Hi, I am on my local CERT (in this case, Community Emergency Response Team, not the CERT homed at Carnegie Mellon). This is a FEMA sponsored volunteer auxillary to the local Fire Dept. Relying on cell phones during and emergency is a bad idea for 2 reasons: 1) Each cell tower is connected to the PSTN (telephone network) by one or more T-1 land lines (or maybe line of sight microwave) that are vulnerable to most of the expected disasters in the region: earthquake, flood, landslides. And individual towers could be knocked out by the side effects of any of the others (toast landing butter-side down). 2) Regardless of point 1), everyone has cell phones these days, and in an emergency, everyone will be trying to use their phones. This phenomenon can easily overwhelm the PSTN, I can remember 2 minute waits for dial-tone after a windstorm with GTE in Beaverton, but the traffic was more than enough to overwhelm the much lesser cell phone system capacity. I can tell you that cell phone service in Dallas Texas at the intersection of 2 freeways during rush hour is non-existent, I can't imagine what an emergency would do. So we are taught that we cannot count on cell phones during an emergency. We rely on FRS walkie talkies (1-2 miles) for intra-team communications with mobile ham operators to relay info to the Emergency Operations Center. We do not have security concerns. We are more concerned with interference, but that is what you get on unlicensed spectrum. I would assume that the Coast Guard should have access to radios with some of the bandwidth allocated to the Federal gov't, that have encryption. A matter of money and dilligence in keeping them charged. Regards, Robert On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, George Heuston wrote: > 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 - 11:07:57 PDT