Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Ticker Views

How do Triple Zero calls actually work? A telecommunications expert explains

Published

on

Mark A Gregory, RMIT University

Making a call to triple zero (000) for a life threatening or time-critical emergency is something most of us learn how to do when we first use a phone.

But do you know how a Triple Zero call actually works?

While it might seem simple, there are many steps involved between you calling Triple Zero, and paramedics, police or firefighters arriving to help. And as the recent Optus Triple Zero outage that left multiple people dead highlights, there are also several points of potential failure.

A federal responsibility

First, some important background.

The federal government is responsible for telecommunications nationally. It has put in place legislation and regulations for the operation of Emergency Call Services – the technical term for Triple Zero.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority regulates and monitors the provision of Triple Zero under Part 8 of the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999.

The first step

The very first step in the process is, of course, a person making a call to Triple Zero – or the international emergency number (112). People with a speech or hearing impairment can also use the 106 text-based service, provided by the National Relay Service.

You don’t need a sim card to call Triple Zero – nor a plan with a mobile phone company. However, you do need to be within an area with some network coverage.

Mobile phones connect to phone towers using radio waves that oscillate at a frequency within one of the spectrum bands allocated for mobile networks. The transmission equipment located on the phone tower receive the signal being carried on the radio waves and convert it into digital data. This data is then carried across the mobile phone core network via optic fibres (or sometimes microwaves or satellite) to its destination.

Sometimes your network provider – for example, Optus, Vodafone/TPG or Telstra – may have no coverage where you are, but another network provider will. If this case, you will see an “Emergency calls only” message on your phone, and your call will be sent through an alternative network. This process is known as “camp-on”.

But this process can sometimes fail, as the recent Optus outage demonstrated. It was caused by an upgrade to a key system which only affected the Triple Zero network – not the regular network. Optus’s mobile towers did not stop transmitting – or, in technical terms “wilt”. This prevented Optus phones from connecting to the Telstra or Vodafone mobile networks to make Triple Zero calls.

This was similar to another Optus Triple Zero outage – one that thankfully didn’t have fatal consequences – that occurred in November 2023 that resulted in a national outage of the entire Optus network.

But if you find yourself within the 5 million square kilometres of Australia currently without any mobile coverage at all, you will not be able to make a Triple Zero call.

A flow chart showing the steps in the Triple Zero ecosystem.
While it might seem simple, there are many steps involved between you calling Triple Zero, and paramedics, police or firefighters arriving to help.
The Conversation, CC BY

What happens next?

The Triple Zero call (provided it goes through) then goes to the nominated emergency call service operator in Australia – currently Telstra. It is responsible for the system that connects calls from the telecommunication carrier networks to the state and territory emergency service organisations.

To fulfil this responsibility, Telstra has Triple Zero emergency service call centres located around Australia.

After answering the Triple Zero call, a call centre operator will ask the caller about the emergency at hand, then transfer them to the relevant emergency service organisation, such as the ambulance, fire or police.

Trained personnel will then handle the call and dispatch an emergency response team.

How is Triple Zero going to improve?

A review of the November 2023 Optus national outage identified the need for a Triple Zero custodian. The custodian would be responsible for overseeing the efficient functioning of the Triple Zero ecosystem, including monitoring the end-to-end performance of the ecosystem.

Earlier this week, the federal government introduced legislation to parliament to enshrine the powers of the custodian into law. Under this legislation, the custodian will be able to demand information from telecommunications companies such as Optus. This will enable it to not only monitor Triple Zero performance, but also identify risks and respond more quickly to outages.

Direct-to-device mobile technology is also currently being developed which will enable calls to Triple Zero that are connected through Low Earth Orbit satellites. This will be a major improvement to safety nationwide – particularly for people living in regional and remote areas, and during emergencies such as fires and floods.

Earlier this year, an amendment to the Telecommunications Act 1997 passed Parliament that enhances consumer safeguards. These safeguards include strengthening mobile network operator obligations.

Last month the federal government also released draft legislation for a universal outdoor mobile obligation. This would require mobile operators to provide reasonable and equitable access to outdoor mobile coverage across Australia.

So hopefully in the next couple of years, Australians should be able to make calls to Triple Zero – no matter where they find themselves.The Conversation

Mark A Gregory, Associate Professor, School of Engineering, RMIT University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ahron Young is an award winning journalist who has covered major news events around the world. Ahron is the Managing Editor and Founder of TICKER NEWS.

Ticker Views

Lunar Gateway faces delays and funding debate amid Artemis ambitions

Published

on

What’s the point of a space station around the Moon?

Berna Akcali Gur, Queen Mary University of London

The Lunar Gateway is planned space station that will orbit the Moon. It is part of the Nasa‑led Artemis programme. Artemis aims to return humans to the Moon, establishing a sustainable presence there for scientific and commercial purposes, and eventually reach Mars.

However, the modular space station now faces delays, cost concerns and potential US funding cuts. This raises a fundamental question: is an orbiting space station necessary to achieve lunar objectives, including scientific ones?

The president’s proposed 2026 budget for Nasa sought to cancel Gateway. Ultimately, push back from within the Senate led to continued funding for the lunar outpost. But debate continues among policymakers as to its value and necessity within the Artemis programme.

Cancelling Gateway would also raise deeper questions about the future of US commitment to international cooperation within Artemis. It would therefore risk eroding US influence over global partnerships that will define the future of deep space exploration.

Gateway was designed to support these ambitions by acting as a staging point for crewed and robotic missions (such as lunar rovers), as a platform for scientific research and as a testbed for technologies crucial to landing humans on Mars.

