Dave wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

Michael Coslo wrote:

wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

Don't agree. First responders are not "radio operators", they're
firefighters, medics, police at multiple levels and all the rest. Given
a big enough disaster like the New Orleans hurricane onsite FEMA
operatives, the Coast Guard, any number of military units from all the
services also land in the middle of it.


I must not have made myself clear Brian. The answer is not in freeing
up the BW now occupied by analog television. The answer for
communications in a disaster is trained and competent operators.

I agree with all that.


And the trained operators should be called in when the regular comms
first go out, not after a few days.

I don't agree here - depending on what I think you mean by "trained
operators". Local governments can't train and store reserve
dispatchers who are only activated for drills in preparation for major
emergencies, won't work. Emergency dispatching is an art and skill
which has to be used on a very regular basis or the dispatchers lose
the edge they need to do the job properly when a "big one" hits
unexpectedly.

In those cases the local authorities can call up all shifts of their
regular crews to get a sufficient amount of manpower and their reserve
radios on the air. But in order to get any benefit out of an approach
like this the dispatch centers have to be able to almost immediately be
expanded and able to keep operating thru hell and high water for an
extended period. None of those type facilities are in place that I've
ever heard about.


What I think should happen is the development and deployment of some
sort of "super" emergency operations centers staffed by highly trained
dispatchers who know how to seamlessly patch the first responder
specialists making the initial call into the specific specialists they
need to contact.

I doubt that there will be the money for that. Good idea tho'.

A couple $80 million civil AWACs planes and $10 million a year to
maintain and staff 'em is chicken feed. Problem is that Haliburton will
have already drained the till before Boeing and Motorola get their
passes at it.


- Mike KB3EIA -

w3rv



it seems like the key is that there is no bridge between the various
agencies that can coordinate the activities. the red herring is that their
radios can't talk to each other.

Yup. It is a function of bandwidth, distance, congestion and other
stuff like that.



in most metro areas there are adequate
frequencies and equipment to coordinate the local activities, and plenty of
dispatchers to do the job... keeping them on the air during a disaster may
be a problem that could be addressed, but its not a frequency allocation
question, its more of making sure they have adequate facilities and backups.
I would bet that most police and fire and even local emergency operating
center personnel would agree that they would not want the feds showing up
and starting to talk to them on their existing frequencies, they are going
to be busy enough with their own work and don't need an outside group
showing up trying to 'help' them who isn't familiar with their normal
operating procedures, the area, the people, and all that other stuff.

what would appear to be needed is a way for fema, national guard, coast
guard, etc to get coordinated with the local authorities... and to do that
there are really 2 or 3 levels of coordination needed:

There is a way. Exists right now. The problem in this particular
disaster is that the emergency services lagged way behind the disaster.


1. planning, pre-positioning, testing, training, all that stuff that happens
BEFORE a disaster. all the plans in the world are great until you walk into
the eoc and can't plug in your equipment because the connectors are wrong,
or the local official starts talking about doing one thing and the plan you
have in hand calls for something else.
2. strategic coordination... that high level, big area, stuff... the
governor's level decisions vs feds and national agencies about when to send
them in, where and when are they to take over operations and who has over
all control, when to evacuate and where to, etc. this would seem to be one
of the big areas where Louisiana had problems.
3. tactical coordination... this seems to be where some people think the
problem is, this is where frequency allocations and equipment compatibility
come into play. i.e. what happens when the local red cross and national
guard meet the local fire department at the evacuation center, who talks to
who and on what radio and using which jargon. I don't think in most cases
that this really requires all that much new stuff, if the first two levels
of coordination have been worked out then this should be simple... get one
person from each agency that needs to work together and sit them down in a
fixed or mobile command post and let them do their thing. frequent training
of these groups is one thing that is probably missing these days... how
often do radio operators and officers from national guard units, fema, and
other agencies sit down and run exercises with local police and fire and
redcross and hams?

The problem as I see it is that the radio comms are kind of like a
swimming duck. Above the water line there is not a lot of stuff going
on. Below the line is all kinds of activity.

Are the emergency organizations going to employ pay and train competent
radio operators who are capable of figuring out where they need to be
frequency wise? I doubt it. If so, I wanna apply for that job.

In this group, we've discussed the contesting issue, in which others
and myself have claimed that it is practice for emergency operations.
One regular poster in particular heaps a lot of scorn on those who
believe it is practice. But it is.

