Slashdot Mirror


First Responder Networks 5 Years After 9/11

stinkymountain writes, "Five years after 9/11, you'd think all of the nation's first responders would be on a state-of-the-art wireless network that would enable police, fire and other emergency personnel to talk to each other in case of a disaster. But they're not -- yet. Network World ran an investigative piece sketching why progress has been so slow, and describing the progress that has been made." The article leads off with a scenario that represents the toughest possible test for a first-responder network. Even the best imaginable networked system might bog down in the midst of "fog of war" situations.

18 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Hey Congress! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Lack of funding is a major impediment. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has helped Washington, D.C., and Denver with grants to upgrade wireless systems, but it hasn't been able to cover the cost for all of the major cities in the United States. Replacing all of the infrastructure used by first responders would cost more than $40 billion, Vaughan estimates. "That's a problem," he says.

    Here's a chance to bring a shit load of money to your districts WITHOUT it being considered pork! Duh!

  2. Easier said than done by OakDragon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like a lot of things, this is one problem that cries out "Something must be done! This is something; therefore, it must be done."

    It's easy to look at the communication failures on 9/11 and recognize we need a better way of doing things. And it seems like a fairly simple problem that can be solved by a neat, tidy bureaucratic process. But as the example of the warehouse full of refigerators shows, it's really not that simple.

  3. Over kill may be the problem. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why use broadband? I am trying to understand why the SWAT team lost communication in the building? Do they used a centralized system? It is impossible for each SWAT member to talk peer to peer with each other SWAT team member?
    Come on people streaming video is nice but not at the expense of calling for help.
    Maybe they should start carrying a few simple HTs as back up for their super wiz-bang system.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  4. What does 9/11 really have to do with this? by mendaliv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It strikes me that in this article, they're just using 9/11 to shock people into seeing a problem that was *already there to begin with*.

    The warehouse shootout they mentioned probably would've happened the way it did, 9/11 or not, and the departments would still have complained that they needed more funding for better comms gear than they can afford.

    1. Re:What does 9/11 really have to do with this? by Mikachu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's because it's a great example of how the government is pouring tons of money into things like homeland security and yet it's (obviously) not going where it needs to.

      The problem, in my opinion, is not really lack of funding on homeland security, it's just not really being put in the right places.

  5. government failure in action by jay2003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The federal government not only should have figured out standards for first responder radios, it ought to have provided the radios to all first responders. Any time you hear a politician compare the Al Queda threat to WWII, try to remember that if President Roosevelt had responded in the slow, unfocused manner President Bush has, we would all be speaking german now. In WWII, this country completely transformed its economy in less than 2 years to rapidly produce ships, planes and tanks. In 2006, we can't even get working radios. How the mighty have fallen.

  6. Of course not. by JavaLord · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Five years after 9/11, you'd think all of the nation's first responders would be on a state-of-the-art wireless network that would enable police, fire and other emergency personnel to talk to each other in case of a disaster.

    Five years after 9/11 you'd think we would have reformed our INS department, so that people who pose no threat could gain citizenship with more ease, and people who might be a threat were deported.

    Five years after 9/11 you'd think we would have the most secure airlines in the world, with sensible screening processes, yet we do not.

    Five years after 9/11 you'd think we would have had an honest review of our interventionist foreign policies since the end of the cold war, by Bush, Clinton, and GW Bush yet this hasn't happened.

    Five years after 9/11 you'd think we would have made more progress in developing our own energy, or finding alternative fuels to use.

    The only conclusion we can draw is that government, especially big government moves slowly, and is not doing the will of the American public. The American public is just too distracted to care. I blame world of warcraft.

    1. Re:Of course not. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Five years after 9/11 you'd think that people would be over it so we wouldn't have to see the victims bodies being waved on political poles over and over and over....

