[LINK] No cash for phone alert system

Wed Feb 18 08:53:45 AEDT 2009

As I've said before, I have a friend who happens to have been a CFA fire
Chief in the Adelaide hills for many years.  He has invented a system
that uses an out of band part of the GSM cell phone system, I think it's
the same one that broadcasts the cell name.  It can broadcast without
the overhead of SMS to any phones in the vicinity.  As I understand it
because there is no handshaking as with SMS there is almost no overhead
in the cell station.  I also believe it would not require much change in
our current systems.

I don't think this would replace anything but it is an additional way of
communicating in a very granular fashion to people on the ground.  It
can be received by anyone who has a cell phone, and isn't that most
people these days?  You don't have to be a techie or a radio ham, you
just have to have a phone.

As with anything in emergencies it couldn't be relied on to last through
to the disaster stage.  It's not meant for that.  It would only be
useful while normal infrastructure was still present.  It wouldn't be as
much use where cell phone infrastructure was thin on the ground.  It
could be useful in small towns and in suburban and outlying areas which
are often vulnerable to fires.

Frankly if it's not that expensive either to set up or to run why
wouldn't you do it?  Anything that might add to communication in
emergencies should help.

Richard Chirgwin wrote:
> Tom Koltai wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: link-bounces at mailman1.anu.edu.au 
>>> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman1.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of 
>>> stephen at melbpc.org.au
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 17 February 2009 11:08 PM
>>> To: link at anu.edu.au
>>> Subject: Re: [LINK] No cash for phone alert system
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard and Lea write,
>>>
>>>     
>>>> Yes - the human element. As Stil noted, we have to be 
>>>>       
>>> prepared to turn 
>>>     
>>>> in our geek cards, and admit that wetware is a requirement in 
>>>> emergency management, and we can't reasonably expect any 
>>>>       
>>> technology to 
>>>     
>>>> replace people ..
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>>> And - we need to accept that we will never have zero losses
>>>>>> from major calamities - We can only aim for loss minimisation,
>>>>>> so we only lose a small amount of people and property ..
>>>>>>           
>>> So, from Link informed discussion .. can we draw any 
>>> conclusions?  What
>>> can we realistically do, if anything(?) to help prevent 
>>> dozens of people
>>> being burnt to death (eg Kinglake) in bed through lack of 
>>> communications?
>>>     
> Here is probably the core of the question. Did people die because of
> lack of communications? For an answer to *that* question, we'll have to
> wait on the royal commission.
>>> If we can't agree on ideal even-in-part-tech-solutions? maybe 
>>> a wet-ware
>>> community-emergency plan which is very widely known and 
>>> agreed upon? I'm
>>> not aware of any such community plan even in my tiny-pop900 
>>> country town.
>>>
>>> Seems we can & should learn from this, and do something, 
>>> whatever it is?
>>>
>>>     
> Tom's CB radio idea is probably perfectly suited to the remote dwellings.
> 
> One of the problems IMO is psychology (Karl reflected on this as well);
> in particular, lots of "tree changers" simply don't adapt their thinking
> to their surroundings; instead, they bring a city psychology with them
> (note I'm not singling out a particular affected community here, rather
> I'm making a sweeping and innacurate generalisation). The
> "city-in-the-bush" mentality was brought home to me in the last couple
> of years, looking at the number of McMansion-style estates sprouting on
> the edge of country towns. Why move to the country to live on a 600
> square metre block, for heaven's sake?
> 
> But where people are already remote, they also already have the CB
> radios. Attaching an alarm to same would be worth the small effort.
> 
> RC
>> Stephen, you asked for a solution - Throwing away my Geek badge - and as
>> much as I hate to say it - possibly it should be mandatory to have a
>> working CB radio set to the emergency channel 24/7 (in silent telemetry
>> mode) if you have a rural address.
>>
>> The cost is $80.00 per unit.
>> Range in Victoria with the Repeaters all operating is approximately 68%
>> terrestrial coverage.
>> (NSW is almost 94%). But with Skip - 100% for both states - Skip means
>> that signals can bounce of water (ocean, lake, water vapour - clouds,
>> and travel several hundreds of kilometres.
>>
>> http://www.cbradioaustralia.com.au/uploaded/Australian_UHF_Radio_Repeate
>> r_Locations.pdf
>>
>> The advantage would be the always on Telemetry only mode that could be
>> coupled to a small in house siren or low voltage bell. Total cost -
>> under $100.
>>
>> It sounds simple - and it is - that's the advantage. When the Telemetry
>> turns on the siren - you change to the emnergency channel to hear whats
>> up. You leave it tuned there for updates.
>>
>> I am sure that if the Australian Government asked a manufacturer to
>> place the siren inside the unit - they would do it.
>>
>> If the Government then: 
>> 1.	subsidised the units via a 100% taxation initaitive, 
>> 2.	introduced a rural levy of 1% to anyone in a rural area that
>> didn't claim the subsidy via a valid serial number.
>>
>> take-up should be ubiquitous.   
>>
>> Sample "Deal" for 2 radios from CBRadios Australia.
>>  
>> * Two TX650 Transceivers
>> * Two Ear Microphones
>> * Two Neck Lanyards
>> * AC Adaptor
>> * Desktop Charger
>> * 750 mAh Li-Ion Battery packs
>> SKU 	TX650
>> Qty 	Price	$159.00
>>
>> http://www.cbradioaustralia.com.au/product/TX650
>>
>> Folks - its cheap - and it works now.
>>
>> Putting my Geek badge back-on - we played with something like this in
>> 1998 with Highway Road warning signs. Imagine if we added bluetooth to
>> the telemetry receive option.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>>> Cheers,
>>> Stephen
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Link mailing list
>>> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________
>>> No viruses found in this incoming message
>>> Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.6.4
>>> http://www.iolo.com
>>>
>>>     
>> _______________________________________________
>> Link mailing list
>> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>
>>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link