It is a multinational endeavour. Nasa is joined by four international partners, the Canadian Space Agency, the European Space Agency (Esa), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and the United Arab Emirates’ Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre.

Schematic of the Lunar Gateway.
The Lunar Gateway.
Nasa

Most components contributed by these partners have already been produced and delivered to the US for integration and testing. But the project has been beset by rising costs and persistent debates over its value.

If cancelled, the US abandonment of the most multinational component of the Artemis programme, at a time when trust in such alliances is under unprecedented strain, could be far reaching.

It will be assembled module by module, with each partner contributing components and with the possibility of additional partners joining over time.

Strategic aims

Gateway reflects a broader strategic aim of Artemis, to pursue lunar exploration through partnerships with industry and other nations, helping spread the financial cost – rather than as a sole US venture. This is particularly important amid intensifying competition – primarily with China.

China and Russia are pursuing their own multinational lunar project, a surface base called the International Lunar Research Station. Gateway could act as an important counterweight, helping reinforce US leadership at the Moon.

In its quarter-century of operation, the ISS has hosted more than 290 people from 26 countries, alongside its five international partners, including Russia. More than 4,000 experiments have been conducted in this unique laboratory.

In 2030, the ISS is due to be succeeded by separate private and national space stations in low Earth orbit. As such, Lunar Gateway could repeat the strategic, stabilising role among different nations that the ISS has played for decades.

However, it is essential to examine carefully whether Gateway’s strategic value is truly matched by its operational and financial feasibility.

It could be argued that the rest of the Artemis programme is not dependant on the lunar space station, making its rationales increasingly difficult to defend.

Some critics focus on technical issues, others say the Gateway’s original purpose has faded, while others argue that lunar missions can proceed without an orbital outpost.

Sustainable exploration

Supporters counter that the Lunar Gateway offers a critical platform for testing technology in deep space, enabling sustainable lunar exploration, fostering international cooperation and laying the groundwork for a long term human presence and economy at the Moon. The debate now centres on whether there are more effective ways to achieve these goals.

Despite uncertainties, commercial and national partners remain dedicated to delivering their commitments. Esa is supplying the International Habitation Module (IHAB) alongside refuelling and communications systems. Canada is building Gateway’s robotic arm, Canadarm3, the UAE is producing an airlock module and Japan is contributing life support systems and habitation components.

Gateway’s Halo module at a facility in Arizona operated by aerospace company Northrop Grumman.
Nasa / Josh Valcarcel

US company Northrop Grumman is responsible for developing the Habitat and Logistics Outpost (Halo), and American firm Maxar is to build the power and propulsion element (PPE). A substantial portion of this hardware has already been delivered and is undergoing integration and testing.

If the Gateway project ends, the most responsible path forward to avoid discouraging future contributors to Artemis projects would be to establish a clear plan to repurpose the hardware for other missions.

Cancellation without such a strategy risks creating a vacuum that rival coalitions, could exploit. But it could also open the door to new alternatives, potentially including one led by Esa.

Esa has reaffirmed its commitment to Gateway even if the US ultimately reconsiders its own role. For emerging space nations, access to such an outpost would help develop their capabilities in exploration. That access translates directly into geopolitical influence.

Space endeavours are expensive, risky and often difficult to justify to the public. Yet sustainable exploration beyond Earth’s orbit will require a long-term, collaborative approach rather than a series of isolated missions.

If the Gateway no longer makes technical or operational sense for the US, its benefits could still be achieved through another project.

This could be located on the lunar surface, integrated into a Mars mission or could take an entirely new form. But if the US dismisses Gateway’s value as a long term outpost without ensuring that its broader benefits are preserved, it risks missing an opportunity that will shape its long term influence in international trust, leadership and the future shape of space cooperation.The Conversation

Berna Akcali Gur, Lecturer in Outer Space Law, Queen Mary University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

South Korea introduces AI job protection legislation

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.

Published

on

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.


South Korean lawmakers are taking bold steps to protect workers from the growing impact of AI on employment. The proposed legislation aims to safeguard jobs and support workers transitioning into new roles as machines increasingly enter the workforce.

Professor Karen Sutherland of Uni SC joins Ticker to break down what these changes mean for employees and industries alike. She explains how the laws are designed to balance technological innovation with workers’ rights, and why proactive measures are crucial as AI adoption accelerates.

With major companies like Hyundai Motor introducing advanced robots, labour unions have raised concerns about fair treatment and the future of human labour. Experts say South Korea’s approach is faster and more comprehensive than similar initiatives in the United States and European Union, aiming to secure livelihoods while improving the quality of life for displaced workers.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#AIJobs #SouthKorea #FutureOfWork #Automation #TechPolicy #LaborRights #WorkforceInnovation #Ticker


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

U.S. ambassador responds to NATO criticism at Munich Security Conference

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.

Published

on

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.


At the Munich Security Conference, the U.S. ambassador to NATO faced tough questions on global order as European allies explored greater defense autonomy amid rising geopolitical tensions. The discussion highlighted the challenges NATO faces in maintaining unity while responding to evolving threats.

The ambassador addressed criticisms directly, emphasizing the importance of transatlantic cooperation and NATO’s role in ensuring international security. European nations voiced concerns about independent defense capabilities and the impact of hybrid warfare from Russia on regional stability.

Oz Sultan from Sultan Interactive Group provides analysis.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#MunichSecurityConference #NATO #GlobalSecurity #DefenseAutonomy #Geopolitics #TransatlanticAlliance #HybridWarfare #USForeignPolicy


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Trending Now