These operators would have to be frequency agile, as well as know what
frequency that they should use in a given situation. They need to be
able to copy weak signals, and be patient.

But I can just about wager a months salary that whatever "new" system
we end up with, it will be heavily infrastructure dependent, and
designed so that someone who knows nothing about radio and electronics
will just mash their PTT button. And it will work perfectly in drills.
And it will fail miserably when the "big one" hits it.

Then the hams with their "old technology" will come out of the woodwork
again.

- Mike KB3EIA -

wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:


Don't agree. First responders are not "radio operators", they're
firefighters, medics, police at multiple levels and all the rest. Given
a big enough disaster like the New Orleans hurricane onsite FEMA
operatives, the Coast Guard, any number of military units from all the
services also land in the middle of it.


I must not have made myself clear Brian. The answer is not in freeing
up the BW now occupied by analog television. The answer for
communications in a disaster is trained and competent operators.


I agree with all that.


And the trained operators should be called in when the regular comms
first go out, not after a few days.


I don't agree here - depending on what I think you mean by "trained
operators". Local governments can't train and store reserve
dispatchers who are only activated for drills in preparation for major
emergencies, won't work. Emergency dispatching is an art and skill
which has to be used on a very regular basis or the dispatchers lose
the edge they need to do the job properly when a "big one" hits
unexpectedly.

I think for all practical concerns, the trained operators are us. From
what I have seen in the short time that I have been a Ham, there is a
learning curve to become a proficient operator. And although A person
can become proficient of course, it takes some time. We get training all
the time in our contests, and the occasional more formal emergency
training events.


In those cases the local authorities can call up all shifts of their
regular crews to get a sufficient amount of manpower and their reserve
radios on the air. But in order to get any benefit out of an approach
like this the dispatch centers have to be able to almost immediately be
expanded and able to keep operating thru hell and high water for an
extended period. None of those type facilities are in place that I've
ever heard about.



What I think should happen is the development and deployment of some
sort of "super" emergency operations centers staffed by highly trained
dispatchers who know how to seamlessly patch the first responder
specialists making the initial call into the specific specialists they
need to contact.

I doubt that there will be the money for that. Good idea tho'.


A couple $80 million civil AWACs planes and $10 million a year to
maintain and staff 'em is chicken feed. Problem is that Haliburton will
have already drained the till before Boeing and Motorola get their
passes at it.

Hey! you stole my line!...really! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

From: Michael Coslo on Sep 14, 1:46 pm

wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:


Don't agree. First responders are not "radio operators", they're
firefighters, medics, police at multiple levels and all the rest. Given
a big enough disaster like the New Orleans hurricane onsite FEMA
operatives, the Coast Guard, any number of military units from all the
services also land in the middle of it.

I must not have made myself clear Brian. The answer is not in freeing
up the BW now occupied by analog television. The answer for
communications in a disaster is trained and competent operators.

I agree with all that.

And the trained operators should be called in when the regular comms
first go out, not after a few days.

I don't agree here - depending on what I think you mean by "trained
operators". Local governments can't train and store reserve
dispatchers who are only activated for drills in preparation for major
emergencies, won't work. Emergency dispatching is an art and skill
which has to be used on a very regular basis or the dispatchers lose
the edge they need to do the job properly when a "big one" hits
unexpectedly.

I think for all practical concerns, the trained operators are us. From
what I have seen in the short time that I have been a Ham, there is a
learning curve to become a proficient operator. And although A person
can become proficient of course, it takes some time. We get training all
the time in our contests, and the occasional more formal emergency
training events.

"Training in [radio] contests?!?" To do WHAT? Win points?

"In the short time that you have been a ham," you've become a
proficient law enforcement person, a medic, a fireman, are able
to wade through flood waters, put up antennas in 100+ MPH winds
and enunciate clearly into a microphone or mash your fist on a
code key as befits a 1940s radio op on a B-17 over Germany?

Remarkable. Maybe I should try that. All I had to do in the
1950s was learn and practice the art of land warfare. ["close
with, and destroy the enemy!"]

In those cases the local authorities can call up all shifts of their
regular crews to get a sufficient amount of manpower and their reserve
radios on the air. But in order to get any benefit out of an approach
like this the dispatch centers have to be able to almost immediately be
expanded and able to keep operating thru hell and high water for an
extended period. None of those type facilities are in place that I've
ever heard about.

