by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 28, 2019 | Comm Center News
Wireless Carriers Want Phased-In 3-Meter Z-Axis Accuracy, No Floor-Level Data
The concerns were part of reply comments filed in response to the FCC’s proposed March rules that side with public safety and would require a vertical (Z-axis) location accuracy metric of ±3 meters relative to the handset for 80 percent of indoor wireless 9-1-1 calls. The new rules will help first responders more accurately locate people who make wireless 9-1-1 calls from multistory buildings.
AT&T argued against requiring floor-level data and agreed with Google that the FCC use a timetable for increasingly demanding Z-axis call coverage and/or geographic coverage requirements. “Given the variances in building structural characteristics and terrain, AT&T continues to believe that imposition of a floor level data requirement is infeasible at this time,” AT&T said.
In its earlier comments, AT&T supported establishing a 3-meter Z-axis location metric. However in its reply comments, the carrier said: “Proven solutions that meet this metric are not currently available, and thus the commission should consider a phased-in approach for implementation, which will allow market innovation to continue while also providing first responders with actionable information in the near term. … Device-based solutions show promise in advancing the evolution to dispatchable location. AT&T anticipates leveraging these technologies, but additional development is needed.”
T-Mobile USA’s reply comments said a phased-in approach based on PSAP readiness would allow carriers to focus their Z-axis development efforts in those areas where PSAPs are able to accept and use Z-axis information.
T-Mobile USA’s reply comments also agreed with Verizon’s comments on geographic areas. “Verizon suggests that the commission should focus its compliance benchmarks on those areas with the most critical need for Z-axis information with 9-1-1 calls — specifically, urban and dense urban morphologies,” T-Mobile said in its reply comments. “T-Mobile encourages the commission to explore this proposal …”
CTIA said in reply comments that “the commission should recognize that there was broad support for setting a ± 3-meter Z-axis metric as an important target, but the record demonstrates that validating whether this metric is achievable in the near-term requires further testing.” The group also said the FCC should require providers to deliver Z-axis vertical location data as an altitude level and not as floor level information at this time.
“Finally, contrary to the arguments made by the Boulder Emergency Telephone Service Authority (BRETSA), the Texas 9-1-1 Alliance, the Texas Commission on State Emergency Communications, the Municipal Emergency Communication Districts Association, and others, a more targeted metric than 3 meters is not feasible at this time,” CTIA said.
Alternatively, public-safety groups that included the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), National Association of State EMS Officials (NASEMSO) and the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) urged the FCC to adopt the 3-meter vertical metric and narrow the metric in five years.
“… The commission has no choice but to immediately adopt a 3-meter metric for vertical location accuracy and require wireless carriers to implement this requirement, or a dispatchable location solution, in the largest 25 cellular market areas (CMAs) by April 2021 and in the top 50 CMAs by April 2023,” the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) said in its comments.
NextNav and Polaris Wireless, two providers of location accuracy technology that participated in testing with CTIA, agreed a 3-meter Z-axis metric should be adopted right away.
In its reply comments, BRETSA, a 9-1-1 authority in Colorado, said the FCC should adopt a vertical location accuracy standard of 2 meters in urbanized markets and 3 meters in the rest of the country, which vertical location providers have demonstrated is achievable.
The Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) International did not file reply comments. However, in its May comments, APCO called on the FCC to refrain from adopting a Z-axis metric and mandate instead that wireless providers deploy dispatchable location solutions only. APCO said that if the FCC retains the Z-axis approach, any metric adopted should include floor-level information.
For its part, Precision Broadband agreed with APCO that the proposed Z-axis metric of 3 meters must include a floor number. The company said the definition of dispatchable location should be changed from the current National Emergency Address Database (NEAD) to encompass other location databases.
