At the heart of the matter is establishing a new visual signaling standard to be used by those who are caught in the aftermath of a disaster. Whether you use one of my apps or other apps that can change the color of your phone screen, ipad screen, etc..., for example the "Color Flashlight" app, the idea is to utilize something most of us carry with us all the time and use the night as an advantage. It was in 1905 since SOS was recognized and technology has changed. I believe we could use lights plus a color code to improve SAR operations and outcomes with something that most of the population is already pre-equipped with. The first thing that needs to be done is prove the system would work and result in better overall post disaster SAR outcomes

One good scenario would be for example, an upcoming exercise at the Georgia Training Center where the exercise is going to last 3 full days. The exercise area can be broken up into two main areas. One in which the survivors are utilizing there cell phones or other colored lights to signal there location and condition and one where the survivors do not utilize there cell phones or lights to signal their location and condition. Then compare which teams performed best and reached their survivors the fastest, besides having results regarding overall situational awareness of where survivors where located during the exercise.

What I want to establish is that if a population is given a night time signaling standard and SAR teams recognize the signaling standard that there would be better outcomes because the simple truth is colored lights would stick out like sore thumbs in the darkness that usually covers a disaster stricken area where electricity has been lost. The colors simply add layers information that SOS does not consider.

Any suggestions or ideas are welcome.

Hello J, I never did hear back from you. Any thoughts on survivor visual signaling system?   

Hello J, thanks for the follow up and feedback. The difference between the pre-disaster selections and the survivor selections is that the pre-disaster screens to not flash and the post disaster screens do flash. After having given it some thought, I plan to change the apps settings to indicate "Survivor - OK" with the solid on screens and then have the second selection be "Survivor - Need assistance" by flashing the screens.

You got me thinking about the Disaster ID app and how when you select the pre-disaster mode (constant on) that you have to slide your finger across the screen and the it takes you to the survivor mode (flashing), then you have to slide it again to turn the screen off. Try a version of the Disaster ID app called "f-Ready". This version not only turns your screen on, to signal at night, it also transmits an email to three friends or family members (Lifelines). The email includes a message stating you activated the app, that you are in alert status or need of assistance status and it includes a link to a Google GPS map showing your general location. Try it straight from your computer at www.triagelights.com/f-ready/app . The f-Ready does not require you slide your finger across the screen two times to turn it off. It also includes a button to transmit an email that you are safe. Let me know if you think it is easier to use.

It would be great if a study could be done to determine how effective it truly would be. One night of exercise could be SAR operations without the night time visual signaling system and one with. Then compare the difference of how many survivors were located and reached. Comments from the responders would also be very insightful. Attached is an image of what I believe a future disaster stricken city could look like at night. Looking forward to your thoughts.      

Interesting idea - but I'm not sure how it expands on the simple idea "at night, turn on a flashing light to be seen."

I am quite sure that an exercise would confirm the obvious - people with flashing lights can be found more easily than people in the dark. What it does not address is the fact that many people who wish to be found are not in a location where a light can be seen -- not all are on top of a roof. Some are buried, some are inside. Nor does it address the fact that cell phones, in an emergency, are probably best used to call or text emergency services rather than flashing a light until the battery runs down.

I would also want to determine whether our most vulnerable populations -- for instance, the ppor, the young, and the elderly -- have access to cell phones and chargers.

I do have a question about colour-coding to determine gender, certainly. It might be a useful protocol to use certain colours to indicate urgency (although that would assume that people in a crisis use the same protocols to determine whether their urgency is greater or less than others -- research would suggest that is not true). But why on earth does a SAR team need to know whether a survivor is male or female? Based on my SAR experience, I'd be more interested in knowing whether you were over or under 150 kg.

At this stage, I'm not convinced of the value. If you climb onto a rooftop, take a flashlight.

Hi Neil,

I am glad you find the idea at the very least interesting. It basically expands on the fact that people do turn on flashlights to signal their location in the aftermath of a disaster, as demonstrated in this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q36vYKXyDSs , and that it works. Without the flashlights, would the people have been noticed at night so soon?

I think it’s great to know the definitive location of a survivor. But now imagine if you knew more than the mere location. Would it benefit to know if the survivor/survivors you are approaching are children, elderly, disabled (deaf, blind, mute, etc…), or adults?

