Washington, D.C. - DHS plans enhanced interoperability standard

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thunderbolt

Global Database Administrator
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
7,143
Reaction score
139
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan
WASHINGTON -- The Homeland Security Department expects to complete an enhanced version of its Bridging Systems Interface technical standard in the this summer to better enable interoperability among emergency response agencies, a senior official said at the GovSec conference today.

DHS plans enhanced interoperability standard -- Federal Computer Week
 

ab3a

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
347
Reaction score
33
Location
Lisbon MD
I know! We'll re-invent Echolink. We'll add all kinds of complicated, useless fluff to make it look like we did something, and it will confuse the users.

Actually, cross connecting users can be a significant problem. Ten codes aren't always ten codes, and phonetic alphabets can be all over the place.
 

kb2vxa

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
6,100
Reaction score
17
Location
Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Echostink? Er, you're confusing it with IRLP and network backbones or in other words computer to repeater with VoIP linked repeaters which BTW has worked well for years. Amateur networks use 70cM and/or internet linking over wide area networks transparent to the users while IRLP uses DTMF tones to establish and disconnect the links. Federal and military repeater networks also have been well established. You're right about the phonetics but I don't think anyone would confuse Monmouth with mike and codes are rapidly giving way to plain language.

Don't worry about confusing users, I don't think they could get any more confused than they already are, there will be just be more of them all in one place. (;->) Seriously, the confused ones are the public, DHS is really a bank that funds to "improve" radio systems are drawn from. Keep 'em scared and the taxpayers gladly fork it over, the Three Little Pigs take shelter in the brick house the local pigs built for them but where is that big bad wolf they keep yapping about? Pardon me if I'm not entirely PC in my reference to law enforcement. The term "pigs" has taken on a different meaning since the 60s, these days they have joined the others feeding at the trough. Oh it's well in evidence, where do you think all these new whiz-bang systems most of which don't work and encryption came from anyway? If you're that stupid... YOUR POCKETS!
 

DickH

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
4,067
Reaction score
5
WASHINGTON -- The Homeland Security Department expects to complete an enhanced version of its Bridging Systems Interface technical standard in the this summer to better enable interoperability among emergency response agencies, a senior official said at the GovSec conference today.

DHS plans enhanced interoperability standard -- Federal Computer Week

Great. Just what we need. Another "standard" written by pie-in-the-sky experts who probably seldom, if ever, use radios. All that's needed in most areas is knowledge of freqs. that are already available, training on how to properly use them and practice, like daily or weekly radio tests.
 

PJH

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,622
Reaction score
87
If you read it carefully, the "standard" is not reinventing the wheel, but setting up basics on things should be organized/used/etc. This is similar to what APCO did for IMBE and the 9600 system.

The problem is that vendors will market all sorts of products that all do the same thing, but do it so differently that they won't or do not work well with each other.

In addition, its common knowledge within the responder communities that when operating in a multiagency response, everyone uses plain language. Phonetic's are phonetic's. If you use APCO, Mil, or on the fly, that same message gets across when spelling something out.

Some people are reading into this way too much.
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
We already have operational standards for "interoperability" that would render the expensive high tech solutions irrelevant if everyone complied with them. Just follow NIMS correctly and the communications problems tend to sort themselves out.
 

PJH

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,622
Reaction score
87
Provided that equipment is available.

Where my home is, you have the following to contend with:

Mutual aid comes in on low split, lowband, high split lowband, VHF-Hi.

Budgets for equipment are almost non-existant. Now, you have mixed groups of firefighters from different departments together with limited resources. Short of going back to bugles and blow horns, who gets what limted portable radios and on whose simplex system are you going to play with?

In Westchester County, Albany County in NY, not a big deal. You go to some rural counties in the state or even out of state/country M/A depts, and how does that work?

Thats my current project for a few departments.

Designing and implementing city systems tends to be easier than implementing smaller soultions with multiple desparte agencies. Politics and finaces are much worse.
 

mikepdx

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
888
Reaction score
93
Location
Corbett, OR USA
Interoperability requires a mindset of cooperation between agencies.
NOT another profitable technical standard.
Real commitment, rather than turf-wars between administrators.

Years after 9/11, they still haven't figured it out yet.
We can't spend ourselves into interoperability.
 
Last edited:

kb2vxa

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
6,100
Reaction score
17
Location
Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
I still say it's just another scare tactic and a poor attempt to justify their existence when they never should have existed in the first place. Leave it to the government to muck it all up as always, if they will ever keep their noses out of our business we'll sort it out on our own thank you very much.
 

scansalot52

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
160
Reaction score
3
Location
Indiana
In my county all the local volunteer fire departments operate on VHF. If they assist in another area, they just switch to a tac channel for the agency having jurisdiction. No fancy smancy patches or stuff needed here. Not to say that the money and radios for 800 isn't here. I just don't see the need. The troops in the interior of a fire scene can't/won/t carry two radios and fight the fire. Only the big cheeses will have 800mhz to talk on. Sorry, I just don't get it. Most places won't let the cheeses off the home 800 talkgroup to establish interoperability with the visiting cheeses anyway.
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
People are still thinking in terms of radio when an rf link is not necessary.

The Unified Command Post puts the "cheeses" face to face. You don't need a radio to talk to the guy standing next to you. Each cheese can relay information to his own forces on their radios.
 

PJH

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,622
Reaction score
87
Either way, I don't see what all the *****ing is about, based on the article. Just mostly a bunch of scanner heads who have no clue in what was actually written.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top