Charley Simon, founder of Precision Broadband, said the company has demonstrated connecting its technology through interfaces with a rural internet service provider (ISP). When a mobile phone is connected to a broadband network with the Precision Broadband technology at the time a 9-1-1 call is made, the PSAP system would receive a dispatchable location — civic address, floor and unit — just like with a landline telephone, as well as a Z-axis barometric pressure provided altitude from another source such as Polaris Wireless, and an assisted-global navigation satellite system (GNSS) location point from a wireless carrier’s network. The 9-1-1 telecommunicator would have access to all readings, and either the PSAP technology or the PSAP telecommunicator would determine the best starting point for location.
The National Emergency Number Association (NENA) walked back some points of its original comments, saying its concerns about the NEAD should not be interpreted as a call for abandoning the program. In addition, NENA said it didn’t mean to suggest that a first responder should not be dispatched to a dispatchable location if that is best for operational needs. The association stood by its assertion that mobile providers deliver a location object (LO), formatted to be compatible with prevailing standards, to public-safety answering points (PSAPs).
Comments on the NEAD from NCTA, the Internet and Television Association, said resources may be better spent on alternative solutions that better boost location accuracy for 9-1-1 callers than the NEAD. NCTA said its members have challenges in working with CTIA to engage in testing of the database.
NCTA members have significant concerns about the NEAD’s effectiveness generally compared with more recent promising technologies, the cable industry’s ability to populate the NEAD with meaningful data, and the potential unintended negative effects on NCTA members’ customers, the group said in its reply comments.
All the reply comments are available here.
Would you like to comment on this story? Find our comments system below.
by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 27, 2019 | Articles, Comm Center News
By necessity, this week’s Advocate will begin at the beginning. During the FirstNet RFP process there were three bidders. As we all know, AT&T won the bid over Rivada Networks, which bid and was disqualified. Rivada sued FirstNet and the award was tied up in court for some time. For those who would like additional details on Rivada’s activities, I will refer you to a recent article in the New Yorker by Sue Halpern in which she writes about what the company is up to here and around the world and its track record.
In the United States, Rivada is attempting to obtain spectrum not being used by the Department of Defense that is worth literary billions of dollars without paying anything. With high-priced lobbyists including Karl Rove, it has come up with a plan to acquire this spectrum by promising to serve rural broadband communities. As a result, Rivada would stand to make huge profits using free spectrum. FirstNet already has an obligation to cover rural America, and if the T-Mobile/Sprint merger is allowed to go through, the company will commit to providing 5G to rural America. More than 11,000 little Low Earth Orbit satellites (LEOs) are to be launched in the near future, perhaps covering the world, and hundreds of smaller players are also focused on delivering broadband to rural America. Even Congress and the FCC are studying how to extend rural broadband into areas where it is not available today.
Do we really need another company promising to build out rural America, especially one that has a poor track record in wireless services? Is it worth giving away billions of dollars in spectrum for a promise and lining Rivada’s pockets? I highly recommend reading the article in the New Yorker. I believe like me you will come away with a much better understanding of this situation and the implications if Rivada is successful. The article speculates this spectrum award will be taken up by Republicans in hopes it will gain traction and assumes this proposal has not yet been endorsed by the President, who could easily make it a 2020 campaign promise. Rivada’s other claims include the prediction that this could destroy China’s hold on the United States communications segment. I hope anyone contemplating this award will take a more realistic approach and study the facts before making any commitments.
More on 5G
I have heard there are issues with 5G and others have shared their concerns in an article in Light Reading. Most disturbing of these is that some network operators feel the need to convince the public safety community that 5G is fully ready for its use. One network recently issued a statement claiming all 5G would be interoperable because of standards and the inclusion of Quality of Service (QoS). The problem with this is that according to Light Reading and the 3GPP website, release 16 of the standard has not been finalized and probably won’t be until mid-2020 or beyond. Under the circumstances, I don’t know how this vendor can make such a claim.