The Greater Los Angeles Emergency Communications Center was set up
just that way prior to January 17th, 1994, and functioned very well.
No warnings whatsoever beforehand. At a few minutes past 4:30 AM
the Northridge Earthquake hit, the Pacific Intertie was broken, and
the entire area of about 10 million residents was without ANY
electric power. The Center worked, the outlying government-
utilities industry communications worked on emergency generators
(already there) and mobile, vehicle power. I repeat, NO warning
ahead of time.

How much warning did New Orleans have? 3 days, 4, 5? Hurricanes
spawn in mid-Atlantic and the Carribean and take days to come
ashore, all the time tracked by NOAA. Plenty of time for all
those hams with their indestructible ham radios to be On The
Scene as First Responders! They are all "trained and competent"
in emergency radio, right? Drill regularly in those "radiosport"
contests? READ all about it in QST?

A couple $80 million civil AWACs planes and $10 million a year to
maintain and staff 'em is chicken feed. Problem is that Haliburton will
have already drained the till before Boeing and Motorola get their
passes at it.

Hey! you stole my line!...really! ;^)

Tsk. "AWACs?" You guys have lost way too many grey cells to
ionizing radiation while being under the fantasy of "training
and competence" by virtue of sitting in front of your radddios
tweaking knobs and imagining you are all he-roes.

Five of those abandoned-and-later-flooded dozens of empty school
busses in New Orleans could have been used. No damn "$80 million"
costs involved there. With over half the city of New Orleans
BELOW sea level for YEARS, the government of the city of the Big
Easy didn't use their brains...for YEARS.

Does your ham radio FLOAT? Can your ham antenna stand up under
Force 4 winds?

Or is your "training and competence" only tied up with classroom
work, talking it up with the students, and imagining How Good
you all are?

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

Lotta nonsense in this article, bunch of clueless politicians going at
it as usual.

I have a real hard time believing anyone has been killed by a spectrum sh=
ortage.
Or did Katrina suck up all the RF spectrum when it came thru.

Heh.

I wonder how they would have fared if comm managers had paid more attenti=
on to
survivability (site/antenna/power generation integrity, generator
shielding/protection/placement/fuel availability).

This isn't quite as glamorous as whiz-bang Trunking & Mobile data systems=
but
it's certainly more important.

You bet. No dispatch centers no radio period. I've been chasing down
articles on the subject for the last couple days. I haven't found
anything which specifically gets into the current condition of the EOCs
but bits and pieces indicate that the power and land line systems are
coming back up much faster than the municipal radio systems. But we're
talking about the Big Easy here which is not exactly the national model
for governmental planning and efficiency.

This is the town where 10% of it's police force quit on the spot and
headed out of town when Katrina landed on 'em. So who knows what shape
their first-responder's infrastucture is in? For all we know maybe all
the New Orleans EOC "sump pump operators" have quit too and the water
is still ten feet deep in the operations room . .

Homeland Secuity gotta get into this field and lay down the national
standards for siting and construction of the EOCs and all their
paraphernalia.=20

=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

w3rv

"Michael Coslo" wrote


Are the emergency organizations going to employ pay and train competent radio
operators who are capable of figuring out where they need to be frequency
wise?

"First responders" are not radio operators. They are firemen, policemen,
medical personel, ambulance drivers, etc., etc., etc. To these people a radio
is just another tool --- they need to just "mash the PTT" like you describe, and
communicate their message.

THIS IS EXACTLY AS IT SHOULD BE! Communications should be transparent to these
people, and require no training at all beyond simple circuit procedures.

The failures of communications in New Orleans were not because of lack of
spectrum, nor lack of "competent radio operators", but lack of properly hardened
communications facilities, and lack of backup for those facilities.

Prime example --- the New Orleans PD EDACS MA/Comm 800 MHz radio system
functioned well during and immediately after the hurricane, but then natural gas
service to the prime downtown transmitter site was disrupted and the generator
was out. (No gas, no generator. No generator, no transmitter.) Owners of the
site would not allow installation of LP gas tanks as a backup to piped gas,
meaning generators did not have any fuel when the main lines were cut.

Further compounding the situation was the fact that the PD EDACS acted as a hub
of the area Inter-Operation system with 17 hard-patched RF links to a variety of
other agencies in NO and nearby cities/parishes. When the EDACS went down, it
pulled all those inter-op links down with it and the whole first-responder comm
system imploded, reduced to little "islands" of communications that couldn't
inter-communicate. Airlifting a thousand "competent radio operators" into the
area would not have improved communications at the level of the "feet on the
street" cop, fireman, or medical person one iota.

