Ask Slashdot: Ad-Hoc Wireless Mesh Network For Emergency Vehicles?

First time accepted submitter Texaskilt writes "I am looking to put together a mobile mesh network for my volunteer fire department and would like some recommendations from the Slashdot crowd. Ideally, the network would consist of cheap wireless routers (Linksys WRT-type) mounted on each vehicle. From there, tablets or other wireless devices could connect to the router. When the vehicles are in the station, the routers would auto-connect to the WiFi network to receive calls for service and other updates. When out on a call, the router would form an ad-hoc network with other vehicles on the scene. If a vehicle came into range of an Internet 'hotspot,' it would notify other vehicles and become a gateway for the rest of the 'ad-hoc' networked vehicles. I've looked at Freifunk for this, but would like some other options. Recommendations please?"

Comments

Get ready for it!

[Frosty Piss]

Of course at least 1/3 of the posts will try to knock you down with the blather "if you have to ask, you're not the right person for the job".

Re:Get ready for it!

[fm6]

In this case, that seems a valid criticism. Messing around with technology you don't understand is a harmless, and even educational, pastime for the hobbyist/hacker. But when lives are on the line, a more conservative approach is called for.

Re:Get ready for it!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have to ask, you're not the right person for the job. There you go.
 
Just trying to improve the stats for number of post that say this. And no I am "Frosty Piss", I promise.

Re:Get ready for it!

[HangingChad]

But when lives are on the line, a more conservative approach is called for.

You know nothing about being a first responder, especially out in rural areas where radio coverage may be spotty to non-existent.

Lives are on the line whether you have working comm or not. There were times I would have settled for two tin cans and a string if I could call for mutual aid on it. During emergencies ad-hoc networks could be a lifesaver.

There is a big need for self-discovering networking between emergency response vehicles. You won't find any commercial solutions in the budget of most departments.

Maybe drag your fat butt out and pull some volunteer shifts before you start telling people in the field what they need.

Re:Get ready for it!

[fm6]

You're right, I don't know much about being a first responder. I'm in no position to argue with your advocacy of self-discovering networks.

But that's not what I'm arguing with. The issue here is reliability. A technical geek whose kludging together unfamiliar technology might be able to promise useful new features, but definitely can't promise that the damned thing will work.

To hackers, making technology do new and interesting stuff is an end in itself. But most people don't care about features if they can't count on a device doing what they need it to do. I may be ignorant of your work, but I think I'm right in assuming that reliability is even more important to you than to the rest of us.

BTW, I had a minor accident a few days ago, and a bunch of first responders came to my aid. I didn't have a chance to thank them, so I'm gonna thank you, for your work, and for putting yourself at risk to make life safer for the rest of us.

Re:Get ready for it!

[mdfst13]

I think that you are framing the question incorrectly. The question is not if it would be better to use a more robust networking method. The question is if this would be better than no network at all. Is a network that only works 50% of the time better than a network that works 0% of the time? The original poster doesn't share the purpose of this network, but for many applications, sometimes working is better than never working.

Another issue here is that if they can build an ad hoc network that sometimes saves lives, it will be easier to then get funding for a more robust networking option that can consistently help them save lives.

It's also true that there are some applications where intermittent connectivity is worse than no connectivity. It's possible that this is one of those situations. You're right to call out that possibility. However, shouldn't we at least consider the possibility that the poster has thought that through and really would be better off with intermittent connectivity?

Re:Get ready for it!

[fm6]

Well, this conversation has convinced me that I don't know much about how first responders might use an ad-hoc network. They say they need it, and the rest of us can only nod and agree, though more specifics would be very helpful. But from what little I've learned so far, it doesn't sound as if a solution that breaks down unexpectedly is an acceptable one.

I'd also suggest that this problem needs to be attacked on a higher level. I know that there's been a big effort to create standards for emergency radio networks using common frequencies. Part of the justification for the move to digital TV was to free up analog frequencies for this purpose. But broadcasters have ended up holding onto their old frequencies even as they moved to new ones. Obviously this problem needs some serious leadership.

Re:Get ready for it!

[fustakrakich]

But when lives are on the line, a more conservative approach is called for.

On the contrary, the more creative approach is called for. Few things spark more and better innovation than an emergency. See Apollo 13.

Re:Get ready for it!

[rtb61]

First step in creating the add-hoc network is to think like a business administrator rather than a network administrator. First question is how can I achieve funding and assistance for this project. Would the Federal government have avenues open for providing financial support. Would the military be interested in providing technical support as they are also interested in providing ad hoc networks in the field to share information and emergency vehicles in the field would provide a valuable test bed for them. Would any local universities or even universities more far afield be interested in providing technical assistance, they gain field research opportunities whilst providing you with technical assistance and hardware.

So asking questions on slashdot is a good start to asking more questions from people further afield. The University route could prove the easiest as they already have the contacts in place for federal and military funding and assistance in place. Start with a few phones and emails to sound people out and then make more formal applications with the support of your local community and organisation. Avoid private industry assistance as your likely to run into asshats that will just bleed dry what ever funding you manage to gather leaving you with non-functional system.

Re:Get ready for it!

[fm6]

OK, Mister Holistic Mashup, you go build a moon rocket. I suspect it requires more bureaucratic expertise than you have.

Creative improvisation makes sense when your carefully laid plans turn to shit. But they're no substitution for carefully laid plans.

Re:Get ready for it!

[AK Marc]

If you have working radio, what good would a WiFi connection be? What is added to the response if you have everything working, WiFi, radios, and mobile phones?

I still don't get what a WiFi connection would do to help. None of the fire trucks here have computer on them, other than what's running the radio and the engine. Most of what a pump operator does could be replaced by a computer and do a much more efficient job (juggling water flows and pressures), but would never be used because of reliability and safety. A human will think before taking an action. If you ask for 1200 kPa on hose one (properly calculating it for the length of the hose to get the 700 kPa required at the branch), The human will not only fail to comply (as a computer should as well), but tell you why, and make sure to tell the OIC that you are an idiot in need of retraining.

Re:Get ready for it!

[fustakrakich]

Fine... use Nextel.. Is that 'conservative' enough for you? If that goes to shit, use Radio Shack walkie talkies. If that craps out on you, blast your sireen..

Re:Get ready for it!

[bkcallahan]

I am a disaster responder. Get your ham license if communication is an issue, I did. Maybe drag your fat butt out and pass a 35 question test...

Re:Get ready for it!

[ceoyoyo]

I think the real question is, is a fancy ad hoc wifi network that will eat up a lot of time to set up and maintain, and a fair amount of money to equip, worthwhile, or would it be better to just put a cell with a data plan and tethering or a mobile hotspot in each truck?

Really, how likely is it that you're going to have a bunch of firetrucks out where there's no cell service but strung out in such a way that one of them manages to slurp someone's unsecured wifi and the others can't see it, but they're all close enough to share?

Project Byzantium?

[Intrepid imaginaut]

http://project-byzantium.org/

I have to wonder though, what's wrong with good old fashioned radios.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[fm6]

If by "old fashioned radios" you mean the kind that just have a voice channel, then consider situations where being able to share things like maps or long lists quickly could be a literal lifesaver.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

I have to wonder though, what's wrong with good old fashioned radios.

They're fine for dispatching and communicating status amongst units. And that's all most emergency vehicles do. I can't see much use in setting up "ad hoc" networks to give emergency responders internet access; I can however see any number of uses for being able to gain control over the RF environment of a small geographical area... Anyone who has studied military tactics knows that gaining control over the environment is a major force multiplier.

I could see something more being needed for military / SWAT responses. Say you have a hostage situation and want to relay the thermal imaging of the building to headquarters or your other units in the field in preparation for an assault, or you want gun camera footage during the insertion. You need a lot of bandwidth to share that data, and the government's solution was to design satellite uplinks and encrypted mesh networking that doesn't rely on the environment to operate.

I could also see having RF equipment capable of cutting in on wifi or other civilian broadcast equipment as having a use in hostage situations; By using a highly directional antenna and a software definable radio, it might be possible to locate the cell phones of the hostages, cutting through any jamming that may be present, in order to communicate with them, activate cameras or microphones, etc.

But you're right; For most emergency responders, internet access isn't needed or warranted. Should that ever change, you want a network under your administrative control; not relying on routers that may or may not be present in theatre. In an emergency, anything that isn't highly reliable is worthless. The last thing I want to see is critical communications going out because someone picked a bad time to make ramen noodles next door!

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

The maps used in most such emergencies are hand-drawn on site and need no distribution because anyone who needs them must walk past them to get to anywhere they would be of use. Seeing the map while still arriving would have no effect.

The processes have to change, and one IT guy won't do that, unless he's also called "chief".

Re:Project Byzantium?

[bhcompy]

Interestingly enough, there are plenty of IT guys that are also called Chief, though, usually, it's because the department can't afford their own dedicated IT and don't want to deal with worthless consultants.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[fm6]

Well then, I guess the computers so many first responders have in their vehicles are just for show.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[RockDoctor]

Amongst other things, some radio systems have unhealthy habits such as producing sparks from the batteries when dropped onto the floor.

Emergency services are very picky about the equipment that they use, and with good reason.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"But you're right; For most emergency responders, internet access isn't needed or warranted."

If you think so, you've never been an emergency responder. The potential usefulness of network access is enormous: access to medical history databases, realtime conferencing with doctors or planners, etc.

"Should that ever change, you want a network under your administrative control; not relying on routers that may or may not be present in theatre."

Most civilian responders don't have to worry much about network availability "in theater". Although there are times it can be a problem; a relative of mine was EMT and Paramedic (both) in a remote area with little access other than radio.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[stephanruby]

I have to wonder though, what's wrong with good old fashioned radios.

If you're stuck under some rubbles somewhere, or if the cell towers are non-operational and you can't be notified of an extreme emergency coming your way, the chances that you'll have a cell phone on you instead of a two-radio radio may be higher.

That's why having some fire departments maintain their own licensed ad-hoc portable gsm emergency networks may not be such a bad idea. The truck ladders could be used to place antennas on high, or even have antennas affixed to them. Not to mention, such portable mobile gsm networks could probably be used for triangulation purposes.

And as a volunteer fire department, if you ever want to help out other Counties, or other States/Countries, to help during their major disasters. Your equipment and your budding expertise in this technical area could suddenly become very valuable there too.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[gbjbaanb]

that's because maps are used to get to the event and inform them of what the caller thinks the emergency is. Once there, normal "old tech" methods are used, mainly because you don't need to be distracted by flashy handhelds when there's an emergency on.

Same with the police - they do not want a fancy handheld computer to access data, not when they can press a button and talk into a radio whilst keeping an eye on anyone they're dealing with.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[slimjim8094]

I am an emergency responder, and frankly I can't come up with much I'd use internet for. Medical history databases? Like what? Even at the hospital they need it sent from other hospitals if they don't already have it , there's no world-wide database of medical history, and even if there was can you imagine the nightmare of hooking every EMS agency up to it? And the security involved in handling patient data on such a scale? No thanks. In any case, it doesn't do me much good. Either the patient can tell me their medical history, or we've got much bigger problems. If they're unconscious, their history is secondary to keeping them alive, and you've got plenty to do on that front.

As for conferencing with doctors - that's crazy. We already have medical directors (physicians) we can call on the phone or over the radio, and it works fine when we need it. Plus, it won't give them any more information than what you can tell them over the phone anyway. I don't much want to fidget with Skype and a webcam when we're supposed to be deciding on a course of action. They can't interact with the patient anyway, and crappy wireless webcam video wouldn't be sufficient to notice something subtle that we missed.

The paramedics that I work with have CAD for tracking status, location, nature, etc - but they don't use it past dispatch. They can also send telemetry (specifically EKGs) from their monitors via their cellphones to the receiving hospital, so a heart attack can be diagnosed from the trace before we get there. That's pretty cool, but it's about the limit of what we've ever felt like we needed.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

I am a volunteer firefighter as well. We have one computer in the station for 30 users. There are no computers in the trucks, unless you count the radio and ECU.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

You don't need a general purpose computer to get to the event. A GPS (non-networked, assuming it has updated maps) is sufficient for that purpose, and if you want something for one and only one purpose. a PC will make it harder, in almost all circumstances (longer boot, less reliable, more confusing).

