TETRA Association, Vendors Plan Next Moves for North America

[brey1234]

The TETRA Association and TETRA vendor officials continue to push for the technology’s use in North America. Representatives recently met with FCC officials, and at least one TETRA vendor plans to begin responding to North American requests for proposals (RFPs).
http://radioresourcemag.com/newsArticle.cfm?news_id=5728

I find this hard to believe! Everyone in government is pushing for true interop, ie: project 25 and the FCC is entertaining plans for ANOTHER "patended" system!!! A system which will only talk to "it's" radios and no one else?!?!?!?!

 

[Comint]

A system which will only talk to "it's" radios and no one else?!?!?!?!

Just like APCO Project 25.

There are numerous manufacturers of TETRA radios, including Motorola.

--
Comint

 

[bezking]

I renew my belief that Motorola would be undercutting it's own marketing strategies this way and they would do anything in their power to stop this from happening. Especially considering their shiny new APX7000 won't do TETRA...

 

[zerg901]

The Feds should recommend that everyone buy P25 radios for 700 Mhz. If testing shows that TETRA is better, then the Feds should recommend that everyone buy TETRA radios at 700 Mhz. If testing shows that P25 Phase XXX is better then TETRA, then the feds should recommend that everyone buy P25 Phase XXX radios.

All radios need to be able to operate on 851.0125 simplex in analog FM 20K0F3E mode for backwards compatibility.

Whats the alternative - recommend P25, and stick with it for 20 years without evaluating any new radios? Or do the Beta vs VHS thing?

Peter Sz

 

[DPD1]

If everyone just keeps chasing whatever they think is the latest greatest that every company tries to pitch them on, there never will be a standard. I think there's already plenty of stuff in the mix as it is.

 

[DaveNF2G]

This might not be a popular thing to say in a scanning forum, but public safety should be able to operate whatever they can afford. Interoperability does not come in a box. They need to learn how to do interoperation rather than rely on the technology to do it for them.

 

[radioman2001]

You may not like my opinion either, but to solve all this BS about interoperability, have the FCC mandate an open format just like they did with Digital TV, so ALL manufacturers can make radios on it. This results in real competition and lowers the costs (just like Digital TV). Let the manufacturers figure out among themselves an open one, and if they can't let the FCC decide. No other option allowed.
When the format is decided the FCC mandates that this is the system type. Then the FCC yank's back all PS frequency allocations on ALL bands. Then the Feds pay for the equipment on a one for one trade. (Congress will decide how they want to tax you for it, because you know for sure they will) and then just implement it. That's really how the 700 mhz band should have been done. The frequencies belong to the public, the public should be served. Not this fifedom attitude that a lot of PS departments have that it's their frequencies to do with what they please.
Now if you don't like the system you can go back to using 2 cans and a string!

 

[kikito]

You may not like my opinion either, but to solve all this BS about interoperability, have the FCC mandate an open format just like they did with Digital TV, so ALL manufacturers can make radios on it. This results in real competition and lowers the costs (just like Digital TV).....

That's what the P25 "standard" was supposed to do. We know by now how long it has taken and all the different directions it has gone. But still, I guess so far P25 still the closest thing to a universal standard as there is. If only the radio users and agencies would stick to it and quit playing around and getting persuaded by salesmen of proprietary technology....


And the Feds have already been paying for communications equipment for almost ten years in the form of Homeland Security grants with only a few conditions needing to be meet like narrow banding, P25 and that it facilitates interoperability.

 

[radioman2001]

The Feds have been paying for radios a lot longer than 10 years, may be you remember LEAA grants in the early 70's. That's when the Feds wanted everybody on 150 mhz sound familiar? I know a lot of departments took those LEAA radios just because they were free or next to free. Installed them for the required 1 year than took them out, because they didn't give them the same coverage they had on Low Band. Today 99% of those departments are on VHF not because the radios were free but because of the interoperablity it gave them with other PS. Most PS departments are slow to change.
What I am saying is that by dictating an open format like P-25 you make sure that there are NO proprietary systems out there. This knocks out the salesman touting their non standard system. Have you seen any other Digital TV formats out there other than the accepted one? All PS departments get for free the same amount of radios they have now on a one for one exchange basis. 700 mhz would have been the perfect platform for such a system. Now we are going to have a hodge podge network of systems, until someone in the FCC realizes that they need to step in and control it. Unfortunately right now the FCC is allowing the market to drive technology, which may be good for consumers, but not for PS radio systems.

 

[2wayfreq]

The reason they want Tetra in the US is not necessarily to compete with P25. It is more intended for the Utility industry (Petroleum,Power (Nuclear plants,Edison, etc) and Water which have a real interest in the technology. Many utilities at least in the California area use the 900Mhz (936-937) Trunking. This technology has a quite limited number of available frequencies and as far as I know will not be converted to P25 digital or even planned for narrow banding. So the utilities need an alternative solution. Tetra appears to be the answer.

