Friday, January 07, 2005
Another 9-1-1 story
At CES the other day, one of the speakers in Jeff Pulver's Consumer VOIP Summit told this story:
He and his wife were home and their house was broken into. They heard the burglar downstairs.
He called 9-1-1 and seconds later his wife hit the panic button on their home security system.
The home security system seized the line, cutting off the 9-1-1 call to dial the alarm company.
Plus it triggered sirens and lights . . . and the burglar apparently fled.
But the 9-1-1 PSAP trapped the Caller ID, and seconds later the PSAP attendant called back.
Another "false alarm" -- in that the problem had resolved without the call.
Also bad engineering on the part of the alarm company. And bad coordination between
the two "defenders."
This was another one of those emergencies that is perfect for 9-1-1. And to a first approximation,
the system "worked." But not well.
The burglar had been chased away by the time the 9-1-1 operator called back.
Also, it is easy to imagine the situation going downhill fast -- the call might have further panicked
the burglar, hostages, sirens, stand-off, etc.
Isn't there a better way? Aren't there better ways?
He and his wife were home and their house was broken into. They heard the burglar downstairs.
He called 9-1-1 and seconds later his wife hit the panic button on their home security system.
The home security system seized the line, cutting off the 9-1-1 call to dial the alarm company.
Plus it triggered sirens and lights . . . and the burglar apparently fled.
But the 9-1-1 PSAP trapped the Caller ID, and seconds later the PSAP attendant called back.
Another "false alarm" -- in that the problem had resolved without the call.
Also bad engineering on the part of the alarm company. And bad coordination between
the two "defenders."
This was another one of those emergencies that is perfect for 9-1-1. And to a first approximation,
the system "worked." But not well.
The burglar had been chased away by the time the 9-1-1 operator called back.
Also, it is easy to imagine the situation going downhill fast -- the call might have further panicked
the burglar, hostages, sirens, stand-off, etc.
Isn't there a better way? Aren't there better ways?
Comments:
Interesting story, even more interesting is that it was discussed during a session on consumer VoIP as none of the consumer VoIP services support alarm systems. If you want to enable an alarm system to call home in case of an emergency, you will need to continue to maintain a POTS line (or take the chance that it may or may not work over VoIP).
Couple of things.
First of all, absent a second line, there is no way to have simultaneous alarm and outgoing calls on one physical line. Its debatable which should have priority. Normally, the alarm probably should, but if you are already calling 9-1-1, it shouldn't. Passive monitoring of the line looking for 9-1-1 calls would be possible, maybe too expensive.
Broadband gives you more options, because you CAN have many simultaneous "calls" in progress.
The system knows about abandoned calls. If a call to 9-1-1 is abandoned, and the 9-1-1 center isn't busy, many systems will call you back.
Alarms are very problematic for 9-1-1. You are NOT ALLOWED to automatically generate a call to 9-1-1 from an alarm system; too many false alarms. Centralized alarm monitoring companies get the alarm signal, try to determine if it is legitimate, and then place a 9-1-1 call for you.
When this happens, an amazing in this day and age dance occurs. The alarm company employee reads address information off of her screen to the 9-1-1 call taker, who types it into his screen. There is NO WAY for the alarm company to send the address information to the 9-1-1 system. Same is true of OnStar and other telematics.
Hopefully, we will get some of this fixed with IP based 9-1-1 calls. We at least will provide ways for the alarm monitoring company to transfer what it knows to the 9-1-1 system over an IP network.
Brian Rosen
Post a Comment
First of all, absent a second line, there is no way to have simultaneous alarm and outgoing calls on one physical line. Its debatable which should have priority. Normally, the alarm probably should, but if you are already calling 9-1-1, it shouldn't. Passive monitoring of the line looking for 9-1-1 calls would be possible, maybe too expensive.
Broadband gives you more options, because you CAN have many simultaneous "calls" in progress.
The system knows about abandoned calls. If a call to 9-1-1 is abandoned, and the 9-1-1 center isn't busy, many systems will call you back.
Alarms are very problematic for 9-1-1. You are NOT ALLOWED to automatically generate a call to 9-1-1 from an alarm system; too many false alarms. Centralized alarm monitoring companies get the alarm signal, try to determine if it is legitimate, and then place a 9-1-1 call for you.
When this happens, an amazing in this day and age dance occurs. The alarm company employee reads address information off of her screen to the 9-1-1 call taker, who types it into his screen. There is NO WAY for the alarm company to send the address information to the 9-1-1 system. Same is true of OnStar and other telematics.
Hopefully, we will get some of this fixed with IP based 9-1-1 calls. We at least will provide ways for the alarm monitoring company to transfer what it knows to the 9-1-1 system over an IP network.
Brian Rosen
# posted by 
: 1/18/2005 7:45 PM
: 1/18/2005 7:45 PM