The description was more of something to use after arrival, which there is no process that would be enhanced by computers.

In typical slashdot fashion, he's looking for a technical answer to a question he doesn't know. The question should start:

If tech were free and every appliance had a 10 Gbps fiber run between it and the station, what would they do differently? If the answer is "nothing" then there's nothing to fix. If there is an answer, then the next question should be something like "why aren't they doing that now?"

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

FOUL! When someone says something about a thing outside their field, it's the god-given right of everyone else to point out that since they're not actually an expert, they must be wrong. Having an actual expert come in and 1UP the poster is poor form. As an expert, you're supposed to keep quiet and let others figure out that the poster's vision of EMTs fiddling with web cams and wifi settings while their patient bleeds out is preferable to people using older, but more reliable, technology. Newer = better. Don't you know anything about slashdot? :D The correct answer to everything on this site is to increase the version number, make it open source, do it yourself, or add more horsepower.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"Medical history databases? Like what?"

I know few places have such things now, but it's happening, gradually. Try to be forward-looking.

"Either the patient can tell me their medical history, or we've got much bigger problems."

BS. If you could have at your fingertips their recent medical history, current medications, etc. on the way to the site, you would be much better prepared even if they aren't responsive. Are they taking codeine? Adderall? Nitroglycerine? Do they have known drug allergies? Known recent drug addictions? Some of the things it could tell you might be life-saving information.

"As for conferencing with doctors - that's crazy. We already have medical directors (physicians) we can call on the phone or over the radio, and it works fine when we need it."

Sure... but why use two systems when one could do the job?

"I don't much want to fidget with Skype and a webcam when we're supposed to be deciding on a course of action."

Who said anything about Skype or a webcam? That isn't what I meant at all. But if you COULD have a doctor there, without messing with Skype or a webcam, would you think that's a bad idea?

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I was referring to future uses of the technology, not a hodgepodge of smartphones and laptops.

"That's pretty cool, but it's about the limit of what we've ever felt like we needed."

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're being shortsighted. You are fixated on what the current systems do for you, but you don't seem to be very receptive to what improvements in the technology COULD do for you.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[fm6]

OK, I'm backing away from the "what's it for" aspect of this discussion. I'm forced to admit that I don't know jack about that.

So far I've heard from first responders like you who are making do with simple radios, and from first responders like this guy who desperately want ad-hoc data networks.Neither side has really explained why they want what they want.

So, please argue with each other, while the rest of us shut up and listen. Please. I for one am sincerely interested.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"As an expert, you're supposed to keep quiet and let others figure out that the poster's vision of EMTs fiddling with web cams and wifi settings ..."

Thanks for the sarcastic "defense", but that isn't even remotely the kind of thing I was talking about anyway. I might not have made it clear, but I was referring to developing technology, not what they have in their trucks today.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said "faster horses". -- Henry Ford

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

Motorola radio networks (The trunking 800Mhz variety) already can support data and voice I believe. And they do all the "mesh" networking/repeating/whatnot you'd need.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

I know few places have such things now, but it's happening, gradually. Try to be forward-looking.

Yes. Poster would like you to experiment with configuring a wifi mesh instead of saving his life. He'll understand because he wants people who care for him medically to be "forward-looking", not "prudent."

BS. If you could have at your fingertips their recent medical history, current medications, etc. on the way to the site, you would be much better prepared even if they aren't responsive.

An EMTs job is to stabilize your vitals, not to diagnose and treat your condition. They don't need to be prepared for anything except keeping you breathing, your heart beating, and, since you're unconscious in the above scenario, not much else.

But if you COULD have a doctor there, without messing with Skype or a webcam, would you think that's a bad idea?

The doctor is at the hospital, treating the other patients who may have life-threatening injuries. You're suggesting the doctor step away from those duties to help the EMTs perform... basic triage?

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're being shortsighted. You are fixated on what the current systems do for you, but you don't seem to be very receptive to what improvements in the technology COULD do for you.

He's fixated on the only thing that matters: Keeping the patient alive. Who the fuck cares what systems he uses? Unless they contribute to Job #1, they're worthless. I don't want someone googling "bleeding to death" or trying to skype or webcam to someone else to tell them what to do when I'm taking the ride, I want them trained in keeping my ass alive until someone with the right qualifications to fix whatever put me in that ambulance can see me.

You're coming at this from the perspective of someone who's spent too many years in technical support -- treat the EMT like he's some kind of moron or puppet, to be directed about by the guy on the other end of the line. Medicine isn't like that. They work as an integrated team, and they depend on their training and experience, not their google-fu, to do the job.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"Yes. Poster would like you to experiment with configuring a wifi mesh instead of saving his life. He'll understand because he wants people who care for him medically to be "forward-looking", not "prudent.""

Knock it off. My comment was about internet access, not even anything remotely like fiddling with or "configuring" a mesh network. Please READ the comments you are replying to.

"An EMTs job is to stabilize your vitals, not to diagnose and treat your condition."

No shit, Sherlock.

"They don't need to be prepared for anything except keeping you breathing, your heart beating, and, since you're unconscious in the above scenario, not much else."

Depending on the circumstances, it can be QUITE A BIT "else". As mentioned before, a close relative of mine was an EMT+Paramedic in a remote location. For over 20 years. I might not have been one myself but I am VERY familiar with what it entails, thank you very much. And sometimes it does involve a lot more than just what you have listed here.

Let me tell you: my relative would have killed for the kind of access I am talking about... which (as I have already stated) has nothing to do with "configuring a mesh network".

"He's fixated on the only thing that matters: Keeping the patient alive."

He's fixated on keeping the patient alive with what he currently has in his toolbox to work with. I was talking about expanding his toolbox when the currently developing technology is mature enough. But he talks like somebody who would have questioned the utility of portable defribrillators, before they were available. "Hey... I can do CPR for 30 minutes straight. I don't want to have to 'fiddle' with one of those! It's a waste of time!"

"I don't want someone googling "bleeding to death" or trying to skype "

I already explained that those were not the kinds of things I was talking about. Seriously: do you really READ the things you are replying to?

"You're coming at this from the perspective of someone who's spent too many years in technical support"

Again, bullshit. I am coming at this from the perspective of someone who is FAMILIAR with the job being discussed, and also familiar with upcoming technologies that can transform how effectively that job can be done. And by the way: I am not in "technical support". Been there, done that... and well. For a short period of time. But it's a shitty job and I got beyond that level many, many years ago.

"treat the EMT like he's some kind of moron or puppet, to be directed about by the guy on the other end of the line"

I did nothing of the sort. But he certainly tried to do that to me. He ASSUMED too much about what I meant. Maybe I did not explain as clearly as I could have but his assumptions are still not my responsibility.

"Medicine isn't like that. They work as an integrated team, and they depend on their training and experience, not their google-fu, to do the job."

And for the last time, "google" is about the farthest thing from what I was talking about. If you really thought I was, then I could understand your criticism... but since I already explained that I wasn't, well before you replied, then I can't honestly give you that much credit.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

sorry brah, your talking out of youre ass and it's pretty obvious. keep your terrible comments to yourself

I went and downmoded your posts to teach you a lesson.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

Knock it off. My comment was about internet access, not even anything remotely like fiddling with or "configuring" a mesh network. Please READ the comments you are replying to.

My low opinion of your comments is not a reflection on my reading ability; It's a reflection of your diminished critical thinking skills. You're fixated on internet access, but there's nothing on the internet that can't be accessed just as readily as a radio, or simply kept in the vehicle. Tablets can contain hundreds of gigabytes of data -- more than sufficient to handle a database and application to assist with triage in a standalone capacity. There is simply isn't a compelling argument for internet access. There are compelling reasons for two-way communication, even digitally, even using a packet switched network, even using IP protocols. But not internet access, which is firmly in the "Not Medically Necessary" category.

Again, bullshit. I am coming at this from the perspective of someone who is FAMILIAR with the job being discussed

Keep chanting "bullshit" over and over. It makes you seem smarter, in the same way drinking beer does. And no, you're not familiar with the job being discussed. You know a guy. So what? I know someone who was a police officer for 15 years. That does not make me qualified to offer advice on police procedure or the law.

I did nothing of the sort. But he certainly tried to do that to me. He ASSUMED too much about what I meant. Maybe I did not explain as clearly as I could have but his assumptions are still not my responsibility.

Once upon a time, there was a point someone was trying to make. I think you killed it some ways back and are now eating its dessicated corpse.

And for the last time, "google" is about the farthest thing from what I was talking about. If you really thought I was, then I could understand your criticism... but since I already explained that I wasn't, well before you replied, then I can't honestly give you that much credit.

You're the one advocating internet access, yet you've failed to come up with a single concrete example of how having internet access could improve any aspect of an EMTs primary job function. Why don't you step back from this a moment, and then look at this from the perspective of a manager who has asked you to provide a business proposal? Because you might know a shit ton about IT and maybe you're even Dr. House himself as well, and can diagnose people just by looking at them crossways, but you clearly don't have a clue about business. In business, you need justifications beyond "Well, I think it would be nice."

Re:Project Byzantium?

[slimjim8094]

"Medical history databases? Like what?"

I know few places have such things now, but it's happening, gradually. Try to be forward-looking.

Sure, but that's going to be 20-30 years. Not what the original question was. And in any case, it'll all fall down if the key isn't known (name, SSN, national ID number, etc), like if they don't have their wallet and were found unconscious - which might be infrequent enough that it's a net positive, except that EMTs are already practiced in figuring out history from clues at the scene, and that's something that doesn't develop without practice. Plus, give an EMT a tool that tells them 80% of what they need to do, and they'll forget about the other 20% entirely. It's not incompetence, it's a side-effect of needing to do too much at once. If they don't actually have to take a pulse manually, they'll use the time to do something else they need to do - but they'll miss important things. Give them a pulse-ox machine and they'll forget to notice if the patient is gasping, or if they have an irregular heartbeat, since "the machine says it's good" and they haven't checked by hand. This database is a magic medical history machine, except it'll be incomplete, unavailable, or plain wrong (if you get the wrong guy) and people won't notice. That's a human problem, not a tech problem, but it's a valid reason to be wary of such a capability.

"Either the patient can tell me their medical history, or we've got much bigger problems."

BS. If you could have at your fingertips their recent medical history, current medications, etc. on the way to the site, you would be much better prepared even if they aren't responsive. Are they taking codeine? Adderall? Nitroglycerine? Do they have known drug allergies? Known recent drug addictions? Some of the things it could tell you might be life-saving information.

All of those things are irrelevant. If their heart isn't beating, CPR is performed until it is. The paramedics do basically the same thing, except they intubate, push epi and atropine and so on. Work the problem. If you can say "his heart stopped because of an OD", that's great, but it doesn't help anyone in the field. It might help at the hospital, but they'll have access to that database long before we do anyway.

"As for conferencing with doctors - that's crazy. We already have medical directors (physicians) we can call on the phone or over the radio, and it works fine when we need it."

Sure... but why use two systems when one could do the job?

What two systems? Radio and cellphones? It's not both, it's either. Cellphone can be more direct, but radio works out of cellphone range.

"I don't much want to fidget with Skype and a webcam when we're supposed to be deciding on a course of action."

Who said anything about Skype or a webcam? That isn't what I meant at all. But if you COULD have a doctor there, without messing with Skype or a webcam, would you think that's a bad idea?

If we had a doctor there, it'd be great, but they wouldn't be able to do much for the vast, vast majority of things, though. For cardiac arrest, a MICU (mobile intensive care unit, paramedics) can do everything a hospital can do except for a cardiac massage, which can only be done in a surgical theater. They might be useful during an MCI, so people could be treated and released right there as appropriate.

