[mdmars_staff] Re: Interoperability Tidbit

  • From: John AAR3CK / AAM3MD <aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: mdmars_staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:02:36 -0500

I changed email clients and puts me at the bottom of the stack. Your point is well taken, though, you are getting old! :-)

J Sears wrote:
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 
    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 
    the essential element of interoperability, and that is the willingness of 
    various parties to work with each other. As indicated by recent email 
    we should initially look no farther than MARS itself and develop jointness 
    interoperability among ourselves before we consider taking the next step 
    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 
    meeting for the state and develop a Joint MARS (JMARS) SOP. We are the 
    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 
    seemingly aimed at first responders.  However, there may be other pieces to 
    pie once it gets formulated.  Maybe just something to be aware of.
>> >> >>

>> >> John >> >> MDC MARS Web Site:
>> >> List Serve Administrator: John aar3ck@xxxxxxxxxxx
    > MDC MARS Web Site:
> > 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, 
    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 
    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 
    we in MARS are on the right track to at least make a good faith attempt to 
    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: