November 14, 2025: I begin a series on the m1ke WLAN IP transceiver in this issue, with future installments planned as I get more comfortable using the device.
NTS is a great system that has been proven successful. However, it feels like the use case for NTS narrows year after year with accessible communications systems being pervasive and incredibly resilient. I think it's great to have as a back-up, but it's hard to invest in something that hasn't seen wide or significant use since I would guess before cellphones and "free" long-distance calls were pervasive? It would be interesting to see NTS ported to other communication channels, not just ham radio. Perhaps an opportunity to broaden reach and regain relevance?
ARRL forgot mesh RF communications (e.g., Meshtastic, Meshcore). I hope NTS makes it. My suggestion to them was the need for grassroots traffic collection in VHF/UHF. Technicians need to be able to pass priority/emergency traffic.
I hesitate to say this, but I think the ARRL is so focused on "traditional" voice and data over RF that things like meshtastic may not be on their radar.
The NTS works, but I agree with K4HCK that the expectation of the public has surpassed the telegram of 100 years ago. The web entry portal to originate a message is good for routine traffic, but wouldn't be of much benefit in the scenario we saw in western North Carolina last year. Well, it would still work for the people with Starlink but they wouldn't need NTS. The other doubt I have is capacity of the NTS. Even if you could put 200,000 messages into the system, how long would it take the NTS to deliver them?
NTS is a great system that has been proven successful. However, it feels like the use case for NTS narrows year after year with accessible communications systems being pervasive and incredibly resilient. I think it's great to have as a back-up, but it's hard to invest in something that hasn't seen wide or significant use since I would guess before cellphones and "free" long-distance calls were pervasive? It would be interesting to see NTS ported to other communication channels, not just ham radio. Perhaps an opportunity to broaden reach and regain relevance?
Yes, NTS is still viable. The revamped NTS website ... https://nts2.arrl.org/radiogram/ ... makes it easy to have anyone send a radiogram.
Built into that system is the checks and balances to insure FCC prohibited communication does not get moved along.
ARRL forgot mesh RF communications (e.g., Meshtastic, Meshcore). I hope NTS makes it. My suggestion to them was the need for grassroots traffic collection in VHF/UHF. Technicians need to be able to pass priority/emergency traffic.
I hesitate to say this, but I think the ARRL is so focused on "traditional" voice and data over RF that things like meshtastic may not be on their radar.
The NTS works, but I agree with K4HCK that the expectation of the public has surpassed the telegram of 100 years ago. The web entry portal to originate a message is good for routine traffic, but wouldn't be of much benefit in the scenario we saw in western North Carolina last year. Well, it would still work for the people with Starlink but they wouldn't need NTS. The other doubt I have is capacity of the NTS. Even if you could put 200,000 messages into the system, how long would it take the NTS to deliver them?