The doctor's presence might be nice because he's licensed to do a lot more than I am. Even if he's instructing me, I still can't place an IV or do a chest decompression or pericardiocentesis. It's no different than over the phone, except he could see the image of what I'm describing to him. We don't have much in the way of decisions, anyway - it might be more useful for the paramedics, but like I said they already provide the relevant teleme

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

I've not had anyone with the ad hoc network say what they'd do with it, other than the medics sending back medical info before arriving at the ER, but knowing doctors and that they generally re-verify everything, I'm not sure how much that would actually help. So if you hear of any actual applications, I'd love to hear them. I've not heard a single thing that benefits the first responders, or those at the scene they are responding to to help.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[fm6]

You should make your response to the post I linked. It was written by one of your colleagues. He's the one who thinks that ad hoc networks are important.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Will.Woodhull]

No, parent post is dead wrong.

When a series of lightning strikes begins a complex forest fire, many of the first responders are separated from the guys who might be starting to do the hand drawn maps by miles of flames and roadless terrain. The responders are coming in from all directions; there is no central point that they are going to funnel through. In the Bilger Creek Complex of fires in 1987, a number of the first responders were woodsmen with bulldozers and chainsaws in the middle of it all, who had to guess where to set up fire lanes since although they were all in radio contact with each other, at that time there was no way to communicate where the fires were or where they were heading.

Lives were lost. If it had been possible to cobble together a mesh and communicate even rudimentary map data between the groups, there would have been fewer losses, and probably the fires would have been contained more quickly at less cost.

Tornados and hurricanes present similar situations: the first responders come in from all the margins. There is no central point they would funnel through. From what I have seen of earthquake news and when Mt St Helens blew its top, the same is true of tectonic events.

Generally, it is probably true that the first responders are on the ground, doing the work, before the map makers have got their magic markers out of the box. It would be very nice if these guys who are already in the thick of it could become a part of a mesh network and benefit from the second wave of responders who are building the maps and beginning to coordinate activities that are already in progress.

Internet connectivity would be useful to such a mesh, but even if that is broken, the ability to send low quality photos, penciled diagrams, rough maps, and plain text lists between the first responders and the first coordinators would be damn useful.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Will.Woodhull]

In the event of a tornado taking out a town, first responders will come in from the margins, from various directions. With cell towers out of operation and cables broken, Internet access can be problematic. An adhoc mesh would be a good way for the various first responders to develop the initial maps of the disaster, identifying where equipment is needed for rescue operations, etc. And ideally link back to the Internet.

Hurricanes: same thing on a larger scale. When Houston next gets hit by a big one, adhoc meshes among first responders are likely to become critical in determining where the boats and helicopters need to be sent first. In big cities we can expect emergency generators and redundant connectivity to keep hospitals, police, and fire stations up and running, but ad hoc meshes should have a big role in the early assessment and response to residential areas.

Forest fires present special challenges as their behavior can be unpredictable, smoke interferes with monitoring what is happening, and first responders can so easily become victims. Also these occur in areas where cell towers are few and dead areas are frequent, and the best Internet access is often by slow satellite connections. Ad hoc meshes would be very useful in assessing what the fire is doing and coordinating the activities of the first responders.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

Internet connectivity would be useful to such a mesh, but even if that is broken, the ability to send low quality photos, penciled diagrams, rough maps, and plain text lists between the first responders and the first coordinators would be damn useful.

The fire trucks here have no computers. What are you going to do with your sketches? Scan them with the non-existent scanner and send them with the non-existent computer via email to the non-existent account assigned to the other truck?

In the Bilger Creek Complex of fires in 1987, a number of the first responders were woodsmen with bulldozers and chainsaws in the middle of it all, who had to guess where to set up fire lanes since although they were all in radio contact with each other, at that time there was no way to communicate where the fires were or where they were heading.

So non-firemen were first responders? Then they wouldn't have had this in their bulldozers anyway, so it would have not been useful, even if it did exist then. The OIC is the one responsible. There's a reason things *should* funnel through one location. If you break protocol, people die. Working WiFi doesn't help if the protocols are poor or are not followed.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Will.Woodhull]

I have a decade of experience as an ICU RN, so I have some idea of what EMTs do. In general, they do a fantastic job, and are very good at using some pretty sophisticated expertise to stabilize victims. As a group, you deserve the honors that you are accorded.

However EMTs are not the only first responders. For that matter, they are rarely the first ones at the scene; they usually do not arrive until someone else has called them, and it is usually someone else who shows them where the victims are. That they might not benefit from ad hoc mesh networks does not mean that other first responders would also see no benefit.

The incidents I am most familiar with are forest fires and white water boating disasters.

In both forest fires and rafting disasters, the exact locations of the problems and victims are not immediately known and the first response is often by more than one group approaching from different directions. These incidents often happen where cell towers are few and there is no Internet access. Being able to link together an ad hoc mesh network would often reduce the risks that the first responders are taking and improve the odds that they find the victims in time to do some good. It is very worrisome to be having to guess whether to put the crew to work cutting firebreak or should they be sent instead to scour the valley for a party of hikers that probably is not there any longer.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Firethorn]

good way for the various first responders to develop the initial maps of the disaster, identifying where equipment is needed for rescue operations, etc. And ideally link back to the Internet.

Good way to put it. The way I'm picturing it now: Police car #4 happens to be within cell tower range; data connection established. It then meshes with car #3, Engine #2(Engine #1 is also there, but not in the optimal path), which reaches Ambulances #1-4, providing them with a (probably slow) internet connection. In addition, it'd probably be good if all of the above could utilize some sort of group chat - the radio might be busier talking back to home station, plus with some sort of 'virtual whiteboard' you could have people sharing drawings/maps/notes.

A number of previous posters seemed to 'buttenhole' a lot of the stuff to purely medical. It could be medical, or fire, earthquake, tornado, collapsed buildings, chemical leak, whatever. The responders could be spread over a wide area.

That being said, while you might be able to get a 'mesh' composed of linksys routers*, I have the feeling that that would actually be of limited use unless you have software designed to work with such networks.

I know the army was working on such a system for itself, however I don't know if random cheap linksys routers have the memory/processor power to manage the crazy routing logic necessary to prevent loops/get packets to their destination in a continuously changing wireless network. Adding some sort of server to each vehicle would somewhat defeat the purpose - and part of it being a true mesh is that you should need some sort of special device in the mix to make it all work.

*I'd go with dual radio units, personally. 2.4Ghz for the 'mesh', 5ghz for local devices. Unless you can hook up custom antennas and have the firmware actually transmit at the highest power allowed on outside 5Ghz channels. Then I'd flip them.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Will.Woodhull]

Last point first: If those who are maintaining the protocols are so fucking stupid that they cannot adapt them to improved technology, then people are going to die. Fortunately, the persons who are responsible for developing first responder protocols are a lot smarter than some of the persons who pretend to represent them on Slashdot.

First point: the issue under discussion is whether fire trucks and other first response vehicles would benefit from having computers (with ad hoc networking capabilities). That they do not have them now is immaterial. The cost of adding an Android phone to a fire truck's equipment is minimal; that would give the truck the capability of photographing sketches or conditions at the scene that could then be sent by Internet or phone link to an off site location. That kind of Internet access would be ideal, and should be done today.

But that is not what an ad hoc network or mesh network is about. This comes into play when there are no functioning cell towers or Internet access in the area of the disaster. The Android would instead communicate with a laptop with wifi router capabilities that would seek out similar units and establish an independent mesh such that sketches and photos, etc, could be shared among the first responders. Who would follow pre-established protocols to organize themselves so their efforts were coordinated.

Catskinners often do carry cellphones with cameras; that is the ideal way of communicating just how the dozer has broken down this time, and the part number of the fitting that needs to be replaced. Logging sites and timber cruisers already have laptops that are powerful enough for a first response mesh (they are useful for on site inventory tracking, etc); they would only need the wifi router and standardized software.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

They don't want or need communications in the event of a hurricaine. I know a number of communications experts that were turned away from Katrina area. I had an ex-military friend who was a communications expert in the military who was contacted to help, but ended up getting turned away.

The problem isn't the lack of communication. They prefer not having communication. They don't want the world to know what is going on. They'd rather no communications than too much. They have millions of dollars of communications gear and hundreds or thousands of people to run them. And for fires, I've seen the trucks with repeaters inside them so that they do form a communications mesh of a sort, but do it with expensive licensed gear that interoperates with the standard radios, not relying on WiFi for primary communications, nor relying on having two sets of gear and coordinating swapping between the two after a communications breakdown.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

Last point first: If those who are maintaining the protocols are so fucking stupid that they cannot adapt them to improved technology, then people are going to die. Fortunately, the persons who are responsible for developing first responder protocols are a lot smarter than some of the persons who pretend to represent them on Slashdot.

Are you talking about yourself again?

Technology should solve problems, not create problems, then solve them.

But that is not what an ad hoc network or mesh network is about. This comes into play when there are no functioning cell towers or Internet access in the area of the disaster. The Android would instead communicate with a laptop with wifi router capabilities that would seek out similar units and establish an independent mesh such that sketches and photos, etc, could be shared among the first responders.

First responders do not have the capability to share sketches, photos, etc. today with working communications. So you think that if you throw together some piece of shit ad hoc wireless running over consumer grade hardware running unsupported OS in an unsupported configuration, then the wireless network will read the minds of the responders and send the photos? When you "fix" requires billions of dollars to see any use whatsoever (And grossly limited use at best, even after billions are spent), I would think there would be a better solution to the non-problem you are inventing.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[poofmeisterp]

I might not have been one myself but I am VERY familiar with what it entails, thank you very much. And sometimes it does involve a lot more than just what you have listed here.

You're playing the "I'm in control because I have secret inside information you could never possibly know" card.

Post the specifics of what you're talking about or shut the hell up and quit arguing with incomplete information with a lack of direction. There is no point other than fueling an argument with your current motions.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Red Storm]

>> But if you COULD have a doctor there, without messing with Skype or a webcam, would you think that's a bad idea?

> The doctor is at the hospital, treating the other patients who may have life-threatening injuries. You're suggesting the doctor step away from those duties to help the EMTs perform... basic triage?

As a former EMT I would also point out there is a reason a doctor is in a hospital, not an ambulance. Doctors are very well trained at what they do, and they are used to having many tools at their hands in the hospital, but in the field none of those tools exist. I have said this before to many people, those who work in a hospital can be some of the worst people to provide assistance in the field as a citizen responder. This is a paradox, the best trained person is the worst person to provide assistance at a car wreck they just witnessed? But it's true. EMTs focus on the basics to get the patient to advanced care quickly (Platinum 10, golden hour). In addition doctors and nurses are not used to thinking about things like scene safety and how they could become another victim. Lastly let's say you had the hospital in a box and you could move the patient into this immediately after the accident etc, the first thing they will be doing is stabilizing, after that is done *then* they consider diagnosis and treatment.

CHAOS = Chief Has Arrived On Scene.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

Our emergency services (including our volunteer fire department) use 3G networks for this sort of deployment. Might I suggest the same?

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Intrepid imaginaut]

I can't imagine your range in a forest would be much good though, a few score meters at best. Satphones or something would be needed there.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

You said, "I am an emergency responder, and frankly I can't come up with much I'd use internet for."

Really, in Louisville, KY a lot of government data is available to first responder who have a user account -- police, corrections, maps, Etc.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Will.Woodhull]

Good point... my home router probably would not be much use. But forest service vehicles and logging crummies all come equiped with fairly powerful 12 volt generators, so I think it would only be a matter of finding an industrial grade router that can punch a signal through a few miles of wilderness. Maybe put a honking long whip antena on the rig...

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"My low opinion of your comments is not a reflection on my reading ability; It's a reflection of your diminished critical thinking skills. You're fixated on internet access ...

It most certainly *IS* provably tied to your reading ability, or lack thereof, because I have at least twice now explained to you that I was referring to upcoming technologies, like the ability to access a medical history database. But that is just one of example. I also stated explicitly that I was not referring to things like Google. However, you keep writing here as though you insist that I am talking about doing Web searches or some damned thing.

"... but there's nothing on the internet that can't be accessed just as readily as a radio, or simply kept in the vehicle."

Haha. That's funny. Once again: there may be little on the Internet today, but there certainly will be tomorrow. Try accessing a medical history over the radio. You will be tied up with back-and-forth queries, the party on the other end will answer your questions wrong sometimes, etc. No, it is not as easy to access it over the radio as it is to have it available to read the way you want, right in front of you.

"Once upon a time, there was a point someone was trying to make."

