back to article 'Blue light services will get 4G on London Tube!' Cool, how? 'Errrrm...'

The government's contentious Emergency Services Network deal, intended to provide 4G coverage and devices for all blue light services, will be able to run on the London Underground, the man in charge of the scheme has insisted. Stephen Webb, senior responsible owner of the ESN deal, said: "We will have a solution that works on …

  1. wyatt

    Here we go again.. VoLTE still isn't working as the ESN requires so isn't in any position to be tested let alone rolled out. Speaking to some Police Forces they have little confidence it'll see the light of day for a good few years and isn't wanted either. They want a device that will do voice no matter what (red button essential), give them another device for everything else.

    Airwave continues to be deployed and improved in other countries. UK Gov should look at why this is..

  2. TRT Silver badge

    Just for once...

    wouldn't it be nice to have the people in power actually know what they're talking about? Or if they don't at least not try to flimflam everyone that they do?

    Instead of using the well-defined term 4G as some short hand for "packet switched data broadcast over radio spectrum" in the hope that the public will then understand (because they really, really think everyone who's not an MP, lawyer, board member of a PLC, earning over £250k without kicking a football or posing for cameras, are just uneducated plebs who wouldn't understand a technical term if it imparted an impulse on their physiognomy), why can't they just say, "We're doing a deal for better 999 service radios. Ones that work on the tube and in other traditionally hard to get a signal to locations."

    Or is it, perhaps, that someone's making a lot of money out of this deal and it's deliberately been structured so that there's no breach of contract - they get what they asked for, but what they asked for wasn't what's going to do the job as promised or understood?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just for once...

      " why can't they just say, "We're doing a deal for better 999 service radios. Ones that work on the tube and in other traditionally hard to get a signal to locations.""

      Might be a sudden onset of honesty?

      1. TRT Silver badge

        Re: Might be a sudden onset of honesty?

        Christ almighty. If they had an outbreak of that around Whitehall... disastrous.

  3. wyatt

    I wonder what happens when the ESN becomes saturated at an incident? Do some camera feeds stop? Who's traffic gets priority? Do they deploy mobile access points to increase throughput? Can the backhaul cope? Contention no matter what priority ESN traffic is given over the network will start becoming an issue.

    1. Simon Rockman

      It's not just contention which is an issue. There is a system called MTPAS which gives the blue light services priority.

      Unfortunately if you switch off access to people who don't have MTPAS you might leave someone at the top of a burning building or under collapsed rubble with no means of communicating.

      Simon

      1. 's water music

        if you switch off access to people who don't have MTPAS you might leave someone at the top of a burning building or under collapsed rubble with no means of communicating.

        Wait, if it isn't live tweeted it isn't really happening no? So does that mean the punter is ok now or not? If not, perhaps nomophobia will distract them from worrying about impending death.

      2. Killing Time

        RE: 'Unfortunately if you switch off access to people who don't have MTPAS you might leave someone at the top of a burning building or under collapsed rubble with no means of communicating.'

        I understood emergency calls from any SIM trumps MTPAS, is that not the case?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      The ESN 4G network will share the same spectrum, masts, antennas and and backhaul as the public EE 4G network. However blue light users will connect to a different mobile network code (MCC) being broadcast by the mast. When things start to become overloaded, blue light users connected to the ESN network code will be given priority access to the spectrum and backhaul (QoS) over those using the public EE MCC.

      1. wyatt

        Obviously.. my comment is that with all their enhanced devices communicating video/mapping/etc they're going to saturate their own links!

        Everyone knows that BT/Virgin can offer pretty good throughput until it gets oversubscribed. I can see this happening at an incident and some services will be dropped.

    3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: "Who's traffic gets priority?"

      Premium account holders', naturally.

      1. Bob H

        Re: "Who's traffic gets priority?"

        If this is EE, will they offer callers priority access if they pay an additional 50p?

  4. TeeCee Gold badge

    Seems to be an error there.

    "The Home Office has said............EE was selected to build the new network because it was the most cost effective optionhas been bought by BT and all their old cronies work for them."

    1. Spasticus Autisticus
      Big Brother

      Re: Seems to be an error there.

      Exactly - its not what you know but who you know.

      The revolving door between government and business needs to be jammed fast. Whatever body that oversees movements, either way, B2G or G2B, needs a full overhaul - its cronies all the way down.

      1. Simon Rockman

        Re: Seems to be an error there.

        As much as I think everything is wrong with ESN I don't think there is any element of cronyism going on here.

        The project is a poison chalice and no one in government would want to hand it to their mates.

        EE has other reasons for this and it's not money.

        Simon

    2. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Seems to be an error there.

      Well my first thought was how convenient for the Home Office that Ofcom endorsed the BT takeover of EE; I'm sure Ofcom is immune to being leaned on by the Home Office/Cabinet Office...

  5. Gordon 10
    WTF?

    "He said there are currently 5km of roads the public cannot dial 999 on"

    Only 5km? Doesnt sound cost effective enough to bother with.

    1. Dazzz

      Probably measured the same way all the coverage maps are by using a car with an external aerial to see if a signal can be received, so in the real world I would expect the figure to be much higher.

  6. jonfr

    What's wrong with TETRA?

    What's wrong with TETRA? It has voice, granted it doesn't have any data support speed (691.2kbit/s latest version) as LTE networks have. It only supports low speed data, but over a long range (up to 200km from a transmitter).

    It is possible to build a dual radio set today, that can support TETRA for voice and LTE for data, with a decent frequency range (TETRA is designed for 380/410/450/480/810/900Mhz). For LTE the normal frequencies applies.