I believe you’re right that if you compared one exercise where no lights were used to signal at night, to another exercise where white lights were allowed to be used to signal, that you would find search and rescue personnel located and extracted the survivors faster in the one where lights were used to signal. I myself tested the concept while I was attending an ESF-9 nighttime training exercise. Due to my use of the phone screen to signal, I was among the first survivors to be located and extracted. One thing that I did not expect to happen was that by my signaling, they not only located me, but they located and extracted a more critical survivor first. My signaling lead to survivors who could not easily signal, being extracted faster. Here is a link to the video I took once I was located and verbally accessed from a distance, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZZDbcR5ND0          

You’re also correct that no system is perfect, I am simply trying to improve the status quo. Many who wish to be found  are not in a location where lights can be seen, but as you can see from the video I mentioned above, those that are in a position to signal can help lead to those that can’t signal. Is that a benefit to SAR? Is this worth studying?   

Many survivors will not be on rooftops, many may be inside buildings or cars. To my understanding, SAR is not only using air drones but also ground robots to aid in SAR. Will the use of light signals coming from survivors inside the building help the robots cameras ID the locations of survivors faster? Will knowing the location of the survivor and also knowing they may be deaf, blind, mute, paralyzed, a child, etc… help in how you equip for and approach a survivor once there location is determined?

Many will be under rubble and won’t be able to easily visually signal  The proposed system is focused on those who can. Like I mentioned, no system is perfect. The question is, is it an improvement, and if so, is it a significant improvement? I believe, even under piles of rubble, a little glow of light coming from one of them could lead to a survivor vs. no light coming from the rubble. Attached is a picture of how the ESF-9 training area looked like before the nighttime exercise. Most survivors were under rubble, it would have been great to have timed, if the responders would have been faster and safer, if everyone in the exercise used a post disaster survivor visual signaling system?

You mention, “Nor does it address the fact that cell phones, in an emergency, are probably best used to call or text emergency services rather than flashing a light until the battery runs down.”. Once again, I agree with you. Please consider the two following scenarios:

A.      Earthquake hits and there is no network service:

·         You cannot use the cellphone to call or text. Is it of benefit to use it as a visual signaling device at this point? Would a standardized survivor visual signaling system aid SAR?

B.      Hurricane hits but networks are still working:

·         You may not be able to use the service due to the amount of people trying to call for help.

·         Let’s say you already used it to call or text emergency services. Why not now use it to help them visually zone in on our location faster, especially if it is dark or at night and the call has been placed?

·         Regarding flashing a light till the battery runs out. I imagine most people would want to conserve as much power as possible and would mostly visually signal only if they heard SAR teams outside their buildings/rooms or if they heard helicopters or drones nearby.  

When speaking about the most vulnerable populations please consider the following:

The poor – Here in the US the poor have access to what I have heard referred to “Obama phones”. “20 million financially-strapped Americans now have a free cell phone and minutes, thanks to this important federal program.” See this link, http://www.obamaphone.com/

The general public – Over 90% own cellular phones. Here is the link to the PEW report, http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-ownership-2015/

The young – You are correct about this concern because the very young do not have cell phones. The way I have always seen this topic is that the following could be done to address it:

a.       Parents buy a little red light and from the very young age, teach their children that if they are ever in a natural disaster to turn on their red lights to let responders know where they are and that they are children. Knowing a survivor is child is very important and helpful to the rescuer, see this JEMS article on, “Planning for Pediatrics in Disasters”, http://www.jems.com/articles/print/volume-39/issue-9/features/planning-pediatrics-disasters.html   

b.      Pet owners could buy yellow collar lights and use them on a day to day basis. When a disaster occurs they simply turn on what they already use for everyday night walks.

c.       The elderly could purchase their own personal emergency lights and not depend on a cellular phone screen. Federal programs could be set up to equip the elderly. In the past, the Federal Government has had many programs to help the disadvantaged regarding preparedness. Take for example the TV Convertor box program. Apply for the voucher with Federal Gov’t and receive the voucher. You then take the voucher to the store and purchase the convertor box. Now you are able to receive “Emergency Broadcasts” even if you do not have a digital TV.    

 You’ve brought up a point about the distinction between women and men in the color code. That reminds me I need to update this post. Over the years I have had many conversation regarding the topic of distinguishing between men and women. I have come to agree that to a responder it makes no difference is you are a man or a woman, so I have changed the color code suggestion. When I proposed a distinction between men and women I received a very mixed response and many were of the same opinion as yourself. After much thought I changed the suggested color code to the following:

Red = children, green = elderly/disabled, blue = adults, and yellow = pets/livestock. Steady/Constant signal = “I’m OK”, flashing signal = “I need medical assistance”. A Bill was introduced to the Texas Legislature in 2015 and was heard by the Texas Homeland Security Committee and the color white was added as a catch all color. By using the color white as a general population signal, you know someone’s location but not the additional information conveyed by the colors. Unfortunately the bill stayed pending in committee.

