Decision makers need to consider many layers when determining future role of mission-critical voice over LTE

So, should we continue to invest more money into our LMR network? This is a big communications question that government administrators and elected officials at all levels—local, state and federal—are wrestling with today. At this moment, it is not that hard, because MCPTT over LTE is not a viable option yet. So, if an existing LMR system needs work right now, it has to be done, because first responders must be able to depend on it in crunch time and there is no alternative at the moment.

But decisions get decidedly more complicated as we try to project into the future. Many government procurement processes take several years to complete, if you include planning and engineering costs. In other words, the decision to pursue an expensive LMR upgrade is not a trivial matter—in some cases, voter approval may be necessary to secure funding.

Barring legal or political battles in the U.S. that could create delays, there should be more clarity about FirstNet’s contractor later this year, and the details of state deployment plans and service pricing could be available as early as the middle of 2017. If all goes smoothly, MCPTT over LTE could be available in 2018 or 2019 in most populated areas of the U.S., and the FirstNet system could be substantially complete in 2021.

There are additional questions that should be considered. For instance, could carrier-provided priority services give first responders the reliability and coverage they need, if FirstNet is not built in their geographic location as quickly as desired? Meanwhile, could LMR systems provide a transport mechanism for low-bandwidth data traffic associated with the projected explosion of Internet of Things (IoT)?

These are interesting technical and strategic issues, but the critical and most unpredictable timing issue is when (or if) MCPTT over LTE is proven to be a viable mission-critical-voice alternative in real-world settings, and when public-safety users are comfortable using the technology during emergencies. And it is important that these assessments are made while considering performance-requirement benchmarks, not just familiarity with a technology or a desire to move to a new one.  

One key benefit in the U.S. is the existence of PSCR, which can provide independent testing of the functionality and interoperability features that are important to public safety, so decision makers don't have to rely solely on the claims of vendors.

Still, there are no clear-cut answers, and the factors are changing rapidly. This is why it is important that key administrators and elected officials monitor the ever-changing landscape of public-safety LTE—FirstNet in the U.S.—and the development of MCPTT over LTE in their jurisdictions. 

Failure to do so could result in lost opportunities and wasted taxpayer dollars. Most important, poor decisions in this area could jeopardize the safety of first responders and the citizens they have vowed to protect.