28/04/2020

TETRA Experience 2006

Sao Paulo July 19 th 2006 1

28/04/2020

Welcome and Introduction

Peter Clemons 2

28/04/2020

TETRA Experience 2006

Sao Paulo July 19 th 2006 3

28/04/2020

Public Safety Shared Networks

Phil Kidner 4

How am I qualified to talk about this ?

 30 years as a Police user  Involved with Airwave in the UK from user requirements through procurement, implementation, operation and service management

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 5

What am I going to talk about ?

 From the beginning  Some of the pros and cons of a shared network  Some of the consequences  Some of the choices  Some other European experiences  Summary

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 6

From the beginning

 Each blue light service on a separate network  Other related organisations on different networks  All our neighbours on different networks  Users from the same service, in the same area, on different networks  Every time there was a major incident communications severely criticised

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 7

From the beginning

 Political decision to have a shared network  Political decision to have shared control rooms  Joint procurement for all blue light services  Reality something different !!

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 8

But we got there eventually !!

 200 different organisations  200,000 registered users  More to come  Still very few joint control rooms in the UK

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 9

Some of the benefits of sharing

 Operational benefits – Common and enhanced functionality, coverage and security – Interoperability between users and organisations – Possibilities for closer co-operation and new procedures • Multi-disciplinary fleet map • Common procedures • Joint control rooms • Cross border operation

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 10

Some more benefits

 Economics – One network built and managed by a dedicated organisation - government or commercial (“Policemen should be out on the street catching criminals”) – Larger volumes  Lower prices – High network capacity to the users – realising the trunking efficiency

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 11

And yet more benefits

 Environment – Lower number of base stations sites

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 12

Are there any disadvantages ?

 Tied to the operator – government or commercial ?

 No direct influence on – Functionality ?

– Coverage ?

– Reliability ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 13

Any others ?

 Security – Other users on the network ?

– Operator ?

 Capacity – Guarantees during major incidents ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 14

Some of the consequences

 A big investment – High profile political environment • Media attention • External audits  Many parties with different history/requirements involved – High complexity

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 15

Some more of the consequences

 Additional requirements • Should be future proofing ?

• Should enable international cooperation?

• Common control rooms?

 Leading to • A Rolls Royce ?

• cost explosion ?

• extra delay ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 16

Some of the choices to be made: Potential Sharers

 National Decision – Emergency Services – yes ?

– Government organisations – some ?

– Military – security issues ?

– Utilities – interoperability ?

– Transport – possibly ?

– Others – not taxis ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 17

Some more of the choices to made: Operator models

 Government Operator ?

– Dedicated organisation • Pro: flexibility for adding coverage, capacity, new functionality network publicly owned • Con: large capital outlay ? technical challenge ? Resources ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 18

Some more of the choices to made: Operator models

 Commercial Operator ?

– Long term detailed contract with professional commercial organisation • Pro: concentrate on core business

28/04/2020

share the risks ?

• Con:long term commitment? less direct influence on coverage, capacity, functionality ? future ? large revenue costs ?

TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 19

Some more of the choices to made: Fee/Cost Structure

 What to charge the different organisations ?

– number of radios ?

– usage of the network ?

– static/roaming ?

– per call ?

– per month ?

– central budgets

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 20

Some more of the choices to made: Performance

 Penalties ?

 Performance ?

 SLAs and ongoing service regime

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 21

Some other European experiences The Netherlands

 Main organisations: Police, Fire Brigade, Ambulance, Military police – 25 multi-disciplinary control rooms – >20 other Public Safety related organisations have limited access under responsibility of one of the main organisations  Government operator, central budget  Highlights: – During the project Ambulance and Firebrigade have strongly improved their organisation structure – Successful large scale multi-disciplinary disaster training in April 2006

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 22

Some other European experiences Belgium

 Network was built for more than 15 organisations, including: – Ambulance – Fire brigade – Customs  Semi-government operator, monthly fee  Highlights: – In the procurement 20 parties from 7 Ministries were involved – It has been hard to level the requirements of all the parties

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 23

Some other European experiences Finland

 Network built for wide user community, currently more than 20 different organisations, including: – Police – Fire and Rescue service – Frontier Guard – Military – Social and Health service – Municipalities  Government operator, monthly fee  Highlights: – Operational since 2002 – Common control rooms

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 24

The Brazilian experience?

 Who will be the users of a Public Safety TETRA network in Brazil ?

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 25

Summary & Conclusions

 building a national shared Public Safety network – has many advantages to the users and the government – the possible disadvantages can be handled – it is complex (mainly organisational)  there are successful examples elsewhere  A successful shared network depends upon keeping all parties involved at all times !

28/04/2020 TETRA Experience - Brazil

Slide 26

28/04/2020

Thank You!!

Questions??

27

28/04/2020

TETRA Experience 2006

Sao Paulo July 19 th 2006 28

4/28/2020

Interoperability vs Interworking

Iain Ivory The Importance of Standards for Interoperability During Major Incidents, Emergencies and Disasters 29

Agenda

 Interoperability Definitions & Need – What is Interoperability and what is Interworking  Interoperability Enablers  Levels of Interoperability  Recommendations & Summary

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 30

    

Interoperability is More Critical than Ever, but What is it?

Many definitions of Interoperability Technology solutions were easier in the analogue world Procedural solutions have an impact Vision of solutions vary by Service We need to use common language to: – Clarify discussions – Help specify requirements – Separate operating conditions  Optimal Interoperability means using the same technology  Interworking is Interoperability. Right?

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 31

Critical Interoperability Enablers

Spectrum Standards

Interoperability

4/28/202018&19 July 2006 TETRA – Brazil 2006

Slide 32

What is Interoperability – to You?

 Cross Border – the ability to roam to neighboring network  Cross Service – the ability to cooperate during incidents  Ability to use terminals from multiple and competing vendors

What is Interworking – is that all you want?

• • • Control Room patching Cross-connect technologies Gateway Interfaces

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 33

Public

Interoperability is About Safety!!

Protectors

R

ight Information 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

R

ight Person TETRA – Brazil 2006

R

ight Time

Slide 34

Disasters have regrettably often been Major Motivators for Interoperability Planning

     Norway – Train accident in Asta, January 2000 followed several marine accidents Sweden – Disco Fire & EU Summit in Gothenburg United Kingdom – Hillsborough, Clapham, Kings Cross September 11th attacks were “experienced” worldwide – Interoperability is getting more attention than ever – It is becomming inconceivable to plan for non-interoperability France – Decission being formalised to force Fire and Health to AcroPol network.

– Arguments used are cost saving and need for Interoperability.

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 35

Importance of Interoperability

“The on scene communications were flawless.” System Manager, Fairfax County, VA

4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Pentagon, Sept. 11, 2001  Arlington County  City of Alexandria  Fairfax County, VA  DC Fire & EMA  Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority Result: Seamless immediate inter agency communications with equipment from multiple suppliers

TETRA – Brazil 2006

Slide 36

Key Needs for Public Safety Radio Schemes – USA reviews post 11Sept

 Dedicated network  Private calls  Multi-disciplined  Strong resilience  Effective TMO fallback  In-building coverage essential  Talk round (DMO – the ultimate resilience)

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 37

International Association of Chiefs of Police IACP

“After each major event in recent history, the most glaring indication of success or failure by responding agencies has been their ability to effectively communicate with each other.”

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 38

4/28/2020

Levels of Interoperability

39

Interoperability Techniques 4/28/202018&19 July 2006 Method TETRA-Based Shared Systems

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA) Gateway (Console Patch) Mutual Aid Channels DMO Swap Radios

TETRA – Brazil 2006 Fit Best Long-Term Solution Full-featured, Wide Area Short-Term System Modification

Easily deployed

Simple Short-Term Solutions

Time-consuming Slide 40

Level 4: Gateway -- Interface Box

 Hardware component that sits between two networks   RF or 4-wire audio links connect systems Provides audio only, no system specific features TETRA System Audio, System data, Emergency ID, control info

4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Gateway

TETRA – Brazil 2006

Audio Only Non-Tetra System Slide 41

Level 4: Gateway -- Interface Box Requires Overlapping Coverage

Gateway does not provide interworking here Gateway provides interworking here 380 MHz TETRA Audio, ID, Emergency PTT, etc.

