Apply the litmus test to new technology

Public-safety agencies depend on radios as basic tools, especially in emergencies. That fact remains as true today as it has for decades.

Newer technologies are all the rage these days, and no wonder. It is amazing how information technology has changed everything, including mobile radio communications.

To be sure, we should all pay close attention to new developments, new products and new applications that may serve as useful additions to public-safety communications. However, we must not lose sight of the essential role of traditional radios in emergency communications, nor of new developments in radio technology. In addition, the aforementioned newer technologies must be evaluated according to the same principles and practical priorities of emergency responders.

Said another way, if new options are promoted as competing with — or even replacing — radio communications for public safety, homeland security and emergency response, then they should be measured against the fundamentals engineered into radio technology and learned over many years of experience in our business.

Although many current strategies focus on enabling radio interoperability — across different manufacturers’ equipment, public-safety agencies and frequency bands — let’s not forget the underlying infrastructure that has defined first responder radio for all these years. That is, the FCC licenses each agency uses to operate and control its own radio communications.

No limit on calls. No airtime fees or pay-per-click charges on an ongoing (and never-ending) basis. No usage fees to discourage using radios as long and as often as needed.

These are radio networks that are independent of commercial landline telephone networks, cellular telephone networks and Internet links. They may be more likely to survive natural disasters, and if not, they will be easier to restore and extend than other types of communications networks.

The tools themselves — mobile and portable two-way radios — have been designed and engineered to meet what we call the core requirements of first responders. What do they tell us that they need most?

• Clear voice quality: When you are on the move and responding to an emergency, your voice must be clearly heard by those you are calling on your radio, and you must be able to hear the voices of those talking to you. It’s as simple as that, though not as simple as it may seem.

• Ease of use: In an emergency, communicating by radio should not be rocket science. It especially should not be difficult to figure out when first responders are in a hurry. We keep saying this again and again, yet it’s remarkable how many new entrants in the public-safety communications sector still don’t seem to get the message.

• Reliability and durability: Public-safety radios are built to last for years under rugged and even hazardous conditions, yet continue to function dependably time after time. All the new high-tech offerings won’t amount to much if they cannot withstand the same treatment.

If a new device can’t meet these essential requirements, then adding advanced features like streaming video, Web browsers and e-mail — and adding more costs and fees — may bring more problems than they solve.

Before being mesmerized by all the promise of new technologies, the tough questions have to be asked.

David P. Storey is president and CEO of RELM Wireless Corp., a manufacturer and marketer of mobile radio equipment for public-safety and government agencies, as well as business-band radios serving a wide range of commercial applications, for six decades.