Integrated Asterisk VoIP & Amateur Radio

[thedqs]

I agree, and for an example, last winter in Western Washington there was a great windstorm in the King County area which just destroyed power lines and put everyone into darkeness. During the first 3 days nobody minded too much because they''re use to power outages. It was when it moved into the 4th and 5thdays that all the stores were sold out of generators and those that had generators and had they're power return were loaning them out so that people could heat their houses. Most of the emergency communications were cell phones and Ham Radio. Nothing really that fancy.

[Greg@mcintoshcomm-p40]

This is a very interesting topic. I believe there is products/solutions out there that resolve this issue much better than others. Using VoIP or Radio over IP (RoIP) is a very useful and powerful tool, but whomever manufactures the solution must be an expert in both VoIP and Two-way radio communications.
I have had experience working with the Church in helping them to develop and create emergency preparedness plans - especially dealing with communications. There are some particular scenarios that need to be addressed.
Consider this:
The Presiding Bishopric sent out a directive a couple years ago detailing that each stake needs to have an emergency preparedness plan and an emergency communications system that is wireless. Money was allocated to each stake and they went forward and procured the necessary licensing from the FCC and they also procured their radio equipment. The troubling factor here is: that directive didn’t specify what format/frequency range each stake or area should use, nor did it setup interoperability between stakes. Therefore, in one area, you could easily find a different stakes with different formats and/or brands of radios. The typical available formats (frequency categories) in the U.S. are VHF, UHF or HAM. Even if two adjacent stakes are on the same frequency range, (i.e.: UHF) unless their radios are programmed with each other’s frequencies, they still cannot talk/coordinate with each other. The only exception to this is HAM. Yet with HAM, it requires each individual to be licensed to operate the equipment and legally, if you don’t have a license, you aren’t able to talk. Also, what is the solution for stakes/areas that may have a new emergency coordinator that has never been trained? There are very few people out there who have not only had the training necessary to handle a minor, medium or major event, but they haven’t experienced one either. How do we help them by getting them information or assistance?
There are two solutions that are needed here: a radio interoperability module that allows disparate radio systems to talk to each other. The other would be radio over IP back to a location with subject-matter experts.
I deal with several interoperability products and the solution I have found that covers both of these scenarios very well is Motorola’s Motobridge. With Motobridge, you can connect up to eight disparate radio systems and allow them to talk to one another by creating patches between the different radio systems. This would allow multiple VHF, UHF or HAM radio systems to be able to communicate with each other as needed. You may also link in Nextel/IDEN phones as well as PSTN lines. That same gateway can also be linked to either other gateway modules for interoperability with them or back to Church Headquarters. Communications with the field personnel can be handled at either Ops Comm, welfare or both. With this type of system, a general authority, an area authority, a stake president that is out of the area or anyone else necessary could call into the system and be patched into the scenario to provide scenario command and control. This also opens up some amazing possibilities and resources for responders at the scenario. Motobridge opens the possibility up for subject-matter experts to be patched in from anywhere as long as they have a telephone to assist an emergency coordinator, stake president, bishops or any other person/entity requiring additional assistance or resources.
Motobridge gateways are small and take up very little room and use very little power. The scenario listed above with a gateway being in a van or truck could easily be done. Even better – I think – would be to have a Motobridge located at each area of the Church and have it sent upon need to scenarios as they happen. You could easily mount a Motobridge into a NEMA enclosure that could easily be loaded and deployed via pick-up truck or van.
Motobridge is also very scalable. You can go from one to thousands of gateways with no central point of failure. I find myself leaning towards Motorola for this type of solution because there isn’t a better company out there that knows or does two-way radios better. Motobridge is also build with 99.99999% reliability. Also, during any type of scenario, information can be very valuable and important to keep in the right hands. (ears….) Motobridge offers encryption on the data stream as well as extended encryption to radio systems that all ready have it.
I can be contacted for any additional information about Motobridge @ gregs@mcintoshcomm.com.

[k0nod]

Unfortunately, it is illegal for other radio services to interconnect with Amateur bands. A better solution is for Salt Lake to mandate the use of MURS-service VHF radios, an unlicensed service allowing two watts of power on relatively inexpensive handheld radios, as well as higher power on fixed stations. The current craze of buying FRS and GMRS radios (GMRS requires a license) for wards and stakes is wasteful, since the allowable power is generally insufficient. Using MURS, entire units (ward and/or stake) can have fairly reliable communication, and do so legally. Post an Amateur operator at each ward and stake building to funnel the local information up the ladder of communication to areas and regions.

[mkmurray]

Motorola Motobridge

DISCLAIMER: The Church has no affiliation with Motorola nor it's product Motobridge. The Church does not endorse the use of this product in anyway. Please consult with your local Church authorities about which solution is or should be implemented for your unit(s).

The post on the Motorola Motobridge was very informative and helpful. I would just add as a caution that we should avoid posts that promote the product to the point of advertisement. This post was pretty tasteful, but somewhat borderline.

[russellhltn]

The typical available formats (frequency categories) in the U.S. are VHF, UHF or HAM. Even if two adjacent stakes are on the same frequency range, (i.e.: UHF) unless their radios are programmed with each other’s frequencies, they still cannot talk/coordinate with each other. The only exception to this is HAM.

Even with Ham. If one stake bought 2 meter (144MHz) and the other bought 70cm (440MHz) the two won't talk. Not unless someone sets up a cross-band repeater or someone has a dual band radio.

There are significant legal issues with connecting other services to ham. During a real emergency, that's not a big issue, but it does affect testing. I think it's far better that stakes have in interoperability plan. The Moto bridge sounds interesting, but it also sounds like a plan that begins to rely on infrastructure which is not a good idea. Probably cheaper to make sure some key people in the adjoining stake have compatible radios.

[russellhltn]

The current craze of buying FRS and GMRS radios (GMRS requires a license) for wards and stakes is wasteful, since the allowable power is generally insufficient.

FRS is 1/2W. GMRS can run up to 5W (for a HT. I think mobile can run up to 50W), but the blister pack radios tend to be 1W or 2W if you look hard. The problem with MURS is that it seems to have died off. Not easy to find those radios any more. GMRS is expensinve with a license something like $80/family for 5 years.

A bigger issue is the topology of the stake itself. What may work in the flatlands won't work in the hills, and what works in the dense member areas of Utah may not work in the stakes of the midwest that cover hundreds of miles. That's probably why the church didn't specify the technology.

[thedqs]

What is needed is for the stakes to devise their own plans and then the region to devise a way for the stakes to talk with each other and then the church give instructions on how the regions will talk with headquarters. I believe the last part is already completed and in some stakes the first part is completed. In my old stake the plan has everyone with a FRS/GMRS radio that all communicate with their local HAM operator (who also has a FRS/GMRS radio) the local ham then talks to the ward emergency person (who happens to be amateur licensed) who then communicates to the stake.

They have run a few disaster simulations on this and it has been pretty effective though the FRS radios were so so.

As the link for stake to region I think that each stake could designate a ham operator with HF priviledges to communicate with the regional emergency rep who then communicates to SLC.

[russellhltn]

HF priviledges

A lot easier now that the code requirement has been eliminated.

[thedqs]

Yes it is though now it is job of finding time to study the questions so that I can upgrade.

[rmrichesjr]

... GMRS is expensinve with a license something like $80/family for 5 years.

Are you sure that's per family? When I read the license application, I understood it was per person/individual. (I had bought a pair of FRS/GMRS units at Wal-Mart, expecting the license to be priced more like the old CB station license I got years ago. My units have never been powered up and sit in a plastic bag until an emergency requires/allows their use.)