5G is an exciting technology implemented on different portions of spectrum that will result in different coverage, capacity, and speeds. Mid-band systems will have an extended range but not the same capacity or data speeds as 5G systems using millimeter waves, which will offer fast data and lots of capacity but in very small areas. The plan is to deploy many millimeter sites to saturate an area, e.g., where there are smart streetlights or where a greater density of cells would be practical. There is also an interesting 5G concept called “network slicing” where a cell being used by different vendors on the same slice of spectrum is shared. However, it appears all this is a long way from being real. 5G is a technology to watch and even experiment with but for now, I don’t think 5G can be considered public-safety grade.
FirstNet Uplifting
The following comes directly from Dave Mulholland, Arlington, Virginia. While I had not been aware of this aspect of uplifting, I decided to report on it here to elicit readers’ feedback. Every so often, this customer has to contend with major public safety personnel issues. According to Dave, there may be 30,000 or more public safety personnel in a very small footprint at the same time at least once every four years. It has been discovered that FirstNet local control for uplifting a user to full priority/preemption status can be accomplished by any person anywhere who is capable of uplifting. This means those in control of the incident do not necessarily control who is uplifted and under what circumstances. Even when coming in to help from outside the area, users can be uplifted by their own local control regardless of whether or not the uplift has been authorized by the incident commander.
I hope this was simply an oversite on FirstNet’s part and it can be rectified. It makes most sense to restrict uplifting on an incident to the local Emergency Operations Center or Incident Command and not allow arbitrary uplifting by a well-meaning person in the unit’s home area. The end of the email is directly quoted as follows:
“The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has just begun proactive efforts in the National Capital Region to create policy and governance for FirstNet local control and looks forward to sharing our ultimate products as model policies for other areas. It is important for us to remember that FirstNet is only 2 years old, it is still a toddler. A toddler makes some missteps while learning to walk, and that’s ok. We need to be patient as a program as ambitious and extensive as FirstNet learns to navigate the practical application of the network in public safety. Meanwhile it is important that public safety understand that the current infrastructure allows any person to uplift any device from any other jurisdiction anywhere in the country, without mechanism to cancel an uplift. We look forward to working collaboratively with FirstNet to understand the significant implications this can have, to evaluate and implement better controls on where and which uplifts can be made, and to create an uplift cancel mechanism. FirstNet will be more responsive to the collective response from public safety. It is important for us to advocate as the whole public safety community on addressing this issue.”
FirstNet the Authority
The day before this is emailed is also the day of the combined Committee and FirstNet Authority Board of Directors meeting (FirstNet.gov for information). Another item of interest is the FirstNet Authority’s road trip explaining board-approved plans to reinvest in the network and hear public safety’s input for what is needed going forward. I like the idea of the road trip but I am disappointed that for whatever reason The Authority decided these meetings should be closed to all but official public safety personnel. This means those of us who consider ourselves friends of public safety and work with public safety agencies on an ongoing basis are not permitted to sit in on meetings or even watch via video. I think this is shortsighted since if public safety communications supporters knew more about FirstNet Authority plans, we could provide more, pertinent information to departments we work with and perhaps provide input to The Authority as it plans for the future. However, with all that is happening in public safety communications, The Authority has decided these meetings will not be available to the public or even friends and family. I am not quite sure what concerns The Authority might have.
T-Band
Twitter has turned out to be a good source for breaking news and over the past few days several people have contributed to a Thread initiated by Bill Schrier on the T-Band giveback. It began with, “The Federal Government’s Accountability office says ‘Don’t Boot Emergency Personnel and #firstresponders from the T-Band spectrum’” (a requirement of the law creating FirstNet). Bill ended his tweet by saying this is good news for @TBandCoalition, @AndySeybold, and public safety. He then referenced an article in Nextgov that goes into more detail and ends with, “The GAO also found there is no other spectrum available for emergency personnel to relocate their communications to in 5 of the 11 Metropolitan areas.”