 

[fineshot1]

I renew my belief that Motorola would be undercutting it's own marketing strategies this way and they would do anything in their power to stop this from happening. Especially considering their shiny new APX7000 won't do TETRA...

x2

Yes - what he said!!

 

[radioman2001]

Great, just what we need, another format designed for use by other than PS being used. It's bad enough that MOTOTRBO and NXDN is making it's way into PS comms, now you have another EU standard trying to enter the PS market. I still stand by what my earlier post says, have the Feds mandate a system and force everyone to it.

 

[Raccon]

The reason they want Tetra in the US is not necessarily to compete with P25. It is more intended for the Utility industry (Petroleum,Power (Nuclear plants,Edison, etc) and Water which have a real interest in the technology. Many utilities at least in the California area use the 900Mhz (936-937) Trunking. This technology has a quite limited number of available frequencies and as far as I know will not be converted to P25 digital or even planned for narrow banding. So the utilities need an alternative solution. Tetra appears to be the answer.

Well said, indeed companies are actually asking for TETRA specifically, as an alternative to other, often proprietary systems. And who knows, maybe TETRA will even make its way into the PSS market. MOTOFEAR.

 

[citylink_uk]

Great, just what we need, another format designed for use by other than PS being used. It's bad enough that MOTOTRBO and NXDN is making it's way into PS comms, now you have another EU standard trying to enter the PS market. I still stand by what my earlier post says, have the Feds mandate a system and force everyone to it.

errr... TETRA was designed for public safety use. I agree that TETRA is probably being aimed at the Utilities market here.

 

[poltergeisty]

Be scared, be very scared

Tetra reminds me of Tetris, and sooner or latter you will lose. Or at least the tax payer.

The premise for Tetra being interested in utilities is proabbly so, but like all companies their business is NOT about interoperability but chiefly money. :lol: So the buck won't stop here and /\/\oto more than likly knows this.

Interoperability? What's that?

Yours, the village idiot. :lol:

 

[KD0NDO]

"Heuston we have a problem"

 

[JRayfield]

errr... TETRA was designed for public safety use. I agree that TETRA is probably being aimed at the Utilities market here.

Actually, TETRA was NOT designed for public safety. It was originally designed as a commercial service system (similar to IDEN). When the market demand dried up before it made it to market, some of the companies that were involved in it's development went 'belly up'. The remaining companies looked for a new 'market' for TETRA and decided to market TETRA to the public safety community. The rest is 'history', as they say.

John Rayfield, Jr.

 

[Raccon]

Actually, TETRA was NOT designed for public safety. It was originally designed as a commercial service system (similar to IDEN). When the market demand dried up before it made it to market, some of the companies that were involved in it's development went 'belly up'. The remaining companies looked for a new 'market' for TETRA and decided to market TETRA to the public safety community. The rest is 'history', as they say.

Can you elaborate which companies went belly-up and provide a source to support the claim that it was originally NOT designed for the public safety market?

 

[JRayfield]

Can you elaborate which companies went belly-up and provide a source to support the claim that it was originally NOT designed for the public safety market?

I'm not making any 'claim' here at all. I'm restating information from a magazine article, comparing DMR and TETRA. It's from Radio Resource/Mission Critical.

Here's a link: Radio Resource Magazine: OnlyOnline

John Rayfield, Jr.

 

[Raccon]

I'm not making any 'claim' here at all. I'm restating information from a magazine article, comparing DMR and TETRA. It's from Radio Resource/Mission Critical.

Here's a link: Radio Resource Magazine: OnlyOnline

Thanks; unfortunately that article appears extremely biased against TETRA as it is full of misleading and wrong technical facts, mostly so that it puts TETRA in a negative light.
Another factual error is the claim that the development was primary for the PAMR market, it should be obvious from the fact that one of the first supported frequency bands was a "traditional" PSS band (380-400MHz). To further prove that the claim is wrong please see the following sources:

TETRA Standard

TETRA is an open standard developed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). The main purpose of the TETRA standard was to define a series of open interfaces, as well as services and facilities, in sufficient detail to enable independent manufacturers to develop infrastructure and terminal products that would fully interoperate with each other as well as meet the needs of traditional PMR user organisations.

TETRA

TErrestrial Trunked RAdio (TETRA) is a digital trunked mobile radio standard developed to meet the needs of traditional Professional Mobile Radio (PMR) user organisations such as:
Public Safety
Transportation
Utilities
Government
Military
PAMR
Commercial & Industry
Oil & Gas

The TETRA standard has been specifically developed to meet the needs of a variety of traditional PMR user organisations. This means it has a scaleable architecture allowing economic network deployments ranging from single site local area coverage to multiple site wide area national coverage.

From Standardisation for Emergency Communications ETSI Project TETRA (PP Slides, 1.8MB):

The overall PMR market in Europe in the late 1980’s varied country to country - successful public cellular systems seemed to hold back PMR development.
But the demand existed, particularly amongst Public Safety and other ‘professional’ user organisations.

[...]

TETRA features were user-led at the earliest definition stage.
Particular contributions were, and continue to be, made by Public Safety users throughout the development of the TETRA Standard.