Rethinking Level 9 Intervention
False alarms don't just cost production, they teach operators to tune out warnings, which is more dangerous than the risks you're trying to catch. MPI's Level 9 system tackles this by combining GNSS, RTLS and TTR intelligence to judge real risk instead of just flagging proximity. The goal isn't more interventions, it's fewer incidents.
A collision avoidance system that stops everything isn't making your mine safer. It's teaching your workforce to ignore it, and that's an uncomfortable thing to sit with. Every unnecessary intervention carries a cost. There's the lost production, the equipment wear and the operational delays, but the one that does the most damage is trust. Once machine operators stop trusting the warnings, you've created a far bigger risk than the one you were trying to prevent.
Picture how it plays out. An alert sounds, operations are interrupted, work stops and everyone reacts, and then it becomes clear there was never a real risk in the first place. Now repeat that dozens or hundreds of times across a mine. How long before the warnings become background noise? How long before a genuine threat gets waved off as just another false alarm?
That's the challenge facing many operations today.
Most Level 9 systems are built to detect proximity. MPI Level 9 system is built to understand risk. It combines:
🔹 GNSS for mine-wide positioning
🔹 RTLS for highly accurate local positioning
🔹 Advanced Time-to-Risk (TTR) intelligence
From there it continuously evaluates the movement, speed, direction, environment and operating conditions of people and equipment, working out whether a situation is developing into a genuine risk before any intervention is triggered.
Proximity on its own doesn't equal danger. A person standing safely outside a work zone isn't a risk. Equipment operating within a designated area isn't a risk. Normal mine activity isn't a risk. A developing hazardous interaction is, and that's the moment MPI steps in, because something is becoming unsafe rather than simply sitting nearby. It's a difference that matters.
The goal of Level 9 should never be to generate more interventions. It should be to prevent more incidents. One creates disruption, the other creates safer mines. As regulations evolve and operations keep working toward Zero Harm, the conversation needs to move past compliance. The question isn't whether your system can intervene. It's whether your system can tell the difference between proximity and risk.
A safe mine with zero fatalities and accidents is a sustainable mine.