Friday, January 07, 2005
I just dialed 9-1-1!
Returning home from an errand just now, I came upon a car crash that had just happened.
At a busy intersection, a man was sitting in a red convertible with a smashed side. It was up on the grass pointed in the wrong direction. Around the corner, a woman was standing by a big old Lincoln, also smashed.
I jumped out and asked the man if he was OK. He said, "I think so," and reached for his leg. "Don't move," I said. (I saw on TV how you're supposed to tell accident victims, "Don't move.")
"Has anybody called the cops?" I asked. "No," he said. So I whipped out my cell and dialed 9-1-1. I told them, "Auto accident with possible injuries. In Cos Cob, Connecticut." I was careful to e-nun-ci-ate Connecticut because my cell phone has a New Jersey area code and I don't know where the 911 Public Service Access Point (PSAP) operator might be.
"City streets or Interstate 95?" asked the attendant. "City streets," I said. "Transferring you to Greenwich Emergency," he said.
I knew that the next voice would have local knowledge. But while I was saying, "Corner of Mead and Route 1," I heard the first siren. And then he said, "We've already got it, they're on their way," as the ambulance pulled up and two police cars blazed in from different directions.
So somebody else had called already. And good for them.
I wonder how many redundant phone calls an accident like that generates. And what each of those calls costs.
(And, of course, there's a trade-off. I can imagine an emergency system with such high calling barriers that nobody
calls in a real emergency.)
This kind of accident is exactly the kind of situation that the 9-1-1 system was designed for, but it still didn't work optimally. The system worked just fine, but still didn't . . .
We're not even talking about a tsunami or a September 11-type situation or a tornado or a flood or an electrical outage or . . .
At a busy intersection, a man was sitting in a red convertible with a smashed side. It was up on the grass pointed in the wrong direction. Around the corner, a woman was standing by a big old Lincoln, also smashed.
I jumped out and asked the man if he was OK. He said, "I think so," and reached for his leg. "Don't move," I said. (I saw on TV how you're supposed to tell accident victims, "Don't move.")
"Has anybody called the cops?" I asked. "No," he said. So I whipped out my cell and dialed 9-1-1. I told them, "Auto accident with possible injuries. In Cos Cob, Connecticut." I was careful to e-nun-ci-ate Connecticut because my cell phone has a New Jersey area code and I don't know where the 911 Public Service Access Point (PSAP) operator might be.
"City streets or Interstate 95?" asked the attendant. "City streets," I said. "Transferring you to Greenwich Emergency," he said.
I knew that the next voice would have local knowledge. But while I was saying, "Corner of Mead and Route 1," I heard the first siren. And then he said, "We've already got it, they're on their way," as the ambulance pulled up and two police cars blazed in from different directions.
So somebody else had called already. And good for them.
I wonder how many redundant phone calls an accident like that generates. And what each of those calls costs.
(And, of course, there's a trade-off. I can imagine an emergency system with such high calling barriers that nobody
calls in a real emergency.)
This kind of accident is exactly the kind of situation that the 9-1-1 system was designed for, but it still didn't work optimally. The system worked just fine, but still didn't . . .
We're not even talking about a tsunami or a September 11-type situation or a tornado or a flood or an electrical outage or . . .
Comments:
The answer is lots of extra calls.
The current system doesn't handle it "well". Of course, well is in the eye of the beholder. Generally, the 9-1-1 system wants the calls, because:
a) They sometimes get more usefull information from subsequent calls
b) They have no way to know if a call from the same area is actually the same problem, or something unrelated
Generally, there is no ideal answer. I think there is some value in sending subsequent calls very near an incident to the same call taker, but thats a pretty minor optimisation.
If the 9-1-1 center is busy, you might at least want an IVR announcement that they are aware of the incident, but if you have additional information, hang on, someone will answer. That is controversial.
9-1-1 is staffed for the "normal peak". Usually, repeat calls don't make the system busy. That would be the real problem; if a caller with a new problem got busy when a repeat caller got through. The size of the queue is amazingly low; current systems are designed to busy out with only a handfull of calls.
When serious emergencies occur, the system returns busy to all but a handfull of calls. Many in the system claim that is a good design. I think it's lousy; no one should ever get a busy from 9-1-1, even in 9/11 scale or California earthquake scale. Again, this is controversial.
Brian Rosen
The current system doesn't handle it "well". Of course, well is in the eye of the beholder. Generally, the 9-1-1 system wants the calls, because:
a) They sometimes get more usefull information from subsequent calls
b) They have no way to know if a call from the same area is actually the same problem, or something unrelated
Generally, there is no ideal answer. I think there is some value in sending subsequent calls very near an incident to the same call taker, but thats a pretty minor optimisation.
If the 9-1-1 center is busy, you might at least want an IVR announcement that they are aware of the incident, but if you have additional information, hang on, someone will answer. That is controversial.
9-1-1 is staffed for the "normal peak". Usually, repeat calls don't make the system busy. That would be the real problem; if a caller with a new problem got busy when a repeat caller got through. The size of the queue is amazingly low; current systems are designed to busy out with only a handfull of calls.
When serious emergencies occur, the system returns busy to all but a handfull of calls. Many in the system claim that is a good design. I think it's lousy; no one should ever get a busy from 9-1-1, even in 9/11 scale or California earthquake scale. Again, this is controversial.
Brian Rosen
# posted by 
: 1/18/2005 7:37 PM
: 1/18/2005 7:37 PM
Way late on a comment but thought I'd add my 2 cents anyways. Yes a dramatic looking accident will provide with numerous calls, as will almost any high-profile incident, such as a vegetation fire. Any incident on a freeway generates a huge volume of calls, just due to the fact that so many people are passing.
Working in the 9-1-1 industry I can tell you that we definetily want the repeat callers. The first caller (or several callers) may not know the location that well (esp. true on freeway or rural areas) and may not have stopped to assess injuries.
As far as the busy signal issue ... it's not neccessarily designed to give out a busy signal ... but it extreme cases such as 9/11 or earthquake the system simply becomes overloaded. Most 9-1-1 centers have a "secondary" center that calls will roll over to if all the 9-1-1 lines are busy. The problem is that in a major emergency there are too many people calling and the system becomes overwhelmed ... there are simply no more lines to put calls onto .. hence the busy signals.
We must all remember to call only if we have a life or death emergency or sitaution that is an immediate threat to property. Calling to ask "did we just have an earthquake" or "why is my power out" just isn't acceptable.
Post a Comment
Working in the 9-1-1 industry I can tell you that we definetily want the repeat callers. The first caller (or several callers) may not know the location that well (esp. true on freeway or rural areas) and may not have stopped to assess injuries.
As far as the busy signal issue ... it's not neccessarily designed to give out a busy signal ... but it extreme cases such as 9/11 or earthquake the system simply becomes overloaded. Most 9-1-1 centers have a "secondary" center that calls will roll over to if all the 9-1-1 lines are busy. The problem is that in a major emergency there are too many people calling and the system becomes overwhelmed ... there are simply no more lines to put calls onto .. hence the busy signals.
We must all remember to call only if we have a life or death emergency or sitaution that is an immediate threat to property. Calling to ask "did we just have an earthquake" or "why is my power out" just isn't acceptable.
# posted by : 9/03/2006 2:30 PM
: 9/03/2006 2:30 PM