When the visual signaling system distinguished between men and women the reception was luke warm as evidenced by the voting and discussion at this FEMA website, http://fema.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Empowering-citizens-to-help-first-responders-help-them-in-afterm/319321-14692   

Once I edited the above post and combined “men” & “women” into simply “Adults” and added the "Elderly/Disabled" selection, we went from +3 up to the +7 you see now.

In a most recent posting of the topic at DHS’s, Science & Technology’s, National Conversation website regarding the responder of the future, we did much better. This post started with the concept of men and women being lumped into one category, “Adults”. In this posting the concept ranked number 1 most popular. Please take some time to read the discussion. There is a lot of information. Here is the link, http://scitech.ideascale.com/a/ideas/top/campaign-filter/byids/campaigns/60591

I hope the above information has helped convince you of the potential value and moves you to consider studying the topic.

Since I posted the topic, I developed a FREE app to support the post disaster nighttime/adverse condition survivor visual signaling system. There are no ads in the app and it is totally free. You may try it hear from your computer here,  http://triagelights.com/visual-911/#demo . You may also try it by downloading it to your Iphone or Android, simply search for the app called, "Visual 911+". The Visual 911+ app not only turns your screen into a visual signaling device, if cellular networks are working it will also transmits an email to your lifelines (family/friends) letting them know of your alert status. The email also includes a link to Google maps showing your general GPS location and instructions to come find you by zoning in on the visual signal coming from your phone is the general GPS location. 

Juan:

An incredibly detailed response, and one that addresses many of my concerns.

Yes, I am interested in continuing discussion and study of the topic. I like the idea of creating a "standard protocol" but my initial objections remain as criteria that need to be met in order to make this useful.

Thank you so much for including the verification studies/exercises. That goes a long way to overcoming my objections.

You also seem to have addressed some of my initial concerns, such as the gender differentiation, and the "non-technologically-linked" folks, with suggestions about specific-use boxes and transmitters.

You've convinced me (and there are only 8 people in the world to date who can claim that distinction). Let's keep talking.

Neil

It’s great to hear you’re interested in continuing the discussion. Thank you for giving the idea a chance, much appreciated!

I am glad you found the references useful. As you can see, the concept has developed over time.

First it was a pre-disaster and post disaster concept. Basically, when a warning was issued by the authority’s folks would light up. A solid color would tell responders the location and group make up just prior to a disaster striking. Once the disaster had passed, the survivors would switch their signal to a flashing signal to indicate you survived and needed help. This way SAR could find both the living and the dead. “Dead” being a steady light and “alive” being a flashing signal.

After some discussions the concept changed to only a post disaster signaling system, where steady meant, “I’m OK” and flashing meant, “I need assistance”. No more dead or alive.

Then after further discussions, the issue of distinguishing between men and women kept coming up. I then was convinced that distinguishing between an adult and elderly/disabled would be of more use to SAR than distinguishing between men and women.

During the 2015 Texas Legislative session the question, “what about those without color capability” came up, so bill HB1970 was modified to include the color white in the code as a catch all color. Basically if the white light was steady, you’re indicating you’re OK, and if it’s flashing, you’re indicating you need assistance. The responder still knows someone is there, they just don’t have the additional details conveyed by the colors.

The issue of practicality came up during the 2013 Texas Legislative session. One of the Texas Homeland Security Committee members stated something along the lines of, “What, are we all supposed to carry colored lights with us? When the person testifying pulled out his phone and showed him that cellular phones are capable of color signaling, he leaned back and stated something along the lines of “Now that’s practical!” Let me know if you would like the links to both the 2013 and 2015 Texas Homeland Security Committee hearings on the bills.                  

I am looking forward to discussing how to address the concerns regarding the criteria that needs to be met. I am sure our discussion will only help bring the concept of establishing a new standard protocol closer to a reality that I believe will save lives. I say, give survivors an additional option when it comes to communication in a post disaster environment. Especially when networks are down and it’s getting dark.     

Lastly, I am honored to be one of eight. I must be doing something right. :)

Look forward to hearing from you.

Juan

Hi Neil,

Have you given any further thought to a post disaster survivor visual signaling system?

Sincerely,

Juan 

Attached is the Naval Post Graduate Joint Inter-Agency Field Exercise, (JIFX) 17-3 report provide by the NPG JIFX office that includes stakeholders comments regarding the 21st Century SOS experiment conducted in May 2017. Here is a link to the video taken during the experiment, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uit-t-DP8hM