Way back above *I* was making the point that internet connection can be valuable to first responders. It has been you and that other person who have been raising all the hell about it. I haven't wavered from that single position. So again you demonstrate apparent reading difficulties. Or maybe it's comprehension or memory. How should I know?

"You're the one advocating internet access, yet you've failed to come up with a single concrete example of how having internet access could improve any aspect of an EMTs primary job function."

Yes, I have. I have already given you once concrete example. And it wasn't even my own idea... there have been whole medical conferences on the topic. There are experimental systems in the works. Why don't you know about them? Hell, they've been on the Discovery channel. And that was just the one thing. There are more.

"Why don't you step back from this a moment, and then look at this from the perspective of a manager who has asked you to provide a business proposal? Because you might know a shit ton about IT and maybe you're even Dr. House himself as well, and can diagnose people just by looking at them crossways, but you clearly don't have a clue about business. In business, you need justifications beyond "Well, I think it would be nice."

Hahaha. You painted yourself into a corner.

Tell you what: why don't you ask a company that's doing it?

Or maybe you could ask this one.

Or maybe you could ask this company that is also doing it.

You don't argue very well, and you obviously don't feel the need to, for example, bother to research the stuff you argue about. It took me no more than 30 seconds with a web search to find those companies, who obviously think it has valid business justification, or they would not be doing it. Granted, they are at an early stage, but they are doing it today. And not the only three, but just three out of the big list that I found.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"You're playing the "I'm in control because I have secret inside information you could never possibly know" card."

Bullshit. I stated that I have a close relative who was in the business for 20 years, I have been around it much of that time, and I am very familiar with what the job entails. I have seen it in action, more than just once or twice.

It was other people who accused me of not knowing what I'm talking about. Let them present their evidence, and then maybe I will present some of my own. It is whoever makes the accusation that bears the burden of presenting evidence of it. They haven't done so. Therefore, there is no obligation on my end.

In fact, one of them (see just above) proved beyond any doubt that she knows next to nothing about what she was talking about.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[poofmeisterp]

Then why are you bothering posting on here at all?

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"You know a guy. So what? I know someone who was a police officer for 15 years. That does not make me qualified to offer advice on police procedure or the law."

Also, just as an aside... if you really want to have a rational argument, you should not attempt to distort what other people say.

I did not say "I know a guy". I didn't even say it was a guy, for that matter. I wrote that I have a close relative -- very close, in fact -- who was in the business for over 20 years. And during some of that time I actually lived in the same place (to anticipate a smartass remark, no it was not my mother), and that place was where the ambulance was actually parked and dispatched from. I was around it a lot, and yes, I know a lot about what the job entails and how it is done. I was even asked to stand in for the driver if it became necessary, more than once.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"Then why are you bothering posting on here at all?"

Because she was being rude and insulting, with no real knowledge or justification to back it up. So I took pleasure in proving that she did not know what she was talking about.

Care to try me out yourself?

Re:Project Byzantium?

[poofmeisterp]

No, I use to play like you, then I learned to just walk away from stupid fights.

see, here I am walking...

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

You are incompetent. The first responders in your area are idiots. The first rule of SAR is "Don't become a victim yourself" (usually with cooler wording, often with a pun or rhyme). If your first responders show up blind to an emergency and get themselves killed, then there's no loss. They can't follow the first rule of any first responder.

But yes, the incompetent may see an improvement if an ad hoc network fed them everything they needed to know.

The issue is if they are too stupid to stay alive unless a computer tells them to, what good would they be in the emergency?

And nobody has yet given a single application that would work over this. It's useless tech for tech's sake that won't help any competent responder.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

Last word.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

"No, I use to play like you, then I learned to just walk away from stupid fights."

I understand, and I sympathize... I would not have been so flippant if I hadn't thought you were taking sides in someone else's fight.

I used to take the "walking away" route, too. Many years. And I felt I was doing the right thing. It took something of an epiphany for me to realize that right or wrong somehow, directly or indirectly, I nearly always seemed to end up getting punished for doing that. Karma is not the right word... call it whatever you want, but it was pretty consistent, once I looked back on it all.

So anymore, if I believe I am right, and the facts are on my side, I stand up and say so. I do listen and I am willing to change my position if shown convincing evidence. But I have been constantly amazed at some of the weird sh*t some people think is "evidence".

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

BS. If you could have at your fingertips their recent medical history, current medications, etc. on the way to the site, you would be much better prepared even if they aren't responsive.

An EMTs job is to stabilize your vitals, not to diagnose and treat your condition. They don't need to be prepared for anything except keeping you breathing, your heart beating, and, since you're unconscious in the above scenario, not much else.

Your comment represents a very uninformed view of EMS and the roles of EMTs and Paramedics. It harkens back to the days of funeral homes scooping and running to the hospital. You may not realize this, but EMS does far more than just scoop up unresponsive people and run them to the hospital.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Jane Q. Public]

Doesn't count, if it contradicts demonstrable fact. :o)

Re:Project Byzantium?

[sociocapitalist]

http://project-byzantium.org/

I have to wonder though, what's wrong with good old fashioned radios.

Email - this is for the volunteer department man...they have jobs to keep!

(yes I am joking - IANAF but I can't see what need they'd have beyond good radio either)

Re:Project Byzantium?

[iamwahoo2]

You are right to be skeptical of the topics main premise of using an off the shelf router without any other supporting services in place. It does not make a lot of sense unless of course it for research purposes of which there have been many instances of researchers working with first responders to demonstrate early prototypes of mesh networks and technologies in that area. Right now, there are a lot of people that believe that Ad-hoc networks, hastily formed networks, and cloud services offer a lot of value in various emergency management situations.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[AK Marc]

And yet, like here, nobody can articulate the value. Not to mention that about half take "ad-hoc mesh wireless" to mean one that searches for and teathers to a landline where available. Even if the network were 100% reliable, the land line wouldn't be. So, what critical services are we to run over this unreliable network? What hardware and applications?

Nobody here can answer that question, but so many think it a good idea that they don't care it won't work, they want to see it implemented (likely with tax dollars). I find it amusing when the generally libertardian slashdot advocates tax and spend, so long as the spend is on tech they like.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[girlintraining]

Last word..

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

As a volunteer A.R.E.S Ham operator i can see the need for digital and internet capabilities.
But since my head of operations [E.O.C.] is a fire fighter let me frame responses geared toward scenarios we trained for.
-Large fires needing data shared to multiple points about what gear is deployed where.
-Equipment tracking [APRS] or track them in a form.
-Tracking units and groups.
-Updating an offsite out of range of point to point comms HQ.
-Sending spread sheets or small photos of the incident. A pic is worth 10 min describing it on the air.
-Found some one alive and unresponsive? Send a photo. maybe some one back at command has files a report or is waiting for an update.
-If your talking for 10 min and some one has emergency traffic or an aide request the net is tied up. 15-30 seconds to send one file VS describing it or voicing the entire list of needed or remaining supplies.

http://www.arrl.org/ares

Re:Project Byzantium?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok lets try this scenario
tornado trashes small town america. All the residential areas have been destroyed. The survivors have moved to the gym at the local school and their only means of communications are down. Cellphone towers and phone lines and internet are down.
Also if your in he field and are able to pull up in a internet ready vehicle and suddenly the displaced people have a way of communicating over the internet to people in other locations their families know they are alive and fine.
This scenario would mean you would need satellite based transceivers. But its also a bit bigger then what the origonal poster is looking for. Hes just looking for WIFI equipped vehicles. Not Emergency communications and response deployment vehicles.

Re:Project Byzantium?

[SputnikCopilot]

I work at a telemedicine company and can tell you that our clients (including hospitals, clinics, and mobile first responder units) have found plenty of use for internet access. We act as a central store for medical information, so each client has already uploaded case history for their patients, and it is available to first responders in the field. It is not world-wide, and not every EMS agency is hooked up to it. However, those who are hooked up (generally via their preferred wireless provider) sure seem to get a lot out of the service. If the patient is unconscious and, as you said, you've got much bigger problems, every bit of information is primary to keeping them alive.

As for conferencing with doctors - that's not crazy; it's enlightening. Because you don't want to fidget with Skype and a webcam, we also offer a preconfigured setup with HIPAA-compliant, business-grade Skype, a hi-res camera with a monitor. Push a button and your patient sees a qualified doctor who sees them. You're supposed to be deciding a course of action? How about if your patient *might be* having a stroke, and the medicine to save their lives has a 50% chance of killing them if they're *not*? Now imagine you're 4 hours from the nearest doctor certified to diagnose a stroke (which they can do with a panned, tilted, zoomed-in view of the patient and their eyes and limbs, alongside their medical history).

The paramedics you work with aren't architects or engineers. They shouldn't be using CAD. They should be using a PACS. What you felt like you needed is limited by what you've thought you could get. The OP believes s/he could get more, so leave it to the engineers here to offer the solution instead of saying there is no need for one.

Cellular hotspot?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not just use a cellular hotspot?

Re:Cellular hotspot?

[jfdavis668]

Because some fires are places where there is no cell service. Now, wifi would be scarce there to, but they may have more wifi then cell coverage.

easiest solution

[starblazer]

While ambitious, this is the wrong path to go down. Great for hobbyists, but is NOT what emergency services needs. Emergency services needs reliability. If your department can't afford a few mobile broadband units, you should seriously look into throwing a couple more raffles or asking for more money from the city/county/township/state.

Re:easiest solution

[TwineLogic]

This post makes a very good point. What is going to happen to you, personally, when a call is lost for some reason, a person dies, and a lawsuit follows?

Re:easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Both of you: READ
"volunteer fire department"
Meaning hobbyists and no money..

Re:easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

But this doesn't mean: no liability
If you screw up bad enough you can go to jail.

Re:easiest solution

[ThatsMyNick]

You mean they have no money? How do they get firetrucks (which are very very expensive, if I may add), and everything else need to support their volunteer fire dept? The mobile devices are really really inexpensive. I have one from ting, the device cost me $70 (a bit more expensive than a wireless router, but not much), and for my usage I pay $15 a month (and all devices get pooled into the same plan, and will share data, making it very cost effective)

Re:easiest solution

[ThatsMyNick]

To add to that if the devices put together use less than 3GB per month, ting would cost $60 per month + $6 per device (+ tax).

Re:easiest solution

[Frosty Piss]

It might be a good "additional resource" for the mobile command and control vehicles...

Re:easiest solution

[raarts]

What will happen with those broadband mobile units, if there's a crowd of people on the scene, with smartphones?
Or there's a disaster and the celltowers go down?

Re:easiest solution

[Bob9113]

Emergency services needs reliability.

Emergency services needs to encourage hackers like this guy to explore many connectivity alternatives. A mobile broadband unit would be less reliable than a swarm of smaller agents in some contexts. Having both options is better than having only one. Having a swarm and a broadband unit working together would solve still more cases. Emergency services is an excellent place to be advancing the state of disaster-tolerant communication networks -- both from the top down and the bottom up.

Re:easiest solution

[starblazer]

Well, way back when it was a parameter called ACCLOC, which determined the priority of traffic. Cellular networks has "Wireless Priority" http://wps.ncs.gov/carriers.html to ensure that emergency services rise above the noise.

Re:easiest solution

[starblazer]

then in that case, we need more details. Where.... What's the population? How big is the department? What is their budget? What are they looking to accomplish?

Sorry, but the statement of "When it comes up to a hotspot".... reads to me as "Whenever we can find someones unsecured wifi for our taxi or my car" versus actual EM duties.

Re:easiest solution

[stephanruby]

Emergency services needs reliability. If your department can't afford a few mobile broadband units, you should seriously look into throwing a couple more raffles or asking for more money from the city/county/township/state.

The guy is a volunteer firefighter. His fire department is most likely all volunteers, with probably little -- to no budget.

Having reliable tools and services for emergencies is great, but government-based emergency services can be notoriously slow at adapting to changing circumstances and at adopting/trying out new technologies.

This is why you need to the people on the front-lines to do their own experimenting. If soldiers in Iraq for instance, had really waited for the next round of funding to get the body armor they needed, or the gps units they needed, instead of jerry-rigging their own version of body armor, or asking their family back home to buy them civilian gps units from Costco, many more would have died if they had not been allowed to use their own make-shift half-fast solutions.

And besides, no one is arguing that firefighters should give up on their existing communication infrastructure, to try out this new approach. This new approach would most likely be used in conjunction with those existing communication channels, trying to supplement them, not replace them (unless of course, those existing channels/tools had become non-operational, or over saturated for some reason, like they were on 9/11, or during Katrina).

Re:easiest solution

[slimjim8094]

"No money" in this context means "let's think carefully before dropping a few thou on some piece of equipment". A few cellular modems is probably less than the monthly soda budget. And yes, IAAVolunteerEMT, and we do spend like $200/mo on soda. When a few guys are sitting around all day, every day, you go through a lot.

Re:easiest solution

[AK Marc]

For most first responders, that's not true. They are protected while on the job. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Guerena_shooting Some ex-marine got his gun while the police were staging an unnanounced home invasion (he was on edge because a relative recently was killed in a home invasion). He never took his gun off safety, but the police fired 72 shots at him, hitting him with 22 of them and killing him. He never fired a shot and the initial reports all indicate the police claim he fired shots first. Yet, not a single charge was filed, even for the guy who shot blindly over the shoulder of another cop, who was in no danger and couldn't have seen or heard any shots from within. And here, firemen have protection under law from just about any liability, criminal or civil. Short of raping an unconscious smoke inhalation victim, I can't think of anything that could get a fireman in trouble.

Re:easiest solution

[silas_moeckel]

Get a bar gun installed, about 35 cents per L all told up front investment about a hundred bucks on ebay.

Re:easiest solution

[DarthBart]

My old department got hand-me-down trucks from the Texas Forest Service that we converted to brush trucks. We also got a 5000 gallon flight-line fuel truck from them that we converted to a mobile hydrant. The one "new" truck we bought, we bought as a used truck from a department in Chicago and had to take out a loan to pay for it. The bi-annual fundraising BBQ we held covered operating expenses, but that was just about it. Everything else came from handouts from the government.

The radio system? Patched together with stuff my dad & I bought at hamfests.

And there was more than a few times during the summer and we were fighting multihundred acre brush fires that I wish I knew exactly where each truck was, how much fuel and water they had onboard, and be able to set a waypoint for them to drive to for their next task.

That may not have all been able to have been done with an ad-hoc wireless system, but that would have helped immensely.

Re:easiest solution

[slimjim8094]

Interesting, but then there's upkeep to keep the CO2 filled and get the syrup. I understand there's some sanitary concerns as well, keeping bacteria out of the syrup lines. Vs. the current system, which is just fridge-packs of cans, and doesn't require ice, glasses to be washed, or maintenance (other than a bi-monthly or so trip to Costco)

Re:easiest solution

[Firethorn]

Briefly a member of a volunteer fire department.
Trucks and most equipment - second hand from the nearby USAF base, bigger towns, etc...
New Purchases - while the members were not paid, the department itself got some money from the town, county, state, and even federal government. ALL of this money came with strings on what it could be used to purchase. All of it went to things like
New Suits (waiver had to be obtained so we wouldn't have to buy a survival tent for each suit)
Hoses
Nozzles ($240 for the cheapest)
Rebuilding the pump on one of the trucks(the other one needed a rebuild almost as bad, but there was no money...)
etc...

An extra $5k for some sort of fancy radio system just wasn't in the budget, short of a grant dictating money be spent on said radio system. Cell phones were generally the member's own.

Re:easiest solution

[advocate_one]

This post makes a very good point. What is going to happen to you, personally, when a call is lost for some reason, a person dies, and a lawsuit follows?

why don't we all give up now and not do anything at all just in case we could be sued afterwards for having done something... it's a wonder anybody volunteers for anything these days with the sheer number of lawyers out there hungry for any work...

Re:easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

That may not have all been able to have been done with an ad-hoc wireless system, but that would have helped immensely.

Offtopic: I got into a serious brainlock trying to parse the beginning of that sentence :)

Re:easiest solution

[avman86]

Would it be possible to use APRS if you are using ham equipment? The GPS tracking is the most popular feature with it, but I've heard it's also possible to do text message type stuff.

Re:easiest solution

[silas_moeckel]

Yea you still need to buy the soda. Bag in box unlike the old canisters is pretty low maintenance since there is little to no air introduced into the system. Sams club normally stocks them costco seems to have them for sale as well. In my case the local pepsi distributor was more than happy to drop them off. I've even gotten whole setups to dispense dropped off for non profit events with them donating the rental and the supplies.

Re:easiest solution

[TwineLogic]

> why don't we all give up now and not do anything at all just in case we could be sued afterwards for having done something..

It's one thing to "not do anything" as you exaggerate.

It's completely different to "not do stupidly dangerous things." Implementing public safety dispatch out of unreliable equipment would be a stupidly dangerous thing to do, not just some random "anything." Dispatching the fire department is deadly serious business, not something to goof around and hack on.

Re:easiest solution

[ceoyoyo]

And there was more than a few times during the summer and we were fighting multihundred acre brush fires that I wish I knew exactly where each truck was, how much fuel and water they had onboard, and be able to set a waypoint for them to drive to for their next task.

If you can't see the other trucks, wifi mesh networking probably isn't going to do you much good. You'd be better off issuing each truck a firefighter who owns a smartphone and has one of the location sharing apps turned on.

Unfortunately I think the contrary posters are right - this fire department would be much better off getting some used radio equipment and figuring out some procedures rather than investing the money and especially time to fiddle with finicky wifi mesh networking that will rarely work anyway.

Re:easiest solution

[DarthBart]

You're assuming that there's decent data coverage in the area (Texas Hill Country). It may have improved over the past few years, but there wasn't shit for data coverage when I lived there. Voice coverage on anything other than 800Mhz analogue cellular sucked. There was one Sprint tower in the area, but it was perpetually overloaded.

Re:easiest solution

[ceoyoyo]

If there's no cell service you're probably not going to magically find someone who's got open wifi either. And at least the cell phone in each truck solution might work when there is cell coverage, as opposed to the wifi mesh networking, which is likely to be useful never.

Re:easiest solution

[sociocapitalist]

My old department got hand-me-down trucks from the Texas Forest Service that we converted to brush trucks. We also got a 5000 gallon flight-line fuel truck from them that we converted to a mobile hydrant. The one "new" truck we bought, we bought as a used truck from a department in Chicago and had to take out a loan to pay for it. The bi-annual fundraising BBQ we held covered operating expenses, but that was just about it. Everything else came from handouts from the government.

The radio system? Patched together with stuff my dad & I bought at hamfests.

And there was more than a few times during the summer and we were fighting multihundred acre brush fires that I wish I knew exactly where each truck was, how much fuel and water they had onboard, and be able to set a waypoint for them to drive to for their next task.

That may not have all been able to have been done with an ad-hoc wireless system, but that would have helped immensely.

Sounds to me like your are meeting a need that should be met by the government.

I'm not knocking volunteers, don't get me wrong - I have the utmost respect for people who are willing to run into a fire (or whatever) to save a life. At the same time I think there's no good reason that the US government (at whatever level of government) doesn't fund whatever organisations are actually needed (such as yours, more than likely).

Re:easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why you need ARES

Re:easiest solution

[SuiteSisterMary]

Short of raping an unconscious smoke inhalation victim, I can't think of anything that could get a fireman in trouble.

Your Honor, there I was, giving her mouth-to-mouth, and she was totally sending me signals that she liked it. She didn't object when I touched her chest to do chest compressions, so things just moved on naturally.....

Re:easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

I may be off base here, but I think the access to the internet if there is an open hotspot would be just a bonus. the mesh would be even MORE useful for simply coordinating movements and giving status updates as to location and disposition of your own units, and that of potential victims, automatically. All the units should have GPS, right? And smart phones probably? With the right software, lots of data could be provided to the units and their peers and dispatchers, without ever having to "talk" to one another. I'm kind of reading beyond what he asked for, but wouldn't that be useful? In the most dire circumstances, without cell or land lines even working, the responders could have a fully functional peer-to-peer mesh data comm net operating to coordinate their movements, call for help from each other, notify about victims needing support, etc.

I don't think the software to make it useful exists in an open or cheap form - maybe there are some that are in-progress - if so someone here will know!

I don't think it's productive for posters to say that this isn't useful. The person making this request seemed to think it would be - if you don't think so, maybe just keep it to yourself? He asked a question, if you have an answer that is productive, useful, etc, please contribute.

Byzantium

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure, but have you checked out this open source initiative? http://project-byzantium.org/faqs/

Liability?

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful about liability. What if something doesn't work right and a loss is blamed on the network?

My hint

[Anonymous Coward]

Tp-link 1043 + openwrt.

Re:My hint

[hamvil]

Then try one of the many mesh packages for OpenWRT: babel, batman, olsrd, wing

Is this the best way to proceed?

[Meshach]

Having Emergency vehicles depend on an ad-hoc network seems risky at best and a potential disaster at worst. Might be best to just stick to the telephone (or whatever you currently use) and leave the flaky network to the non-life-critical tasks.

Re:Is this the best way to proceed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Regarding disaster: every home-brew solution is useless in a disaster as you have to be able to communicate with other volunter and professional emergency responder teams. Ideally the state or country standardizes on one system and sponsors equipment for all relevant parties. Normally tetra or similar systems are used.

Re:Is this the best way to proceed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just look at PA... they tried to implement coverage for the state on a setup where different area could inter-communicate etc, and the coverage is so spotty and awful it *is* better to sometimes use a phone. An adhoc setup could at least allow those in the area to communicate while allowing the ability for someone without coverage from the network to hop a few adhoc mesh links and get out onto the network and talk to who they need to

Re:Is this the best way to proceed?

[AK Marc]

Usually, in the US, the city standardizes on one, and the county on another. The state, a third, the feds, a 4th. And often the police and fire are on incompatible systems.

Throwing another homebrew into the mix wouldn't make that much difference.

money

[Anonymous Coward]

A lesson i have learned over the years; when spending other peoples money always ask the question, "is it better, or just different?". I dont know the size of your operation, or what state you are in, but analogue, trunking, IP (opensky...) radios are normally more reliable, which is the name of the game. Other services like LTE may be the best bet (location location location), and if you can find the right people to talk to at the state you would be surprised the kind of things the state will spend money on.

Re:money

[AK Marc]

If you had infinite money and infinite bandwidth, what would change? If the answer is "nothing" then don't spend any momey. Figure out how it helps before trying to build it to see if they do anything with it.

Cellular data?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even the most basic of smartphones have good tethering capabilities. Why not simply go with normal phones? Wi-fi on the station, and mobile data when not? Generally, the simpler an idea is, the better.

What is it for ?

[SomethingOrOther]

What is it for?

No really......
You have told us how you *think* you want to communicate, but not what information you are communicating.

The first step of any IT problem is to adapt your ideas to fit users needs........... not adapt users needs to fit your ideas.

Re:What is it for ?

[fm6]

Actually, that's the second step. The first step is to find out what users need. This step is often skipped, alas.

Re:What is it for ?

[Minwee]

Or worse, finding out what the users say they need is substituted.

Re:What is it for ?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is it for?

Hey, it is VITALLY important that I am able to update my facebook status at ALL times.

If I can't post pictures to flickr and videos to youtube while I'm fighting a fire, I refuse to be a volunteer firefighter.

Re:What is it for ?

[AK Marc]

Step one:
Determine solution.

Step two:
Convince others they want it.

You must be the FNG...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Wireless Mesh Network" sure sounds sexy, doesn't it. And what Fire Department wouldn't want more sexy shit than, say, the Police Department?

APRS

[Anonymous Coward]

for a Emergency Vehicles i would propose that you take a look at APRS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_Packet_Reporting_System used by HAM guys. this is the robustest wireless protocoll i am aware of, also the range is better than WLAN.

Narrow the scope

[Anonymous Coward]

This is essentially being done by the Emergency Medical Service in Virginia Beach, Virginia, where every ambulance is a hot-spot -- but only for the sake of conveying electronically collected medical reports and transmitting them (via VPN) to "the cloud" where they can rapidly be seen by receiving hospitals and by other units on the same incident. (Yes, we've addressed all HIPAA concerns.) It is *not* being done as a means to communicate calls for service. In Virginia Beach, calls for service are transmitted via a VPN on the commercial cellphone service, with a municipal trunked radio system as a backup.

My advice: Field test the heck out of the routers. Make sure they can survive the weird electric power supply anamolies that occur during standard vehicular operations.

Re:Narrow the scope

[Anonymous Coward]

How's ORION doing, anyway?

(I helped build that muni radio net.)

Have a look at Mikrotik

[Jimbookis]

http://www.mikrotik.com/ devices might have what you want. They are inexpensive, very flexible and have interesting mesh modes I have yet to try out and will run directly off your fire engines battery system with some power filtering and clamping. Whatever you do in general you should have a play, write a clear specification with all sorts of test cases and run a small trial for a while. Make the devices/solution meet your requirements, not the other way around or you will be sorry.

Re:Have a look at Mikrotik

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed, Mikrotik rules. As for applications I can see where looking up hazmat placards would be useful, as well as private messaging between apparatus. Motorola has sucked up all the grant money for every city & county, moving them over to an overpriced P25 radio system, so I doubt there is any left for anything else, like what your planning.

Don't cheap out when lives are on the line

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a budget. Go with a commercial solution. Homebrew is for people hacking and tinkering with stuff. You need something designed to be rugged and meet your requirements.

Astro radios, tetra radios, other systems designed for emergency services are all good options. Go talk to the IT staff at your local cop shop to see what they're doing and if you can nail down their vendor contacts. It will go a long way. Don't have your volunteers trying to reboot the routers when it's more important for them to be saving lives.

Easier approach

[Anonymous Coward]

Talk to your Motorola dealer. You're using trunking Motorola radios, and they have IP built right in. You don't have enough bandwidth allocated to be able to do broadband stuff, but, given that you don't have a real objective stated, that's okay. You'll get one additional radio per vehicle, plus a godawful expensive adapter, and plug it into your laptops in your vehicles.

Re:Easier approach

[jmauro]

Or you can talk to the Motorola dealer about the Mesh Networks products. They work pretty good in EM situations, but they're not cheap. Which is what I think the original poster is looking for.

Re:Easier approach

[icebike]

You can't build a mesh until you have some place for the mesh to connect.
If you are out in the sticks so far that you have no radio coverage, there is not likely any nearby mesh members either.

I can see where being deep in a ravine with your home base transmitter on the other side of a mountain might present a localized situation which might be solved if you could some how get a mesh partner on top of that mountain.

But knowing how long it takes to get something working it would be easier to send a guy out in a support car to some intermediate point and simply relay data back and forth until air assets arrive.

Does someone living near by have wifi you could tap into? Maybe. But is Grandma going to have a clue how to turn off encryption or even what the password is when you wake her by pounding on her door in the middle of the night?

Satellite phones can be had for under 700 bucks, and an annual satphone plan starts Under 500/yr. I would recommend radio mapping the service area and determining those areas where there is no radio service and equip at least one unit in that are with sat phones.

But before you go to that expense take that cell phone out of your pocket and see if it works in these areas. If it does, your mesh is already in your pocket, and just forget about ad-hoc anything in an emergency.

Re:Easier approach

[complete loony]

The Serval Project is working towards solving these kinds of issues. A group of people in a ravine can use our software to form a mesh network and communicate among themselves. Our file distribution process will attempt to replicate encrypted data to everyone running our software, so a text message / voicemail / photo / GPS fix can be shared with the rest of the team even with only intermittent connectivity. You could even send an sd card via avian carrier, if that's the only option available. Then a single person with cell phone coverage or a satellite terminal can upload everything that's relevant to anywhere in the world.

These are the kinds of use cases we've been working towards for a couple of years now, and we think we're getting close to something usable.

Throw a few more Ham & Bean suppers.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously - ad hoc crap is worse than nothing to emergency workers. Get the right equipment or learn to do without. Don't cause mayhem trying to introduce a homebrew system that *might* work half the time.

Mesh potato perhaps?

[Anonymous Coward]

A recent article over at arstechnica about an interesting piece of wireless mesh hardware: http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/08/how-one-man-is-bringing-voip-net-access-where-telecoms-fear-to-tread/

Good ol' HAM radio?

[guruevi]

It works well, it won't give you much throughput but if all you need is some text and voice-based systems this should be plenty (it's about 300-9600 baud for IP so a slow serial link).

The issue I see with your approach is that when the vehicles are within range of each other they will also be within range of the same hotspot. So mesh is simply overkill. Mesh is intended for lots and lots of nodes in dense areas to connect to each other to a single (large?) uplink for either anonymizing or places where you cannot place (either due to economic or ecologic reasons) multiple antenna's. This works well for the GSM range because they are intended to cover literally miles (2W) at a frequency that is licensed to cooperate with each other and able to penetrate a lot of structures so two cell phones can technically talk to each other and extend the range of the original tower another mile or so (given the battery usage to do so is acceptable).

The 100 mW you get out of a WiFi router close to the hydrogen resonance frequency is simply not enough to cover a mile of random area which may have other compatible and incompatible broadband sources (microwaves, garage door openers, bluetooth ...) that could overpower the signal.

You're better off using the professional systems for this. WiMax base stations can be had for $1500 and a receiver is ~$200 and it will cover about 50km. Otherwise get a free cell phone plan for your volunteer fire department (I mean, some local corporate overlord MUST be benevolent enough) or set up your own transmitter (HAM or otherwise).

Re:Good ol' HAM radio?

[drwho]

This is not appropriate for ham radio. Ham is supposed to be for amateurs and emergency comms only. Emergency comms as used by an auxiliary force. It is not to be used for commercial purposes, military purposes (even though tthe military acna overrid this and do whatever they want, it would be frowned upon), and not for police/fire/rescue. Seriously, the emergency services have enough equipment and bandwidth of their own, they shouldn't be trying to compete with all the signals on 2.4 ghz and the ham frequencies. They shouldn't be using crap equipment either.

This should be obvious - emergency services communications need to be reliable - not the ad-hoc stuff life mesh and ham radio that works when the sunspots are in the right position. That means VHF and big heavy radios, high bandwidth gear, that has been proven reliable and yet costs a lot of money because of it. There are no rusted out old pickups being painted red and used as fire trucks. Same principle applies here.

Re:Good ol' HAM radio?

[Anonymous Coward]

It works well, it won't give you much throughput but if all you need is some text and voice-based systems this should be plenty (it's about 300-9600 baud for IP so a slow serial link).

The issue I see with your approach is that when the vehicles are within range of each other they will also be within range of the same hotspot. So mesh is simply overkill. Mesh is intended for lots and lots of nodes in dense areas to connect to each other to a single (large?) uplink for either anonymizing or places where you cannot place (either due to economic or ecologic reasons) multiple antenna's. This works well for the GSM range because they are intended to cover literally miles (2W) at a frequency that is licensed to cooperate with each other and able to penetrate a lot of structures so two cell phones can technically talk to each other and extend the range of the original tower another mile or so (given the battery usage to do so is acceptable).

The 100 mW you get out of a WiFi router close to the hydrogen resonance frequency is simply not enough to cover a mile of random area which may have other compatible and incompatible broadband sources (microwaves, garage door openers, bluetooth ...) that could overpower the signal.

You're better off using the professional systems for this. WiMax base stations can be had for $1500 and a receiver is ~$200 and it will cover about 50km. Otherwise get a free cell phone plan for your volunteer fire department (I mean, some local corporate overlord MUST be benevolent enough) or set up your own transmitter (HAM or otherwise).

Look up hsmm dot org, Self healing mesh network, this is what you need, cots hardware, software is open source. No need for a ham license. I am a ham, used to be the emergency manager for my county. Don't listen to the nay sayers'. you will find plenty of uses for a mesh network, that is a stand alone system. When all else fails, you will still be able to communicate.

Re:Good ol' HAM radio?

[Anonymous Coward]

Total bullshit. Your not a ham, or a very poorly informed, one.

Re:Good ol' HAM radio?

[jsfs]

If you need the higher speed, HSMM-Mesh is designed for basically this purpose. We're doing webcam streaming and all kinds of fun things, all via amateur radio and Linksys WRT54gs units. Someone in your area might be working on a mesh already, which means you could take advantage of it in addition to your own gear.

Since it's been posted before...

[sbrown7792]

Here's the article from less than 2 weeks ago about the same thing. They had a few interesting ideas.

Consumer grade routers? Not a good idea!

[toygeek]

While I applaud your willingness to use technology where you see a need for it, the consumer grade routers just aren't up to the task. I've seen routers die simply being moved from one side of the desk to the other. All it takes is a cold solder or a flaky chip and *poof* that router is history. You'll be troubleshooting weird problems constantly and will be replacing routers just as often. If your solution depends solely on these routers, then I think its not much of a solution at all.

Re:Consumer grade routers? Not a good idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree completely. I have experience with professional mobile mesh networks, and from your description, you will not be happy with dd-wrt or anything similar. Adhoc wireless networks are dinosaurs - what you're more interested in is mobile WiMax deployments. This is of course more costly - but you get what you pay for. Otherwise, you're wasting your time and starting down a path that no one will be happy with. Trust me.

Re:Consumer grade routers? Not a good idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

BS they have run or system for years trouble free.

3G

[Great Big Bird]

What about using some level of 3G wireless access that can be low bandwidth attached to other hardware?

Re:3G

[Anonymous Coward]

good point... all you need is a smartphone with hotspot feature (galaxy s2 has portable hotspot)

i've heard that tethering is sometimes a no no in the states unless you pay extra, but i'm on a telstra plan in australia and can set up a wireless 3G hotspot for computers or other phones in a couple of seconds at no extra cost (and with no nasty letters following)

where are you fighting fires exactly? i was involved in a volunteer fire brigade for nearly 10 years with both rural and urban roles. connecting to open wifi is a nice idea, but what's the likelihood you're going to find any open networks at the location of every job? what about if the job is out in the bush? what if there are heaps of networks in range but they're all secured (as they should be, unless you're at McDonald's or something)?

depending on where you are, you may be unlikely to find a solution that is 100% guaranteed to be available at every job, but where I am telstra's 3G is the most available mobile service. even satellite communication can be patchy in some places. if it was for something really critical you might want to consider a multi-tier approach

another possibility may be overlaying a data signal on a UHF band. the brigade i was with had uhf radios in every vehicle and they were always within range of at least one repeater station (if not fixed, mobile comms with repeaters brought in) because radio is your lifeline. we also had trunking radios that we could make phone calls from (i'm not sure exactly how they work underneath, but if you have them they may also be a possible avenue for data).

Hammers and Nails

[abarrow]

Yeah, this definitely feels like a case of "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail".

WiFi meshes like crap. Your first responders will spend valuable time just trying to get their devices to work. While your volunteer situation is well understood, and your budget is probably pretty low, don't ask people to depend on consumer stuff for this sort of thing. A trunk radio system (and one that is not too highly loaded) or something similar is highly recommended.

Re:Hammers and Nails

[Anonymous Coward]

Again plenty of people here, talking about so mething they don't know about. If you can configure a snag phone you are good to go.

VANET

[ArhcAngel]

So you want to set up a VANET (Vehicular Ad-Hoc Network)...a subset of the MANET (mobile ad-hoc network). There's even a proposal for a secure fire truck communication protocol via VANET. Perhaps you can find more information by reaching out to some of the agencies working on this protocol.

Saw a presentation on MESH for emergency response

[bdwoolman]

Keven Whipp of the Montgomery [County Maryland] Amateur Radio Club gave a presentation last April on a very similar topic to the Columbia Area Linux User's Group (CALUG). The radio club has been working with Montgomery County to test various setups of MESH networks on Linksys WRT54GL routers running custom firmware to be used in emergency situations. They have been testing distances and reliability using different frequencies using high gain antennas (which require a license). As I recall the deployments they tested faced a lot of technical and regulatory obstacles. And they were looking at simple static deployments, not mobile. If, say the infrastructure went down after a flood, their objective was to provide basic internet services to Emergency Response Teams working in the area.

