Back in my day… Technology convergence in Public Safety

Two years ago when we welcomed our firstborn son, like many first-time parents, we brought the big digital SLR camera to the hospital to capture those first shots of our new son.  Just over two years later as we welcome number two, all we brought was my blackberry, and my wife’s iPhone.  This is not to suggest that the birth of our second was any less important that our first, rather the tiny little camera in our phones will now take comparable photos in that environment to a big bulky, expensive SLR camera.

So what on earth has this got to do with a communications blog?  I use this story as an introduction to a discussion on convergence for two reasons.  One, it’s an example I think many can understand, and two, it’s an opportunity for a very proud dad to brag about his beautiful baby girl!

The improvements in optics and photosensors in cell-phones is well on it’s way to making at least the standard digital camera, if not the SLR, obsolete for the general population.  Where there was once two devices needed, now there is one.

Well, currently many first-responders carry pagers, land-mobile radios, as well as smart-phones.  My money is on a continuation of this convergence.  In the not-too-distant future, I can see a smart-phone type device, ruggedized (or paramedic-resistant as we call it) serving all three of these functions for our public-safety professionals.

We’re all hoping that Industry Canada will dedicate a chunk of the 700 mHz band to public safety this year.  We don’t know yet what that will look like, how the networks will be built out, and what role the big telecoms will play, but regardless we should see public safety communications moving into this spectrum.  I  don’t think it’s a stretch to envision a smart-phone device, capable of ‘choosing’ between the public LTE network and the private public-safety net, receiving pages, handling 2-way voice, data, media, oh, and still maintaining phone capabilities.  The pager and portable radio perhaps will join my old digital camera on the shelf of things I’ll explain to my daughter with sentences starting with, “back before you were born…”

LightSquared Ground Control Station – Reliability done right

LightSquared Ground Station

While out in Ottawa last week for the CITIG 5 conference, we had the opportunity to tour the Lightsquared ground control station – the base station for the push-to-talk Satellite radios (MSAT) we use in a number of Emergency Services Communication Solutions.  My thanks first of all to Richard, Eric, and Valerie for the wonderful tour.  We chose to tour their ground station to gain a deeper understanding of both the control/routing of signals with the PTT (and other) satellite radio solutions, and the monitoring / redundancy plans to deal with the inevitable glitches that occur with technology.

I must say, they’ve done an amazing job of building redundancy into their systems.  On the power side, they’ve used redundant disparate public feeds, UPS, Generator (with 1 week worth of fuel), priority fueling service contracts with dual distributors, and (in case that wasn’t enough) the ability to connect a trailerable generator with one simple plug.

LightSquared NOC

Power of course is just one of the links that could fail – and they’ve built redundancy in the others too.  Each antenna has a backup (or two).  Network hubs, Network Ops Center (NOC), controllers, computers – all duplicated and virtually hot-swappable.  Compared with even some of the better public safety systems I’ve seen, LightSquared has done a stellar job of building in redundancy for reliability.  I think there are a few learning lessons here for all of us.

Do we need interoperabililty? Answered!

Well, wouldn’t you know it.  As a question about the need for interoperability, and life will answer it for you. My colleague, returning home from CITIG – 5 had the answer beautifully displayed for him.  Sadly, not in the good example way, rather in the ‘what happens when you don’t have interoperability.  While driving home from the airport, he observed a vehicle weaving all over the road, and coming close to hitting other vehicles.  It appeared to be an impaired driver.  As is encouraged in this province, he dialed 911 to report the event.  Based on his location, he was routed to the city police.  Although the event was within the city, it was an area not routinely patrolled by the city force, rather it was covered by provincial police.  However, the city police dispatcher was unable to contact provincial to determine if they had closer resources, so a car was dispatched from the city.  My colleague continued to follow the suspected impaired driver while remaining in contact with the police dispatcher (yes using hands-free).  At one point the driver exited the freeway he was on, and subsequenly left the jurisdiction of the city police, entering an area of responsibility for the RCMP.  The city car responding was cancelled, and the call handed over to an RCMP call center.  With delays in the RCMP dispatch answering the call, by the time a member was enroute, the driver in question had arrived back at his house, parked in the garage, closed the door, and exited the vehicle.

I don’t think it takes much of an imagination to figure out how interoperability between the three forces in question could have resulted in a different outcome.  It also doesn’t take much of an imagination to figure out how much worse the outcome could have been.

Do we need Interoperability?

Before you shoot me for asking, please read on.

At the CITIG 5 Conference (Canadian Interoperability Technology Interest Group), I was having a few beverages with a colleague from the NWT who gave the following feedback on the conference (after day 1).  He said that while the presenters had spoken at length about the processes they were in, or followed towards improved interoperability, or the technology they were procuring or using, none had given a single example of where this new interoperability had had any positive impact on patient care, fire suppression, criminal apprehension, or responder safety.  I agree, none (to that point in the conference) had done so.  I suggested to him that in my opinion, none had felt it necessary to sell the delegates on the need for interoperability – that presence at the Interoperability Technology Interest Group implied that you’d drank the cool-aid already.

But his comments got me to thinking – do we (as in the first responder community) value Interoperability as much as I do?  Are we all on board?  Do we think it’s just the latestest management buzzword, and like so much low-hanging-fruit will soon fall from the tree and be forgotten?  If our colleagues are not yet on board with this concept then we must quickly rework our strategies.  There’s no point pounding the drum on the how (700 mHz Broadband, P25, National Interop Strategy) if our own community doesn’t see the why.

Now my belief is that a) this is not the case, and our first responder community as a whole does buy in to the need for interoperability, and b) this colleague was mostly playing devil’s advocate.  However, I think it’s a valid reality check.  Are we on board?  I’d love to hear some feedback on this question.  Do you and your colleagues want improved interoperability?  Will it improve your daily safety and outcomes?  Will it improve your response to major events?  Please – comment with your thoughts.

CITIG 5, Successful Conference

Since ‘Networking’ impeded my planned post last night, I’ll add an update tonight.  The remainder of the conference was fantastic, better each day than the previous I think.  Many lessons learned, new contacts made, and discussions held.  I think the most exciting new piece for me was discussion of the MASAS project, or Multi Agency Situational Awareness System.  This system will provided shared (multi-agency) real-time, graphical representation of pertinent information to first responders and commanders alike, aimed to improve situational awareness.  Using a Wiki format for information aquisition combined with a familiar Google-maps type interface for display the First Responder community will have access to information on road closures, staging areas, search results, hazards, and much more.  The combination of a system like this, with the deployability LTE will give us will give our responders rapid, accurate information like they’ve never seen before, improving safety and effectiveness.

As I mentioned on day 1, I had some fun with Twitter as well.  I was not alone.  One speaker quipped, ‘I made my first tweet yesterday, I think that makes me a twit.’  It was facinating watching the trends real time, as well as interacting with my colleagues as presentations happened.  In addition to being a fascinating case study of social media in this environment for me, it proved valuable as well.  Social media comments became dialogues, and created face-to-face meetings and discussions that otherwise may not have occured.  Responses to my musing provided me with perspective, insight, and answers where in another time they may have been no more than a fleeting thought.

The most pressing need coming forward from this conference, is something we all need to be aware of, and ensure we spread the message with our colleagues, leaders, and political representatives.  I’m talking of course of the upcoming distribution / auction of the 700 mHz spectrum, and specifically the need for Industry Canada to dedicate 20 mHz of that spectrum for Public Safety Broadband.  I’ll talk more on this in future posts, as this discussion is too large to cover tonight.  Suffice it to say, the dedication of this block is paramount to the future of public safety – the safety of our responders, and the safety of those we go out to help.  More information on this at CITIG and other locations.

Speaking of more to say on future posts, we followed the conclusion of CITIG with a guided tour of the Lightsquared facilities and NOC.  More another time, for now, thanks to our hosts for a great tour and good discussions.  And with that, goodnight, stay safe.

CITIG 5 – Ottawa Day One

Day One of the Canadian Interoperability Technology Interest Group (CITIG 5) wrapped up.  Great first day, looking forward to the next two.  I came with three goals; education, networking, and enjoyment.  After day one, I can say mission accomplished!  Interesting speakers, cool toys and informative vendors at the trade show, and a great group of people.  Enjoyed an evening with some new and old friends – great catching up with the team from iMedic again!

Had some fun today playing with Twitter during the conference.  I’ve been aware of where  Twitter fit into events like this, and what people did, but never having  participated live, I didn’t really understand how it all worked.  It was interesting to see trends, thoughts,  and impressions in (almost) real-time as we listened to presenters.  I had feedback from the conference organizer on one of my tweets in which I disagreed with a presentor’s perspective.  Interesting to me on 2 fronts – both the issue I commented on, and the role Twitter played in creating this dialogue.  I will meet with him in the morning to discuss further.  if neither fatigue nor peer-pressure driven indulgence in Captain Morgan interfere, I’ll talk about that dialogue further tomorrow.

The gist of the presenter’s position was this.  Emergency services agencies should not invest in diverse and divergent technologies today, as it’s driving us further from acheiving interoperability, rather they should look to standards to guide them in procurement of technologies to move towards interoperability.  Great concept, and I’d agree…if those standards existed.  They don’t currently, and while they’re ‘in the pipeline’, we know from experience that the timeline to universally accepted standards can be measured in years if not decades.  Most of us have needs long before that timeline.

The approach we’ve adopted instead, is to meet the needs of today, while designing backbone infrastructure with maximal flexibility for bridging to newer standards based technologies whenever they’re available.    This approach has allowed us to meet our needs of today and tomorrow, and permit a scaled, scheduled (and budget cycle friendly) migration to newer tech / standards, as required in the future.  The first system we designed for EMS back in 2004/2005/2006 was threatened with being shelved pending the provincial ‘standard’ solution.  Much of the end-user technology in that solution is approaching it’s planned end-of-life, and that provincial standard, well, coming real soon now.  I guess my point was, let’s not get paralyzed waiting for nirvana – lets meet our needs of today and tomorrow, with an open mind towards adapting to the future whenever, and whatever that may bring.  I look forward to continuing this discussion in the morning – as mentioned, I’ll try to bring an update tomorrow evening.  For now, goodnight.

Turning point for Fire Dispatch in Alberta

Fire Departments in Alberta are facing some interesting times on the communications and dispatch front.  Since the Province gave Emergency Medical Services(EMS) an official home within the Healthcare system, EMS has steadily consolidated dispatch services and radio communications to todays three major EMS Dispatch Centers (with a few remaining contracted sites).  Not surprisingly these centers are specializing in EMS dispatch, and avoiding or divesting of Fire Dispatch roles.  With the loss of EMS Dispatch functions, some local dispatch vendors are struggling to survive on Fire Department call volumes alone. 

The much heralded provincial P25, 700 mHz, First Responder Radio System (AFRRCS) is making progress, but remains a few years away from completion.  Many Fire Departments are now facing an uncertain future with reference to their dispatch providers, combined with a reluctance to invest heavily in infrastructure (understandibly) with AFRRCS ‘coming soon!’

So, what to do?

Well, if the current system is working, stay the course!  But that’s not the case for many services.  Facing a need to change dispatch providers, or move off shared radio infrastructure, many departments have no choice but to do something today, but what?

I think on it’s most basic level, the principles need to be:

1. Meet todays need (and the need for the next 3-5 years);
2. Maximize investment protection;
3. Ensure your plan leaves maximal flexibility on when and how to adopt components of the AFRRCS system.

So what I often hear is, “so we should buy a 700 mHz system today right?”  Well no, I don’t think so.  And why not?  In a word, Interoperability!  Going it alone for the next few years in the 700 mHz band means no more talking to your friends and neighbors.  I can’t recommend that.  The second reason I’ll give is cost.  700 mHz hardware is currently substantially more expensive than comparable VHF or UHF infrastructure. 

“So we should at least get dual-band, right?”  Again, I’d argue this is cost prohibitive, and unnecessary at this stage.  Dual-band radios are running anywhere from 3 to 6 times the cost of a comparable VHF/UHF model.  We are hopefull that with the increased demand in this band with the AFRRCS system, costs will come down, so I say, wait it out.

The consolidation of EMS Dispatch has resulted in a consolidation of Fire Dispatch services as well.  There are some obvious benefits to this consolidation, but some very real challenges as well.  Increasing distances not only make our historical RF solutions cost-prohibitive, but too slow for many applications.  Radio over IP can address this issue, but must be designed and implemented well, or you’ll be plagued with issues.  Satellite based solutions offer great coverage and reliability, but can be cost-prohibitive.  Public solutions such as iDEN are tempting, but a risky venture for protective services.  So, what to do?

In the most common scenario I’m seeing (need to connect with a new, distant Dispatch Provider), here’s my suggestions:

• Address local RF Infrastructure where needed.  Only replace hardware where needed (lack of coverage, nearing end-of-life)  Tie radio back to single point within your service area.
• Combine your radios to a single net, and route a single stream over IP to your dispatch provider.
• If you’re fortunate, your dispatch provider has some IP solutions in place.  In this case, tie in to their solution.
  • A well designed solution will utilize a readily available, low cost IP network for primary connectivity, with a true redundant backup pathway available.
  • The IP connectivity should be established and maintained either within a single managed network, or if across multiple ISPs (most common) using Virtual Private Network (VPN) hardware.
• If you need to go it alone on the IP front, here’s some pointers:
  • (shameless self-promotion aside) Find someone with expertise in RoIP systems, and Emergency Services Communications.  Your friendly neighborhood radio vendor may not have the expertise and experience in this field, and there are many hazards to be wary of.
  • Route your networks through a VPN system.  This will increase the security and reliability of your connections.
  • Networks go down.  Look for true redundancy. (I’ll talk about this more another time, but suffice it to say, two cables running side-by-side through a common ditch, are not truly redundant, as one backhoe can kill them both simultaneously).  Look at redundancy in provider, technology, and geographic dispersement.  This is where I love satellite – you can’t get much more geographically dispersed than that!
  • Monitor your connections!  As I talk about in ‘Surprise the Radio is down’, IP connectivity should be monitored.

