LightSquared, the wholesale satellite and terrestrial carrier at the center of the GPS interference issue signed an agreement with Javad GNSS to eliminate interference issues with high-precision GPS devices imperative for operations of first responders.
The solution? A high-precision GPS device which is said to be invulnerable to the interference created by their nationwide LTE network, designed and sold by the company itself. The military personnel and first responders should be thrilled to spend tax dollars purchasing this new, albeit beneficial, solution - directly from the creators of the problem.
This is just the most recent proposal from LightSquared, a finale to the attempted side-stepping, then spectrum shifts, then the claim of a 10-cent filter that can be installed to eliminate interference.
Phillip Falcone, the billionaire backer of LightSquared, claims that 10-cent filter installed into each affected device would resolve the interference issue, but despite GPS advocates' requests to obtain the device for testing, it has never appeared. Certainly General William Shelton, head of Air Force Space Command, would like to see this simple solution at work. He gave a testimony before the House Armed Services Committee last week, outlining the results of the interference testing.
Shelton claims that he was pressured to give a testimony more favorable to LightSquared, but instead of bowing to the pressure, he expounded the details of adverse effects LightSquared's proposed network has on GPS devices, and it's not pretty.
LightSquared blames the GPS industry for the problem, claiming the manufacturers should have heeded the 2008 Department of Defense recommendation on filtering technology for new GPS devices. Developing filtering standards may be a good idea with or without LightSquared's network in the picture, however at this time there are no filtering standards in place to abide by, only recommendations. Whether or not abiding by these standards will solve the interference problem remains to be seen.
Falcone is now attracting the attention of House Republicans concerned about impropriety of White House interactions for LightSquared to obtain Federal loans. The mogul's $30,400 donation (as well as his wife's and his C.E.O. at LightSquared's matching donations) to the Democratic campaign organizations certainly appear to be unethical, or atleast bad timing, as they were made on the same day as a meeting with White House staffers in 2009.
LightSquared is also catching the attention of Republican Senators wondering how this most recently proposed solution will be funded. In his open letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) expresses his concerns regarding how the FCC is handling LightSquared: "My concern regarding LightSquared’s application to create a terrestrial 4G network is that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) appears not to have taken sufficient steps to safeguard the American taxpayer and appears to have let LightSquared off the hook regarding the multi-billion cost to retrofit GPS receivers to block out LightSquared’s terrestrial network."
Sen. Grassley also goes on to question who will be footing the bill for the retrofitting GPS receivers, the answer to which impacts tax payers, the U.S. Department of Defense, as well as other military and Public Safety/Homeland Security agencies.
It should be noted that the House Representative, Ralph Hall (R-Tex.) calling these donations into question receives donations to his own campaign of tens of thousands of dollars from AT&T.
Politics don't belong in public safety, but unfortunately issues such as this one could have a significant effect on operations of our military and first responders. Personally, we don't care who wins the fight as long as it's in the best interest of the public. LightSquared expects to have 25 of their new devices available within the next two weeks, and the investigation into the company's dealings with the White House is well under way.
Read the most recent report on the interference study, straight from the source.
Kamis, 29 September 2011
From the FCC
September 2 - 28, 2011
Daily Digest Highlights
1. AMENDMENT OF PART 90 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES TO PERMIT TERRESTRIAL
Daily Digest Highlights
1. AMENDMENT OF PART 90 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES TO PERMIT TERRESTRIAL
TRUNKED RADIO TECHNOLOGY. Clarified the scope of the waiver granted by
the Commission. by ORDER ON CLARIFICATION. (Dkt No. 11-69 09-234 ).
Action by: Chiefs, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, and Office of Engineering and Technology.
