N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


As long as the cell phones are avaialble, they are obviously the preferred
method because anyone so equipped can push 911 and report directly.

I think this may be the confusion here also. A cell phone is great for
localized small-scale problems. If everyone has one, then of course they
will be great for calling 911. An accident happens and likely the next
person ther will have a cell phone. One of the best reasons for having
one of the otherwise evil little devices.


AH, Mike, I see where you're going with this. And I agree!

As the scale of problems gets bigger, then they become of less use,
their usefulness being inversely proportional to the scale of the problem.

Eventually, the cellular concept falls apart because of the massive
support structure needed for the instruments use, and that often the
same disasters that make emergency comms necessary take out that
infrastucture.


Even if the infrastructure is largely intact, it can be overwhelmed by the
unexpected demand.

Correct! Which makes it not a likely candidate for emergency services.
If it works to let people know you're still alive or need help or
whatever, of course you use it. But it is still very much a point to
point solution. Which is to say, not a solution for large scale disasters.




I recall the pictures from the wildfires in San Diego last year showing


people trying to use their cell phones without success. The look on many
faces was one of surprise that the things weren't working.


Because they'd never encountered that behavior before.

Indicative on not knowing how the little things work. No tower or
power, no cell.

- mike KB3EIA -