Gateway

TETRA – Brazil 2006

Audio Only

4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Non-Tetra Slide 42

Level 4: Gateway (Console Patch)

   Works Via: Radios talk via link established by dispatcher, unmanned interface box, or mobile apparatus Advantage: – Moderate cost to implement in addition to network cost – Links different system types or frequency ranges Disadvantage: – Connected systems must have complementary/overlapping coverage – Console patch is unavailable if control center is not operating – Advanced calling features unavailable to users: dispatch audio only – Reduced channel capacity – what were two independent channel resources are now one talkpath – System management ends at gateway boundary – Not for ad hoc use: pre-planning required on each system for channel crowding procedures and setup

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 43

Interoperability Techniques Method TETRA-Based Shared Systems

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA) Gateway (Console Patch)

Fit Best Long-Term Solution Full-featured, Wide Area Short-Term System Modification

Easily deployed

4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Mutual Aid Channels DMO Swap Radios

TETRA – Brazil 2006 Simple Short-Term Solutions

Time-consuming Slide 44

Level 5: System Specific Roaming 380 MHz Site 380 MHz Site 380 MHz Site Zone Controller 380 MHz Site Zone Controller

Slide 45

4/28/202018&19 July 2006 TETRA – Brazil 2006

Level 5: System Specific Roaming

 Works Via: Radios talk to each other via infrastructure or DMO using infrastructure  Advantage: – Covers large areas seamlessly – Users can contact agencies across entire coverage area – Can handle larger numbers of users – No console intervention required – All advanced features are available to users  Disadvantage: – Additional planning and provisioning required on each system – Requirement for double RF coverage, more towers – and more spectrum  Requirement: – All players adopt TETRA and enjoy competition within the open standards sphere.

4/28/202018&19 July 2006 TETRA – Brazil 2006

Slide 46

4/28/202018&19 July 2006 Interoperability Techniques Method TETRA-Based Shared Systems

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA) Gateway (Console Patch)

Fit Best Long-Term Solution Full-featured, Wide Area Short-Term System Modification

Easily deployed Mutual Aid Channels DMO

Simple Short-Term Solutions

Swap Radios Time-consuming

TETRA – Brazil 2006

Slide 47

Level 6: TETRA-Based Shared System A 380 MHz TETRA Site 4/28/202018&19 July 2006 380 MHz TETRA Site Zone Controller 380 MHz TETRA Site TETRA – Brazil 2006

Slide 48

Level 6: Standards-Based Shared Systems

   Works Via: All radios built to a standard (TETRA) talk to each other via infrastructure or in DMO Advantage: – Interoperability at the turn of a dial – Links different vendor systems – “Out of the box” interoperability, simple to set up infrastructure – No console intervention required – All advanced features are available to users Disadvantage: – Requires equipment to be built to same standard, usually happens via new/upgraded system purchase – Not all vendors build to standard. Interoperability holes are still possible

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 49

Interoperability Basics -- Keep it Simple

 Massive Incidents = Massive Stress  Allow your Public Safety Responders to Respond  Plan with your Neighbor’s Neighbors – Massive incidents will require massive response  Direct Interoperable “Everyday” Systems – From Pentagon after 9/11: Use your Interoperability tools regularly

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 50

Recommendations & Summary

 Plan for the highest level of Interoperability – Accept nothing less – consider your stakeholders  Public systems are great for communication from/to the public.

 TETRA is a high capacity solution and the tool for the Emergency Services Radio Communication

TETRA – Brazil 2006 4/28/202018&19 July 2006

Slide 51

4/28/2020

Thank You!

52