Global. SET Global Simulated Emergency Tests – Experiences and the Future Greg Mossop, G 0 DUB
Why do we need Global. SET? We are good at emergency communications in our own countries – but disasters do not stop at borders. Demonstrate that Radio Amateurs ARE a valuable asset for emergency communications in any situation.
ITU recommendation M. 1042 -2 that administrations encourage the development of amateur service and amateur-satellite service networks capable of providing communications in the event of natural disasters;
ITU recommendation M. 1042 -2 that such networks be robust, flexible and independent of other telecommunications services and capable of operating from emergency power; that amateur organizations be encouraged to promote the design of robust systems capable of providing communication during disasters and relief operations;
ITU recommendation M. 1042 -2 that amateur organizations be allowed to exercise their networks periodically during normal non-disaster periods. . . and that is what Global. SET has been promoting since 2006 !
The Objectives Increase the common interest in Emergency Communications Test how usable the Co. A frequencies are across the IARU regions Create practices for international emergency communications Practice the relaying of messages by voice and data modes
November 2006
May 2007
November 2007
May 2008
November 2008
April 2009
Is this realistic ? There have been questions whether the Global. SET should have a scenario. What can we do that is not going to cause panic? What can we do that will not break license conditions? What is a realistic scenario for a Global Net?
Disaster Risk Categories ECHO Evaluation December 2003
Earthquake ?
Flood ?
. . . everything else !
Realistic is difficult… English is not the only language and instructions can get confused. We are listened to by others, we do not want an exercise to cause a panic. Would focusing on a particular type of disaster put countries off from taking part. “It will never happen here…”
Barriers English is not the only language. . . Emergency Communications Organisations are not always part of the IARU/National Society Is the event getting too big ?
Creating common practices The objective is to create practices for INTERNATIONAL emergency communications. But for new groups, these should be able to be used locally. There were some suggestions that we should use NATO military procedures but most of the world is not NATO. . .
We have a procedure
Common Message Format
Relaying messages We must pass messages accurately How would we cope with messages in different languages ? We must pass messages quickly We must get messages to the right destination.
Message issues The instruction was for messages to “be less than 25 words and must not include anything which would be considered as a 'real emergency' message by a listener” “Em. Ctr. three firefighters with PTSD need KIT Team emediately. ” Also had some messages sent in last years format.
In practice… A sample audio file. . .
Message issues We have not dealt with message routing. We trust that people know where a country is and what is an appropriate route. We hope that propagation is on our side ! We need to look harder at how we organise a flexible network.
Data/E-Mail Delivery times The report of long delays in email delivery presented at GAREC 08 appears to be related to my own domain. Global. SET April 09 used Winlink through a VHF RMS Packet gateway. Airmail set to connect to gateway every 10 minutes. 89 messages received and responded to. Only one period where mail could not be answered within 10 minutes.
The way forward Next Global. SET November 14 th 2009 1800 -2200 UTC No changes to rules or exchange Allow people to learn from previous exercises See if increased Solar Activity affects inter-region communication.
But… Do we encourage National Exercises ? Do we think that twice a year is too often ? Do we need to pre-register stations ? How do we get the network to grow ?
Capability Maturity Model The CMM defines five levels of maturity for a process; 1. Initial (chaotic, ad hoc) – The starting point for the use of a new process. 2. Repeatable – the process is able to be used repeatedly, with roughly repeatable outcomes. 3. Defined – the process is standardised and documented.
Capability Maturity Model The last two levels are harder; 4. Managed Are we checking that things are working properly and instructions are followed ? 5. Optimised – includes deliberate improvements. Can we start to make changes which will not leave countries behind ?
Conclusions The 'Em. Com Parties on the Air' / Global. SET have laid the foundations for a Global network. We have a long way to go before things run smoothly. We are making great progress though !
Any Questions ? Website www. iaru-r 1. org Email gregm@raynet-hf. net
Скачать презентацию Global SET Global Simulated Emergency Tests Experiences
6d28f3647a3ab3445ebadc98d8764ae6.ppt