RE: CRIME FW: Wireless Communications during disaster?

From: St. Clair, James (JStClair@private)
Date: Fri Jun 06 2003 - 10:07:14 PDT

  • Next message: Dorning, Kevin E - DI-3: "RE: CRIME FW: Wireless Communications during disaster?"

    GETS cards will work for mobile comms but only at the first terrestrial AP.
    You are correct that the phone must still work.
    
    Priority wireless comms are still a project with the NCS. However, the
    physical problems of infrastructure are still a vulnerability, as Kevin
    pointed out.
    
    Satellite phones are currently the only real solution, with your WALLET
    being the largest vulnerability.. :) 
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Dorning, Kevin E - DI-3 [mailto:kedorning@private]
    Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 12:56 PM
    To: 'George Heuston'; crime@private
    Subject: RE: CRIME FW: Wireless Communications during disaster?
    
    
    In past emergency's where Cell phones were a primary means of
    communications, there were considerable problems in getting essential
    messages through.  I know that a friend at one of the local utilities told
    me that during the 95/06 floods and storm season, they sometimes had crews
    waiting up to 4 hours after completing an emergency repair, for their next
    assignment.  This was because they relied on Cell's for communications, and
    the cell circuits were jammed because of outages on the surface phone lines.
    It is also a phenomenon that whenever there is a disaster/emergency of any
    magnitude in a geographical area, the phone systems are maxed almost
    immediately with family contact calls.
    Some of us have Government Emergency Telephone Cards (GETS) that allow us to
    break in to the phone system for emergency communications,  However, I don't
    think that the cards cover cell communications at this time.
    
    An additional problem with wireless communications is that they rely on
    fixed broadcast and repeater sites, which, in a major earthquake situation
    may not be fixed any longer.
    
    For real emergency communications, most people are going to Sattelite
    phones, but this is a very expensive service to maintian just for emergency
    use.
    
    K.d>  
    
    Kevin E. Dorning
    Chief Information Security Officer
    Office of the CIO  DI-3
    Bonneville Power Administration - USDOE
    503-230-3082
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: George Heuston [mailto:GeorgeH@private]
    Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 9:17 AM
    To: crime@private
    Subject: CRIME FW: Wireless Communications during disaster?
    
    
    Forwarded at Rich's request (he's doing the Rose Festival gig, and not
    at a terminal today)...
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Goerling, Richard J. LT (TAD to CGIC Portland)
    [mailto:RIGoerling@private] 
    Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 8:55 AM
    To: George Heuston
    Subject: Wireless Communications during disaster?
    
    I'd like to get some input from those of you who have expertise in
    wireless communications.  I know these are rather expansive questions,
    and the issues related to them, security and otherwise, are myriad.
    However, the basics are what I'm after:
    
    --What are the weaknesses of relying on cell phones, during post-natural
    disaster or man-made disaster, for a public safety agency's
    communications (Coast Guard in this case)?  
    
    --Are other wireless forms of comms more reliable than cell phones?  
    
    As a part of a broad-based Port Security Plan covering the Oregon,
    Idaho, Southern Washington region. We are looking at what comms options
    we should consider as a contingency for a disaster... any input would be
    appreciated.  
    
    Regards, 
    
    Rich 
    
    Richard Goerling
    U.S. Coast Guard MSO/Group Portland
    6767 N. Basin Avenue
    Portland, OR 97217
    (503) 247-4018 office
    (503) 240-9302 fax
    (503) 849-2026 cell 
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jun 06 2003 - 10:27:57 PDT