7/7 bomb rescue efforts hampered by communication failings

Report criticises lack of underground digital radio network...

NEWS

A report into the 7 July 2005 London bombings has said the lack of a digital radio network hampered the efforts of emergency service rescue teams, which were unable to communicate properly between the sites of the explosions underground, colleagues at ground level and control rooms.

The London Assembly's 7 July Review Committee report said it is "unacceptable" that the emergency services are still not able to communicate by radio when they are underground, 18 years after the official inquiry into the King's Cross fire recommended action to address the problem.

A project, called Connect, to enable emergency services personnel with digital radio handsets to communicate underground and from below surface to ground level is currently two years behind schedule but Transport for London (TfL) says it will be completed next year.

The lack of a digital radio network meant that many senior managers among the main emergency services, and the London Ambulance Service in particular, were forced to rely on using already overloaded mobile phone networks to communicate in the aftermath of the explosions.

Martin Flaherty, director of operations at the London Ambulance Service, told the committee: "We have accepted that we have become too reliant on mobile phone technology as a communication tool and it is clear now that it cannot be relied upon in a complex major incident scenario."

This had a direct impact on rescue efforts with requests for further ambulances, supplies and equipment by London Ambulance Service personnel at the scenes of incidents failing to get through to the main control room. They were also unable to receive instructions as to which hospitals were still receiving patients.

The London Assembly report concluded: "It is essential that London's emergency services are equipped with digital radio equipment so that they no longer have to rely on mobile telephones to communicate between the scenes of major incidents and the control rooms."

The scale of the mobile network overload is revealed in the report. Vodafone, for example, experienced a 250 per cent increase in the volume of calls and a doubling of the volume of text messages. Across all networks on 7 July, 11 million calls were connected - 60 per cent more than usual. This figure doesn't include unsuccessful calls.

Despite this network overload, the emergency services did not invoke the Access Overload Control (ACCOLC) system - apart from a 1km-square area around the Aldgate incident - which restricts mobile network access to the police, fire and ambulance personnel.

One of the reasons ACCOLC was not activated was that key emergency services personnel who were not carrying specially enabled telephones would not have been able to make or receive any calls.

The London Assembly report said: "This is clearly a major flaw in the system: there is no point in having the technology to enable key people to communicate with each other if the relevant authorities do not make sure that the right people are in possession of that technology."

London Underground's "antiquated" radio systems were also criticised after they failed to work on any of the three affected tube trains on 7 July, preventing direct communication from the trains to either the emergency services or TfL's control centre.

The report said the 20-year timeframe for the completion of TfL's £2bn PFI project for the rollout of a digital radio system underground on the tube needs to be "significantly reduced" and a feasibility study undertaken to assess potential interim technology solutions.

TfL said it welcomed the report and the London Resilience Network, which represents the city's emergency services, said some of the communications issues raised by the London Assembly report have already been recognised and acted upon.

Comments

There are 4 comments. Join the discussion

  1. 1. Roger Huffadine

    What's with the "DIGITAL" radio crap? Any radio system that worked would have - and will - serve the purpose. A simple cross-band repeater system with a load of cable and some simple aerials would have sufficed. Even a field telephone system with a couple of wires. Two bits of this whole scenario are worrying. Firstly that nobody had ever thought of building a comms lorry with cross-band repeaters and operator consoles for just such an emergency. Secondly the idea that digital radio systems are ideal for emergency situations could be deeply flawed - just because a description contains the word DIGITAL doesn't mean its any good or ideal. Analogue radio systems have a degree of inherent capability that is not found in 'digital' & TETRA systems - they can easily work "back to back" without a base station & the algorithms don't crash when subjected to interference.
    In a real emergency give me analogue every time. I really hope that someone involved in this re-vamp of the emergency comms systems reads this and has a pause for thought.

    • 6 June 2006 11:28
    • Add comment
  2. 2. Richard

    Why no low-tech stop-gap communications?

    Apparently, rescuers had to rely on human "runners" to carry messages underground.

    What's happened to the underground radios rapidly designed by Plessey, to help with the 1975 Moorgate BR Crash?

    Why no cheap low-tech equipment such as simple "field telephones" or "guided wire" telephones?

    Why none of the equipment used by cave rescue teams?

    Why no specialist communications help from eg. the army?

    The proposed digital communications system may be nice, but it's surprising that there apparently was (and is) no stop-gap in place; and that emergency plans did not provide for rapid specialist communications support.

    • 6 June 2006 11:46
    • Add comment
  3. 3. anonymous

    Establishing reliable radio communication underground is made difficult by the laws of physics.

    Mine rescue teams use very low frequency equipment as only these frequencies will penetrate through the ground to any distance.

    The frequencies used by mobile phones have negligible penetrative power and such phones will effectively only work line of site to the nearest base station.

    The use of digital equipment will not, per se, improve things, the digital aspects enable clever things to be done with signal routing and will improve communications efficiency under marginal conditions, but if there's no receivable radio frequency, there's no communication.

    • 6 June 2006 12:18
    • Add comment
  4. 4. Tim

    The Washington Metro system is installing a VOIP based system which will enable surface to subsurface communications. Given the links that Airwaves (the TETRA radio that the police (and eventually Fire service) use) can make into an IP system all that is realy required now is the investment.......

    • 7 June 2006 13:54
    • Add comment

Post your comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

You can also log in with Facebook. Log in or create your silicon.com account below

  • Login

Will not be displayed with your comment

By signing up for this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understood our Privacy Policy.

Questions about membership? Find the answers in the Membership FAQ

Get silicon.com's daily newsletter

  • Register on silicon.com

    Enter your email to register

Keep in touch with silicon.com

silicon.com newsletters