House subcommittee applauds FirstNet’s progress toward nationwide public-safety network
What is in this article?
Davis testimony, Eshoo says $5,000 radios are ‘yesterday’
Ohio CIO Stu Davis also testified before the subcommittee. In November 2013, Davis testified before the subcommittee and expressed concerns about FirstNet, but his tone was notably different yesterday.
“FirstNet has made significant progress in further defining and communicating the mitigation of these concerns [aired in November 2013],” Davis said. “Regarding the state’s relationship with FirstNet, it’s important that FirstNet views this as a partnership. FirstNet has come a long way in this regard
“Over the past year and a half, many states have had the opportunity to meet with representatives of FirstNet to discuss issues and concerns. FirstNet’s message has been clear. They are listening and reacting to our concerns. Ohio’s FirstNet consultation was held last week and, by all accounts, was a positive interaction.”
Davis noted that Ohio is working cooperatively with other states in FEMA Region V—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin—about FirstNet, and the primary issues discussed have been local control, leveraging existing systems, business models and the integration of FirstNet with next-generation 911.
Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), a member of the 911 Caucus, also noted the importance of FirstNet integrating its broadband system with IP-based next-generation 911 technology being installed in public-safety answering points (PSAPs) thoughout the country. In addition, FirstNet should work with wireless carriers of all sizes, particularly regional and rural providers, she said.
But Eshoo was most outspoken about the need for FirstNet to foster device competition, which she said is “critical” to FirstNet’s success.
“$5,000 public-safety radios are out: O-U-T,” Eshoo said, spelling out the word to emphasize her point. “I don’t want to hear about them anymore. As far as I’m concerned, they don’t exist, and I don’t think any of the dollars that are being provided should go to anything like that. That is yesterday.
“What’s in? Highly innovative, broadband-enabled devices that can transmit live video from a robot sent—for example—to assess a suspicious package, view floor plans of a burning building, access medical history of a patient in distress, as well as the wide range of other mobile applications. In other words, you have to be just as 21st Century as the rest of this ecosystem is in our country.”
Eshoo is so O_U_T with
Eshoo is so O_U_T with reality and needs to be voted O_U_T.
Rep. Eschoo plainly has no
Rep. Eschoo plainly has no clue what is actually needed in Public Safety communications. The first issue that comes to mind is that those responders out in the field will always rely first and foremost on voice communications. LTE will NOT be ready for public safety grade voice for at least 5-8 years yet. The 3GPP group is just now talking about consumer grade voice for carriers over LTE, and we all know how bad our cell phones sound. This will be just as bad, if not worse.
Next, while I agree that paying $5000 for a basic public safety grade handheld or mobile is out of line, $1000 to $2500 is not. That technology, LMR, using P25, or DMR, or the most reliable form-Analog, will not be going away for at least 10-20 years yet. Telling public safety agencies that they should not be investing in these systems will put lives in danger as they limp along with old systems, while sitting on their hands waiting for this somewhat pie in the sky system.
Also, the government’s record for these kinds of projects is not very good. 800 MHz rebanding was supposed to take no more than 3-4 years. It’s been well over 10 years now, and there are still many areas that are not done, including the Mexican border area that is just getting going. P25 has been in process for nearly 25 years, and still has a few areas that have not been fully completed or implemented. The digital TV migration got delayed several times. VHF/UHF Part 90 narrowbanding did not go very smoothly at all, and the main reason it kept close to any schedule was because the FCC put virtually all the responsibility for completion on licensees-as in-‘here’s the deadline, and you’re sticking to it, whether you’re ready or not’ (for the most part).
I’ll repeat this for emphasis: Telling public safety agencies not to put any more money into LMR radio systems is very dangerous, and *will* result in accidents, and probably tragedy, at some point.
The trend in wireless
The trend in wireless technology is clearly towards broadband and away from narrowband. The investment in engineering, and the allocation of new spectrum is almost all in the broadband space. LMR systems that are local in nature will gradually be replaced by broadband wireless systems.
Broadband LTE is a global phenomenon. It is much bigger than FirstNet. The U.K. and South Korea have both committed to replacing their public safety LMR systems with LTE systems by 2020. Mission Critical Voice standards will likely be complete by 2017, and even if they are not completely nailed down, South Korea and the U.K. will proceed with their LTE deployments.
FirstNet can easily fail due to poor management, politics, or resistance from LMR interests, but broadband wireless technology will not fail.
Broadband and narrowband are two very different technologies. Narrowband can cover vast distances from a single site, broadband can not. Conversely, broadband can support applications such as HD video wheras narrowband can not. Within a defined coverage area where sites can be constructed at regular intervals of 50 miles or less and connected to a core by fiber or microwave, broadband is the clear choice since it can outperform narrowband in all three application categories (voice, video and data). Narrowband systems operate in a single domain (either the frequency domain or the time domain). LTE operates in three domains simultaneously (frequency, time and space) making it far more specrally efficient than narrowband. Spectrum is a limited asset that must be conserved since the demand for spectrum has never been greater and continues to increase. All governments are under pressure to adapt more spectrally efficient technologies. LTE has a re-use factor of one; the same channel can be re-used at every site. This is one reason it so popular with commercial networks and government reglators alike. The more you aggregate spectrum (the wider you make the channel) the more efficient you can become since you can allocate sub channels at will when and where they are needed.
why not add ROIP (radio over
why not add ROIP (radio over IP) to your existing system? Less than $50 a user and quit waiting for FirstNet