Adopted: 09/26/2011 by ORDER. (DA No. 11-1604). WTB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1604A1.doc
2. BROADBAND: A DRIVING FORCE FOR AMERICAN JOB CREATION & ECONOMIC GROWTH.
Genachowski addresses America's broadband opportunities and challenges; lays out path for job creation, economic recovery and global competitiveness through broadband. News Release. News Media Contact:
Neil Grace at (202) 418-1032, email: Neil.Grace@fcc.gov OCHJG http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309892A1.doc
3. Released: 09/27/2011. FCC'S PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAU TO HOLD WORKSHOP/WEBINAR ON DEPLOYABLE AERIAL COMMUNICATIONS ARCHITECTURE. (DA No. 11-1607). PSHSB . Contact: Jennifer A. Manner at (202) 418-3619, email: Jennifer.Manner@fcc.gov. News Media Contact:
Lauren Kravetz at (202) 418-7944, email: Lauren.Kravetz@fcc.gov http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1607A1.doc
4. Released: 09/26/2011. EMERGENCY ACCESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENT OF OCTOBER 14, 2011 MEETING. (DA No. 11-1599) Committee to Focus on Matters Pertaining to Next Generation 911 Access for Persons with Disabilities. CGB . Contact: Cheryl King at (202) 418-2284,
email: Cheryl.King@fcc.gov or Patrick Donovan at (202) 418-2413, email:
Patrick.Donovan@fcc.gov, TTY: (202) 418-0416 http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1599A1.doc
Rabu, 28 September 2011
Motorola Solutions Investigated for Bribery Accusations
The U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission have requested information from the Public Safety communications giant Motorola Solutions about their transactions in seven European countries from the past two years. The company is reportedly being investigated regarding bribery allegations.
According to Forbes.com sources say the investigating agencies are searching for evidence that of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, meant to prevent American companies from offering bribes to officials of foreign governments.
The company opened up its own investigation in 2009 of possible bribery mispractices, sparked by a suspicious transaction in Turkey. U.S. officials began their investigation shortly after, now focusing on the business dealings in Europe.
Motorola Solutions has not been subpoenaed and is voluntarily providing information. Part of the investigation is focused on an bribery allegations involving an Austrian lobbyist and count, in relation to BAE Systems. Authorities are looking into whether the lobbyist was involved with paying a bribe to win a contract on behalf of Motorola in 2004.
The penalty for violating the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is a hefty fine, and with recent questions about Motorola dominating the Public Safety communications industry, the company's reputation will be further damaged by another question of its ethics.
According to Forbes.com sources say the investigating agencies are searching for evidence that of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, meant to prevent American companies from offering bribes to officials of foreign governments.
The company opened up its own investigation in 2009 of possible bribery mispractices, sparked by a suspicious transaction in Turkey. U.S. officials began their investigation shortly after, now focusing on the business dealings in Europe.
Motorola Solutions has not been subpoenaed and is voluntarily providing information. Part of the investigation is focused on an bribery allegations involving an Austrian lobbyist and count, in relation to BAE Systems. Authorities are looking into whether the lobbyist was involved with paying a bribe to win a contract on behalf of Motorola in 2004.
The penalty for violating the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is a hefty fine, and with recent questions about Motorola dominating the Public Safety communications industry, the company's reputation will be further damaged by another question of its ethics.
Senin, 26 September 2011
Multimedia Access for 9-1-1 Call Centers
The FCC unanimously approved a notice of proposed rulemaking last Thursday seeking input to improve the framework of next-generation 9-1-1 (NG-911). The goal is to provide multimedia access call centers and prioritization of 9-1-1 calls on commercial networks.
The notice examines the expected benefits and discusses facilitation of 911 call prioritization, text-to-911, MMS, IP-based messaging or Real-Time text, standards development and PSAP-based triggers for providers to implement non-voice solutions. Read more about the FCC's goals for NG-911 at Urgent Communications.
Senin, 19 September 2011
New Obama Job Bill Includes D-Block
President Obama's recent speech to a joint session of Congress outlined a draft version of a jobs bill that includes reallocation of the 700 MHz D-block and provides $7 billion of nationwide LTE network funding ($3 billion less than the S.911 Senate bill) for Public Safety.
According a report released by the Telecommunications Industry Association, the nationwide LTE network buildout would create more than 100,000 new jobs. With House Republicans focused on balancing the budget, reducing deficit, and creating jobs, it is important that this bill is beneficial to the economy as well as Public Safety.
The Obama administration voiced support for D-block reallocation and funding previously, although S.911 (the D-block Senate bill). Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) has been an outspoken advocate for auctioning the D-block to commercial operators will reportedly introduce his legislative proposal within weeks. Although Walden's proposal would prevent D-block allocation to Public Safety, many believe the introduction of such a debate will inspire a more productive debate.
Read more at Urgent Communications.
According a report released by the Telecommunications Industry Association, the nationwide LTE network buildout would create more than 100,000 new jobs. With House Republicans focused on balancing the budget, reducing deficit, and creating jobs, it is important that this bill is beneficial to the economy as well as Public Safety.
Read more at Urgent Communications.
More Wholesale Agreements for LightSquared
After the announcement of a 15-year, multibillion dollar agreement with Sprint Nextel, LightSquared announced last week that it signed its 14th multiyear wholesale agreement- with VoX Communications.
According to Frank Boulben, LightSquared's chief marketing officer, the company is currently the only carrier offering 4G LTE on a wholesale basis, making them attractive to customers across the country hoping to compete with AT&T and Verizon 4G.
LightSquared is reportedly in contract negotiations with 22 other entities and initial talks with 30 others. The company's nationwide broadband network is scheduled to launch during the second half of 2012. Where 4G is not available during deployment, customers will be able to use Sprint's 3G network, enabling nationwide coverage even if deployment is not yet complete.
LightSquared has signed agreements with wireless carriers that lack a 4G migration path but are still hoping to compete with Verizon and AT&T and with some wireline communication providers. Internet service providers and some retailers such as Best Buy have expressed interest. The previously offered satellite push-to-talk services for Public Safety will continue from LightSquared, and the company plans to enhance this capability with push-to-talk offered via applications over LTE. The goal is to offer all of these capabilities on a single device powered by Qualcomm chipsets and possibly other vendors. The cost of ownership for first responders carrying two handsets would be decrased with one unified device offering regular cell service, data, and satellite service.
According to Frank Boulben, LightSquared's chief marketing officer, the company is currently the only carrier offering 4G LTE on a wholesale basis, making them attractive to customers across the country hoping to compete with AT&T and Verizon 4G.
LightSquared is reportedly in contract negotiations with 22 other entities and initial talks with 30 others. The company's nationwide broadband network is scheduled to launch during the second half of 2012. Where 4G is not available during deployment, customers will be able to use Sprint's 3G network, enabling nationwide coverage even if deployment is not yet complete.
LightSquared has signed agreements with wireless carriers that lack a 4G migration path but are still hoping to compete with Verizon and AT&T and with some wireline communication providers. Internet service providers and some retailers such as Best Buy have expressed interest. The previously offered satellite push-to-talk services for Public Safety will continue from LightSquared, and the company plans to enhance this capability with push-to-talk offered via applications over LTE. The goal is to offer all of these capabilities on a single device powered by Qualcomm chipsets and possibly other vendors. The cost of ownership for first responders carrying two handsets would be decrased with one unified device offering regular cell service, data, and satellite service.
Andrew Seybold on Public Safety Broadband: Real-World Testing Results
This was re-posted with permission from Andrew Seybold.
Originally posted 9/18/11 on andrewseybold.com.
This past spring we were contracted by San Francisco Bay Area UASI (Urban Area Security Initiative) to conduct real-world testing of the first Public Safety broadband network in the Bay Area. This network, known as the Cornerstone project, is the precursor to the East Bay Regional LTE network currently being deployed.
Originally posted 9/18/11 on andrewseybold.com.
This past spring we were contracted by San Francisco Bay Area UASI (Urban Area Security Initiative) to conduct real-world testing of the first Public Safety broadband network in the Bay Area. This network, known as the Cornerstone project, is the precursor to the East Bay Regional LTE network currently being deployed.
The East Bay Region is one of 21 jurisdictions that received waivers from the FCC to operate a broadband network on the 10 MHz of 700-MHz spectrum already allocated to Public Safety. The license is currently held by the Public Safety Spectrum Trust (PSST) and the waiver recipients not only have a waiver from the FCC to build and operate their portion of the nationwide network, they have all entered into lease agreements with the PSST for use of the spectrum.
The East Bay organization entered into an agreement with Motorola to provide the system and it received a $50 million grant from the broadband stimulus funds (BETOP grant) to build out the network. A previous grant funded the first part of the network known as the Cornerstone project and this was the network we tested. The report goes into detail about the network, test procedures, actual tests, and results. We have also included more details on all phases of the testing in seven appendices.
The tests were based on real-world incidents that are typical in both metro and suburban areas on a daily basis. The number of first responder personnel assigned to each incident and their functions at the incident and in the command center have been vetted by many within the Public Safety community and, in reality, the number of first responders assigned to the incident for our tests represents a conservative set of personnel on the scene.
It should also be pointed out that these tests were made under ideal conditions. There was no other network traffic, each test was conducted at the center of a single cell sector, multiple times, and the mobile devices were mounted in vehicles using roof and trunk-mounted outside antennas. The backhaul between the cell sector and the network was 30 Mbps and cannot be considered as a choke point in the network. Further, the testing server was physically located at the network center or core so there were no additional data links that could have skewed the results.
A paragraph taken from the conclusions section of the report sums up our findings.
“Based on these real-world tests, we strongly recommend that public safety be provided with at least 20 MHz of contiguous spectrum (10 MHz by 10 MHz). The only way to accomplish this is to reallocate the 700-MHz D Block to public safety and this should be done prior to the build-out of the waiver recipients’ portion of the nationwide network. The cost to build out 10 MHz of spectrum and 20 MHz of spectrum is identical at the time of construction. Later, the addition of this spectrum would add to the cost of the network and require device redesign, adding to the cost of the user equipment. The entire premise of providing public safety with broadband spectrum using a commercial technology is to provide public safety personnel with capabilities they do not have presently at a lower cost than its existing voice communications equipment.”
The full report, as it was submitted to the FCC, is attached to this column in PDF format and will also be posted on our website for future reference. We believe our testing methodology is solid and that the tests, which were repeated multiple times for each incident, were conclusive. In addition to our own findings, Anritsu America was taking off-the-air measurements with its test equipment to verify the total traffic being sent over the network. We thank Anritsu for its support and assistance. I would also like to thank Motorola, the provider of the network, for its cooperation in working with us on this project. Finally, a big thanks to Panasonic, which provided us with seven identical Toughbooks running Windows XP. These units are identical to thousands of Toughbooks that are installed in police, fire, and EMS vehicles around the United States.
The bottom line: Public Safety needs the D Block and the funding to build out the nationwide Public Safety network. If the D Block is not reallocated, Public Safety will end up with a network that will not provide the types of information and videos it wants and needs on a daily basis for incidents that occur multiple times a day in both major metro areas and their surrounding suburbs. Senate bill S.911 provides both the spectrum and the funding that is needed by the Public Safety community. This bill passed through committee with a strong 21-4 bipartisan vote and it needs to be introduced on the floor of the Senate as soon as possible. This will put pressure on the House of Representatives to pass a similar bill and send it to the President for his signature.
Ten years after 9/11, there is no excuse for not providing the Public Safety community with the tools it needs to better serve all of us. This becomes even more important when the Public Safety community has seen layoffs at a local level because of a lack of funding. Doing more with less takes the right tools, and in this case the right tool is a robust Public Safety-only broadband network that has 20 MHz of spectrum available.
Andrew M. Seybold
Kamis, 08 September 2011
Andrew Seybold: Mission-Crticial Voice and LTE: Be Careful!
Reposted with permission of Andrew Seybold.
This was posted on andrewseybold.com on August 26, 2011:
Do not ignore continued investment in existing mission-critical analog and P25 voice systems because you believe voice over LTE broadband that is mission-critical is just around the corner. Many elected officials in federal, state, and local agencies seem to believe this so continued investment in existing channelized voice systems is not needed. While a lot of progress is being made in the world of broadband voice, it will be sometime in the future (undefined) before all of the pieces and parts of mission-critical voice as defined by NPSTC (soon be to published) are included in LTE. Even then there may be limitations that will hinder the Public Safety community or require some changes to how voice systems are used today.
My view is that our channelized voice systems will be around and needed for at least the next 5-10 years, therefore, continued investment in these systems not only makes sense, it should be a requirement. Progress is being made as you will see below, but even with the definition of mission-critical voice in place I know of no work being done to determine the specific requirements regarding the number of dispatch, coordination, or simplex, talk-around, or peer-to-peer voice channels or circuits that will be required. It is possible that there will be mission-critical voice capabilities on LTE and other broadband networks but that these broadband technologies may not be able to provide the number of voice channels that are used today for major incidents such as wildland fires, etc. It is also possible that broadband voice will not be able to support the number of dispatch areas or zones in use today in major metropolitan areas. It is also possible that the combination of voice and data services will give Public Safety the ability to make changes in the operations to streamline the dispatch and tactical aspects of incidents as well as to operate as it does now.
Where We Are Today; Where We Are Going
As the 700-MHz waiver recipients begin building out their portion of the nationwide 700-MHz broadband network, and as the various committees of the various Public Safety organizations meet and discuss issues, one that keeps coming up is the use of the broadband network for mission-critical voice. I have been saying for a long time now that mission-critical voice (as defined by a recent NPSTC document) is still a long way from becoming real over the LTE broadband network.
However, some progress has been made in recent months. One of the most important elements of Public Safety-grade mission-critical voice has to do with off-network or tactical communications, sometimes referred to by the IT world as peer-to-peer communications. Simply stated, this means the ability for two or more field devices (mobile or handheld) to communicate with each other without having to use a cell site or radio tower system. Many who have discussed this include it as a must-have for times when field units are out of coverage of a network. However, in most cases this type of off-network communications is also a requirement of field units even when they are within network coverage.
Call it what you will—tactical, simplex, talk-around, peer-to-peer—it is the ability for units in the field to be able to communicate directly with each other without any infrastructure required. Today’s Public Safety voice devices all include this feature as standard, but cell phones do not support this mode of operation. I have been skeptical that commercial network operators or others within the LTE broadband community would get behind this mode of communications, but recently, simplex mode communications was introduced at the 3GPP standards body and has been endorsed by some commercial network operators including AT&T, as well as by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In other words, now at least the beginnings of this function are being incorporated into the 3GPP standard for LTE and other broadband wireless technologies. BUT, and this is a big but, it may take years for this to work its way through the 3GPP and be voted on by the membership.
Several federal agencies have funded development work on mission-critical voice over LTE and broadband in general, and several of the bills to reallocate the 700-MHz D Block to Public Safety include additional funding for this type of research and development. However, to date there is no real specification that outlines the number of voice circuits that are or will be needed going forward. If we look back at past major incidents and add up the number of voice circuits that were used at a given incident, is this really the number of voice circuits that will be needed when combined with broadband data services?
For example, if we look at one of the major wildland fires in Southern California over the past few years it is possible to determine how many incident and non-incident voice channels were in use during the incident, but does that translate to how many voice circuits will be needed when we add broadband capabilities into the mix?
The Incident Command System (ICS) clearly defines the roll-out of both the ICS management system as well as the Communications Structure. During a major incident today, the communications leader or someone appointed by him usually completes an ICS form 205, which is the Incident Radio Communications plan that lists the incident name and then radio channel utilization. In most cases, this form is filled out by hand, usually at the staging area where vehicles arriving at the incident report to receive their assignments.
The number of voice radio channels used depends on the size of an incident. During the Tea Fire in Santa Barbara that started on November 13, 2008, burned 1,940 acres, destroyed 210 residences (130 in Santa Barbara, 80 in the county), and caused 30 firefighter injuries, the total number of radio channels in use at the height of the fire was 18 command-and-control channels and 72 tactical or simplex channels used for the fire and by police and other first responders directly involved with the firefighting efforts. Normal operations used an additional 4 dispatch channels and 6 tactical or simplex channels.
The good news is that in California almost all of the fire units that responded from federal, state, and local agencies had multi-channel VHF radios so there was a good amount of interoperable communications available. However, this did not include police, sheriff, highway patrol, and other agencies that were also involved in the firefighting. Coordination between these agencies and the fire command was handled via the dispatch centers and/or the emergency operations center. As you can see, there were a large number of radio channels in use and of these, some of the channels were federal, some state, and others local channels. One of the questions that need to be answered as we add broadband services (data and video) to these types of incidents is how much of the traffic on these channels would be reduced and could a future incident get by with fewer voice channels. Another question is that since this fire covered a large area, could some of the voice channels, in the future, be reused in different sectors? These are questions that can only be answered by those who plan for these types of major incidents and it is their input that will be critical to the development of the requirements for mission-critical voice over broadband systems.
One of the reasons so many voice channels are required during major incidents has to do with the fact that each group assigned to the incident has its own specific task to complete. Since each of these groups must have instant and complete communications capabilities, each group is generally assigned its own voice channel with the commander of each group monitoring both the local working channel and the channel on which they then talk to the next higher ranking officer at the incident. This system has worked well for many years and has provided a highly reliable way of ensuring that anyone who needed help could get on a radio and ask for it, and that someone else, either local to them or within radio range, could hear the call and respond accordingly. Without this type of reliable communications there might have been more injuries or even deaths as a result of someone calling for help and that call being unanswered.
In an ideal world it would be wonderful if every first responder had all of the capabilities needed to do their job and protect themselves and the public in a single device. Such a device would give them all of the voice, video, and data capabilities they need, when they need it. But we don’t have this type of device today. First responders cannot take the time to dial a phone number, and many times they do not have two hands available to change the status of the wireless device or make a menu selection. They need to know that simply by pushing an emergency button or calling for help their location and their need for assistance has been heard and that help is really on the way.
Technology is advancing rapidly and the first responder community, for the first time ever, is embracing a commercial and readily available technology for broadband (LTE). Hopefully, Congress will give the first responders the spectrum they need to build out a nationwide broadband network that will provide fully interoperable communications from border to border and coast to coast. Broadband will provide video for those responding to an incident, which is like giving sight to the blind. It will enable a swat team commander to see, on a mobile device, exactly what his snipers are seeing through their high-powered rifle scopes, all of which translates to better protection for both the citizens they serve and for themselves.
In the future, there is no doubt in my mind the Public Safety community will be able to have a single device that will permit voice, data, and video, but when will that future be? There are, at the moment, about 100 different answers to that question. The general consensus from those working with the technology is that some level of mission-critical voice can and will be available over LTE broadband networks. The remaining questions are how many of the mission-critical voice requirements can actually be met with LTE broadband or future broadband technologies, and how long will it take to be able to prove to the Public Safety community that LTE broadband can provide both voice and data services?
The bottom line is that today’s mission-critical channelized voice systems, and the new systems being deployed, developed, and planned, need to continue to be funded to ensure that when the time comes, the capabilities of LTE broadband can be weighed against the needs of the Public Safety community. If there is a perfect fit, the transition from channelized to broadband mission-critical voice should begin. Perhaps some of the channelized spectrum could be returned to the FCC for reallocation to others but this process should not, today, be viewed as something that will happen overnight but rather that it could take years to accomplish.
Is voice coming to LTE broadband? Yes, it’s the when that is in question. Is mission-critical voice coming to LTE broadband? I hope so, but in the meantime, not maintaining or building new mission-critical Public Safety voice systems should not be an option considered by any local, state or federal agency!
Andrew M. Seybold
This was posted on andrewseybold.com on August 26, 2011:
Do not ignore continued investment in existing mission-critical analog and P25 voice systems because you believe voice over LTE broadband that is mission-critical is just around the corner. Many elected officials in federal, state, and local agencies seem to believe this so continued investment in existing channelized voice systems is not needed. While a lot of progress is being made in the world of broadband voice, it will be sometime in the future (undefined) before all of the pieces and parts of mission-critical voice as defined by NPSTC (soon be to published) are included in LTE. Even then there may be limitations that will hinder the Public Safety community or require some changes to how voice systems are used today.
My view is that our channelized voice systems will be around and needed for at least the next 5-10 years, therefore, continued investment in these systems not only makes sense, it should be a requirement. Progress is being made as you will see below, but even with the definition of mission-critical voice in place I know of no work being done to determine the specific requirements regarding the number of dispatch, coordination, or simplex, talk-around, or peer-to-peer voice channels or circuits that will be required. It is possible that there will be mission-critical voice capabilities on LTE and other broadband networks but that these broadband technologies may not be able to provide the number of voice channels that are used today for major incidents such as wildland fires, etc. It is also possible that broadband voice will not be able to support the number of dispatch areas or zones in use today in major metropolitan areas. It is also possible that the combination of voice and data services will give Public Safety the ability to make changes in the operations to streamline the dispatch and tactical aspects of incidents as well as to operate as it does now.
Where We Are Today; Where We Are Going
As the 700-MHz waiver recipients begin building out their portion of the nationwide 700-MHz broadband network, and as the various committees of the various Public Safety organizations meet and discuss issues, one that keeps coming up is the use of the broadband network for mission-critical voice. I have been saying for a long time now that mission-critical voice (as defined by a recent NPSTC document) is still a long way from becoming real over the LTE broadband network.
However, some progress has been made in recent months. One of the most important elements of Public Safety-grade mission-critical voice has to do with off-network or tactical communications, sometimes referred to by the IT world as peer-to-peer communications. Simply stated, this means the ability for two or more field devices (mobile or handheld) to communicate with each other without having to use a cell site or radio tower system. Many who have discussed this include it as a must-have for times when field units are out of coverage of a network. However, in most cases this type of off-network communications is also a requirement of field units even when they are within network coverage.
Call it what you will—tactical, simplex, talk-around, peer-to-peer—it is the ability for units in the field to be able to communicate directly with each other without any infrastructure required. Today’s Public Safety voice devices all include this feature as standard, but cell phones do not support this mode of operation. I have been skeptical that commercial network operators or others within the LTE broadband community would get behind this mode of communications, but recently, simplex mode communications was introduced at the 3GPP standards body and has been endorsed by some commercial network operators including AT&T, as well as by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In other words, now at least the beginnings of this function are being incorporated into the 3GPP standard for LTE and other broadband wireless technologies. BUT, and this is a big but, it may take years for this to work its way through the 3GPP and be voted on by the membership.
Several federal agencies have funded development work on mission-critical voice over LTE and broadband in general, and several of the bills to reallocate the 700-MHz D Block to Public Safety include additional funding for this type of research and development. However, to date there is no real specification that outlines the number of voice circuits that are or will be needed going forward. If we look back at past major incidents and add up the number of voice circuits that were used at a given incident, is this really the number of voice circuits that will be needed when combined with broadband data services?
For example, if we look at one of the major wildland fires in Southern California over the past few years it is possible to determine how many incident and non-incident voice channels were in use during the incident, but does that translate to how many voice circuits will be needed when we add broadband capabilities into the mix?
The Incident Command System (ICS) clearly defines the roll-out of both the ICS management system as well as the Communications Structure. During a major incident today, the communications leader or someone appointed by him usually completes an ICS form 205, which is the Incident Radio Communications plan that lists the incident name and then radio channel utilization. In most cases, this form is filled out by hand, usually at the staging area where vehicles arriving at the incident report to receive their assignments.
The number of voice radio channels used depends on the size of an incident. During the Tea Fire in Santa Barbara that started on November 13, 2008, burned 1,940 acres, destroyed 210 residences (130 in Santa Barbara, 80 in the county), and caused 30 firefighter injuries, the total number of radio channels in use at the height of the fire was 18 command-and-control channels and 72 tactical or simplex channels used for the fire and by police and other first responders directly involved with the firefighting efforts. Normal operations used an additional 4 dispatch channels and 6 tactical or simplex channels.
The good news is that in California almost all of the fire units that responded from federal, state, and local agencies had multi-channel VHF radios so there was a good amount of interoperable communications available. However, this did not include police, sheriff, highway patrol, and other agencies that were also involved in the firefighting. Coordination between these agencies and the fire command was handled via the dispatch centers and/or the emergency operations center. As you can see, there were a large number of radio channels in use and of these, some of the channels were federal, some state, and others local channels. One of the questions that need to be answered as we add broadband services (data and video) to these types of incidents is how much of the traffic on these channels would be reduced and could a future incident get by with fewer voice channels. Another question is that since this fire covered a large area, could some of the voice channels, in the future, be reused in different sectors? These are questions that can only be answered by those who plan for these types of major incidents and it is their input that will be critical to the development of the requirements for mission-critical voice over broadband systems.
One of the reasons so many voice channels are required during major incidents has to do with the fact that each group assigned to the incident has its own specific task to complete. Since each of these groups must have instant and complete communications capabilities, each group is generally assigned its own voice channel with the commander of each group monitoring both the local working channel and the channel on which they then talk to the next higher ranking officer at the incident. This system has worked well for many years and has provided a highly reliable way of ensuring that anyone who needed help could get on a radio and ask for it, and that someone else, either local to them or within radio range, could hear the call and respond accordingly. Without this type of reliable communications there might have been more injuries or even deaths as a result of someone calling for help and that call being unanswered.
In an ideal world it would be wonderful if every first responder had all of the capabilities needed to do their job and protect themselves and the public in a single device. Such a device would give them all of the voice, video, and data capabilities they need, when they need it. But we don’t have this type of device today. First responders cannot take the time to dial a phone number, and many times they do not have two hands available to change the status of the wireless device or make a menu selection. They need to know that simply by pushing an emergency button or calling for help their location and their need for assistance has been heard and that help is really on the way.
Technology is advancing rapidly and the first responder community, for the first time ever, is embracing a commercial and readily available technology for broadband (LTE). Hopefully, Congress will give the first responders the spectrum they need to build out a nationwide broadband network that will provide fully interoperable communications from border to border and coast to coast. Broadband will provide video for those responding to an incident, which is like giving sight to the blind. It will enable a swat team commander to see, on a mobile device, exactly what his snipers are seeing through their high-powered rifle scopes, all of which translates to better protection for both the citizens they serve and for themselves.
In the future, there is no doubt in my mind the Public Safety community will be able to have a single device that will permit voice, data, and video, but when will that future be? There are, at the moment, about 100 different answers to that question. The general consensus from those working with the technology is that some level of mission-critical voice can and will be available over LTE broadband networks. The remaining questions are how many of the mission-critical voice requirements can actually be met with LTE broadband or future broadband technologies, and how long will it take to be able to prove to the Public Safety community that LTE broadband can provide both voice and data services?
The bottom line is that today’s mission-critical channelized voice systems, and the new systems being deployed, developed, and planned, need to continue to be funded to ensure that when the time comes, the capabilities of LTE broadband can be weighed against the needs of the Public Safety community. If there is a perfect fit, the transition from channelized to broadband mission-critical voice should begin. Perhaps some of the channelized spectrum could be returned to the FCC for reallocation to others but this process should not, today, be viewed as something that will happen overnight but rather that it could take years to accomplish.
Is voice coming to LTE broadband? Yes, it’s the when that is in question. Is mission-critical voice coming to LTE broadband? I hope so, but in the meantime, not maintaining or building new mission-critical Public Safety voice systems should not be an option considered by any local, state or federal agency!
Andrew M. Seybold
Jumat, 02 September 2011
From the FCC
August 31 and September 1, 2011
Daily Digest Highlights
1. ESTEVAN J. GUTIERREZ. Notified Esteven J. Gutierrez of an AapparentLiability for Forfeiture in the amount of $25,000 for operating on a frequency licensed to the Las Vegas, New Mexico, Police Department without authorization,and other matters. Action by: District Director, San Diego District Office, Western Region, Enforcement Bureau. Adopted: 08/30/2011 by NAL. (DA No. 11-1475). EB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1475A1.doc
2. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC. Granted the Petition. Action by:Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 08/31/2011 by MO&O. (DA No. 11-1478). MB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1478A1.doc
3. Released: 08/31/2011. FCC EXTENDS DEADLINE FOR MEMBERSHIP NOMINATIONS FOR OPEN INTERNET ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY THIRTY DAYS. (DA No. 11-1485).(Dkt No 09-191 07-52 ) Extended deadline for submitting nominations for the Open Internet Advisory Committee from Sept. 1, 2011 to Oct. 1, 2011.GEN . Contact: Deborah Broderson at (202) 418-0652, email:Deborah.Broderson@fcc.gov
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1485A1.doc
4. Released: 08/31/2011. FCC ANNOUNCES SEPTEMBER PUBLIC SAFETY SHOWCASE IN THE FCC TECHNOLOGY EXPERIENCE CENTER. PSHSB . Contact: Ronald Cunningham at (202) 513-4515 or email: TEC@fcc.gov. News Media Contact: Lauren Kravetz at (202) 418-7944, email: Lauren.Kravetz@fcc.gov
5. PANASONIC AVIONICS CORPORATION. Granted blanket authority toPanasonic Avionics Corporation for domestic operation of up to 50 technically identical transmit/receive aircraft earth stations in the Aeronautical Mobile Satellite Service. Action by: Chiefs, International Bureau and Office of Engineering and Technology. Adopted: 08/31/2011 by O&A. (DA No. 11-1480). IB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1480A1.doc
6. VALUTEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Adopted a Consent Decree in this proceeding. Action by: Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau. Adopted: 08/30/2011 by Order/Consent Decree. (DA No. 11-1469). EB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1469A1.doc
Langganan:
Komentar (Atom)