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

Last month, I wrote a column that examined the notion that mission-critical push-to-talk (MCPTT) functionality could be the “killer app” for public-safety LTE systems, including FirstNet’s proposed nationwide public-safety broadband network. It attracted quite a bit of response, both in the comments section accompanying the story and in various phone calls I’ve received since then.

It’s not surprising that the article caught the attention of many in the industry, as the notion of MCPTT over LTE is hot topic. Some see it as a fad that is doomed to fail. Others believe it can augment mission-critical-voice services over LMR networks. Still others believe MCPTT is destined to replace private LMR networks entirely.

It is this last notion that tends to be the real lightning rod. Some LTE proponents tend to focus on mission-critical promises that haven’t happened yet, while LMR proponents often note that two-way radio has saved the lives of countless first responders, so they argue that public-safety personnel would never abandon the technology.

But that’s not how society works, as has been proven repeatedly throughout history. People want and need to get from one place to another, but cars replaced horses as the accepted vehicle. People want and need access to written information, but digital websites largely have replaced print newspapers and magazines. People want and need to have long-distance conversations with each other, but cellular devices are replacing landline phones.

Even within the realm of wireless devices, there have been significant shifts. Several years ago, multiple speakers at IWCE proclaimed that, no matter how much technology changed, they would always use a Blackberry. This year, a speaker asked a crowded audience if anyone still used a Blackberry, but no hands were raised.

It’s not that Blackberry stopped making a quality product or that people stopped reading their e-mail while away from their computers, but users found other devices—typically smartphones or tablets—that provided the service in a more user-friendly package.

And that should be the framework for the important debate surrounding the role that MCPTT over LTE may play in the mission-critical voice arena for first responders and other critical-communications users. The need for reliable voice communications is never going away, but there’s nothing that dictates that it has to be delivered via LMR. What’s important is that the users establish their requirements and then determine which technology best meets those requirements for their situation.

In other words, the real question is pretty simple: Which service works better for the user and the entities they represent?

But to make an accurate assessment, all involved need advance the discussion beyond where it is in many industry circles today: an LMR-versus-LTE debate filled with an undercurrent that someone is about to lose their job, not on the merits of each technology. More important, the conversation needs to be based on accurate information about what exists today and is on the near-term horizon, instead of simply regurgitating statements that have been outdated for years.

With this in mind, let’s examine some common statements tossed about in a typical LMR-versus-LTE debate regarding the subject of mission-critical voice.