The LMR-to-LTE transition: revolution vs. evolution
The ultimate vision
Such analysis of available technologies and business models will give FirstNet the edge it needs to revolutionize public-safety communications. The technologies available today have much better capabilities and provide an opportunity to exploit best-of-breed solutions for specific operational needs. Public safety is not accustomed to defining operational needs and has been forced for many decades to accept limited capabilities of devices and systems developed for a mass-sale opportunity, as opposed to specific user needs.
With the endless equipment, devices and applications being developed every day, public safety now can demand the specific architecture and systems capabilities it wants, based on actual user needs in a specific region of the country. With the development of an entire system that leverages public-safety LTE, different business models can be explored for agency use, regional use and national use (see Figure 2).
Sharing the public-safety LTE network—during non-emergency periods that generally dominate the system use on a daily basis—may be possible to generate revenue. Properly structured sharing arrangements could provide added capability for the public in areas where broadband services do not exist, but public safety would retain priority during emergency situations.
FirstNet can evaluate and select the capabilities and standards for devices and applications on the system, should it wisely choose to take advantage of pilot projects — such as those already funded by federal BTOP grants — that could provide much-needed visibility into LTE’s impact on real-world public-safety operations, and help to define the capabilities of the FirstNet network. Further, the early availability of these capabilities could provide a glimpse of the ultimate vision.
Again, by utilizing the latest commercial standards, economies of scale can be realized to reduce the cost of devices and to take advantage of the commercial demand for smartphones, now and into the future. Public safety sorely needs to leverage the innovation that is happening today in commercial mobile broadband to achieve specific technology improvements for police, fire and EMS.
Meanwhile, NIST’s Public Safety Communications Research laboratory in Boulder, Colo., in addition to other independent labs, could be used to test capabilities, as well as the compatibility of systems with existing commercial standards. Once a process is developed, public safety then will be able to decide which models it prefers and in what regions, based on regional operation capabilities.
As the analysis progresses, the pilot projects will begin clarifying the standards that FirstNet will choose for the revolution to LTE as the standalone system for public safety.
As previously mentioned, today’s communications systems typically are bought and maintained by a local agency, thereby maintaining local control. In some instances, several agencies have banded together to form a regional system, usually defined by a formal agreement. A formal process for regional systems can be outlined by FirstNet to maintain the balance between local control and shared resources for the benefit of the entire public-safety community, as well as the taxpayers that fund the systems.
As this model is extended to the NPSBN, a fully open, standards-based model can be maintained that allows the proper balance of local functionality, regional coordination and national resource sharing. Such an approach also would allow the use of current public-safety real-estate assets when deploying new LTE sites, thereby drastically reducing the capital required to deploy the NPSBN, and reducing long-term operating costs by avoiding the leasing costs prevalent in the commercial models.
The exponential benefits of achieving this balance cannot be predicted, just as the explosion of capabilities that commercial wireless technologies have enabled could not be predicted several years ago. However, it must be a prime responsibility for FirstNet to begin a true revolution for LTE in public safety.
Michael J. Bostic is the director of customer advocacy for Raytheon’s public-safety and security unit.
Yep lets do away with LMR as
Yep lets do away with LMR as soon as we can, so that we can channel all our extra money to the companies that are so willing to HELP us. Wrong LMR needs to staty inplace and we can continue to use LTE to support us.
my thoughts exactly….reach
my thoughts exactly….reach for more and more. then periodically “advance” technology so it can be sold over again.
once they control public safety we are over a barrel.
I can live without my smart phone.
LTE? For Cops who can’t even
LTE? For Cops who can’t even drive a car straight ahead? Are they kidding? Sure it MIGHT be a good idea for certain administrative and investigative units but cannot replace PTT radio plus we have Smartphones with custom LE APP’s already….Plus our radios are now FREE TO USE and can interoperate with surrounding agencies..What a bill of goods..Hey, at lesat we are not on 470 MHz channels so won’t have to hand them back in…A Cop from a big City who will be long retired when this happens helped make that deal. Amazing.
Is everyone out of there
Is everyone out of there cotton-pickin minds? Maybe LTE is the savior of the eastern seaboard but out here west of the MIssissippi things are a lot different. In my state you can drive for hundreds of miles and never see another car but the still LMR works. LTE with its limited range will necessitate building hundreds of new sites to equate to that our the LMR. That is only one of many deficiencies. Backhaul for all those new sites is another. $7B is not even close to enough money. Try $70B and good luck.
While you only briefly
While you only briefly menttion coverage, I believe it is one of the main factors that will not allow LMR migration especially in rural areas with difficult terrian. Many of these areas do not have any cell coverage. The term “Nationwide’ is very misleading in that nationwide coverage will most likely be based on population, not the entire land mass of the U.S. which will leave out the rural, less populated areas.
When FirstNET covers the 4
When FirstNET covers the 4 corners area [NM, AZ, CO, UT] with in-building, handheld device coverage, THEN my agency MIGHT consider moving away from LMR.
What part of the
What part of the Manufacturer’s desire to “…generate more income” do we not understand? That money has to be allocated to budgets to pay the service provider. Instead of owning the system and not having a monthly bill for each device, now we will have to take taxpayer dollars and allocate it to fund a monthly fee per device. Most department and management do not realize how much this will cost in the long run.
Once again it is the tail
Once again it is the tail wagging the dog. Big business and politicians telling Public Safety Users what they need and what they have will no longer suit them. Try using your smartphone to make a call with your winter gloves on … I think not.
Since when is it a good thing
Since when is it a good thing to put all our eggs into one basket? Especially when it’s a new technology (PS voice)
Most accreditation requirements I have read look for multiple ways to contact first responders for a reason.
LMR is not going away anytime
LMR is not going away anytime soon. LTE is still too new and First Net is a joke.
Funny. Mr Bostic sings the
Funny. Mr Bostic sings the praises of a technology that has yet to be developed and talks down about what is tried and true. Do you think the fact that his company (Raytheon) wants into your business has anything to do with it? Since they have no offerings in the current LMR world, this could allow them to increase their presence. It’s about the Benjamins!!!
Terrestrial LTE coverage will
Terrestrial LTE coverage will be a huge problem in rural America, that is currently covered with LMR. The purported satellite data solution is only prospect, without even a brochure or a prototype to show in daylight.
I don’t foresee agencies
I don’t foresee agencies going to a nationwide LTE network anytime soon due to systems costs. Out here in the west, coverage is much better served by conventional LMR systems. The high cost of sites and regulations prevent the wide spread deployment of LTE especially in mountainous terrain. Not to mention the environmental regulations one would have to satisfy. There are also site hardening costs that would be needed to meet public safety communication standards for service reliability. Getting sites and building them to public safety communication specs would prevent it given the high number of sites which would be required to service the west.
Anonymous from yesterday has
Anonymous from yesterday has it correct. How many times has a stand alone Police/ Fire proven itself. for reliability. Why do (even current day) Amateur (even though they know a lot) operators help out w/ their stations. Because they do not rely on anyone to be on the air. Public safety radio should continue to stand alone. And Congress should give the FCC back the 470 Mhz(Tband) to LMR. Why break something that works well. Ask the Depts involved in tracking down the Boston bombers. Their comms. worked thru the entire episode.
There doesn’t seem to be a
There doesn’t seem to be a consensus as to whether LTE is going to include PTT or be just broadband. If it’s just broadband only, it doesn’t need hardened sites and 100% coverage – which is a much cheaper, more doable, alternative. I’m ok with the broadband only approach and, when combined with existing LMR, it fills most user needs, at a cheaper cost. The universal network, PTT & Broadband, concept is unrealistic and is just trying to line the pocket of big non-traditional LMR companies. Someone please make the final call – PTT or NOT. The future depends on it. If the decision is PTT, then we know the project is doomed out the gate and we don’t have to worry about it anymore. If the answer is no PTT, then we might start doing some long-range planning to include it.
FirstNet sounds like a group
FirstNet sounds like a group of political appointees who have little technical knowledge and even less appreciation for economic concerns. I keep thinking I detect an underlying rat here – a desire to see the deployment of BILLIONS of dollars of equipment without serious regard to technical, economic or operational realities. Even EAST of the Mississippi, there are many areas without cellular coverage. The economics and terrain don’t support good coverage, and yet, we are told that FirstNet will blanket the NATION with LTE for public safety?
A horrible bill of goods is being sold here.