1

Interoperability vs

Interworking

The Importance of Standards for Interoperability During Major Incidents,

Emergencies and Disasters

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 2

Agenda

Interoperability Definitions & Need– What is Interoperability and what is Interworking

Interoperability Enablers

Levels of Interoperability

Recommendations & Summary

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 3

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?

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 4

PlanningPlanning PracticePractice

InteroperabilityInteroperability

Critical Interoperability EnablersStandardsStandards

PlanningPlanningPlanningPlanning PracticePracticePracticePractice

SpectrumSpectrum

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 5

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

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 6

Interoperability is About Safety!!

ight InformationR ight

PersonR ight

TimeR

Public Protectors

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 7

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.

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 8

“The on scene communications were flawless.”

System Manager, Fairfax County, VA

Importance of Interoperability

Pentagon, Sept. 11, 2001Arlington CountyCity of AlexandriaFairfax County, VADC Fire & EMAMetropolitan Washington Airport Authority

Result: Seamless immediate inter- agency communications with equipment from multiple suppliers

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 9

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)

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 10

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.”

11

Levels of Interoperability

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 12

Interoperability Techniques

Fit Method

Swap Radios

DMO

Mutual Aid ChannelsSimple

Short-Term Solutions

Gateway(Console Patch)

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA)

TETRA-Based Shared Systems

Short-TermSystem Modification

Best Long-TermSolution

Full-featured, Wide Area

Easily deployed

Time-consuming

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 13

Hardware component that sits between two networks

RF or 4-wire audio links connect systems Provides audio only, no system specific features

Level 4: Gateway -- Interface Box

Audio, System data, Emergency ID,

control info

TETRA System

Non-Tetra System

Gateway

Audio Only

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 14

Audio Only

Level 4: Gateway -- Interface Box Requires Overlapping Coverage

Audio, ID, Emergency PTT, etc.

Gateway

Non-Tetra

380 MHz

TETRA

Gateway provides interworking here

Gateway does not provide interworking here

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 15

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

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 16

Interoperability Techniques

Fit Method

Swap Radios

DMO

Mutual Aid ChannelsSimple

Short-Term Solutions

Gateway(Console Patch)

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA)

TETRA-Based Shared Systems

Short-TermSystem Modification

Best Long-TermSolution

Full-featured, Wide Area

Easily deployed

Time-consuming

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 17

Zone Controller

380 MHzSite

380 MHzSite

380 MHz Site

Level 5: System Specific Roaming380 MHz Site

Zone Controller

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 18

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.

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 19

Interoperability Techniques Fit Method

Swap Radios

DMO

Mutual Aid ChannelsSimple

Short-Term Solutions

Gateway(Console Patch)

System-Specific Roaming (TETRA)

TETRA-Based Shared Systems

Short-TermSystem Modification

Best Long-TermSolution

Full-featured, Wide Area

Easily deployed

Time-consuming

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 20

Zone Controller380 MHz

TETRA Site

380 MHz TETRA Site

Level 6: TETRA-Based Shared System

380 MHzTETRA Site

A

                             

     

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 21

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

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 22

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

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 23

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

24

Thank You!

Jeppe.Jepsen@Motorola.com

12&13 June 2006 TETRA – Poland 2006 Slide 25

Interoperability is About Safety!!

Inter-?Level

Process Benefit Issues BestApplications

6

TETRA-Based Shared

Systems

•Required Std. Exists (TETRA)•No setup time•Full system features available•Event scale is immaterial•Subscriber operation unchanged

•User can stay in touch with home system

•Funding for new system•Region must be operating w/std.•Minimal preparation--“out of the box” interoperability

•Many—not all—vendors building to standard

•Work required to satisfy multiple agency needs—local control

•Small to massive scale events•Urban to rural locations

5System-Specific Roaming

•Connects multiple types of systems

•No setup time•Full system features available•Full system range

•Requires plan/setup & adv. Knowledge of respondents

•Depending upon configuration, controller could be costly component with infrequent use

4Gateway (Console Patch)

3Mutual Aid Channels

2 DMO

1Swap

Radios

•Small to large scale events•Cross band•Limited response areas

•Small to moderate scale events (2-4 agencies)

•Preplanned events (Concert, sports, etc.)

•Small to moderate scale events

•Unplanned events (Channel plan required in advance)

•Works for urban/rural

•Console/field intervention or other efforts needed to set up on the fly

•Patched systems must have complementary coverage

•No advanced features, audio only•Multiple systems required•Limits channel resources•Moderate (1 site) range•Users can’t leave home system

•Connects disparate systems/bands

•Can be cost efficient, when systems are in place

•Moderate (1-2 site) range

•Defacto standard—commonly used

•Cost efficient

•Simple to implement•Point-to-point•Direct communication•Cost efficient

•Simple to implement•No administration necessary

•Product cross-training required•Slow to setup physical exchange•Limited range•W/O talk-around, multiple systems are required

•Limited range•Frequency independent•Requires compatible systems

•Plan/radio programming req’d•No advanced system features•Radio removed from home system•Limited range, needs infrastructure•Frequency dependent•Requires conv. & trunking in radio

•Small events (2-3 agencies)•Preplanned events with key players coordinating (Concert, sports, etc.)

•Small events (2-3 agencies)•Tactical Coordination•Emergencies only