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    2. Re:Of course not. by jackbird · · Score: 2, Insightful
      All true, but off the mark. The last of the debris was hauled out quite a while ago. The reason is the mexican standoff between:
      • Larry Silverman (WTC leaseholder),
      • his insurers (who would love not to pay billions),
      • George Pataki (who would love to be president),
      • Mayor Bloomeberg (who would love to have a viable project under way during his tenure, but who has no authority over the site),
      • the survivors' organizations (who would love a memorial and nothing else on some of the most valuable real estate on Earth),
      • SOM (freedom tower architects),
      • the Transit Authority (who would love to be able to modernize the spaghetti of subway lines under the site),
      • and The Port Authority (landowner).

      All have wildly differing interests, all have some claim to legitimacy in determining the direction of the project, and none have a coherent vision or the individual clout to make something happen at the site.

      Add to that 3 scrapped freedom tower plans, a memorial that can't be built, and no real pressing need for a large office building there, and you have a Big Mess.

  7. Another Attack Vector by vlakkies · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FTA: With IP, SWN can upgrade radio software over the network and provide mobile data support.

    The state of software security being what it is, I wonder if the next major attack would not be accompanied by a day zero exploit of a bug in the radio software that renders all the radios useless because the bad guys uploads some bad software. Vendor diversity in radios may be beneficial just as it is in operating systems.

  8. Re:CB channel 9 for 802.11 by loose+electron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why does everyone love to point the finger at 802.11 for things it was never designed to do?

    Internet methods for emergency communication in a burning building where the power plug has been pulled? Dependence on computer systems in these types of emergencies?

    I don't thinks so.

    --
    www.effectiveelectrons.com "chips that work" Analog, RF, Mixed Signal
  9. Re:CB channel 9 for 802.11 by ajs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's a nice idea, but can you imagine how fast it would be abused?! "Hello, random router, I'm a ... fire official ... please let me route traffic through you." Heck, you could boostrap an entire fidonet-like service in any major city without spending a dime.

    No, the bottom line is that, when you're inside what is essentially a faraday cage, you're screwed. You might have the radios figure this out and talk directly to eachother, but that's about as good as you're going to get. The only way around it that I can think of would be to drop a repeater in a doorway or blow down a wall.

  10. Where our tax dollars are going... by TheDarkener · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Very strange, I'm not sure either. You'd think that even BEFORE 9/11 happened, NORAD would have known about the planes' diverted flight path (and if not the first plane, the second one at least..??) ...but for some reason they had no idea.

    Talk about strange.

    You'd think that 5 years after this horrible disaster, all of this "homeland security", increased taxpayer spending, would at least help us prepare for another homeland strike..but for some reason, most of us feel more at risk than before 9/11. Even our president tells us it could happen at any time, and the only thing to do is "fight the terrorists".

    Talk about eerie...

    I'm 26, young and still have a lot of fight left in me...but I'm scared for the older people that are sitting at home, watching CNN/Fox news, scared that a terrorist will blow their house up. Or the kids (the kids!) who don't understand why two huge buildings "just fell down"... For some reason, these billions and billions of taxpayer dollars that are supposed to be going toward helping us all feel better about the security of a nation...just isn't there.

    Talk about a completely unbalanced proportion. 5 years later, we still don't know what happened on 9/11.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  11. A Firefighter's Opinion by MikeyTheK · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason why it hasn't happened is that WE DON'T WANT IT OR SEE THE NEED FOR IT.

    I do NOT want cops polluting my tactical channels with their blather. Do any of you own scanners? Take a listen to EMS, Fire, Law Enforcement, and Air Traffic channels. None of these groups want anybody else to contend with when the shit is hitting the fan. The vocabulary is different. The lingo is different. The culture is different. It's hard enough at an emergency scene to keep traffic to a minimum between the various commands, let alone adding several more channels that someone has to monitor, and shout over.

    This is why NIMS and Unified Command exist. The various agencies can talk to each other IN PERSON since they're face-to-face, and then relay the messages via their radio frequencies to their people.

