Check This Story Out From Tech Crunch
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/29/a...-billion-emergency-response-network-firstnet/
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/29/a...-billion-emergency-response-network-firstnet/
Good concise article. The last paragraph says it all. But other paragraphs are interesting as well - specifically how this was proposed 15 years ago and how technology has evolved since then..
Nobody is required to subscribe, so public safety can stay with Verizon or whoever (or nobody if they don't want cellular data). Just because a state opts in, they don't have to pay anything, subscribe, or use it. The opt-in just meant they didn't want to build it themselves.
Interesting point to note is that First Net is a "Subscription Service". Cities, Counties, States, and even the Feds, will have to pay an annual subscription fee to AT & T to receive full benefit of the First Net Network. I have to say, that the federal legislation is written in a way, that actually leaves no financially viable alternative to states. Thats why all 50 states and all the territories, signed on with First Net. They didn't sign on because they liked the program, they are mandated to provide the service, either through AT & T, or build their own from scratch, on whatever frequency they get from the FCC with "statewide" availability. (pretty much impossible)
Are you sure about that? From what I've read everyone must subscribe.
Some excellent points are raised in the comments as well. It has to be one of the worst thought out "plans" ever. I believe that it's nothing more than a greedy cash cow created solely for AT&T's benefit.
Are you sure about that? From what I've read everyone must subscribe.
"Interesting point to note is that First Net is a "Subscription Service". Cities, Counties, States, and even the Feds, will have to pay an annual subscription fee to AT & T to receive full benefit of the First Net Network. I have to say, that the federal legislation is written in a way, that actually leaves no financially viable alternative to states. Thats why all 50 states and all the territories, signed on with First Net. They didn't sign on because they liked the program, they are mandated to provide the service, either through AT & T, or build their own from scratch, on whatever frequency they get from the FCC with "statewide" availability. (pretty much impossible)"
Thank you for the correction. I still have some concern about the reliability of the system when it comes to coping with disaster situations such as the extensive destruction of the cellular infrastructure caused by the wildfires in California and adjacent states.No. There is no requirement that everyone must subscribe.
Not sure where that quote came from, but it has a number of errors in it.
For that matter, hurricanes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters present the potential risk of communications collapse as well. Will AT&T provide rapidly deployable portable systems to maintain network integrity?
Having looked at the current AT&T LTE/4G/3G coverage, there are quite a few rather large holes in their coverage. If that means that they will have to plug these holes, then that's a good thing.
Oh yeah, out west here, AT&T coverage is really lacking in rural and even some suburban areas. They've got a lot of work to do.
I've read that FirstNet requires AT&T to build out sites, but the specifics are not known. A lot of rural/wilderness type coverage will rely on other technologies. FirstNet is recommending in-vehicle solutions for mobile applications. External antennas, amplified boosters, etc. is one option.
Satellite based systems for larger on scene will be an option. Also Cell-on-Wheels will be an option. Not immediate solutions, but resources that can be put on scene as needed.
But, yeah, I agree, I'm skeptical of AT&T's ability to run this system reliably. Supposedly there are performance/uptime requirements, but I'm not aware of what those are yet.
As I look at FirstNet for our PD, I'm also working on a complete radio system upgrade, I'll never rely on FirstNet as our only form of communications.
In the end it will be "best effort" in terms of performance, whatever that is. The solution is a hybrid radio/data terminal with conventional LMR and a 700 MHz data interface. Realistically, you are not going to get countrywide coverage on a smartphone device with internal antenna resistor.
I agree with you on this point, which is pretty much what I wrote in post #6 above.In my opinion this FIRSTNET is a boondoggle.