Sep 29, 2017

THE IMPORTANCE OF AVAILABILITY IN PUBLIC SAFETY MOBILE DATA

When talking about critical broadband connectivity for public safety, we are talking about saving lives. The availability of the online information is thus of the utmost importance. If one tries to fetch information from criminal records, the latest blueprints of a building in case of fire, or send cardio information to a doctor in hospital, connectivity is crucial. It might not be a matter of a second or two, but one certainly cannot wait minutes for data to be delivered.

In critical communications, the command and control application become a focal point. With an efficient C&C application one can share information about other units’ locations, target drawings and other various case specific information. The more instantaneous the data is, the better security it provides for the officers on the case. We have seen live situational pictures shared from the criminal site to enhance co-operation and to minimize the inefficient use of mobile voice terminals.

I wish to underline that 99.9% of the usage of broadband data in public safety is outside of a big catastrophe. This is normal day to day work for public safety personnel. When this work can be made more efficient, the savings are immense. Let's look at the network infrastructure requirements of the solution.

CASE: COMMERCIAL NETWORKS

The most common mistake public safety has made is to rely solely on one commercial broadband network. It almost seems like all concentration with development is on the applications. Too often, connectivity issues are handled without due consideration “…oh and we’ll use the broadband of the number one commercial operator, with a dongle or similar.” The fact is no single network, especially a commercial one, is ever enough. The networks are built and designed in a way that do not enable 100% availability regardless of coverage. Commercial networks have occasional service breakdowns, on larger and smaller scales. These networks also have IP addressing scheme changes that cause links to break down. This requires new connection set-ups that always take time. Typical availability, under the coverage area, over any larger single network when in full operation is about 96-98%.

CASE: DEDICATED NETWORKS

The most obvious and most employed solution to the broadband question in the market is to repeat the previous narrow band and voice implementations in the new environment. The communication of public safety has previously been done by dedicated networks. It all started with RF – radios. With digitization, the P25, Tetra and Tetrapol technologies were implemented. These regional or even countrywide implementations have been paid for using taxpayers’ money and the arguments in support of these networks have revolved around availability during crisis situations. Well, no solution is 100% reliable and despite little official communication on the subject, we know that existing digital PMR networks are far from being perfect. A good question today is if a dedicated network is even needed for voice services? There are novel push to talk possibilities and various MVNO approaches that could even replace the existing networks. If we select a dedicated network for public safety use, we should consider the cost vs. benefit. If the network has already been built, it certainly makes sense to use it, but building a new one is another question.

The approximate amount of users on a dedicated network compared to a commercial one is about 0.5%. Dedicated networks builders argue that this small number of users isn’t interesting enough for commercial operators. Is the answer to build another network with even higher availability requirements? With a simple calculation, the cost would be 200-fold per user. How much are the public really prepared to pay for these services? There is always a limit to everything and I have a hard time believing that a dedicated network, especially a Broadband one, would be accepted anywhere as the only possible solution.

I understand the need for coverage in remote areas where there is no business case for the connectivity of commercial networks. This can however, also be covered by satellite.

CASE: COMBINED NETWORKS

This last alternative is somewhat like what FirstNet is doing in the US, the Emergency Services Network (ESN) in UK, and Red Compartida in Mexico. There are more, but these are maybe the most important ones right now. The idea is to combine the existing infrastructures of commercial operators and to build more infrastructure and robustness into the solution. The major thinking behind these approaches are dedicated frequencies. The problem here is that dedicated frequencies offer neither high availability nor resilience. For that you need robust infrastructure.

This solution would also still rely on a single network at a time, with all the associated problems. Why try to create robustness where it already is available? The best solution is at hand with a multiple network approach. Finally: implementing some resilience, like battery backup for base stations, can occasionally be a good idea. New infrastructure where no networks are available can be justifiable, but there is no need to build anything extra when it is not really needed.

The worst scenario with these old-school approaches is that lots of money will be spent and the customers will not be happy. Often in these cases, after the false investment has been made, the critics are silenced. Finally, and sadly, users are not given any alternative for a better solution, which is a multiple network approach.

A MULTI-CHANNEL, MULTI-NETWORK APPROACH IS NEEDED

One benefit of using multiple networks comes through security in case of interference. If someone tries to jeopardize the functionality, or manages to block the traffic of one network, the possibility to use several connections solves the problem. One can always use rapid deployment connectivity via extra LTE or 5G networks, use WiFi, or satellite alternative. The best about the solution Goodmill offers is that these alternative networks can be used automatically; the system selects the best or the most viable connection, depending on how the switch over protocol is determined.

Everything previously discussed summarizes that utilizing a combination of networks brings availability to the accepted level for Public Safety mobile use. It is always a matter of resilience that dictates what the approach selected in each region or country will be: how many networks and what type of network enhancements are required. In our experience, with constant monitoring capabilities and Mobile IP enhanced session persistence, a multiple network approach that auto selects the best network, exceeds the current needs of public safety. There are, however, few important criteria that must be met. First, the multi-channel routing solution needs to have a short switch-over time between networks. Second, sessions need to stay up when the IP addressing changes. Thus, the solution needs to be network agnostic, so that the applications don’t have to know anything about the occurring changes.



The multiple network solution has proven extremely reliable and cost-effective all over the world. Goodmill has one of the largest installed base of managed multi-channel routers in public safety in the world. The solution has been proven in nationwide implementations for years. Of course, the products need to meet the highest standards. As an example, Goodmill products have MBTF of more than 400,000 hours for the routers in use. Our clients can constantly monitor the connectivity situation. The remote management (over-the air) OTA capabilities provide a constant online view of fleet connectivity and provides access to routers whenever needed. This is the connectivity platform that meets the hardest public safety requirements.

Goodmill Systems Ltd.

Sep 15, 2017

THE ULTIMATE PUBLIC SAFETY BROADBAND SOLUTION IS A BLUE OCEAN ONE


In the past, there have been huge investments into public safety networks around the world. Investments into digital voice solutions with country-wide coverage are still ongoing in many countries, with Germany and Norway being the latest and widest implementations. Big infrastructure providers have been earning good revenue with these national roll-outs. Now, as the old technology cannot provide the data rates required, many of the traditional players are planning on selling new broadband networks the same way in the future.

There is however, a new ‘Blue Ocean’ concept that changes the whole business model for public safety broadband. This is good news for taxpayers, but poses a significant risk for the previous rulers of the marketplace. Before I get to that, let’s summarize what ‘Blue Ocean’ in this case stands for.

INTRODUCTION TO BLUE OCEAN STRATEGY (BOS)

This term was invented by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne in their book “Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant”. The idea is that you don’t only develop and enhance your offering to win markets, but you can redefine it by introducing aspects of elimination and reduction. With the new model, we can reduce or even eliminate investments into new networks and simultaneously improve data security, reliability, coverage and resilience. And all this at a fraction of the cost of the old business model.

>>WITH THE NEW MODEL, WE CAN REDUCE OR EVEN ELIMINATE INVESTMENTS INTO NEW NETWORKS AND SIMULTANEOUSLY IMPROVE DATA SECURITY, RELIABILITY, COVERAGE AND RESILIENCE


THE DILEMMA OF OVERSERVING THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION MARKET

Whenever talking about public safety, the argumentation for selling solutions has been around the importance of the service itself. I’ve heard arguments like “TETRA is the only technology you can trust on your life” or “dedicated and government controlled networks are the only solutions that fulfill the availability and resilience needs of public safety”. As we know that Tetra is far better suited for critical communications than a single commercial network, these statements are still not true. The digital PMR, when introduced, was the only suitable solution. It has given over the years us great benefits, is very useful today and will continue to add value in the future. However, we also know of numerous situations where TETRA, Tetrapol or P25 networks have been down or unusable due to congestion problems. These, like any single network solutions, are still vulnerable to storms and other natural catastrophes. The dedicated PMR networks too often get overcrowded when needed most. Simultaneously, when there’s nothing important going on, the networks are using even as little as 2-5% of their capacity. This means that there is a huge investment standing unused most the time, yet failing unfortunately often when needed the most. If this is what the current situation is, do we really need dedicated networks business model in the future? Are there solutions that can outperform the availability and resilience of a single network investment? I think these are questions worth asking.


ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION


The new strategic alternative comes from eliminating the need for new networks. We already see solutions for fixed landline based internet where dedicated secure networks are built inside a commercially available one. VPN tunneling or MPLS technologies are commonly used in the PS sector today. The solution is to combine commercial networks, as many as one wishes, and use secure tunnels inside them. This way, the existing infrastructure of all mobile operators can be used, taking advantage of the resilience, availability and operational security they can serve together. This is very important to understand: the existing, separate networks can offer these benefits when used in unison. The same reason we have two ears and eyes. It is possible using these separate networks to have secure tunneling running simultaneously across them all. This means that the costs of the solution are magnitudes lower than building an entirely new network anywhere with any significant coverage.

To read more about the ultimate solutions, check this white paper. 

By Juhani Lehtonen, VP Sales & Marketing of Goodmill Systems Ltd.

Sep 4, 2017

Would You Build Dedicated Roads Just For Public Safety Vehicles?

The recent developments in the discussion about future broadband solutions for public safety have been quite alarming. We hear arguments like "frequencies save lives" and "dedicated broadband is the only solution you can trust your life on". These demands to allocate natural resources and tax money to totally new networks are same as asking for dedicated road infrastructure for public safety.

There are two concerns in public safety about mobile broadband that lead to these demands. The first one is availability. If broadband networks were roads we would already have 3-4 road providers in each country. All of them assure the roads to be available in the populated areas. Simultaneously they also overlap quite nicely. If one road owner does not guarantee a road to your remote summer cottage, it is very likely that one of the 3-4 have made the road for you. Of course, there might be some areas where there are no roads, but there's a reason for that: no one lives there! If a plane crashed into an area with no roads, one would just use helicopters and vehicles designed for terrain to access the crash site.

The second argument for dedicated networks and frequencies is congestion. This demand means that if the roads were full of traffic, we would need to have separate roads for police and ambulances so they would not be blocked by other traffic. Think of the use of natural resources (land) and the investment into building these extra roads. And all just for these occasional jams. How about the idea of giving priority to ambulances by letting them easily by when they have emergency? How about organizing green lights for their path as they are driving to and from a site?

We have, of course, solved the issues of public safety when it comes to road infrastructure. It's because the issues is comprehensible to a common man. The broadband network infrastructure is not much different. Broadband networks can be operated and handled actually very similarly to road infrastructure.

As we already have 3-4 network infrastructure providers in most countries, it makes sense to use a combination of networks for best possible availability. As the infra is already there, why to build it? Solutions like multi-channel routing with 3-4 simultaneous connections enable the usage of the. It's a bit like why we have two eyes. Not any single network is ever resilient enough anyhow! How about areas with no networks then? Remote road to a non-inhabited destination because of a possible plain crash has never been argument to build a road, but seems to be for public safety networks. Also with broadband one can always use satellite or build temporary networks when necessary.

Congestion can also be avoided already with current infra. Prioritization is already possible and implemented for LTE networks. You can even accomplish dynamic prioritization where you use it only for certain users and allocate the traffic only when necessary. Just like with normal traffic: when the situation requires, you stop other traffic.

Dedicates networks and allocated frequencies are not the answer to resilient, redundant and safe broadband infrastructure. Special solutions for public safety are required, since always online connectivity in critical situations is a must. Dedicated network and frequencies can in some cases be seen as an additional insurance. But giving away natural resources or investing into a unnecessary infra is the same as building dedicated roads only to be used by public safety.

More on the topic by Juhani Lehtonen soon to be published in a new white paper about public safety broadband development.

May 31, 2017

Network Slicing: The Silver Bullet That Killed Old School Thinking in Critical Communications

Exhibiting at Critical Communications World show in Hong Kong, our Sales VP Tomas Granö and I were party to a number of heated discussions on using IP networks and shared frequencies for mission-critical purposes. The argument pits the old school types, who contend that only Circuit Switch connectivity over owned infrastructure can serve mission critical operations, against another camp that says quite the opposite. Though much more quiet, this latter group represents the majority who argue that infrastructure can be shared but is has to be built more robustly. Perhaps needless to say, we heartily agree. And this doesn’t just relate to the important issue of network planning, but touches on network hopping (as provided by our newest partner, Goodmill Systems) but as well battery life, weight and efficiency.