As I see it, two mundane planning changes could have prevented this train
wreck....

1) Emergency fuel supplies at the transmitter site (a 2,000 pound tank of
LP lasts weeks).
2) A star or mesh (rather than a hub) topology of the mutual-aid/other
interop links which didn't allow a single point of failure to crash the whole
system.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Sure, they can nibble at the ham bands. But there's not much spectrum
to be had from them below 400 MHz. All of 6, 2 and 220 only adds up to
about two TV channels.

What you're really seeing is a push to end NTSC TV transmissions, and
go to DTV exclusively.

IMHO

73 de Jim, N2EY


Hello, Jim

Hello

I'm not sure they'd want anything below UHF. If you are inside of a steel
building, I suspect they'd be better off at higher frequencies as they will
tend to bounce around and find an egress far easier than VHF.

A 6 meter HT is going to have antenna/ground efficiency problems as well.
It is far better than 10 (or 11, for that matter), but still is limited with
a small antenna and a far from satisfactory ground. Plus the wavelength is
going to have a difficult time getting outside of a building.

2 meters is better, but still lacking. 440 is better, but up around 1 GHz
would probably be better than the VHF television channels.

Agreed on all that but what I'm saying is that it's not what that blurb
is really all about.

As Hans, K0HB and others have pointed out, the big problems in NO
aren't about lack of spectrum. They're about lack of planning and lack
of good system design.

What I think that blurb is really all about is the desire fo some to
turn off their NTSC TV transmitters. And I can't say I blame them.

Most TV stations here in Philly are simulcasting DTV and NTSC. That's
expensive, both in tower rental, power and labor costs, and because the
NTSC stuff is all going to be worthless when they finally shut it down.

The migration to DTV has taken a long time and it's going nowhere fast.
The stores keep selling NTSC TVs, VCRs, etc., so the 'installed base'
isn't shrinking. DTV sets still cost a pretty penny, and if someone
doesn't watch that much TV it's not a high priority to replace an NTSC
set.

How many more years and dollars before they can shut off the old NTSC
transmitter? That's the big issue.

One solution is to distribute set-top boxes that convert DTV signals to
NTSC, so that you can watch the DTV transmissions on your NTSC set,
tape them on VHS, etc. But who is going to pay for it?

By wrapping the issue in disaster-communications bunting, the whole
thing can be made to look as if it's in the national interest to shut
down NTSC broadcasting ASAP. The red herring is that the freed-up
spectrum will somehow enhance disaster comms.

---

You get down to the museum yet? They have a working pre-NTSC B&W/color
TV set complete with color wheel...

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Sure, they can nibble at the ham bands. But there's not much spectrum
to be had from them below 400 MHz. All of 6, 2 and 220 only adds up to
about two TV channels.

What you're really seeing is a push to end NTSC TV transmissions, and
go to DTV exclusively.

IMHO

73 de Jim, N2EY


Hello, Jim

Hello

I'm not sure they'd want anything below UHF. If you are inside of a steel
building, I suspect they'd be better off at higher frequencies as they will
tend to bounce around and find an egress far easier than VHF.

A 6 meter HT is going to have antenna/ground efficiency problems as well.
It is far better than 10 (or 11, for that matter), but still is limited with
a small antenna and a far from satisfactory ground. Plus the wavelength is
going to have a difficult time getting outside of a building.

2 meters is better, but still lacking. 440 is better, but up around 1 GHz
would probably be better than the VHF television channels.

Agreed on all that but what I'm saying is that it's not what that blurb
is really all about.

As Hans, K0HB and others have pointed out, the big problems in NO
aren't about lack of spectrum. They're about lack of planning and lack
of good system design.

What I think that blurb is really all about is the desire fo some to
turn off their NTSC TV transmitters. And I can't say I blame them.

Most TV stations here in Philly are simulcasting DTV and NTSC. That's
expensive, both in tower rental, power and labor costs, and because the
NTSC stuff is all going to be worthless when they finally shut it down.

The migration to DTV has taken a long time and it's going nowhere fast.
The stores keep selling NTSC TVs, VCRs, etc., so the 'installed base'
isn't shrinking. DTV sets still cost a pretty penny, and if someone
doesn't watch that much TV it's not a high priority to replace an NTSC
set.

or watchs mostly news type shows (I really don't need a HDTV pic of
Bill ORiely or Neil Cavuto) But localy NO HDTV is avable at all and
DVDs don't take advantage iof it so why should I pay for one?

