There are many questions that arise out of catastrophes, usually ranging from how the event occurred to how protections can be made to be sure they don't ever happen again. Unfortunately, the tactical surprise surrounding the September 11th attacks proved that we had many weaknesses. The intelligence community's agencies stove-piped each other with bureaucratic excuses on why they shouldn't cooperate. Our cell phone grid couldn't handle calls and data properly in the disaster zone and in the rest of New York City. Radio signals were partially jammed as thousands of firefighters and dozens of fire departments rushed in. No other words can describe the scene besides that it was mass chaos. Honestly, if another catastrophe occurs in the near future, I can see this same type of chaos ensuing.
In class, we talked about numerous theories about the importance of first responders, but that these responders are often untrained and confused, that there are citizen groups that do what they can when presented with opportunities, and that we are much more reliant on communications technologies than we once thought. Sadly, for all the talk these analysts make about the situation, there hasn't been enough action to prevent another communication and coordination collapse.
One thing that really needs to be addressed is that communication is key when disaster strikes. Cell phone providers still lack the ability to handle data and calls when populations flood the network. Just look at what happened when the mild earthquake hit Virginia. The event was obviously something unexpected due to its powerful resonance. Within a matter of seconds, millions of people went to use their phone to send SMS, to call each other, and to hop on Facebook. This one event is just proof that even now, 10 years after a demonstration on network capacity, that hubs cannot handle when thousands of people act at the same time. In another instance, how can people be reassured that police and fireman have the ability to share channels on their radios? Even though radio systems have digital controllers, how can different teams and different departments coordinate right after an unexpected catastrophe, without hogging each other's lines? There are no promises nor accurate, disseminated plans to identify which department handles different sectors of a disaster. THERE IS NO PLAN.
Do I think that another catastrophe like 9/11 could happen again? I absolutely believe that communications will again fail, and that coordination will crash due to the lack of organization. Lives will be lost in the time that it takes for 5 fire departments to argue who's on what radio frequency and who's going to what location. This virtually guarantees that there will also be mix-ups along the way, factoring into even more lost time.
Add into the fact that everybody relies more on their technology than they did 10 years ago. People will simply panic because their calls for help can't get through. The area of "ground zero" in this disaster will be chaotic and disorganized. Nobody takes into consideration that there will be lots of scared people along the way, and this will surely cause more problems.
The next disaster could strike at any time, and we will fall victim again to a lack of proper adaptation to old-fashioned response systems. Why isn't there a solution coming 10 years out?
Hey Tony – Great picture. I think you would be interested in taking a look at my last post, entitled, “Technology Assisting First Responders.” I did a bit of research and found that there has been work to improve the response efforts in the event of another attack on the scale of 9/11. For example, New York City built the FDNY Operations Center. In my blog post I focus on the new measures and technologies that have been implemented and installed in New York City. However, I hope that other cities and populated areas have evaluated and updated their security measures and response plans for the new threats we face.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that if another catastrophe like 9/11 occurred in New York City, cell phone communication would again fail. But, from what I have learned, particularly concerning the new 800-megahertz radio system, I do not believe that fire departments and other emergency personnel would not have nearly as much trouble communicating with one another, as they did on 9/11. Also, new policies and procedures have been developed to improve coordination efforts. I think the big question now is: has enough been done?
As for cell phone networks crashing, I think that is just something that must be accounted in disaster response plans. Technology, obviously, has not evolved to the point where it is possible to deal with massive amounts of “network activity.” Ideally, everyone who called 911 on September 11, 2001, would have gotten through. But, would that have really been necessary? I mean it was probably pretty clear after the first 50 or so calls that the disaster in New York City was pretty isolated. The largest advantage of victims being able to communicate to emergency responders after the location of the incident has been identified, is so responders can understand the situation. This is what I see as the biggest problem. If emergency personnel could get a better idea of what they were getting into, their response will probably be more efficient. That is why it is so important to have the ability to communicate with victims on the inside, during dynamic situations. It is just as important to have open lines of communication between victims and responders as it for responders to have open lines of communication between each other. After all, the more information emergency response personnel have about the actual consequences of the disaster, the better chance they have of initiating a “successful” response.