The NPSTC report went further stating all eleven metro areas that now use the T-Band would be affected and not only is no spectrum available, there are no funds to pay for the relocation process. This is all good news for the movement to rescind the T-Band giveback and I hope those in Congress, pro-public safety or not, will take action to stop the T-Band from being returned for auction.
Again, the fallacy with placing a value on this spectrum in the millions or billions of dollars is that it is not nationwide and the same portion of the spectrum is not being used in all eleven metro areas. Each area was assigned a portion of spectrum in the T-Band that would not create interference to TV broadcast stations and TV broadcast stations would not interfere with T-Band users. What the GAO did not say is that the many business radio users licensed to use the T-Band are not governed by the law authorizing FirstNet that requires the giveback. Even if the T-Band were to be cleared of emergency personnel and first responders, business users would remain.
Thanks to Bill for Tweeting this news. I hope this becomes another in the long list of reasons Congress should act on the bills to Stop the T-Band Giveback.
Winding Down
I recently received a nice email from a member of historycooperative.org asking if I would be willing to publicize its latest work on the history of the iPhone. I agreed to do so and have provided a link to its website and the work of this organization. While this does not have much to do with public safety, it is an interesting history of a device that changed the world of wireless as we knew it pre-iPhone. Current iPhones, the Xs and Xr, both have public safety Band 14 onboard and are, therefore, FirstNet-compatible.
This email got me thinking how we need to capture the history of public safety communications. Motorola had a wonderful museum at its then Schaumberg Headquarters, and I understand there are fire and police museums around the United States including one in Phoenix, which has the first radio system in Arizona on display. However, I don’t know of a museum specifically for the history of public safety wireless communications. The National Law Enforcement Museum offers a look into the past, I have my mobile communications newsletters published monthly from 1981 to 2000, my Forbes newsletters, books I have written and, of course, my Public Safety Advocate articles dating back to mid-2010. While I do not have radio hardware as developed over the many years, I do have most of the early wireless modems for CDPD, RAM Mobile Data, and ARDIS, as well as one of the first “smartphones,” a Simon made by IBM for BellSouth with its black-and-white screen and oh-so-slow data capabilities.
The Wireless History Foundation has collected interesting information surrounding the advent and development of cellular communications, and its Hall of Fame features many prominent wireless innovators. The Radio Club of America (RCA) is home to a number of notable wireless personalities and it has a relationship with the Antique Radio Museum. Beyond these, I don’t know of any place where the history of pubic safety communications is showcased. Some vendors have their own devices on display, for example when I was visiting Kenwood, I saw its collection of both ham radio and public safety radio from EF Johnson and Kenwood. Perhaps someone, somewhere will think this is an idea worth pursuing. It would be both educational and interesting to follow the footsteps of Fred Link and Motorola on to today’s FirstNet and discover how technology has evolved and continues to do so.
Meanwhile, today we are still on the cusp of what I consider to be the near-ultimate suite of communications for public safety: Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG911), Land Mobile Radio (LMR), and FirstNet. Once NG911 is in place around the United States, FirstNet will move a large volume of video and data originated by citizens that is vetted at Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) and then sent to first responders to better prepare them as they report for duty and assist them as they clear incidents. Land mobile radio will remain a critical element in this roadmap—it is already in place, it provides great coverage in many areas, and it offers several levels of graceful degradation. FirstNet’s Push-To-Talk (PTT) cannot deliver off-network push-to-talk, which is and will remain vital to the first responder community.
The good news is that NG911 is being discussed in Congress, FirstNet is building out and adding to its network in many states, AT&T is deploying 5G that will also be available to FirstNet subscribers, and many land mobile radio systems are being updated and/or refreshed. We are finally reaching a point where NG911, 5G, and FirstNet will work in concert to provide the information and services public safety needs to protect first responders as they protect our lives and property.
Andrew M. Seybold
©2019, Andrew Seybold, Inc.
by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 25, 2019 | Comm Center News
Iowa County Contracts IXP for 9-1-1 Services for 5 Years
Utilizing IXP’s managed care solution is expected to bring cost savings and enhanced safety to Webster County. IXP’s management will also enable the county to transition to a medical dispatching system, which involves dispatchers gathering critical information for EMS personnel, along with providing medical direction to callers in some cases.
The center will be staffed by 12 supervisors, call-takers and dispatchers who are recruited from the local workforce. IXP said its managed services model achieves cost savings for municipalities by alleviating the burden on local governments due to long-term unfunded pensions and other benefits liabilities.
IXP manages emergency communications centers for Princeton, East Windsor, Lawrence Township and Hightstown in New Jersey; Johns Creek, Dunwoody, Sandy Springs and Brookhaven in Georgia; Danbury, Connecticut; and Boston’s Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority.
Would you like to comment on this story? Find our comments system below.
by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 25, 2019 | Comm Center News
Oklahoma 9-1-1 Association Selects Consultant for NG 9-1-1 Implementation
MCP will work alongside 9-1-1 ACOG leadership and engaged local stakeholders to develop a strategic plan that is compatible with its public-safety answering point (PSAP) needs. With 21 PSAPs spread throughout the 9-1-1 ACOG region, MCP will work with 9-1-1 ACOG staff and PSAP stakeholders to facilitate the development of a set of requirements that best fit its unique technical and operational needs and then oversee a procurement and implementation.
“We are excited about our new partnership with MCP as we strive to effectively implement NG 9-1-1 and believe that MCP’s technical and professional guidance will help us sustain our leadership role in providing the most advanced 9-1-1 services in the state of Oklahoma,” said Mark W. Sweeney, ACOG executive director.
MCP will provide additional procurement support for 9-1-1 ACOG’s call-handling equipment (CHE) solution assessments, helping to develop the CHE technical and functional requirements that support the replacement of the current systems in a seamless transition.
Formed in 1988 to implement, administer and coordinate the operation of regional enhanced 9-1-1service, 9-1-1 ACOG provides its services to nearly 50 communities in central Oklahoma.
Would you like to comment on this story? Find our comments system below.
by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 24, 2019 | Comm Center News
NENA Hires Heinze as 9-1-1, PSAP Operations Director
Heinze has spent the majority of her nearly three-decade career in 9-1-1 focused on public-safety answering point (PSAP) operational issues. In her new role, she will identify how the ongoing technological evolution will impact 9-1-1 and next-generation (NG 9-1-1) services and operations, as well as how new technologies and new leadership, workforce management and wellness best practices can enhance 9-1-1-center operations.
Additionally, she will design and implement projects related to current, emerging and prospective issues affecting 9-1-1 operations within the 9-1-1-authority and PSAP communities, including the development of standards and the management of the association’s dispatcher-focused programs.
“I couldn’t be more excited to join NENA during this time of transition for the 9-1-1 community,” said Heinze. “I’ve had the privilege of serving NENA in volunteer-leadership positions, and my experience has allowed me to become well versed in NENA’s standards development processes. I look forward to working alongside NENA staff, volunteers and members to provide 9-1-1 professionals with the tools they need to best serve the public.”
Would you like to comment on this story? Find our comments system below.
by AllThingsECC.com | Jun 20, 2019 | Articles, Comm Center News
During the first full year of network availability, FirstNet has demonstrated how it increases first responders’ effectiveness in handling most disasters including wildfires, tornadoes, flooding, and hurricanes on the East coast. In fact, its debut in Alaska was greeted by an earthquake. Those using the network, considering joining FirstNet, and its proponents have seen time and again how the network has held up under adverse conditions. In cases when it did incur problems, they saw how quickly FirstNet (Built with AT&T) responded to provide temporary coverage and then to restore the network.
In the majority of cases, FirstNet met or exceeded expectations. Early on, some departments complained FirstNet did not come to their aid. However, for the most part, these departments had not yet joined FirstNet. Conversely, in some cases departments were taken care of regardless of their current standing. We have also seen FirstNet equip federal and state agencies with devices during many of the disasters thus enabling those arriving at an incident to better coordinate activities and initiate more actions more quickly.
Meanwhile in Alaska
According to Anchorage Daily news, Anchorage Police Chief Justin Doll and other commanders had signed on to test the FirstNet network with their personal cell phones only days before the 7.1-magnitude earthquake struck. During the emergency operations, Chief Doll observed that only officials with FirstNet were able to communicate without problems. Other reports say the existing Land Mobile Radio (LMR) system was “spotty” after the earthquake but FirstNet performed well.
And in the Seattle Area
It appears press folks who cover public safety stories are feeling cut out of the loop since FirstNet came along. FirstNet is a secure and private network and information sent and received over this network is intended for public safety only. What is being transmitted should not be made available to the press until a Public Information Officer (PIO) is ready to release it. Since members of the press have been in the habit of listening in on public safety calls and cannot do so with FirstNet, they are unable to follow what is happening and are feeling left out. Both FirstNet the Authority and FirstNet (Built with AT&T) have said that sharing information on a local level is up to the department. However, I believe it would not be advisable to provide the press with access to FirstNet. Information that may impinge on individual rights, medical information, and more is routinely transmitted over the network and such information belongs on a private network.
Network Investments
On an almost-weekly basis we see press releases about FirstNet (Built with AT&T) and/or AT&T expanding their networks. This week it is Phoenix’ turn with AT&T announcing it will be investing $375 million to help expand FirstNet and, therefore, its commercial network as well. Having performed extensive drive testing in the Phoenix area, I can attest to the fact that the network is growing more robust almost daily. You can easily see the new cell sites, many of which are sort of “stealth” sites that are bad impressions of palm trees sprouting up in the area. In the City of Scottsdale, I even passed by a rather large cactus I later determined was a cell site.
Meanwhile, in my area north of the city, fiber is being laid in along all major and many secondary roads. It is not clear whether this is the precursor to 5G or if our cable TV or landline phone company is running the fiber. In any event, the amount of fiber being put in the ground is amazing and I cannot wait to see what develops.
Texas
Some of you may have seen the notice on Linkedin.com about Texas voting to elevate its Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) personnel and dispatchers to first responder status. This was a great move that I hope will be replicated in many more states until members of Congress finally “get it.” As several wrote on Linkedin.com: these people are our FirstNet of defense; they are here for us from the beginning to the end; they are a lifeline and, in many cases, save lives on their own while public safety is still responding. Congratulations to Texas. Which state will stand up next to be counted in this important elevation of those who work tirelessly to see that public safety receives calls and stays safe?
Alliance
The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) has formed an alliance to educate fire fighters and paramedics on the 21stcentury tools available to provide critical data and inter-agency communications through FirstNet. This endeavor by the IAFF and FirstNet along with others is making the difference between merely a new network used for Push-To-Talk (PTT) and interoperability with a new network that provides floor plans, hazmat information, and video, and enables paramedics to transmit more data back to hospitals. For example, ultrasound from the field can help detect internal bleeding that may not otherwise be discovered until the patient is in the emergency room.
AT&T’s first priority was to build an operational FirstNet network. Now it is up to the various agencies to make sure their responders are conversant with the network and all its capabilities. It certainly works well as an interoperability platform for push-to-talk and integrated LMR-to-FirstNet PTT, but it is capable of so much more. Unfortunately, not all FirstNet users have been trained on the data and video aspects of the network nor in many instances have dispatch and PSAP personnel been schooled in what data to send when and how to assure it has been properly vetted.
