[mdmars_staff] Re: Interoperability Tidbit

  • From: J Sears <aat3ok@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: mdmars_staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:25:12 -0800 (PST)

Bruce,
  That is a very good idea but lets attack from both ends !  See my problem is 
that we have been working on this with Navy for over 2 years.. since I was ASMD 
and they still resist.  So plan a meeting but lets also use a flanking maneuver 
and come at them from another angle.  IF we Army MARS have so many of the 
federal agencies in our bag of trick then in order to do anything they will 
have to come into the fold or dissappear into obscurity.  
 
 This may sound like a sneeky tactic but I call it hedging my bets.  You see 
what they are resisting is the fact that they thing we (meaning Army MARS) 
wants to control everything. What they fail to realize is that in the real 
world the army DOES control the works.  I dont remember seeing any admirals 
running the show in Saudi Arabia during the first gulf war nor during WWII.. or 
Korea.  It is ALWAYS the army that determines the overall mission and anythign 
that AF and Navy does is supposed to support the Army...this is why there is so 
much resistance and rivaly.  Call it penis envy if you want I dont know.. 
 
Fact: Army MARS does control the overall direction of the MARS program.  Most 
dont know this  ..but I had this confirmed for me just recently over the 
problems with TRANSCON taking traffic.  
 
SO... please proceed with the efforts to organize a joint meeting to discuss 
interoperability but lets not stop working the other angles as well.
 
Jim
 
p.s.  John... please put your comments on top of mine not down the bottom.. I 
have trouble finding them.. I am old remember !!


--- On Tue, 1/27/09, John AAR3CK / AAM3MD <aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: John AAR3CK / AAM3MD <aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [mdmars_staff] Re: Interoperability Tidbit
To: mdmars_staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Wayne" <AAT3GI@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 10:53 AM

bmcpherson73@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> Thanks John,
> 
> In the 20 years or so that I have been involved with interoperability
planning, I have seen lots of state,local, and federal interoperability plans
come and go.  It really ramped up after 9/11 and Katrina. But no amount of
federal reports and commissions or new interoperability technology will change
the essential element of interoperability, and that is the willingness of the
various parties to work with each other. As indicated by recent email messages,
we should initially look no farther than MARS itself and develop jointness and
interoperability among ourselves before we consider taking the next step toward
interoperability with state and federal agencies. I dont think our state or
federal customers should even know or care about the distinction between the
different MARS groups.
> 
> In the absence of any joint guidance from the services, and in the spirit
of Jims recent comments on this subject I think we should convene a joint MARS
meeting for the state and develop a Joint MARS (JMARS) SOP. We are the largest
of the three, so Army MARS should lead the way.  What do you think?
> 
> Bruce AAT3TW/AAM3IMD
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at  7:37 PM, John AAR3CK / AAM3MD wrote:
> 
>> Hi, Guys -
>> 
>> Here's a short story I just saw.  Sorry if it is a duplicate for
you. About half way down there is mention of a new interoperability initiative
seemingly aimed at first responders.  However, there may be other pieces to the
pie once it gets formulated.  Maybe just something to be aware of.
>> 
>> 
>>
http://fcw.com/articles/2009/01/23/obama-unveils-homeland-agenda.aspx?s=fcwdaily_260109

>> 
>> John
>> 
>> MDC MARS Web Site:
http://mdarmymars.home.comcast.net/~mdarmymars/index.htm
>> 
>> List Serve Administrator:  John aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx
> MDC MARS Web Site:
http://mdarmymars.home.comcast.net/~mdarmymars/index.htm
> 
> List Serve Administrator:  John aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 3803 (20090127) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
All very worthwhile points, Bruce. 
One interesting example of attempted interoperability was the FEMA vehicle at
MEMA on the 20th.  They were kind enough to show us how they can flip this, and
click that and tie a whole bunch of systems together with the ease of a
computer.  It was pretty impressive, but that is that truck, and who knows how
effective it actually is under emergency communications?  They probably have a
bunch of different antennas, but the discussion seemed pretty fixated on
satellite comms.  Even if they can map frequencies across bands, it didn't
appear to me that they could deal with encryption issues between users.  I think
we in MARS are on the right track to at least make a good faith attempt to build
a better coalition of the three groups.

Keep your powder dry.  73,

John  AAM3MD

MDC MARS Web Site: http://mdarmymars.home.comcast.net/~mdarmymars/index.htm

List Serve Administrator:  John aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx



      

Other related posts: