Transcript Amman05_RToikkanen_TETRAMktPosn

TETRA market positioning
3rd TETRA Middle East Conference
Amman September 2005
Risto Toikkanen
Vice chairman / TETRA MoU Association
29.08.2005
A. PMR or Cellular
technology?
Cellular subscribers count in billions.
Why not to use their cool handsets?
Mobile markets overview
Mobile markets:
A Cellular telephony
B Professional Mobile Radio
C Dedicated mobile data networks
D Broadband WiFi/WLAN etc non-licensed
Mobile mass market trends
•
•
•
•
•
•
cellular mass market enjoys huge growth
Cellphone replacing fixed phone line
convergence of voice & data: GPRS, 3G
convergence of telecomms & media/entertainment
VoIP/Push-to-Talk applications
dedicated mobile data networks disappear
Mission critical needs
Guaranteed service
- under normal conditions
- during incidents
- planned capacity for emergency handling
- semi-duplex (only one channel per group per site)
Fast group communications
- x00 ms set-up time
- good dispatching
- dynamic group management
Specific functionality
- emergency calls (pre-emptive)
- security
- monitoring, status messages
Professional users need own PMR
They must have the best service during emergencies
They need faster call set-up than cellular or PTT over
cellular can offer
Cellular PTT systems need too many channels for big
talkgroups – PMR uses semi-duplex
Their dispatchers need powerful functionality
Cellular system cannot
meet these requirements
- Neither can Push-To-Talk over
cellular (CDMA/GPRS)
B. Okay, we need PMR.
What technology?
A look at market dynamics and
technical offering of two PMR
technologies
Market trends in radio
Shared multi-agency networks
Increased security requirements
Increased use of mobile data
• from voice to combined voice & data
Increased telephony connectivity
Data and text messaging
Seamless nationwide service coverage
Need for international cooperation
Need for better radio spectrum efficiency
Overview of 2 digital PMR
standards
TETRA – defined by the European
Telecommunications Standards
Institute
Project 25 – defined as joint project
of U.S. user (APCO, NASTD),
government and industry (TIA)
organisations
Standardisation / market approach
Project 25
• Strict Public Safety
focus
• Focus on economic
rural coverage and
working in limited
spectrum
• Voice centric services,
data often in separate
network
• U.S. centric standard
• Spectrum split and
fragmented: VHF, UHF,
800 …
TETRA
• Designed to meet the needs
of various user groups
– Shared multi-agency PSS
– Smaller private networks
• Designed to support higher
capacities
• Combining voice + data in
same network from the
beginning
• International standard from
the beginning
• Harmonised radio spectrum
for European emergency
services
Market differences
Project 25
TETRA
• Single supplier
dominance
• Interoperability still under
planning
• Leader in U.S. PSS market
• Individual contracts in
Asia-pacific & Latin
America
• Handset prices even at
4000 – 5000 USD level !
• Strong multi-vendor focus
• Working interoperability
certification
• True multi-vendor experience
• Continent wide leader in
Europe and Asia
• Latin American contracts
• Much lower equipment prices
due to working competition
Maturity of standards
Project 25
TETRA
Many different paths tried
• Conventional 12.5 kHz
FDMA
• Trunked 12.5 kHz FDMA –
trunking protocol came
later than products
• 6.25 kHz FDMA – never
implemented in products
• TETRA-like 25 kHz TDMA failed
• Now trying 12.5 kHz TDMA
– very slowly
Trunked 4-slot TDMA from the
beginning
In TETRA standards many
things were completed
years ahead of Project 25:
• Intersystem Interface,
roaming support
• Authentication, air
interface encryption
• full duplex, handovers
• supplementary services to
one-to-one calls
Technical 1: FDMA - TDMA
Project 25 - FDMA
TETRA - TDMA
• Traditionally assumes
wider coverage and lower
capacity
• Benefits from high power
mobile radios ( 10 to 30
W)
• Expensive when number
of channels becomes high
• Trend towards higher user
densities poses challenge
• Trend towards handsets
dilutes the coverage
benefit
• Traditionally assumes
smaller cells and higher
capacity
• Can handle high capacity at
lower cost
• Spectrum efficient
• Easy full duplex,
simultaneous voice + data
• In handset use on par in
terms of coverage (uplink!)
