Someone brought to my attention a news story about the Palisades fire, specifically mentioning that radio communications were identified as a factor. Of course, it was not our system involved in the problem. We have sites that cover the area, and we kept them running by hauling fuel up there while the power was out. He thinks that our NexEdge system could be a solution for some of the people who need better communication systems.
As an amateur (ham) radio operator, I have organized communications for events such as the Special Olympics, emergency drills, and actual emergencies, including the Avalon Fire on Santa Catalina. There are those who would minimize the capability and contributions of an amateur, but I am also a professional in the field of radio communications. There are times when an amateur has expertise that a first responder does not and may have resources that the agencies do not. We were not experts in putting out fires or arresting criminals, but our operators were trained in thinking through alternate communications methods and relaying messages quickly and accurately. We had equipment (repeaters) in places the county did not.
In reading through the report, I noticed several notable points that stood out to me. Most significantly, there were multiple mentions of coverage issues encountered during the emergency response. The Palisades region presents unique and significant challenges when it comes to radio communications. Its geography is complicated, full of steep hillsides, numerous canyons, and rugged terrain, all of which make it challenging for radio signals to penetrate consistently throughout the area. Because of these physical barriers, it is necessary to have a network of several radio sites positioned strategically in order to provide adequate coverage for firefighters, first responders, and other emergency personnel.
The situation was exacerbated during the Palisades Fire. Some of the existing radio sites went down, either because they were damaged by the flames themselves or because they suffered power outages as the infrastructure in the area failed. This meant that even the planned redundancy within the system couldn’t guarantee full communication capabilities when they were most needed. Under such circumstances, it may seem like the obvious solution is to pour more resources into hardening existing infrastructure or expanding it further out. While investing more money might improve things to some extent, it quickly becomes clear that simply adding more equipment and towers is not a cure-all for these types of environments.
There were further complicating factors as well. Several accounts in the report described incidents where too many individuals were talking on the same radio channel at once. This kind of congestion made it hard for crucial messages to get through in the chaos of the wildfire response. Important information risked being lost, misunderstood, or delayed because of the sheer volume of radio traffic. Additionally, the report noted that there was a repeater—a device that could have potentially improved radio range and clarity—that went unused. However, it was also made clear that even if that particular repeater had been put to use, it would not have been a magic fix. It alone could not have solved the underlying issue of inadequate or inconsistent coverage, nor would it have addressed the confusion arising from unclear protocols and overlapping conversations.
Altogether, the report paints a picture of a multifaceted problem that cannot be addressed by a single solution. Technical fixes like installing more repeaters or upgrading infrastructure are certainly important, but they are only one piece of the puzzle. Effective communication during emergencies also requires robust operational protocols, clear training for personnel in using available technology, and adaptive strategies that reflect the unpredictable conditions of wildfire-prone areas like the Palisades
An emergency “prepper” once challenged me on social media, insisting that “anybody can use a walkie talkie.” While this may seem true to those who have never operated in an actual emergency, my field experience suggests otherwise. I have often found myself assisting others just to turn on a radio. It’s essential that everyone is tuned to the correct channel—yet even county agencies sometimes overlook this fundamental detail. For example, during a drill, I witnessed a firefighter who was unaware that his radio would not function in the underground Emergency Operations Center. Although these may seem like minor oversights, such mistakes are more than enough to cause communication failure.
One thing to understand is that emergencies are chaotic. If it were planned, it wouldn’t be an emergency. You encounter things that nobody has seen before. How do you evacuate an elephant when you only have a horse trailer? (It happened.) To mitigate that, you not only train for what is supposed to happen, but you also train for how to solve unexpected situations. If a building fails, you have your Mobile Command Unit. Then what do you do if the generator fails? What frequency do you go to, and what is your backup? Do you have message routing planned out? All of this takes planning and practice.
Whether you are an emergency responder or a company, communication takes training. Even when using cell phones, I have had techs call in who had trouble conveying what was going on to me. Any communication requires a common language, definitions, and protocol. Care needs to be taken to ensure that the person on the other end got the message and that nothing is assumed. Some of this has been addressed by SEMS, NIMS, and ICS, but the class and test are not the same as dealing with real-world issues.
Training should not only be conducted, but also leveraged as an opportunity to refine and improve existing procedures. Many drills are designed merely to ensure that employees follow established protocols, but real-world situations are rarely so straightforward. What happens if equipment fails unexpectedly during an emergency? Understanding factors that can interfere with radio signals is crucial—where is the optimal location for your antenna? How do you ensure precise message relay when visual contact is impossible? What strategies can you use to accurately transmit information through multiple intermediaries, considering the risk of distortion (think of the “telephone game”)? Furthermore, frequency changes can result in the loss of communication with half your team. How can you prepare for and minimize these disruptions? Comprehensive training should not only focus on rote procedural compliance but also develop adaptability and problem-solving skills for unpredictable scenarios.
I have found it beneficial to train even network technicians in effective phone communication, despite it being a tool they use every day. A frequent mistake is assuming the person on the other end already understands what you’re talking about. Taking a moment to consider what the other person needs to know, and what information has actually been conveyed, can make a significant difference. This approach not only reduces misunderstandings but also enhances everyday efficiency.