Hi Tony, Your point about reliance on the kinds of communication systems we have (ie, Facebook, cell phones, etc.) hits on the same topic I addressed in my blog. The one thing I wondered about was if there really wasn’t any development in the communication infrastructure after events like 9/11—there must be, right? So often, we hear of buildings and power plants given an examination and analysis in post-disaster events, but can you recall the last time you read an article or something where notes of refining the communication structure reaches news? Perhaps it may be too technical for a paper; perhaps people wouldn’t be interested in behind-the-scenes work in fortifying our communication grid. But one thing that certainly hasn’t been mentioned is alternative sources of effective communication methods when the tools we use routinely are no longer available. Unfortunately, when alternatives aren’t offered, despite how less effective they will be than the systems we usually have at our disposal, of course the first reaction is to panic or be at loss for the next step. The first step is making vulnerability assessments more accessible/available for the public post-disaster; it is necessary that something we depend on to such a great extent is publicly evaluated and shared. From there, the next course of action could be planned. Otherwise, I think the message people get is that these displays of vulnerability in the communication grid is something that happens for short periods of time, providing a crippling sense of security that such occurrences are few are far between and less reflection on alternative actions/methods in communication to take.
ReplyDeleteAs you and others have pointed out, in an event of another 9/11 attack communication networks will inevitably fail. You mentioned how the earthquake in Virginia temporarily shut down networks across the east coast. I don't think you even need to look at the Virginia earthquake to realize just how inevitable it is our networks will fail in the event of another 9/11 type of attack. People with AT&T iPhones have been complaining about dropped calls since the iPhone release. If AT&T cannot even run a cell network during regular usage, how can we expect the network to stay functional during an emergency?
ReplyDeleteYou can also look at how inevitable network failure is by looking at cell phone service during a Penn State football game. Beaver Stadium during a Penn State football game would make an ideal target for a terrorist attack. There are 100,000+ people in the stadium with thousands of people outside of the stadium during the average Penn State football game. Currently, cell phone service at Beaver Stadium is touchy at best during a football game. SMS messages will sometimes fail to send, and phones calls will often be dropped or fail to go through. Verizon has attempted to help relieve the problem by installing temporary network tower, but even with these temporary fixes network service is spotty.
Emergency planners must plan on cell phone networks being unusable in the event of a disaster. Failing to plan on cell phone networks failing, is a failure to recognize the realities of our network services. You asked why there is not a solution for this problem 10 years out of 9/11. I'd say that we have increased our capabilities in this area because of the way the cell phone infrastructure is set up in the United States. Verizon and AT&T really are not motivated to improve the network as long as the network can handle "most" of the regular stress on the system. Unless either government or customer demands incentivize them, they will not do so in the near future.
I feel that you are correct that communications will go down and that you have a right to be frustrated about a lack of a plan but you and I both know how complicated the situation is. I agree that in most cases first responders do not have training but they still provide a great deal of help in a crisis.
ReplyDeleteIt is our job to train them (ourselves I suppose) and that is something that should have gotten done in the ten years since the disaster. We need to have a class, pamphlet, and easy to view video about what to do in a crisis, just to give people some kind of basic game plan at leas then they wont feel hopeless and terrified should this ever occur again.
Communication does need to be improved but you can't just say it and not offer suggestions, this is what we are in this class for and this is what our final project is going to be about. Do you have any suggestions of how to improve communication or an alternative form of communication in case all the regular ones go out? I understand it is a daunting and pressing question and something that should be at least trying to be addressed but it is very hard to imagine an alternative or an improvement to the current system. It is something we must try and fix though.
I disagree that because of the fact we all rely on technology more than ever before if it all goes down things will become more chaotic and unorganized. I feel that in times of need we rise to the occasion and will do just fine. We will realize we can't google or wiki every problem away and remember that all of those people we ignore on the street everyday have voices and will want to use them to help each other better understand the situation.