May 21, 2010 at 14:57IT support in Antarctica as an example of one station - an unexpected response
My respect, dear habrasociety!
On April 23, I published a topic of IT support in Antarctica as an example of one station . And recently, I received an unexpected response from the Institute of AANII. Since the person who wrote to me does not have the opportunity to answer in the comments or in a separate topic, I promised to place his text on Habré without any corrections and notes.
Good afternoon abelozor
I read your article “IT-support in Antarctica on the example of one station”
dated April 23, 20010
First, a little about yourself. Since 1994, I have been Sergei Nikolaevich Dorozhko, the head of the ASPD service of the AANII GU (communication center). I spent the winter in Antarctica as the chief specialist in radio electronics (the last wintering of 36th SAE at the now closed Molodezhnaya station). The duties of the ASPD service (communication center) include the organization and provision of round-the-clock operational communication with Russian Antarctic stations, scientific expedition vessels and North Pole drifting stations.
Sorry, but what you wrote in your article is complete nonsense.
For starters, a little historical background. Until the beginning of the 90s, communication with then not Russian, but Soviet Antarctic stations was carried out via radio channels in the HF band. The main broadcasting station was Molodezhnaya. For this, transmitters such as Lightning, PKM-20, Cyclone, PKM-5 were used. All information was transmitted to a communication center located near Moscow. Already then, understanding that it was necessary to develop new communication systems at the Soviet Antarctic stations, the Volna satellite communication stations were installed, which operated via INMARSAT and Horizont satellites. Since 1993, all communication with Russian Antarctic stations has been carried out through the satellites of the international satellite communication system INMARSAT. Each station has several satellite terminal models (INMARSAT-C, INMARSAT-B, FLEET-77, BGAN,
Now essentially your article.
1. You and all users are very indignant at the cost of access to INTERNET. Yes, the cost of access to INTERNET at Russian Antarctic stations is really high, to be very precise it is 4.25 USD per 1 Mbps - that is 36 USD per 1 Mb. But this cost was not set by the leadership of the Russian Antarctic Expedition, but by the international satellite communication system INMARSAT, which operates through its 4 geostationary satellites and through foreign coast stations (in Russia there are no such stations). This tariff is the same for all countries and for the USA, and for Russia, and for China. If he outrages you, you can contact the INMARSAT headquarters, it is located in London (I can give the address).
2. Is there censorship of the private correspondence of polar explorers. I’ll answer right away, no, although I personally am for her with both hands. I’ve been the head of the communications center for 16 years, and in my memory, only once has it been decided not to send a private letter to the specified address. The reason for this was that 50% of the text of the letter did not contain normative vocabulary, but the remaining 50% of the threat to the addressee. Let me give you another example of why I am for censorship. 3-4 years ago, on one of the vessels that was in service of our communications center, a minor technical breakdown occurred. One of the crew members via satellite communication system reported this to the media. Not being a specialist and completely understanding nothing in technology, he inflated an elephant from a fly. As a result, three days, employees of the communication center, Instead of providing the vessel with operational communications, some of them were answering the phone calls of their worried relatives, of which they were in intensive care because of the worries, and the vessel made repairs and continued the voyage. You forget that the communication system with the Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and the rules for using this system are right for those who own it (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system. that the communication system with Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and that the system to which it belongs is the right to establish the rules for using this system (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system. that the communication system with Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and that the system to which it belongs is the right to establish the rules for using this system (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system.
3. I do not understand why you are so much concerned about the fact that the staff of the operational shift have the opportunity to find out the content of private correspondence. You don’t be indignant when you come to the post office and send a telegram, the telecom operator gets acquainted with its text during transmission. Exactly the same employees are the employees of the communication center of the AANII GU. All of them comply with the rule of secrecy of private correspondence and, if violated, are punished accordingly. About 9-10 years ago, I had to dismiss an employee of the operational shift only because he informed me not only the contents of the letter, but only the mailing address of the recipient. And to be honest, my employees are already sick of these letters (imagine for so many years it’s free or not free to read such nonsense). The feeling is that a person goes not to winter, but to write letters.
And the last one. In my deep conviction, the trouble of Russia is not in fools and bad roads, but in incompetent people. Everyone should do their own thing; an environmentalist in Antarctica should do the environment (simply put to clean the station area from garbage, and a communications specialist should do the communication).
PS Due to the heavy workload (May 21, 2010 10-05 Moscow time to St. Petersburg, the Akademik Fedorov RV returned from the next Antarctic flight, and the Rossiya nuclear-powered icebreaker went to the joint venture drift station) I am not going to write to you anymore. I also ask for my request for assistance in registration to be canceled. 05/21/2010
,
Head of the ASDP service (communication center) of the
State Institution of the Arctic
and Antarctic Research
Institute Dorozhko S.N.
UPD (sent in the next letter): I
forgot to answer another question why the letters of polar explorers sometimes do not reach the addressees. At one time, specifically at the direction of the leadership of the Russian Antarctic expedition, a 3-month monitoring was carried out to find out the reasons. If interested, I can tell you its results.
The first reason and the most important. The letter is sent to the so-called free mailbox open on yandex, rambler or mail. People in no way can understand that only cheese in a mousetrap can be free. The worst thing is that you can track the sending of the message by the AANII mail server, and it is impossible to obtain data on the reception of this message from the administrators of the above mail servers. Since the box is free no one will give you any information. (about 80% of cases).
The second reason. Spam protection is incorrectly configured on the recipient's mail server, and this is why a letter from Antarctica is considered spam (10% of cases)
The third reason. Invalid email address. Sometimes it’s bent so that you can’t even figure it out without a glass. (about 7-9%) cases.
And the most exotic case. The recipient received the letter, but refuses to admit it, and only when you press it against the wall, confirms the reception (guess three times why, who did not work in operational communication with the Russian Antarctic stations and ships, I won’t guess). (3-5%).
--------------------------------- End of the original text -------------- -----------------------
For my part, I will not enter into a discussion with Sergey Nikolaevich in this topic, but if hab-users have questions, I will be happy to answer in the comments.
On April 23, I published a topic of IT support in Antarctica as an example of one station . And recently, I received an unexpected response from the Institute of AANII. Since the person who wrote to me does not have the opportunity to answer in the comments or in a separate topic, I promised to place his text on Habré without any corrections and notes.
Good afternoon abelozor
I read your article “IT-support in Antarctica on the example of one station”
dated April 23, 20010
First, a little about yourself. Since 1994, I have been Sergei Nikolaevich Dorozhko, the head of the ASPD service of the AANII GU (communication center). I spent the winter in Antarctica as the chief specialist in radio electronics (the last wintering of 36th SAE at the now closed Molodezhnaya station). The duties of the ASPD service (communication center) include the organization and provision of round-the-clock operational communication with Russian Antarctic stations, scientific expedition vessels and North Pole drifting stations.
Sorry, but what you wrote in your article is complete nonsense.
For starters, a little historical background. Until the beginning of the 90s, communication with then not Russian, but Soviet Antarctic stations was carried out via radio channels in the HF band. The main broadcasting station was Molodezhnaya. For this, transmitters such as Lightning, PKM-20, Cyclone, PKM-5 were used. All information was transmitted to a communication center located near Moscow. Already then, understanding that it was necessary to develop new communication systems at the Soviet Antarctic stations, the Volna satellite communication stations were installed, which operated via INMARSAT and Horizont satellites. Since 1993, all communication with Russian Antarctic stations has been carried out through the satellites of the international satellite communication system INMARSAT. Each station has several satellite terminal models (INMARSAT-C, INMARSAT-B, FLEET-77, BGAN,
Now essentially your article.
1. You and all users are very indignant at the cost of access to INTERNET. Yes, the cost of access to INTERNET at Russian Antarctic stations is really high, to be very precise it is 4.25 USD per 1 Mbps - that is 36 USD per 1 Mb. But this cost was not set by the leadership of the Russian Antarctic Expedition, but by the international satellite communication system INMARSAT, which operates through its 4 geostationary satellites and through foreign coast stations (in Russia there are no such stations). This tariff is the same for all countries and for the USA, and for Russia, and for China. If he outrages you, you can contact the INMARSAT headquarters, it is located in London (I can give the address).
2. Is there censorship of the private correspondence of polar explorers. I’ll answer right away, no, although I personally am for her with both hands. I’ve been the head of the communications center for 16 years, and in my memory, only once has it been decided not to send a private letter to the specified address. The reason for this was that 50% of the text of the letter did not contain normative vocabulary, but the remaining 50% of the threat to the addressee. Let me give you another example of why I am for censorship. 3-4 years ago, on one of the vessels that was in service of our communications center, a minor technical breakdown occurred. One of the crew members via satellite communication system reported this to the media. Not being a specialist and completely understanding nothing in technology, he inflated an elephant from a fly. As a result, three days, employees of the communication center, Instead of providing the vessel with operational communications, some of them were answering the phone calls of their worried relatives, of which they were in intensive care because of the worries, and the vessel made repairs and continued the voyage. You forget that the communication system with the Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and the rules for using this system are right for those who own it (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system. that the communication system with Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and that the system to which it belongs is the right to establish the rules for using this system (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system. that the communication system with Russian Antarctic stations is departmental and that the system to which it belongs is the right to establish the rules for using this system (that is, the management of the AARI GU). And then, in your opinion, it should be so, one creates a communication system, supports its operability, and someone else sets the rules for using the system.
3. I do not understand why you are so much concerned about the fact that the staff of the operational shift have the opportunity to find out the content of private correspondence. You don’t be indignant when you come to the post office and send a telegram, the telecom operator gets acquainted with its text during transmission. Exactly the same employees are the employees of the communication center of the AANII GU. All of them comply with the rule of secrecy of private correspondence and, if violated, are punished accordingly. About 9-10 years ago, I had to dismiss an employee of the operational shift only because he informed me not only the contents of the letter, but only the mailing address of the recipient. And to be honest, my employees are already sick of these letters (imagine for so many years it’s free or not free to read such nonsense). The feeling is that a person goes not to winter, but to write letters.
And the last one. In my deep conviction, the trouble of Russia is not in fools and bad roads, but in incompetent people. Everyone should do their own thing; an environmentalist in Antarctica should do the environment (simply put to clean the station area from garbage, and a communications specialist should do the communication).
PS Due to the heavy workload (May 21, 2010 10-05 Moscow time to St. Petersburg, the Akademik Fedorov RV returned from the next Antarctic flight, and the Rossiya nuclear-powered icebreaker went to the joint venture drift station) I am not going to write to you anymore. I also ask for my request for assistance in registration to be canceled. 05/21/2010
,
Head of the ASDP service (communication center) of the
State Institution of the Arctic
and Antarctic Research
Institute Dorozhko S.N.
UPD (sent in the next letter): I
forgot to answer another question why the letters of polar explorers sometimes do not reach the addressees. At one time, specifically at the direction of the leadership of the Russian Antarctic expedition, a 3-month monitoring was carried out to find out the reasons. If interested, I can tell you its results.
The first reason and the most important. The letter is sent to the so-called free mailbox open on yandex, rambler or mail. People in no way can understand that only cheese in a mousetrap can be free. The worst thing is that you can track the sending of the message by the AANII mail server, and it is impossible to obtain data on the reception of this message from the administrators of the above mail servers. Since the box is free no one will give you any information. (about 80% of cases).
The second reason. Spam protection is incorrectly configured on the recipient's mail server, and this is why a letter from Antarctica is considered spam (10% of cases)
The third reason. Invalid email address. Sometimes it’s bent so that you can’t even figure it out without a glass. (about 7-9%) cases.
And the most exotic case. The recipient received the letter, but refuses to admit it, and only when you press it against the wall, confirms the reception (guess three times why, who did not work in operational communication with the Russian Antarctic stations and ships, I won’t guess). (3-5%).
--------------------------------- End of the original text -------------- -----------------------
For my part, I will not enter into a discussion with Sergey Nikolaevich in this topic, but if hab-users have questions, I will be happy to answer in the comments.