XZ: “W3XA, number fifty five, Jim Smith,” (continues address block for message number two)
W3XZ: “Break. W3XA?”
(This “break” indicates the end of the address block and therefore the end of the stuff that W3XA must copy. W3XZ gives W3XA’s call sign, inflecting the question mark, to inquire whether W3XA copied the message.)
W3XA: “Roger, W3XA.”
Now, W3XA is finished and has legally signed off with his call sign. If this message was being passed on a frequency other than the net frequency, W3XA then returns to the net frequency. Next, W3XZ continues as above, sending the unique parts of message number 56 (the second message) to W3XB and message number 57 (the third and final message) to W3XC. The only difference is in what W3XZ says at the end of the third message’s address block. Instead of, “Break. W3XC?” W3XZ would say, “End book, no more.” He says “end book” instead of “break” because there’s nothing more to send to anyone. He doesn’t need to say “W3XC?” because W3XC is the only station remaining and knows that after he hears “End book no more” it’s his turn to say “Roger, W3XC.” After W3XZ hears that final “roger,” he signs off with his call sign.
This procedure looks pretty complicated but if you look through it and try it a couple of times, you’ll get the hang of it. And it can save a lot of time on a voice net!
Winlink 2000: An NTS Gray Area?
Recently, I’ve been having mixed thoughts about NTS stations passing traffic via the Winlink 2000 (WL2K) radio email system.
WL2K is a nifty system that allows people to get Internet email via a radio connection. It’s especially useful to operators at sea. They or anyone else can send and receive email with a computer, a sound card interface and a ham rig. As long as they can connect to any of many gateway stations worldwide, they can send email and retrieve email that’s waiting for them.
The system does not store email at the gateway station. It stores it via the Internet on multiple, identical, redundant Common Message Servers (CMS). In short, when a WL2K user connects via radio to a gateway station, that gateway station connects via the Internet to one of the CMS to exchange email.
So, what does this have to do with NTS? Well, some NTS officials have proposed a change to NTS Methods and Practice Guidelines that would officially incorporate WL2K into NTS. But that’s not what I’m writing about here.
What’s on my mind is what’s happening in the meantime. Some NTS operators are using WL2K radio email to complete traffic assignments they receive on phone (voice) nets. For example, it’s not unusual for a station on a region net to check in, list 10 messages for one of the sections and then tell the section representative that the traffic will move via radio email.
The history of NTS has been “radio all the way.” For example, if I check into a section net and pass a message for California to a region net representative, that station is expected to retransmit the message on the region net via radio to an area net representative. NTS would frown on him telephoning it to the area net representative or sending it to the area net rep. via Internet email. He’s supposed to move it on the air.
But if my region representative sends the message to the area net representative via WL2K, he is necessarily sending it over the Internet. This is true even if he uses his radio to connect to a WL2K gateway station. It’s true even if the area net rep. later connects via radio to the same WL2K gateway station to pick it up. The message will still have traveled via the Internet to and from a WL2K CMS.
Now, imagine this scenario: W9AAA tells N9BBB on the phone region net that he’s sending him traffic via radio email. W9AAA then connects via radio to WL2K gateway K9RMS and sends my California-bound message. When N9BBB tries to connect to K9RMS later, propagation has changed and K9RMS can’t hear him. So, he connects instead to WL2K gateway N6RMS and picks up the message. The message route would look like this:
W9AAA—(radio link)—K9RMS—(Internet link)—CMS—(Internet link)—N6RMS—(radio link)—N9BBB
From a practical viewpoint, I wonder if the above route is really all that different from K9RMS putting my message in a regular Internet email to N6RMS. Or for that matter, is it really different from K9RMS calling N6RMS on the telephone with my message?
And the area gets even grayer. Referring again to the example above, W9AAA doesn’t even have to use his radio to put the message on WL2K. The same software with which stations connect via radio to WL2K can also connect directly to a WL2K CMS via the Internet. So it’s possible for all those NTS stations using WL2K to move their phone net traffic to each other without radios! Of course, we assume they use their radios and not the available direct Internet links. But to a purist like me (I admit it!) the whole thing seems, well, gray.
Don’t read what I’m not writing! I’m mostly thinking out loud here and I do not condemn the use of WL2K. As I said at the beginning, it’s a nifty system and using WL2K radio links to get Internet email the “last mile” into and out of a disaster area is an especially excellent idea.
I just wonder sometimes whether using it routinely in connection with our phone nets is in keeping with the spirit of NTS. I don’t know. I just wonder. What do you think? Click the “comments” link below and add your thoughts.
Traffic Handling and Antique Engines
Have you ever been to a county fair or similar event and saw an area with guys sitting around running very old “hit-and-miss” engines? Today, those engines are anachronisms. But many people get enjoyment out of restoring them, running them and displaying them. Sometimes, I feel how those guys must feel when I’m handing traffic on ham radio, especially using Morse code.
There was a time, not too many decades ago, when the American Radio Relay League’s (ARRL) National Traffic System (NTS) served a real purpose on a day-to-day basis. Back in the 1960s and 1970s, people often hesitated to make long-distance telephone calls, because such calls were expensive. It wasn’t unusual for them to turn to their neighborhood ham radio operator to send a free radiogram for simple greeting messages, like “happy birthday.” The NTS was full of real messages being relayed on behalf of real people. And if a disaster stuck, citizens and government officials relied on NTS to fill in for incapacitated telephone and other communication systems.
Things sure are different today. Most people have telephone plans (either landline or cellular) that include long distance. Most have email, not to mention text messaging, Facebook and Twitter. There’s no longer incentive for the general public to use ham radio to wish someone a happy birthday. Even disasters don’t always create a big demand for ham radio. Many (if not most) local emergency managers are equipped with satellite phones that will put them in touch with the outside world even if landline telephone, cellular telephone and Internet services are unavailable. And it takes a pretty huge incident to disconnect the Internet. Not long after the earthquake in Haiti in 2010, pictures of the scene were showing up on web pages and Twitter, provided by “citizen journalists.”
So, why do I invest my time practicing a craft that has little practical value except in the most dire of circumstances (e.g. something even bigger than the 2010 Haiti earthquake)? Well, I’ve never talked to one of those hit-and-miss engine hobbyists but I suspect I handle traffic for the same reason they keep their antique machines running.
It’s fun. I enjoy it.
There’s a certain order to traffic handling procedures that gives me comfort. Even if I’m relaying a “mail merge” radiogram addressed to some unsuspecting ham by someone who sent it only to provide “grist for the mill,” I get a feeling of accomplishment from keeping my skills honed. So, yeah, I realize I might never be pressed into service to handle real emergency traffic. But I know I can. And I enjoy the exercise. I’d be interested in hearing your reasons for participating (or not participating, as the case might be).