In fairness, while its true that network sharing for critical communications isn’t there yet, the old school folks, quite rankly seem to be missing the forest for the trees. Priority service levels are already delivered via circuit-based services but they are confined to voice, and in this case most importantly group voice. But with the move to IP we’ve opened a vast sea of services, from detailed location information to HD video and real-time database access, not to mention voice via VoLTE. Public safety organizations are already using these services delivered to them upon shared networks, but their lack of reliability is an unavoidable bi-product of Best Effort. The point is that this will remain the same even on a private, dedicated network, because even if it is serving a smaller number of users this essential character flaw doesn’t disappear.

This all begs the question, not of how public safety organizations are going to afford to build out their own private networks, but rather how we may offer the services they already use on shared commercial networks more reliably. The great news is, we already know the answer. Native to 4G LTE and soon to be the dominant feature of 5G is network slicing which amounts to a silver bullet for public safety and much, much more. Even though the world’s public safety users number only some 70 million, their stuff needs to work well all the time, period. The ability to provide dedicated, SLA-assured slices on existing mobile networks not only removes the pervading conundrum over shared vs. private, but opens up a huge number of opportunities for critical communications organizations and the carriers that support them.

But this coming sea change will need to be managed, and public safety agents will be required to move with the times and onboard new technologies that will radically extend their capabilities. While the current cohort of agents, habituated to using group calls to get information will need to be re-trained, the next generation of operatives will ask which AI system their dispatchers are using. Real-time data delivery is already a component in game-based training where teams solve problems in the field with the help instant, AI-delivered data.

A corollary to this, and though on its face may seem quite different, is in the area of billing. This came up last week at another conference, the TM Live! Forum 2017 in Nice, France with KPN CTO Erik Hoving asking a rather disruptive but squarely on point question. “Why do we have a billing system at all?” he asked, pointing to the fact that the number of digital companies sending bills amounts to about zero. “We’ve spent zillions on BSS, but who wants a bill?” and he’s right. No one wants one, and the cost to carriers for this unwanted part of their service is phenomenal. And yet, just like old school public safety people are reluctant to jump aboard the shared network bandwagon, mobile operators, many of whom define themselves as billing companies, show all the nervousness of an identity crisis when the idea of a bill-free future comes up.

Once again, like dedicated networks, big billing systems are the product of the age oldcircuit switch voice era and are confined to counting minutes or bytes. And this, along with Best Effort is among the core reasons why consumers don’t feel a great deal of loyalty to their carrier or feel the value is there for the high monthly bills they pay. They don’t want to pay a middle man, but they are more than willing to pay content providers for the stuff that they love. On the flip side, one trick pony services like Spotify and Netflix have paved the way for this with unlimited services at bargain basement prices.

As mobile operators venture into these waters, the idea of integrating these services into their behemoth billing systems makes no sense. But further, and what does make sense is moving their entire business model over to unlimited, or time based service and hey, why not go the age-old net zero path and bring those advertisers aboard? Certainly customers love it, and revenue potential is huge.

And while we’re on the subject of revenues, let’s return for a minute to network slicing which will play an enormous role in all of this coming together. While everyone selling any technology will talk about the "Win-Win", or even triple win and always big Op Ex and Cap Ex savings and revenues, I have been in the tech and telecom world for a while and I have never seen anything like this. Network Slicing not only allows the mobile operator to deliver real value within their core business (which is not billing btw), solve the issue of serving multiple industry segments, including public safety, but most importantly all but guarantee a dramatically improved customer experience; and all this at a fraction of the cost of traditional network deployments. What’s more, network slicing can be delivered and paid for OTT in the same way Netflix or Spotify does.. There are too many wins to name, but you get the point.