How many more years and dollars before they can shut off the old NTSC
transmitter? That's the big issue.

One solution is to distribute set-top boxes that convert DTV signals to
NTSC, so that you can watch the DTV transmissions on your NTSC set,
tape them on VHS, etc. But who is going to pay for it?

By wrapping the issue in disaster-communications bunting, the whole
thing can be made to look as if it's in the national interest to shut
down NTSC broadcasting ASAP. The red herring is that the freed-up
spectrum will somehow enhance disaster comms.

---

You get down to the museum yet? They have a working pre-NTSC B&W/color
TV set complete with color wheel...

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:


"Training in [radio] contests?!?"

Yeah, training. Please deal with it. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

KØHB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote


Are the emergency organizations going to employ pay and train competent radio
operators who are capable of figuring out where they need to be frequency
wise?


"First responders" are not radio operators. They are firemen, policemen,
medical personel, ambulance drivers, etc., etc., etc. To these people a radio
is just another tool --- they need to just "mash the PTT" like you describe, and
communicate their message.

THIS IS EXACTLY AS IT SHOULD BE! Communications should be transparent to these
people, and require no training at all beyond simple circuit procedures.

Design the system that will always be up, will allow anyone to
communicate to anyone anywhere with no knowledge of anything by the
users, aside from turning the radio on, adjusting the audio, and mashin'
that button.

Then pay for it!

Then watch what happens when the big one hits.





The failures of communications in New Orleans were not because of lack of
spectrum, nor lack of "competent radio operators", but lack of properly hardened
communications facilities, and lack of backup for those facilities.

They probably needed backup for the backup too....

Prime example --- the New Orleans PD EDACS MA/Comm 800 MHz radio system
functioned well during and immediately after the hurricane, but then natural gas
service to the prime downtown transmitter site was disrupted and the generator
was out. (No gas, no generator. No generator, no transmitter.) Owners of the
site would not allow installation of LP gas tanks as a backup to piped gas,
meaning generators did not have any fuel when the main lines were cut.

You suggesting reactors for power supplies?

The hyper complicated system that you describe only adds to the
infrastructure needed to support the system.



Further compounding the situation was the fact that the PD EDACS acted as a hub
of the area Inter-Operation system with 17 hard-patched RF links to a variety of
other agencies in NO and nearby cities/parishes. When the EDACS went down, it
pulled all those inter-op links down with it and the whole first-responder comm
system imploded, reduced to little "islands" of communications that couldn't
inter-communicate. Airlifting a thousand "competent radio operators" into the
area would not have improved communications at the level of the "feet on the
street" cop, fireman, or medical person one iota.

As I see it, two mundane planning changes could have prevented this train
wreck....

1) Emergency fuel supplies at the transmitter site (a 2,000 pound tank of
LP lasts weeks).
2) A star or mesh (rather than a hub) topology of the mutual-aid/other
interop links which didn't allow a single point of failure to crash the whole
system.

You're coming in on the end of the issue with suggestions of how the
beginning should be handled. You'll admit that is a lot simpler?

I suspect that nature can eventually beat anything that we can design.
What if it was a Cat 5 storm? What if the base of the bulletproof system
was washed away?

I doing a bit of devils advocate here Hans. Your ideas are good,
especially the mesh idea as opposed to a hub. But nature has a way of
accelerating entropy that beats most of the things that we can come up with.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote

Design the system that will always be up, will allow anyone to communicate to
anyone anywhere with no knowledge of anything by the users, aside from turning
the radio on, adjusting the audio, and mashin' that button.


You have it precisely correct. I knew you'd catch on!


You suggesting reactors for power supplies?


Where did I suggest that?


The hyper complicated system that you describe only adds to the infrastructure
needed to support the system.


Actually, the EDACS at New Orleans was pretty compact, simple, and
straightforward compared to most major metropolitan areas. Certainly wasn't
"hyper complicated".


Your ideas are good

Of course they are. I made my living for many years in telecommunications
planning/configuration.


--
73, de Hans, K0HB
--
Homepage:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
Member:
ARRL http://www.arrl.org
SOC http://www.qsl.net/soc
VWOA http://www.vwoa.org
A-1 Operator Club http://www.arrl.org/awards/a1-op/
TCDXA http://www.tcdxa.org
MWA http://www.w0aa.org
TCFMC http://www.tcfmc.org
FISTS http://www.fists.org
LVDXA http://www.upstel.net/borken/lvdxa.htm
NCI http://www.nocode.org