• Improvements in TDMA BS
receiver technology and
multi-receiver diversity
promise equal cell range
Technical 2: Functionality
Project 25
TETRA
• Still only half duplex
• No handover signalling
• Supplementary services
now under debate
• DTMF now debated
• Very little IP data seen in
neworks still today
• Text messaging still now
debated
• The new debated features
may come only to the yet
noexistent TDMA standard,
if even in that ...
• Also full duplex from the
beginning
• Handovers during call
• Supplementary services
related to one-to-one calls
• DTMF signalling long ago
• IP packet data in use long
ago
• Text messaging from the
beginning
• Much faster feature roll-out
(due to competition?)
Technical 3: Networks
Project 25
TETRA
• Idea of international cooperation not visible in
standards
• Inter-Subsystem
Interface
standardisation still
ongoing
• Strong pressure from
users asking for
“interoperability” – in
long term this may
improve the standards
• Designed for crossborder operation, ISI
standard
• Designed for international
traffic, numbering,
country codes
• Implemented efficient
VPN support for multiagency sharing
• TETRA network can be
nationwide homogenous
seamless entity - today
Radio terminals
Project 25
TETRA
• High output
powers available,
tens of watts
• Quite many
manufacturers
showing handsets
in exhibitions
• But still the U.S.
price of
encrypting
handset is 4000 to
5000 USD
• Have supported full duplex for
years
• Smaller size & weight
• Innovations like integral GPS,
65 000 color display emerged
• WAP and web browsers built in
• Handsets are preferred
• And the handset sells at 500 to
1000 USD
• Competition is driving
innovation and cost efficiency
Speed of innovation
Who else can do this – TETRA already does:
• Which other PMR technology delivers
handsets with integral GPS receiver today?
• Which other PMR technology delivers
handsets with 65 000 colour display today?
• Which other PMR technology delivers
handsets with web & WAP browsers today?
Quick questionnaire in TETRA seminar in Oslo
March 2005 revealed close to 30 new TETRA
terminal models being launched during the
last 3 years
Only open competition can boost this amount of
handset innovations and R&D investment
Multi-vendor interoperability
TETRA is the first PMR technology
that created a truly open multi-vendor
market
Benefits of open multi-vendor
market
User benefits
•
•
•
•
wide choice of compatible certified terminals
specialised product for special needs
continuous and genuine competition
less dependency - lower risk of market
disturbances
Industry benefits
• wider market, bigger volumes
• more possibility to invest – faster
product creation
• longer lifetime of market
TETRA MoU Association runs the IOP
certification process to guarantee
open multi-vendor market
TETRA IOP Certification process
ACCEPTED into OPERATION
(Also need CE mark or TA)
STANDARDS
CERTIFICATE
MoU
Operator/User
Association
Technical Forum
Members’ Enquiry
TMO AI group
DMO AI group
ISI group
(PEI group)
MoU
Certification Body
ISCTI *) –
Rome/Italy
approx 12
suppliers
*) Instituto Superiore delle Comunicazioni e tecnologie dell'Informazione
TETRA IOP achievements
Tested products
from:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Cleartone
DeTeWe/FWK
Frequentis
IFR (tester)
Marconi/OTE
Motorola
Niros
Nokia
Rohde & Schwarz
Rohill
Simoco/Sepura
Teltronic
Thales
Certificates at:
www.tetramou.com
TETRA IOP certification results
• 7 companies have received
TETRA infrastructure certificates
*)
• 9 companies have received
TETRA terminal certificates in
trunked mode
• 6 companies have received
TETRA DMO certificates
*) Two new companies have called TETRA
IOP test sessions for their infra: Thales and
Simoco Digital Systems
Summary, TETRA vs. Project 25
1. TETRA makes major difference in multi-vendor
support, certified interoperability and open
competition
2. In voice group call services both technologies
offer about the same level of services
3. In one-to-one calls related services TETRA
clearly leads
4. Use of data much better exploited in TETRA
networks - IP data is in operational use
5. Clear difference of innovation seen in TETRA
handsets
6. The difference in handset prices is dramatical
Conclusions
Cellular networks cannot serve the
needs of mission critical radio
users – dedicated radio network
is needed
TETRA standard provides:
-
-
Widest set of functionality
High capacity at low cost
Fast development of innovative product
solutions
True multi-vendor market and genuine
competition
Questions?
www.tetramou.com
[email protected]