So, how does this stack up with the goals?

1. Meeting today’s (and next 3-5 years) needs.  Check!  Connects reliably to dispatch provider of your choice, and addresses any local RF needs as required.
2. Maximize investment protection.  Check!  First, we maintain as many components of the existing system as are usable (frequencies, system hardware, end-user hardware), limiting todays spend.  Secondly, we invest in technology which will help us integrate with the AFRRCS system when it’s on line. (see point 3)
3. By linking your current RF system into a single net for IP routing to dispatch, you invest in some interoperability / IP technology which will allow a staged AFRRCS adoption while maintaining maximal interoperability.  If you’re not likely to have the budget to do a wholesale switch to 700 mHz P25 devices, but would look at a phased in adoption as devices reach end-of-life, this approach can allow you to have users on your legacy system and users on AFRRCS, and maintain interoperability.

Yes, some challenging times for Fire Departments in Alberta, but reasonable solutions are there, available, and even deployed in some places for your review!  As always, your thoughts, ideas, and comments are welcomed!

Uncertain future for iDEN Push-To-Talk cellphones

As Sprint announces it’s next generation of wireless network, http://ow.ly/3txax, including a move to Push To Talk (PTT) over the CDMA network vs. iDEN, one must wonder what this means for those of us using iDEN today in many of our applications.  This will mean the end of iDEN  http://ow.ly/3txhj in the USA by about 2013, but what of us?  There’s a number of these PTT phones being used in a variety of industries, most importantly for me, in Emergency Services Communication Systems.

The USA is certainly the biggest consumer of technology in general, cellular phones being no exception.  While Motorola (the only manufacturer of iDEN products) has not announced a discontinuation of the iDEN line, their announcement of 3 years of support certainly implies an end of support at that time.  On the Telus website http://ow.ly/3txsr is a posted FAQ regarding the future of Mike in Canada.  Telus makes an effort to distance themselves from some of the challenges faced by Sprint / Nextel, but fails to make any actual commitments to maintaining the Mike / iDEN system beyond 2012.

Sprint is rolling out it’s ‘Network Vision’ platform, which will allow it to use CDMA on 800 mHz and 1900 mHz bands, including 4G on a single tower.  Combined with new devices which include the popular PTT functionality on the CDMA protocol this tells me there is now case for Telus to maintain the iDENnetwork any longer than they have to.  I fully expect to see a migration to CDMA based PTT devices for those heavy PTT users, while Telus continues it’s strategy (Since 2007) of migrating non-PTT users from iDEN to CDMA based devices, followed with a rapid removal of the iDEN infrastructure.

So what does this mean to those using PTT iDEN devices in their Emergency Services Communication System?  Well, I don’t think there’s a need to panic.  No change is going to happen overnight, and if history is any indicator, there will be lots of opportunity to upgrade to a new system.  Telus doesn’t want to loose it’s customers.  At this stage, I wouldn’t rush out to replace my iDEN systems, but I’d be cautious investing significant additional money in an iDEN components.  I’d monitor the situation, stay tuned to Telus, and plan to upgrade or replace in the next few years.

Tune in to Alberta Prime Time

I’m looking forward to my upcoming guest appearance on a discussion panel with Alberta Prime Time later in December.  I’ve been asked to participate in the discussion around a new whitepaper by Allan Bly with Vitel Consulting  discussing interoperability in Emergency Services Communications Systems in Alberta.  We’ll discuss some of the factors which generally impact interoperability, the impact of the upcoming Alberta First Responder Radio Network (AFRRCS), and the impact of recent changes in Fire, EMS, and dispatch services in the province. 

As I understand it, the program will air on Access,  December 22nd at 7 and 10 pm.  I’m sure it will also be available on the Alberta Prime Time website at www.albertaprimetime.com.  I hope you’ll watch the show, and I look forward to your feedback.

Newest Emergency Services Consultant.

It’s my pleasure to introduce the newest member of our consulting team.  Randal Toews is one of the very rare individuals with the combination of skills and experience we seek to provide consulting and design services to Emergency Services for their communications systems.  We believe strongly that Emergency Services have unique needs; needs which are not completely met through the standard communications solution.  Our ability to approach communication system design from both a technologies perspective and an emergency services perspective has proven successful time and again.

Randal’s has 25 years experience in the Fire Service, with 16 years as Chief.  He’s worked in communications roles with Search and Rescue, as well as in Emergency Operations Centers.  On the Communications Technology side he brings 21 years experience in the communications industry in system design, sales, installs, and repairs.

With Randal’s knowledge and experience with the Radio Frequencies and Fire Department world he will add to the balance of our team. He will fill many roles with Critical Communication Solutions Inc., with a focus on the RF propogation / design component.