    The hardware is stable, secure (as can be) and no risk of blockage or overcrowded transmitters in a emergency.

    1. Bob H

      Re: What's wrong with TETRA?

      But the TETRA equipment costs a fortune, they could use more COTS parts with LTE (if done correctly).

      That saying I would suggest that in the interim, until LTE is ready, it would be easy to build a TETRA accessory module which has a emergency beacon button and links to the officers phone by Bluetooth or USB? That way you could use the LTE network for day-to-day operations but keep TETRA for emergencies and when LTE is unavailable.

    2. Martin an gof Silver badge

      Re: What's wrong with TETRA?

      What's wrong with TETRA?

      I was about to post the same question. I do not work in the emergency services but from everything I have read, TETRA was designed from the ground up to be the "ideal" (or close to what ideal meant 25 years ago) radio service. It has certain features such as group calling, one-to-many, push-to-talk with no setup (i.e. no "dialling") that even 3G struggles with, and 4G LTE can't do voice reliably at all as far as I'm aware. These features are absolutely vital for emergency services.

      There's also the issue of coverage and again, I believe that the current TETRA network has better geographical coverage of the uk than any other technology, and of course TETRA stations can work in "mesh" network mode to enable coverage to be extended to places such as the underground with nothing more than a small battery-powered unit, or an officer stood between the rescue team and a good signal. Try getting 4G on the underground if a bomb has taken out the comms and power to half a mile of tunnel under Canary Wharf!

      The main problems with TETRA are said to be relatively poor battery life (it has a linear amplifier for some technical reason) and the lack of high speed data. Well, so what if the units look more like mobile phones from 1996 than smartphones from 2016? I'd rather rely on something big and chunky that won't be useless because some perp clobbered it with a baseball bat and cracked the screen, than a smartphone-alike, especially if it has a fragile touchscreen that can't be used in the rain.

      Surely a TETRA-compatible device could be designed that uses more modern radio technology and has better battery life (and probably costs less), while containing a secondary 3G/4G radio for high speed data when coverage is available? If a large touchscreen is necessary for the facilities high speed data will make available, perhaps design a folding or sliding unit with "normal" keys on the outside, with the advantage that the fragile touchscreen is protected when not in use.

      TETRA itself had a lot of teething problems when it launched (not least interference with broadcast TV) and we have come to expect that government procurement contracts are basically the product of a monkey squeezing a squid onto a bit of paper and selling it to the highest bidder, but can't we dream of something better, and of people to run it who actually know what they are talking about? I believe that TETRA is held in much higher regard now than were the FM systems it replaced, so shouldn't we be building on its successes rather than scrapping it and starting again?

      M.

  7. Tempest
    FAIL

    What's wrong with TETRA?

    There are numerous reasons why TETRA should be replaced. SDR is one good reason.

    With SDR (Software-Defined Radio) has most of the answers to TETRA'd deficiencies. In fact there are several InterNet SDR systems running circles around TETRA UK providing full decryption of Plod radio in the UK.

    The ability of SDR's software emulating hardware components such as mixers, filters, amplifiers, modulators/demodulators, detectors, etc. can be achieved with an embedded system. SDR systems are today based on an internationally endorsed open Software Communications Architecture (SCA). This standard uses CORBA on POSIX operating systems to coordinate various software modules.

    The P25 Program in the USA high-tech digital radios used by the FBI, Secret Service, and Homeland Security were designed so poorly that they can be jammed by a $30 children's toy GirlTech IMME, Mattel's pink instant-messaging device with a miniature keyboard that was marketed to pre-teen girls!

    A P25 Digital sells for USD$3,295! Read: <https://gcn.com/articles/2011/08/11/p25-radios-eavesdropping-jamming.aspx> for full details. The Texas Instrument CC1110 sub-GHz RF chip is the key to this pursuit!

    Motorola (aka Airwave) produces these P25 Digital USD$3,295 Edsels!

    (Amateur and home use, see: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_radio>)

    1. Martin an gof Silver badge

      Re: What's wrong with TETRA?

      There are numerous reasons why TETRA should be replaced. SDR is one good reason.... providing full decryption of Plod radio in the UK

      Ok, I'll take that, but it doesn't actually answer the question of why "4G" is the answer when it cannot (as far as I understand it) provide the usability features that were the key reason TETRA supplanted FM in the first place. Surely the best thing to do would be to change the security protocols used by TETRA, and SDR may be the key to enabling this cheaply and efficiently while also retaining backwards compatibility with the existing system when necessary. I know absolutely nothing about this kind of thing, but it strikes me that desinging a set of "TETRA mk II" radios in this manner would be a relatively small project and if it were mandated that all new radios had to be TETRA II immediately the technology was available, over time the new technology would replace the old.

      Even if it took five years it'd probably be quicker than trying to cludge a new system together using inappropriate technology, and if it gets to three years and it looks like upgrade cycles are slow there could be a push from central government to get it sorted.

      Also prevents putting undue pressure on the civilian services (mountain rescue etc.) to get their expensive equipment updated before they were planning to. You may not want a criminal gang eavesdropping on the police who are staking out their hideout, but does it really matter if a Ham can listen to the team searching for two lost climbers up Cader Idris?

      M.

      1. jonfr

        Re: What's wrong with TETRA?

        TETRA is secure, since it allows for encrypted communication, since it is a digital standard designed for military and emergency response use. SDR is not able to brake that encryption at the moment, since new versions of TETRA have upgraded the encryption standard (far as I know).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like