112 vs 999
in [UK Mobile]
|
From: tony sayer on 20 May 2010 17:44 In article <slrnhv8jsl.da9.catwheezel(a)ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers <catwheezel(a)operamail.com> scribeth thus >On 2010-05-19, Zaz <zaz(a)zaz.zaz> wrote: >> On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:41:03 +0100, Whiskers <catwheezel(a)operamail.com> >> wrote: >>> Some 'smartphones' are now capable of identifying their own location to >>> a certain extent, the best probably using an integrated GPS receiver and >>> mapping application. I don't know if the emergency operator has any way >>> of tapping into that information as yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if >>> the emergency services are investigating the possibilites. >> >> There was a story about someone in America that accidentally called 911 >> from a mobile phone that he had stolen. He was selling drugs and the >> operator could hear the conversation and was able to give the police the >> caller's exact location. >> >> It didn't say how this was done but I imagine it must be through GPS. I >> can't imagine mobile manufacturers didn't consider the possibility of >> allowing GPS coordinates to be sent when an emergency call is made. >> Unless there were privacy concerns I can't think why this wouldn't have >> been implemented. > >More likely an urban area with small 'cells' and the cops knew how to spot >a dealer in action, or knew him by sight already, or possibly locked on to >the signal from his handset. In analogue days they could probably listen >to the actual conversation using a simple 'scanner' (as could journalists >hounding careless 'celebs'). > >"Geolocation" currently requires deliberate activation of the equipment >and software, and an internet connection to a suitable web site to >'publish' the information. Of course if a thief unwittingly steals a >handset that is already so connected ... > Ever heard of Triangulation for mobile phones?.. -- Tony Sayer
From: Whiskers on 21 May 2010 10:48 On 2010-05-20, tony sayer <tony(a)bancom.co.uk> wrote: > In article <slrnhv8jsl.da9.catwheezel(a)ID-107770.user.individual.net>, > Whiskers <catwheezel(a)operamail.com> scribeth thus >>On 2010-05-19, Zaz <zaz(a)zaz.zaz> wrote: >>> On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:41:03 +0100, Whiskers <catwheezel(a)operamail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Some 'smartphones' are now capable of identifying their own location to >>>> a certain extent, the best probably using an integrated GPS receiver and >>>> mapping application. I don't know if the emergency operator has any way >>>> of tapping into that information as yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if >>>> the emergency services are investigating the possibilites. >>> >>> There was a story about someone in America that accidentally called 911 >>> from a mobile phone that he had stolen. He was selling drugs and the >>> operator could hear the conversation and was able to give the police the >>> caller's exact location. >>> >>> It didn't say how this was done but I imagine it must be through GPS. I >>> can't imagine mobile manufacturers didn't consider the possibility of >>> allowing GPS coordinates to be sent when an emergency call is made. >>> Unless there were privacy concerns I can't think why this wouldn't have >>> been implemented. >> >>More likely an urban area with small 'cells' and the cops knew how to spot >>a dealer in action, or knew him by sight already, or possibly locked on to >>the signal from his handset. In analogue days they could probably listen >>to the actual conversation using a simple 'scanner' (as could journalists >>hounding careless 'celebs'). >> >>"Geolocation" currently requires deliberate activation of the equipment >>and software, and an internet connection to a suitable web site to >>'publish' the information. Of course if a thief unwittingly steals a >>handset that is already so connected ... >> > > Ever heard of Triangulation for mobile phones?.. Of course. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4738219.stm>. That's the non-GPS method I was talking about. Legally the user of the handset is meant to give permission for the thing to be tracked. Of course police can get the authority to over-ride the user's preference in certain circumstances (such as the user being a suspect terrorist, apparently), but getting that permission and discovering the IMEI number of the handset concerned and then finding it in the logs of neighbouring 'cells' must all take time - and might still only give you an area covering several streets in a city or 20 sq km of woodland or fields. In the context of an emergency, a verbal description from the caller is likely to be a lot more useful. [1] "Geolocation" using GPS receivers built into mobile phones can be a lot more accurate, of course, but requires the necessary software to be running on the handset. There are commercial services that will track the handsets of children or employees, for a fee - provided their handsets are connected to a suitable network. Precision claimed varies from "50 - 350 meters" on the Vodaphone network in a town, to "900 - 2500 meters" on the O2 network in the countryside; for example <http://www.mobilelocate.co.uk/faq.htm>. [1] I believe sea or mountain rescuers have been known to 'home in' on the signal from a mobile phone, once they've got close enough to detect it. Using a portable 'base station' is the latest trick in that particular book <http://pistehors.com/news/ski/comments/0985-spooks-gadget-could-revolutionize-mountain-rescue/> Even an LED 'camera flash' has helped a rescue <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3993325.stm>. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
From: tony sayer on 21 May 2010 15:16 >> Ever heard of Triangulation for mobile phones?.. > >Of course. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4738219.stm>. That's >the non-GPS method I was talking about. Legally the user of the handset >is meant to give permission for the thing to be tracked. Of course >police can get the authority to over-ride the user's preference in certain >circumstances (such as the user being a suspect terrorist, apparently), >but getting that permission and discovering the IMEI number of the handset >concerned and then finding it in the logs of neighbouring 'cells' must all >take time - and might still only give you an area covering several streets >in a city or 20 sq km of woodland or fields. In the context of an >emergency, a verbal description from the caller is likely to be a lot more >useful. [1] > >"Geolocation" using GPS receivers built into mobile phones can be a lot >more accurate, of course, but requires the necessary software to be >running on the handset. Not a lot of cop indoors and in some urban areas. Don't suppose Mr Terrer-wrist will want one of those... > >There are commercial services that will track the handsets of children or >employees, for a fee - provided their handsets are connected to a suitable >network. Precision claimed varies from "50 - 350 meters" on the Vodaphone >network in a town, to "900 - 2500 meters" on the O2 network in the >countryside; for example <http://www.mobilelocate.co.uk/faq.htm>. Yes used them for a while but due to almost non existent customer service now use www.followus.co.uk ... > >[1] I believe sea or mountain rescuers have been known to 'home in' on the >signal from a mobile phone, once they've got close enough to detect it. >Using a portable 'base station' is the latest trick in that particular >book ><http://pistehors.com/news/ski/comments/0985-spooks-gadget-could-revolutionize- >mountain-rescue/> You'd think that people up in the mountains would be rather aware of a device that could do that in times of distress but then again Joe Publicke eh;?.. >Even an LED 'camera flash' has helped a rescue ><http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3993325.stm>. > -- Tony Sayer
From: Jon on 22 May 2010 03:54 In article <d360d6c5-5ad7-4861-b828-2a1d755da93b@ 11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>, bobkoytc(a)googlemail.com says... > I was recently told by someone connected with the emergency services > that you should always dial 112 from a mobile rather than 999. The > reason given was that with 112 the operator will know your location > within a matter of metres whereas with 999 they only have a rough idea > where you are calling from. > > My gut feeling on hearing this was that it's nonsense. Trust your guts. They serve you well. If that were really true it would be the subject of massive publicity, do you not agree? -- Regards Jon
From: Jon on 22 May 2010 03:56
In article <WbVIn.12978$dh7.12142(a)newsfe13.ams2>, zaz(a)zaz.zaz says... > It didn't say how this was done but I imagine it must be through GPS. Err, no. How do we know this phone had GPS? It was done in the usual way. > allowing GPS coordinates to be sent when an emergency call is made. I very much doubt that's in the GSM standards. > Unless there were privacy concerns I can't think why this wouldn't have > been implemented. It takes several seconds if you're lucky to get a GPS fix. Sometimes a minute. And you've got to be outdoors. It's simply not workable. -- Regards Jon |