Anyway, here is a link to a PDF summary of the presentation. My take away was that even after pretty extensive testing the system was not ready for prime time, but was very promising. To be useful in the situations to which they aspired the Mesh had to be reliable and robust. It was not. I am sure they would be happy to share their experience with you. And I bet they made progress over the summer.

How is this going to be more useful?

[NimbleSquirrel]

What exactly do you need this system for? Seriously, if you are needing internet access to save people, there is something wrong. Sure, there may be a situation where an Incident Commander may need to look up something like an MSDS on a hazardous material, but in that situation a tablet with 3G access is all you need.

If you're wanting this for comms, then you really need to think again. For Emergency Services, any comms system need to be robust (ie. not built on cheap consumer grade hardware), reliable (ie. able to work when parts of the system fail, and it must be easy to fix or replace) but most importantly it need to be able to work with the systems of other Emergency Services. If you go ahead and do your own thing, it could potentially cripple your response capability. If your Fire Department was first to attend a Mass Casualy Incident, would you be absolutely sure that your system, built on 'cheap wireless routers', would be 100% effective? Would you be prepared to stake your life, the lives of other firefighters, and the lives of multiple casualties on this system working? If the answer is not an absolute yes, then walk away now.

Don't get me wrong, it is a cool idea, but it is not something that you or your Volunteer Fire Department should be looking into as a deployed solution. You cannot go from "hey, this sounds cool" to putting it into operational situations without doing some serious research and development as well as thorough testing. This may seem over the top, but this is for an Emergency Service: people's lives will depend on this.

Re:How is this going to be more useful?

[sumdumass]

There is a hazardous materials response guide that all first responders will have access to. There will be a pocket version in every vehicle that would respond to a hazmat incident. Every truck that transports hazardous materials in the US has to have the pocket version in the truck also. There is even a toll free number that anyone can call in case of emergency that will provide the appropriate response including initial and mandatory evacuation distances. If someone is looking for a MSDS, they should not be making decisions at the scene other then maybe evacuation distances, they are under qualified.

In other words, they wouldn't even need the tablet with 3g access because the information should already be readily available to anyone qualified to respond.

Meshed Mofi Service router

[Anonymous Coward]

You are likely looking for an inexpensive service router ideally with a number of different ports, ideally supplied by 12 VDC (negative ground.) Ideally the service router will have a number of comm interfaces including two wire, antenna, USB, etc.. There are a number out products on the market. Your challenge is to validate the product, accept the risks, or adjust your specs/reqs.

UMTS service router wan
meshed 5 GHz wifi service router wan
meshed 2 GHz wifi service router wan
Tetra service router wan
APCO P25/P35 service router wan
MPT 1327 service router wan
MPT IP service router wan
Iridium service router wan

Not appropriate

[drwho]

I've been doing wifi mesh networks for over ten years. As much as people try, these just aren't reliable or secure enough to be used for such things as military and emergency services networks. Emergency services have more radio spectrum than they know what to do with, and access to lots of other resources. Use technology which is appropriate to these advantages, taking into account the demand for very high reliability.

Re:Not appropriate

[soldack]

The military is using meshing products from the company I work at, Rajant, http://www.rajant.com/. They are secure enough for their use. As for reliable, we are used in open pit mining operations with 100s of mobile nodes in vehicles that are like multistory buildings on wheels. These folks loose tons of money if they are down for just the smallest amount of time and they rely on our meshing networks for their fleet control.

There are standards for this.

[Animats]

It's not standardized across the US, but many states have standards for emergency radios. Find out what's standard and go with it.

One of the more useful projects of Homeland Security is to get all the agencies that have first responders connected in emergencies. It's hard, because each agency has their own system and they don't interoperate. Here's the Texas plan. And the Florida plan.

Most of the hard problems have to do with too many people on the air in urban areas. If you're a volunteer department, you're probably not in an urban area and don't have that problem. If you want something that will Just Work, get high-powered 700MHz public safety band capable VHF FM handhelds and vehicle radios for your own people and get them fitted into your state plan. A few Iridium satellite radios for command personnel and those who really need to talk to the outside world during an incident are helpful. Here's one suitable for fire truck installation. Iridium airtime costs are high, about $1.29 per minute, but in an emergency that's the least of your problems.)

Re:There are standards for this.

[tipo159]

Iridium airtime costs are high, about $1.29 per minute, but in an emergency that's the least of your problems.)

Have you seen the movie Contagion? There is a scene in the movie where the CDC reps are scoping out a sports arena to use as a make-shift hospital and the local people come in and ask "whose budget is this coming out of?" I am a county ham radio volunteer (backup communications) and, having been through a number of county and regional drills, this scene struck me as so true. There are budget people at the EOC who clear the simulated expenses run up dealing with the simulated emergency and know what budget the expenses will come out of.

Re:There are standards for this.

[Anonymous Coward]

In ICS, the Logistics Branch gets the stuff and the Finance/Admin branch figures out where the money is coming from.

Re:There are standards for this.

[tipo159]

In ICS, the Logistics Branch gets the stuff and the Finance/Admin branch figures out where the money is coming from.

Yes. And I typically don't pay attention to that stuff because our gear is already there and paid for (or, as volunteers and ham radio enthusiasts, we stock our own go-bags). But we had more than enough hams at the last drill, so I had time to pay attention to what was going on with the city staff (and I hung around for the after-action review) and the Logistics people were getting clearance and budgets from the Finance people before proceeding.

My point was that the "it is an emergency, so cost is no object" attitude doesn't apply in the drills that I have participated in.

use a cisco 877w

[Anonymous Coward]

This would be pretty simple to do with a cisco router.

One SSID for the 'WAN', all devices in same subnet.
Each device also has an SSID to talk to your tablets etc, turn on DHCP on each individual router.

Advertise both subnets into OSPF. Central site can advertise out a default route.

Job done.

Directional WLAN

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have a need for long-distance, broadband communications, you should build yourself either cantennas or cantennas+parabolic dishes. Even very primitive cantennas which are just cans with a hole inside work wonders to boost distance. Some guys on youtube made 70km links with parabolic antennas ! Make sure there is no line-of-sight obstruction, as this will strongly attenuate the signal. That in turn means you need long, portable masts. German THW has dedicated communications gear and units for that. SATCOM is also an option, as you will almost by definition have line of sight to a geo-stationary sat.

Of course, always ask yourself "what is the scenaio we will need it ?" "how would that communication technology be integrated into actual operations in a meaningful way ?"

If your connventional HF communications gear does the job, WLAN would be just a hindrance. I assume WLAN or SATCOM only makes sense in a major disaster such as a vast flood or whenever senior leaders and politicians need to perform confidential video conferences. Always remember, Rommel lead whole armies via hand-typed morse code and rather primitive HF radios.

Also, have you thought about text messaging via HF by some kind of automated acoustic signalling ? Makes a lot of sense because HF works quite well over serious distances and without line-of-sight. Text should be encrypted, of course; just use GnuPG.

The Serval Project

[complete loony]

The Serval Project on the Android Market.

Our focus is on providing useful services without any reliance on fixed infrastructure. Phone calls and text messaging via adhoc mesh, and even file distribution in the field.

Though you might find our next release more suitable than the version on the market. It's still in heavy development, but would also allow phone calls to be relayed to the PSTN via an asterisk PBX. We'd be happy to provide an alpha version and help you to get the most use out of it.

We're also working on a separate application that uses open street map data for situational awareness and collaborative mapping.

A few thoughts

[KenDiPietro]

I can see several applications that would make this type of network incredibly useful. Having the ability to distribute situational awareness video in real time would be awesome. This could be useful independently from internet connectivity and a tablet with a decent amount of storage could keep the video for later review. If it were within the budget, wouldn't a head's up display in the firefighters helmet of something built into the brim of a law enforcement officer's hat be pretty slick? The ability to Wifi locate any of your team could also be quite useful. Perhaps more to the point are disasters like Katrina or 9/11, where the telecommunications network may be down for extended periods of time. This kind of backup network could very well be the difference between life and death. If enough of these radios could be dropped in place with solar and battery backup as entire area could be brought back online in a very short period of time. Year's ago there was mention of a completely independent group of license exempt wireless pros forming an instant adhoc network on the the upcoming anniversary of September 11th to drive this exact point home. As a suggestion, you might want to look if the 4.9GHz band in available in your location. Among others, Motorola's Motomesh uses this band. It's clean, licensed for this use, and some Wifi adapters can be switched to work in that band, lowering the cost for equipment. Certainly, challenges exist and need to be worked through but if the opportunity to experiment is presented, why not go for it?

We are trying HSMM-MESH

[tipo159]

Our local club is playing with HSMM-MESH to supplement our existing ham radio set-ups (two repeaters and an "assigned" ARES/RACES-type simplex frequency (in the last regional drill, hams in the next county were demanding that we get off "their" frequency, which is why "assigned" is in quotes)). Some times it would be helpful in an emergency situation to be able to transfer files or stream video and Wifi speeds are better than TNC speeds.

A bunch of us have purchased a bunch of WRT54Gs and reprogrammed them, but we haven't yet tried to get them to mesh.

Re:We are trying HSMM-MESH

[Salgamma]

My answer was going to be "Ham Radio License + HSMM-Mesh" That is exactly what they should experiment with. hsmm-mesh.org has the details, uses Linksys WRT-54x's, and development is being done on Ubuquity's Bullets. Austin, TX hosts most of the hsmm-mesh activity, and there are plenty of other organizations in the US (and around the world).

I have 2 that are headed to the boonies in NY at the end of the month for possible RACES/ARES use. I've been away from the area for over a year, and have a lot to share with the local Amateur Radio Clubs.

Bad idea

[slimjim8094]

First of all, let's imagine the technical stuff isn't an issue. Imagine all the trucks have cellular modems and can just communicate over the Internet as usual. What are they using it for? I do volunteer EMS (not fire, admittedly, though I work with fire agencies a fair bit) but I can't figure out what it'd be used for, aside from CAD (computer-aided dispatch) which is outside the scope of our volunteer agency, and likely outside the scope of yours. Large-scale incidents (MCIs) do require a lot of information sharing that might be well-served by a data network of some sort, but interop is already a huge problem just with bog-standard FM radios. What sorts of computer data are they going to share without the internet? Keep in mind, this has to be data that's either already available digitally (in which case, why the network?) or created on-scene and then digitized. I can't think of any, honestly, except for perhaps pictures? And they're not really necessary.

So assuming there's a use for wireless data sharing, what justifies not dropping a few hundred a month (which is nothing for even a volunteer FD) on cellular broadband? It's a mature technology, reliability is high, and it doesn't require any customization - just logging into a VPN or something, if even.

Finally, your solution can't be finicky or unreliable at all. If it doesn't work once, it'll become a liability and nobody will rely on it. People don't screw around with stuff like this, since it can literally get people killed. Public safety has been doing fine on voice radios for a long time, and even if it could be done better, there's no hesitation about giving up your enhancements permanently the first time there's a problem with it.

I'm an amateur radio operator. I get the attraction to playing with this kind of stuff. But I'd never use it in my EMS agency, since "playing" isn't acceptable. That's why we buy $1k-a-pop Motorola radios that do less than my $100 Chinese HT - because there's no fidgeting, and no question about whether it's going to work when you need it. Even if you've dropped it in a puddle, or it's gotten dropped from 6 feet onto pavement, or used it to clobber a drug addict away from you (yes, it happens).

Mobile routers

[Anonymous Coward]

If reliability is what you seek it's probably best not to rely on ad-hoc wifi networking but pay that $5/mo and get a mobile (cell) card to connect to a router ($50-100). It's incredibly cheap and we use to do it for any employees that carpooled.

An unreliable network was used many times HAM

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. In such situations, an unreliable mwireless mesh has been used many times, proving it's worth. It was called ham. That experience shows that an ad hoc mesh is sometimes far better than no communication, or in addition to whatever other communication is available.

It's funny to me that MOST people consistently debate how well things MIGHT work without considering how similar things have worked. Ie, most public policy debates concern ideas already tried in California or elsewhere, yet everyone argues whether X would work, ignoring the fact that California already tried X and it failed miserably (or succeeded, as the case may be.)

