Posted on 03/04/2006 5:33:03 PM PST by 2Jim_Brown
CHICAGO, March 3 (UPI) -- New wireless technologies being developed by a secretive government agency in collaboration with private contractors may dramatically improve communications for homeland defense among federal, state and local officials, experts tell United Press International's Wireless World.
The Department of Homeland Security, working with BlackBerry Wireless devices, Palm Treos and other mobile handheld computers, has been working to secure wireless e-mail through a testing program being run by its very secretive Advanced Research Projects Agency, a unit created for the war on terror that is analogous to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, devised during the Cold War by the Pentagon to create secret, new technologies. By Gene Koprowski
(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...
Yeah, but can they keep a cell connection for more than 10 miles without the call dropping?
ßu11$h¡† - you mean to tell me that the telecommunications system cannot sufficiently recognize one set of phones (dedicated to emergency personnel and systems) from plain 'ol users (aka 'the great unwashed'), prioritize incoming traffic, and selectively allow 'priority' traffic to connect (at the expense of disconnecting lower-priority traffic)?
_I_ have no problem with only being permitted time-limited calls if I'm in the middle of a disaster if it means that necessary traffic can get through.
Boy, these guys have really active imaginations. HSARPA projects are in the public record. Anyone can access the grant proposals for current and past grant solicitations on-line at http://www.hsarpabaa.com/
I don't know what the situation is in the United States, but in the UK they simply give special SIM cards to emergency personnel and essential government officials. When the sh*t hits the fan, the phone company pushes a button, and those whose the "high priority" bit set on their SIM cards get access to the cell network before anyone else, even if it means cutting off a regular user's call. Or, of course, in a worst-case scenario they can block regular users entirely. You can run a web search on the phrase "ACCOLC" for more information.
Them press peoples am smart!
That scheme works over there because they have standardised on GSM. The U.S. has a real melange of different standards and freqs in use.
I feel certain that can be done, but I'd be surprised if it's just that simple. There's a different technology out there that's pretty slick; I read about a company that's opening a location in Tupelo, MS; can't remember the company name. They make gear specifically for critical-needs telecommunications like this, and if I correctly understand the technology, it doesn't require any big build-out of new infrastructure by the telcos.
MM
I dunno - I think it _can_ be as simple as that. after all, they know your phone number so they can bill you; it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to have a 'priority' list and a 'public' list and start bumping 'public' calls when a new 'priority' number wants to initiate a call.
As for that company you mention, I think I heard something similar: they bring in a self-contained 'cell tower' (with generator& all), set it up, and narrow-beam the out-of-area traffic to a distant location to connect with the rest of the world. The tower would have its own central office to manage its own local links so those in the area could communicate with each other over the affected area.
It looks like that OBeverywhere company just makes the software; nothing to do with the carriers.
"_I_ have no problem with only being permitted time-limited calls if I'm in the middle of a disaster if it means that necessary traffic can get through."
See, this is where it gets tricky.
The government, through its inherent incompetence, especially with complex things, cannot - despite countless 10's of Billions of dollars, create it's own communication network so that in an emergency, first responders, gov't leaders, etc. can communicate with those they need to communicate.
Solution? Usurp the commercial network (at their expense to implement the technology) with a prioritization scheme, whereby gov't weenies can use their commercial cellphones, while the great unwashed will not be able to use their cellphones.
This scheme is supposedly already implemented, by the way.
Now, what do you think is on the list of reasons why nearly everyone buys a cellphone? Emergencies, unexpected developments, and ability to be reached no matter what.
Guess what? In a national emergency, nobody in the great unwashed masses gets to phone home to ease the minds of worried relatives, unless you are a gov't employee. You can bet that they are handing priority phone privileges out like candy to every self-important bureaucrat that wants one.
Guess what else? Cell phone companies won't tell you this, because people might realize that in a disaster, even if the cellphone network is operating, their cellphone is a paperweight - and this would likely influence buying decisions.
I DO have a problem with the government telling me I can't call my family in a disaster situation on a commercial cellular network.
If government can't build their own robust communications system, despite huge expenditure of funds, what makes anyone think they'll be any more effective in a disaster situation - especially by interfering with the commercial use of cellphone systems.
His sentence isn't even factually correct. "DARPA" became "ARPA" years ago, certainly long before 9/11.
Them press peoples am smart!
At some point, most mobile phone calls must interface to physical landlines in order to make a connection, particularly if the call is directed to a land-based phone. If the call is directed to another mobile phone, it depends on where the other phone is located as to whether the call goes onto the physical cable/fiber network or is able to be switched/transmitted totally via radio frequency. This is even true on the NexTel-type walkie-talkie phones.
There is a very detailed section on cell phone technology on www.howstuffworks.com
Aren't these connections normally refered to as "circuits"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.