Open Standards
As I understand it, FirstNet the Authority has stated many times that only open-standard applications will be permitted on the FirstNet network. Yet I am hearing a new push-to-talk vendor will be certified to operate its Mission Critical Push-to-Talk system over FirstNet even though it has embedded a code into its chipset in order for it to work. As far as I can tell from the definition, this is a proprietary application. While this may be the best solution for now, it may not be as push-to-talk applications continue to evolve. In any event, I find it interesting that this proprietary push-to-talk system would even be considered for use over the FirstNet network.
A number of push-to-talk companies have or will soon offer more open-standard solutions so all PTT applications that run over FirstNet will be able to communicate with all other PTT applications on the network. Without this interoperability, FirstNet will simply serve as a common platform, falling short of the goal to provide a nationwide broadband network that is available to all public safety agencies and to provide true and functioning interoperability capabilities, especially for push-to-talk, FirstNet’s most-used feature.
I have been pushing for interoperability between LMR and FirstNet for some time. Currently, several approved vendors are interfacing LMR and LTE using ISSI for P25 trunked systems and other means including Radio over IP (RoIP) for other modes of LMR communications. I always assumed when the Mission Critical Push-To-Talk (MCPTT) “standard” is finally a standard and most PTT vendors offer some version of MCPTT, all versions will be required to interconnect and inter-operate with each other. If not, I do not believe FirstNet will be fulfilling its promise to resolve the department-to-department interoperability issues public safety has faced for more than thirty years with their digital land mobile radio systems and differing slices of spectrum.
Winding Down
I am hearing from public safety communications professionals that FirstNet is determined to do away with land mobile radio altogether leaving only FirstNet standing. I have to push back on this notion since I believe the folks at AT&T who tell us LMR will remain an important part of the public safety communications landscape for many years to come. As it competes for customers and none of the other operators has stepped up to match AT&T’s investment in FirstNet, AT&T’s support for LMR sets it apart. I believe the folks inside AT&T who are responsible for FirstNet are realists when it comes to public safety’s need for off-network direct-mode communications and its acknowledgment that LMR still has a better footprint than FirstNet in many areas.
My vision of future public safety communications includes nationwide Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG911), land mobile radio, and FirstNet on both LTE and 5G. As previously stated, I expect all these communications platforms to be integrated using a common IP back-end. So far, companies such as Kenwood’s EF Johnson have designed and built IP-based P25 trunked and simulcast systems around the United States and other LMR vendors offer or are developing IP back-end systems.
In the worn-out comparison marketing uses of a three-legged stool with one leg being FirstNet, another land mobile radio, and the third NG911, the stool seat forms a common platform to hold all the legs in place. This common platform needs to be IP-based and used for all forms of public safety communications including the three above along with WiFi and 4.9-GHz systems when properly encrypted and made private. The Internet itself should never be used for any of this connectivity. As with FirstNet today, the back-end should be separate and apart from commercial back-end systems.
Perhaps public safety can use a common network in the future, but even then, I worry about bad guys taking the network down in a given area so they can perpetrate some dastardly deed without having to worry about public safety personnel being able to communicate with each other.
Years ago, when PTT on FirstNet was first considered, I suggested that FirstNet should purchase the guard bands. “Guard bands” are slices of spectrum between FirstNet and other networks and they were for sale for only a few million dollars at the time. The thought was to keep PTT on the guard bands and use FirstNet primarily for data and video. These guard bands would have worked really well for a public safety Internet of Things (IoT) and PTT. However, this did not happen and I don’t see it happening now. Now we must fight to keep every last morsel of public safety spectrum from turning into a new revenue source for Washington, DC, even if public safety needs the spectrum to function.
I will continue to believe in the three-network public safety communications platform. It works, it is already in place, and we can continue to incorporate the best of all worlds into what appears to the back-end as a series of networks that work together parsing out data, video, and voice where needed, for as long as needed.
Andrew M. Seybold
©2019, Andrew Seybold, Inc.