None of this will happen over night, and certainly it will take a major change to the culture, thinking and business model of the mobile service industry, but the opportunity is simply too great to ignore.

By Mika Skarp, Founder and CTO, Cloudstreet

Mar 30, 2017

Public safety vehicles need to be always online!

For many years, public safety organisations around the world have implemented land mobile radio systems (LMRS) to improve the communication capabilities of their field operations. Some nations have been the forerunners in this area, boosting digital networks with excellent coverage throughout their respective countries. Others are slower to adapt, with rollouts still ongoing in many territories. These systems, whether TETRA, TETRAPOL or P25 technologies, were designed for specific public safety voice applications and often use technology similar to the first digital mobile networks. Although the systems provided a great improvement over voice-only services, their networks now face great limitations due to very low data capacities. Data traffic carried over digital LMRS networks may even jeopardise the primary voice services. 

The data solution required today must improve the main functionality of voice while simultaneously offering data communication that meets the capacity and requirements of public safety. The requirements for current and future critical data connectivity are:
  • Coverage;
  • Availability;
  • Data integrity;
  • Session persistence;
  • Cost efficiency; and
  • Interoperability.
What are the used services?

The required services are the key reason to implement new data connectivity. Services that are needed today within public safety vehicles include:
  • Image and file transfer;
  • Location-based services;
  • Database queries;
  • Biometric checks; and
  • Video streaming.
Information sharing between different public safety operations is a valuable tool for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of these service providers. This means collecting, sharing and forwarding data between databases controlled by different jurisdictions or pure command centre interoperability. These important applications are impossible to implement within the technological limitations of traditional voice and SMS-type data services. It is obvious that broadband capabilities that fit public safety requirements are essential in order to improve efficiency. This creates the next dilemma: what is required from a police broadband solution technically, and how can we afford it?

Using multiple networks is the "blue ocean" of critical connectivity

Utilising multiple networks simultaneously is the key to using these new data applications efficiently. The idea is to combine two or more relatively well-functioning networks into one connection that meets the requirements of field operations. Multi-channel router technology offers the means to utilise existing parallel commercial and/or private networks. Multi-channel routers need to be populated with several wireless terminals supporting a wide variety of different radio technologies or operators’ networks, and directing mission-critical traffic should always be performed using the best connection available. This enables the minimization of investment into new and expensive networks and does not require necessarily allocated frequencies for public safety. 

Services used

As a first example, the services police authorities use with the data connection are many and varied, with the future offering seemingly limitless capabilities. The first step is to enable a basic functionality (e.g. enabling e-mails with larger data files to be sent without interruption). The increased data capacity also significantly improves situational awareness (e.g. seeing in real time where all other units are and what their status is). With broadband data for police vehicles capabilities, it is possible to drastically expand the area within which units can be surveyed. Other immediately accessible services include real-time blogging, where units can write their observations to specific shared pages on a region by region basis. This service in particular has been extremely well received. The safe connection eventually enables easier and secure sharing of confidential information. It is possible to call up a suspect’s criminal record, any outstanding/previous fines, or even vehicle information. With this approach, all the needed tasks can be performed on the spot, while required documents can be created and printed immediately. This includes a wide variety of tasks, including:
  • Reporting an offence;
  • On-the-spot fines;
  • Sentence claims;
  • Preliminary investigations;
  • Crime enquiries;
  • Technical investigations;
  • Weapon register checks;
  • Personal ID checks; and
  • Passport checks.
The use of broadband in ambulances is somewhat similar. The hospital district needs to chart patients and share data in real time in order to more easily manage ambulance trauma workflow and analyse patient data. The applications used help hospitals realise significant clinical and operational benefits, as well as improving performance and quality. It is even possible to capture data using a touchscreen interface, making charting quick, accurate and comprehensive. The applications enable hospitals and staff to see the status of all patients, including real-time information from charting in the field. It is also possible to use a workflow management system that allows agencies to manage EMS through review and approvals, ultimately replacing the paper trail. The hospital district can then use pre-built server reports and a powerful data analytics package to observe trends and effect change. 

Ambulances are outfitted with docking stations and tablet PCs. Data is entered via touch or voice recognition. Paramedics can send patient data in real time to the hospital, but more than this, the system allows users to quickly and accurately capture and relay far more information than a manual method via paper charts. The patient data is then available instantly to the emergency department and clinical audit staff.

Is this economically viable?

Is a multiple network approach an expensive solution due to hardware and software pricing, as well as due to high network data costs? To answer this, one should look at the costs of the whole unit on the wheels. Whether it’s an ambulance or a police car, one can add the costs of two persons in the vehicle to the vehicle costs, easily making between €100 and €200 per hour. The issue with the broadband connectivity is efficiency. Can we use this expense more efficiently if we have a reliable broadband to the vehicle? Yes, we can.

For work efficiency improvement the clue is whether the users actually begin their work on the move. If the connectivity is not good enough, no matter how cheap, the applications will not be used and the availability levels should always be more than 99% – in many cases up to 99.9% is required. Only this high availability assures the office application usage and makes the ‘office on the wheels’ concept a reality. 

The future is now

It has been proven by many implementations around the world that the high data rate and high availability broadband services offer are a tremendous advantage to public safety operations in the field. This is a direct response from users that have used the technology for years. The applications constantly demand more bandwidth, as well as those currently available. In the future, online streaming video will be the killer application.

Additionally, intelligence cannot remain in the vehicle’s on-board computer. This means that safe and high availability access to central databases is a must. A managed multichannel routing solution is the future-proof answer to these needs, and no huge upfront investments are needed: one can start easily with multiple commercial operators and the links can be upgraded to new dedicated networks when they emerge. A wonderful benefit of Goodmill is that it can use any available network technologies now and in the future, provided that there are modems available.

From a monetary point of view, the approach is rock solid. The payback is only weeks due to improved operational efficiency and, most importantly, the solution has been proven to save not only time and money but also lives.

Juhani Lehtonen
Vice-president, Sales and Marketing
Goodmill Systems Ltd
+358 50 572 5542
juhani.lehtonen(at)goodmillsystems.com
www.goodmillsystems.com


Oct 28, 2016

The Misunderstood vs. Real Demands of Critical Vehicle Broadband

The development of applications and solutions that help and improve public safety operators’ daily work has been rapid lately. This has led to a situation where traditional public safety narrow band connectivity seldom meets the applications’ requirements today and in near future. This all has been acknowledged by everyone involved in our field. However, there are some misunderstandings and misconceptions of what the connectivity requirements of future will be and even more of what the most beneficial and useful applications and services will be. I will highlight in this short article what type of services are the ones that bring public safety operations to a totally new efficiency level and what type of connectivity only assures that improvement.

The most common mistake any organization makes in developing and implementing the new services is either to take good connectivity as granted or to develop services where connectivity is not crucial. This seems controversial that both of these approaches are wrong. Let me explain.

Often organizations that have first experimented with broadband have come to a conclusion that they cannot rely on the single connection they’ve used and thus develop services where broadband is only “nice to have”. If it’s not there it doesn’t matter, because the connection problems can be replaced with local data storage or by postponing the required tasks to be executed in the office. This has led, as an example, to applications where cameras record everything but the data is saved locally and can be recalled then later in the office. This might be a good thing for the public interest when evaluating actions and procedures, but no use what comes to operational support. Another example is the paperwork on the road. If there is not always connection. the documents need to be downloaded later and there is no possibility to check the background information often needed to fill in all the documents. This often leads to reluctance to actually perform the tasks in the field and they are postponed to be done in the office. Both of these examples, as being improvements for sure, don’t bring the change in efficiency expected by the investors.

The key to significant efficiency improvement is the always online connectivity. If the users can be certain that the connectivity is there, the whole operational picture changes. Some of the users claim that the always online connectivity has brought a change that has been “bigger than changing from horses to cars”! How can this be achieved then?

The first example is the video streaming. With online video streaming the whole concept becomes a command and control solution. Wherever anything worth sharing happens, the unit in the field can share the view with the headquarters and with any other task relevant units. Data is shared online and in this case a picture is truly worth thousand words, minimizing also unnecessary voice traffic. Also recording is possible in this scenario, but the application and use is totally different and recording can happen in vehicle or command and control center. In some countries the camera in the vehicle is already considered the “third officer” due to its capability in information sharing!

Online video streaming is one of the high end solutions, but there are many more significant ones. The real efficiency improvements, when talking about saving time, come from using the vehicle as an office. When the connection is there one can always check any required background info from vehicle registers, customs, criminal records, tax registers; everywhere the officer has rights to. Also the required documents can be always up to date and filled and saved directly in the databases. This means one has to do the work only once. Think of the time savings achieved in writing a simple speeding ticket! In some scenario you can use the bank card to pay the fine on the spot even. We calculated with a client that this online capability saves 1,5 hours every shift in the vehicle. This means yearly savings of approximately € 100 000, - per vehicle per year! Being online to a level that you have uninterrupted broadband connectivity brings the benefits and savings. Any half-baked “low end” connectivity solution that jeopardizes the connectivity also risks the whole investment.

How to then make this happen? One would think that only dedicated country wide LTE network would be the only solution. On the contrary. As a dedicated network brings added resilience and can help to minimize congestion issues, it never provides the only solution. The best way to realize this is to combine available networks in a smart way.

Luckily we have already great examples of the solution. Norway, Finland and Iceland have implemented solutions with only commercial networks, using 2-4 networks depending on the area. Many Middle East countries have selected the dedicated network path supported by one or more commercial operators. The hybrid network approach offers also a very nice evolution path to the dedicated network builders as one does not have to wait until the own network is fully implemented. One uses the dedicated network when available and other alternatives when not. As the network grows, the resilience and the performance of the services increases.

Individual availability of three operators vs. combined "hybrid" availability. First a view of the whole tour statistics and second the statistics in Paris. 

There are also misunderstandings that multiple networks would not together add much to the availability due to site sharing and similar business cases of the operators. In all tests we have conducted this assumption has been proven wrong. We have tens of these tests that show all significant availability boosts. Here as a summary the results of a test conducted by Thales during Tour de France. In these cases, you would suspect network contamination as well as low coverage due to spectator crowds and remote mountain locations of the Tour. Nonetheless, the use of three commercial operators improves the connectivity to a level where it makes the needed difference!

Juhani Lehtonen
@LinkedIn

Feb 1, 2016

Public Safety Broadband and Mobile Operators: what if (when) the networks fail?

Public safety operations always concentrate on ‘what-if’ – scenarios. The most important one, when talking about mobile broadband, is the scenario of network failure. What happens if the used networks are be down? Too often this question leads to postponing the investments to wait for the perfect solution: “We want guaranteed 100% availability and we don’t do anything before that can be offered.” This leads unfortunately to development paralysis that keeps public safety applications and services tightly in the inefficient working habits of the past. Instead of searching a solution that’s never going to realize, the decision makers should invest into smart modern solutions that enhance the operational capabilities today. You can always, as you should, improve the used solutions to meet the strictest standards also later when you know more about the applications’ demands.

The typical approach for public safety mobile communication has been to build dedicated networks for public safety use. Tetra, Tetrapol and P25 have been the answer to communication in the past and are currently also serving well. You still hear once in a while comments like: “Tetra is the only technology you can rely your life on.” Or like: “Narrow band is the only way to guarantee critical connectivity needs.” For everyone’s information, these networks, like anything we humans do, are never 100% sure either. But what we are certain of, is that PMR solutions don’t provide for the broadband capacity required by modern public safety applications.



Single operator broadband availability in vehicle vs. multichannel router availability

The modern way to enhance the capabilities and to introduce modern working methods and services is to ensure the highest possible broadband availability by using several networks. These networks can be either commercial or a mixture of commercial and dedicated (government owned) networks. This approach gives huge monetary benefits, but also increases the resilience of the solution to a level unseen before in mobile access. The new approach is a paradigm change in our industry. Instead of spending billions in new networks, one can use smartly existing infrastructure and invest only into areas where commercial targets do not support investments.

Juhani Lehtonen
juhani.lehtonen(at)goodmillsystems.com