Peer to peer cellphones without cell service

[Sussurros]

There is an Android app developed by a mob of Australians which allows cell phones to talk directly to each other in emergency situations without using any cell service at all. Sorry I have no name either for the app or the developers. It was developed last year, released this year, and is intended for bushfire teams and search and rescue operators. I'm guessing it won't be in the app store and I know it works by dialling the number you want and if both phones have the app and are within range then they connect. I'm sorry I can't provide you with more information but it's just something I read about in the Sydney Morning Herald (www.smh.com.au) some months ago and it stuck in my mind because the main developer spoke at length about the incredible problems of getting the protocols to work.

Re:Peer to peer cellphones without cell service

[Anonymous Coward]

Radio hacking on android phones sounds cool, but unless you're using ad-hoc wifi, they're going to be phone/manufacturer/model specific.

Re:Peer to peer cellphones without cell service

[fustakrakich]

There is an Android app developed by a mob of Australians...

For everyone else, there's Nextel's Direct Connect, and you can 'broadcast' to everyone (up to 100 users) within range at once like a real dispatcher. But do check for available coverage.

Re:Peer to peer cellphones without cell service

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called Serval. GPL'd mesh with voice data and text.

Get real!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your thinking of putting 'emergency' services together using band aids, twine, and consumer crap products and expect it to work reliably enough so that you don't get sued for when it fails?

What?

[kenh]

If you have a need for internet access, get a MiFi/wireless hotspot. If you only want internet access if one of the houses/businesses has a free/unsecured hot spot you can "jump on to" what is the point? Either you need it or you don't.

Do you rummage through people's medicine cabinets for bandaids/medicine or do you bring them with you? Do you look for garden hose when you respond to a fire or do you have a tanker with a pump and hoses you bring with you?

If there is an open, unsecured, wifi hotspot the mesh network can find in the neighborhood, why can't the netbooks, laptops, and tablets you bring with you find them?

Wasn't there a post not two-four weeks ago about an effort to make mesh networks areas without service? Did the original poster even see that posting?

Commercial grade...not hobby grade

[ff1324]

Disclaimer: I work for a paid fire department but started as a volunteer. I understand the financial challenges for both m

Our metropolitan area uses InMotion OMG1000 or OMG1050 mobile routers. The cost just over $2000 each, but they create a man network for emergency equipment, have up to four different WAN connections, are remotely configurable and upgradable, and provide GPS services. They're almost bulletproof.

Wiring up WRT54Gs isn't the answer. You'll spend more time than your time is worth creating a solution than finding funding to implement one. Apply for a FIRE grant or cooperate with multiple agencies to access a larger program. Check with your county or state.

Realisitcally, an air card is all you need otherwise. If enough agencies want in on the project, see if the wireless provider will put you on your own APN.

Good luck.

My Volunteer EMS service

[Adam Appel]

I am in a Volunteer ambulance service we are also a USA Medical Corps member so we have a response to MCI's and natural disaster events. We mainly work sporting events, fairs, festivals and so on. Some are loud (Cage fights, heavy metal concerts etc) so voice comms are not very useful. Some are spread across hundreds of miles vast sections lack even cell service (like the Fireweed 400; Sheep Mountain to Valdez, AK). And some we run a field clinic with 3 exam rooms and 5+ roaming teams of medics and 2 fast response team in a non-motorized setting with a tight HIPAA compliant comm net. So our needs are quite varied. Several of us in leadership are IT or comm pros (our comm director owns a industrial communications sales/service for oil and gas exploration companies) and have gone though a number of potential solutions. This is what we do: Our backbone for disaster work is the ALMR radio system some of which can carry data or will soon. We have a few SAT phones for bush work. Over that we have our own VHF/UFH simplex/duplex radios with repeaters and FCC assigned channels (however that works) for our day to day work cupeled with regular data plans with a ATT MiFi type divice for PCR's, SCAT forms and as much paperwork as we con do electronically.

I have to wonder why you need the local networking?

I know I didn't address the question of the best way to set up an EMS/Fire network, but that's what I got. Good luck.

Order a bunch...

[LMahesa]

... of cheap MiFi 3G routers from sw-box or brando, or use cheap but reliable brands like TP-Link or Huawei. I don't know where you are but these can be had for as little as $15 in Indonesia. You don't need fancy firmware and in-depth features, just connectivity over a short range.

Just use this network for an informative "Oh that's nice" role - nothing mission critical, but everything mission 'helpful'. Don't use it for live comms; but using it for advanced notification (before they get there and ask) in order to negate the need for live comms should be okay. Don't use it for anything at the scene, conditions will most likely be WiFi-unfriendly anyway.

With 2 on vehicles and 1 on each person (dump the casing and put the contents in more convenient/robust containers on a belt or something), with select 3G capability on each vehicle, you should be able to make a sweet logistics net.

Oh, make sure the enclosures for all your toys are fully waterproof. Things could get embarassing otherwise.

Sorry to mention this twice

[fustakrakich]

If it's available, just go with Nextel. Every phone can act as a dispatcher. Hey, if it works for ENG*, why not this?

* There are times when the news crews arrive first.

don't cheap out on emergency comms

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously critical comms is not an area to reduce costs on - try a commercial wireless mesh - cobham as an example

Keep It Simple - Focus On The Goal

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't let your decisions become technology oriented, instead make your decisions more goal oriented. I don't know what you are trying to accomplish with the mesh network, but a simpler solution that a wifi mesh net is more likely to operate in bad conditions.

More to it than it seems

[Anonymous Coward]

If in the US, there is dedicated and exclusive spectrum available for WLAN type communications, at 4.9GHz. Contact your regional spectrum coordinator through APCO. The equipment you select should operate in that spectrum as to avoid the exposure to unlicensed ISM bands (i.e. 2.4 and 5 GHz) where every dohickey operate their wireless routers.

Next, vehicle installation needs to be properly planned. Is there enough electrical capacity left to hook up additional gear? Where do you locate the antennas? If you happen to find a spot on the roof and it is fiberglass, you need to install a metal base plate. Also, you need to offset the antennas at least 1ft from other antennae as not to have your gear fried by high powered public safety comms gear already installed on board. There might be regulation re: the types of cable you are required to use to hook everything up, e.g. all plenum. Most importantly: Are you indemnified to perform any work on the vehicles? If something goes wrong down the road you might be on the hook for damages. And don't think you wouldn't get sued. If something goes wrong "they" sell everybody under the sun. How about maintenance in the long run? It's cool to hook stuff up and such, perhaps make it to the local newspaper, but somebody needs to maintain the whole sheebang.

So.... still interested?

Airmobile

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at Motorola's Airmobile solutions.

Vodafone

[Anonymous Coward]

They have a system for emergency communications in Italy, so that a wifi mesh network carries cellular in case of network failures, basically it works like the Serval project in Australia but is much more advanced. I recall it has a voip converter between gsm and wifi . With all the quakes they have it makes sense to have a backup.

Specific rules, codes, standards

[adapt]

Home networking equipment will probably not be suitable for installation on any emergency response vehicle due to local codes, standards and rules. Start with cabling, then check EMC, EMR, shock, vibration, temperature, etc.

Mobile broadband will realistically be used for sharing IP surveillance streams with a Operations and Control Centre.

Kit suppliers include Fortress Technologies, Firetide, Aruba / Alcatel Lucent, Moxa, and start at low thousand $.

old project

[oPless]

I had a consulting friend ask me the same question about ten years ago. Of course the fire department in question realised they didn't really need it and moved on as a business case couldn't be made.

The dormant project has come to the top of my list ... building a fancy battery-powered 3G router is simple :o) Configuring it to do mesh networking isn't a priority right now, media serving is though :D

Wireless for Emergency Vehicles

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the UK Fire Brigades is currently using an Aerohive Wireless solution to allow the multiple Fire Tenders to be in communication with the Lead Fire Officer. As I understand the Firemen are also kept in Radio communication via Wifi, and the APs in each of the Fire Tenders can be used to triangulate the Firemen's position.
I would suggest you contact Aerohive via aerohive.com

Mesh Networks

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked for a company that developed this technology in 2003. Mesh Networks. In 2004, Motorola bought the company.

http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Business+Product+and+Services/Wireless+Broadband+Networks/Mesh+Networks

WiFi is no mobile network

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference between WiFi and Cellular Radio (GSM) is that the latter allows handover of a moving vehicle from one transmitter to the next, whereas WiFi only allows you to walk from one access point to the next.

Develop it quick

[Anonymous Coward]

A patent application on this general type of application with very broad claims is being compiled. Might want to hurry up and develop this idea.

http://www.batswireless.com/

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.batswireless.com/

Short term versus medium to longer term

[Anonymous Coward]

You guys who are trying to figure out what an EMT in the middle of administering CPR could use this for are thinking too immediate. Consider places like Christchurch in the days (and weeks) after the earthquake. The infrastructure is hosed: the cell system is broken or overloaded, power is out to most of the city (but there are generators), half the roads are impassable. The thing I keep hearing over and over from people who lived through that is that they needed comms. Even half-assed taped-together comms.

802.11s

[Anonymous Coward]

You are looking for 802.11S, a wireless ad-hoc mesh network. The standards committee has moved very slowly on this. The government doesn't really want it because once activated it would basically be out of their control. There is no central office where they can snoop on everyone. Terrorists bedamned, they want to control what content people are sending to other people. This is why 802.11s has occasionally been described as a 'backhaul network' or a 'dark net'. In rural areas, you could have an internet-like connection spanning dozens or even hundreds of miles, connecting thousands of people. Google 802.11s and see the current status for yourself.

What purpose does it serve?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would think the focus of the people on the vehicle would be to save the patient, not find a way to have network access.

I think our society has become addicted to networking everything for the sake of doing it. I was at HH Gregg today and they had a freakin' toaster oven that could be controlled over the Internet.

Mesh network + GPS + Open Street Map

[whyloginwhysubscribe]

Yes - and if you had a GPS then the mapping would be almost automated - say if you could use an open map such as openstreetmap then it would be a neat application of a mesh network + the data that the people on the ground are providing - to me this could be quicker than hand drawing maps.

Rajant for rugged mobile mesh

[soldack]

I work at http://www.rajant.com/ so I may be a bit biased but our BreadCrumb line will work great for rugged meshing. We support 4.9 GHz radios that are reserved for emergency responders. We are in use by the military and large mining operations that require 24/7/365 networks with 100s of nodes and lives on the line.

Thanks Everyone!

[Texaskilt]

I'd like to thank everybody for their comments, good and bad, polite and well...not so polite. Some of y'all "got" what I was asking for, some didn't, and some went WAY overboard in assuming what such a network would be used for. It was quite interesting to see how far off the beaten path some of the posts got. I gained some interesting leads and direction from the posts that I'll be looking into. Thanks to my brothers and sisters in the Fire Service and EMS and thanks to my fellow amateur radio operators. Thanks to everyone else as well. I'd love to meet you and have either a beer or a coffee, but I'd rather not hat to meet you professionally! Stay safe all...

Mesh as a Complement to Public Safety

[Anonymous Coward]

This seems like a very interesting area, and one well worth investigating-- don't get discouraged by the negative commentators here. And I disagree strongly with those who say mesh can't be sufficiently reliable for the military; to the contrary, the military has been using mesh for years, and the barrier to wider option is the fact that military deployments tend to be proprietary and closed, not the fact that they are unreliable... to my mind, using mesh as a supplement to (not a substitute for) traditional public safety networks is a really interesting concept.

I'm not well equipped to provide specific hardware reqs (pun not intended), but do have some general recommendations re: leads to pursue in in this space:
As some folks have mentioned, might be worth connecting with the Serval Project. LifeNet down at GA Tech might also have some ideas, as might Funkfeuer in Austria (http://www.funkfeuer.at/index.php?id=42&L=1). Also, Robin Chase and others involved with the DoT's ITSPAC (http://www.its.dot.gov/itspac/index.htm) issued some reports involving VANETs that could be informative. Finally, Ushahidi (http://ushahidi.com/about-us) has done some really innovative post-disaster work, especially after Haiti, that might inform the development of your project.
Finally, I encourage you to reach out to local HAM radio operators, many of whom are quite interested in innovative solutions to communications during emergencies.