Failure of communications networks

[Pellice]

I am astounded at the mass failure of communications. I can understand that telephone networks, cell phone networks, cable networks go down in a disaster of this magnitude, but it appears that the highest level authorities are unable to communicate with each other. For example, the mayor apparently could not communicate with the corps of engineers about the levee problems. I saw an interview with some official in Mississippi who was using teams of runners!!!

This should have been fixed after 9-11. There was a ton of money allocated for Homeland Security. What happened (or did not happen) with the authorities' communications networks? What do you think would help the situation? This is a huge vulnerability.

[Persepone]

Apparently officials are not heeding the warnings of 9/11 regarding communications. Perhaps there is no money to replace technology that will fail with technology that will work.

But there is also a lot of stupidity. I personally worked for a corporation on a Disaster Recovery plan where the company spent a fortune on special lines into an emergency call center and then put phone instruments on them that required power!!! ("Old fashioned" phones do not need local power to work). The reason was that a high level manager, who did not understand technology, felt that the "old fashioned" basic phones that would work did not convey the right "high tech" image!!!!! All pleas to ensure that the technology work failed because this person had the power to fire people who disagreed. In the end, they got phones that will not work in an emergency. I'm sure that company is not the only one with stupid disaster recovery concepts and misused technology. I'd be wiling to bet that there are lots of similar attitudes in the public sector.

As I write this, I'm amazed that the President of the United States is saying that the breeches in the levees in New Orleans were "totally unforeseen." (this is on ABC, interview with Diane Sawyer). Obviously he did not pay attention. Not just to special reports--and there have been many--but to basic common sense!

If there are levees built to withstand a Cat 3 hurricane and you have a strong Cat 4 hurricane, the levees are at risk! This is not rocket science. If you have pumps that require electricity to work and there is no electricity, you are going to have a flooding problem. Now I would agree that the extent of the flooding, etc. was perhaps not foreseeable (although there were predictions out there that it would be) but I do think that everyone in America was holding their breath when they realized that the hurricane was headed toward New Orleans.

Okay, but even if we admit that the President was not "paying attention" he has had 3 days to be briefed by his "experts" so his statement that the breeches in the levees and the subsequent flooding was "totally unforeseen" tells me that there are significant numbers of people in the government who don't pay attention to their own experts!!!

Is it a wonder then that they did not pay attention to the communications infrastructure and communications technologies that they would need in the case of a hurricane?

By the way, on Storm2K we repeatedly see two forms of communication that members champion as effective and workable in such emergencies: satellite phones and HAM radio equipment. Perhaps some of those members might comment on why these two technologies seem to be workable in emergencies...

I do believe that the communications breakdowns were probably human problems rather than technology failures. Note by the way that cellular technology does NOT have the government (FCC) requirements for battery backup, etc. that the land line technologies. In New Orleans I am guessing that the telco batteries for the wired network flooded out.

[Hfcomms]

I'm a ham radio operator. When everything else is down ham radio will still be around. Thats why even the Feds still use a backup HF radio system. The thing is basic communications is very dependent upon power and infrastructure.

Many of the high tech communications systems are dependent upon microwave links, repeaters and relays. When electrical power go's out they do have backup batteries and generators but how long does that last? The batteries discharge and the generators run out of fuel.

Then you have the microwave links and radio towers and antennas that the storm knocks down...result is no communications.

With the HF radios you can use fancy antennas but you can also throw a spool of wire up into a tree and use an antenna tuner and you can talk around the world if you need to.

You can run them off car batteries, generators or solar panels. When worse comes to worse and all the bells and whistles quit the ham radio operator will still be there. That has held true in disasters for more than the last 50 years and will continue to be so in this hi tech age.

[Downdraft]

I agree as a HAM and a member of ARES/RACES the amateur organization empowered by law to provide communications in emergencies they should be utilizing HAM radio at least in the short term. HAM's could set up portable repeaters on top of some of those skyscrapers powered by generators. I'm sure the FCC would be looking the other way if a few non Ham's got to use the radios.

[Robert]

This should have been fixed after 9-11. There was a ton of money allocated for Homeland Security. What happened (or did not happen) with the authorities' communications networks? What do you think would help the situation? This is a huge vulnerability.

There was "a ton" of money allocated, but when you look at all the needs, it ended up pretty thinly spread. Our county just got a new emergency communications system. Same old technology (didn't go to a different frequency, too expensive), same dead spots, and you are dispatching almost a whole county of EMS and Fire departments on one frequency. They did look at upgrading, but to replace the old system (which was, I believe, about 25 years old) was about $250,000 and to upgrade would have been much, much more.

With each disaster, or even drill, you learn more, but in any real emergency, things do not work as planned. Fire, EMS and other emergency response groups train all the time (for smaller and bigger things). But there is no amount of training that can show what will really happen. Will your commincations work? Will all your equipment work (such as the hydrants in a flooded city)? And when ABC and XYZ all fail, then what do you do?

I do remember after 9-11, in Pennsylvania they brought in cell towers and set them on a hill (it was a portable unit, mounted on a trailer, if I remember right) because there was no service in the area they were working. I would imagine that they work like a repeater and would have some kind of booster to send the signal to an existing tower (or tie into a landline someplace), but it seems like a few of those units would at least help the situation down there. It would not solve the problem, but seems that, if they had any available, they could fly one in and put it on the top of a building or something in NO to at least get some coverage in the area.

Robert

[Persepone]

to the HAMs...

I know that in WWII my father had a transmitter that somehow could be cranked...

Also, I agree that you could use an antennas strung from trees, from buildings, etc.

Perhaps the old technology should not be abandoned yet....