    We don't want it. We don't need it. If you want to see how we operate in an emergency, ask to be an observer at the Command Post the next time your local jurisdiction does a mass-casualty drill. Airports do them on a grand scale once per year to once every two years. The regional Counterterrorism Task Forces do them once per year. Your regional Emergency Management Agency does it once per year. Watch and learn. We don't need more crap on the radio.

    --
    Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
    Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
    1. Re:A Firefighter's Opinion by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The regional Counterterrorism Task Forces do them once per year. Your regional Emergency Management Agency does it once per year. Watch and learn. We don't need more crap on the radio.

      I have and I also notice that in REAL emergencies your stuff does not work and the HAM RADIO guys save your asses.

      Yet you ignore their reccomendations on how to fix your poorly designed communications systems because they are "hobbiests" and "amateurs" ignoring that most have more experience and education than the engineers that motorola's sales guy sent in to design your system. 800mhz trunked is stupid for emergency it always fails, great for the day to day crap though. long range VHF systems from the 60's work and continue to work and are perfect for emergencies... but you guys dont gear up for emergencies.

      Every year we offer to help and work with the regional emergency groups, they ignore us until the shit hits the fan then they come crawling asking for help. Local search and rescue groups are far more organized and effective than any of the government paid groups.. yet they as well are ignored until needed (and needed far more than people realize) Get off your high horse and involve those of us that actually know what the hell it takes to get emergency communications as well as how to actually do the tasks needed.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  12. "Toughest Possible Test?" Not even close. Nukes? by Cr0w+T.+Trollbot · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "The article leads off with a scenario that represents the toughest possible test for a first-responder network."
    Um, a lone shooter in a warehouse? Not even close. How about the following as the "toughest possible test":

    A ten kiloton nuclear weapon goes off in the heart of downtown Manhattan tomorrow.

    How's that for a test? Certainly Iran is doing everything in its power to make this a real possibility...

    - Crow T. Trollbot

  13. Re:CB channel 9 for 802.11 by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You might have the radios figure this out and talk directly to eachother, but that's about as good as you're going to get. The only way around it that I can think of would be to drop a repeater in a doorway or blow down a wall.

    And both are valid solutions I was thinking of mentioning (ignoring the one about blowing down a wall). Why can't the radios mesh and have one (or more) that can talk to the nearest fixed repeater act as a local repeater? Why can't they have repeaters they can drop in the middle of the building to take care of the problem? I know that some police cars have repeaters built into them, so why not have a briefcase one for emergency use? If it's such a huge warehouse, I'm sure that police cars could have driven in it directly, why not drive the cars in and have the repeaters in them help out?

    The problem is that the people designing the systems are non-technical and the technical people are being involved only after the system is designed and the budget is approved. When someone is given $5 million to build a wireless network to have 98% outdoor coverage and that is the correct amount for that task, he can't make it also cover inside to that same 98%. So, they need to get the tech people in the design process sooner. They need creative people with technical understanding to come up with scenarios like the failure listed so that the people that approve the budget can decide whether they will or will not address such problems.

  14. Re:A local... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    One might think that RF and EE -type engineers would be in big demand; after all, with all the new mandates for better communication systems - these guys should be the go-to experts.

    When CNN wants to talk about why the radios didn't work inside WTC, they don't speak to RF engineers, they speak to a uniformed fire captain, the misinformed mayor, or some under-informed political hack for the Port Authority.

    When the FAA and AF command centers couldn't get enough information to make decisions on 9/11, you might think they might increase coverage to avert info-gaps. My local TVnews tells me the NYC metro area is under-staffing ATC by around 30%.

    Friends tell me a local PD (07xxx) is refitting its aging radio infrastucture. Instead of taking the lower-priced, higher wattage, more versatile Isreali version... they are signing a new contract with the same-old-vendor. Guess what - they continue to use radios from the same mfr. who made all the radios that failed the firefighters in the WTC.

    We don't need terror; we should live in fear of our own idiots.