vall engineering 10/2014 isa survey results review
TRANSCRIPT
VALL Engineering10/2014
ISA Survey Results Review
VALL and Idaho BHS involved in early FirstNet discussions.
Having a high level baseline for all counties, helps pave the way towards future planning.
Because all counties differ, a generalized high-level survey was created to capture most of the vital data.
Goals: Open dialogue, look at ways to drive efficiency, and help provide different perspectives.
Survey Background/Context
Why VALL?
Wireless Engineering Professionals
Corporate Management
Vendor Management
RFP’s/Pricing
Designed, Built and Launched Major US
Markets
New Technology evaluation and business case development
Extensive experience with voice and data radio technologies
Technology Operational &
Capital Expense
Technical & Financial Risk
Product Lifecycle Vendor Type
Survey Objectives
Promote Knowledge Sharing Amongst All Counties
Working Together to Achieve Success
County A
County C
County B
County D
County A
County C
County B
County D
Lower Cost Per County
• Counties work together to standardize technology and negotiate cost
• End result is standardization, lower cost and newer technology
• Vendors love autonomy.
• Inconsistency creates a continued revenue stream.
• Working as a team can help lower cost and refresh technology.
• RFP, SLA’s, Contracts, etc..
or
Survey Overview
• PDF questionnaire sent to all counties (July 2014)
• Results were exported into a database
• Reviewed each questionnaire and followed up as needed
• Created data models
Participation Map
75% Participation40% Fully Completed Surveys
Spending By Category
• 911 Selective Routing• Standard voice/trunked circuit cost• IP connectivity
Telco• 911 Phone System• Recording System• CAD• Dispatch Console
PSAP
• VPN/FirewallIT• Lease/Rent• Generator• Grounds keeping• Fuel
Site Maintenance
• Microwave• Power System Maintenance• Repeater Maintenance• Software Maint/Upgrades
Radio
• Monthly Data Service Cost• Annual Maintenance• Avg Per Device Cost
MDT
Categories Analyzed
Category Cost Analysis
• Represents data from all participating counties
• Provides a high level overview of key spending areas
Telco38%
PSAP25%
IT1%Site Maintenance
13%
Radio12%
MDT11%
Backhaul/Telco Category
Backhaul/Telco Cost Breakdown
PSAP Category
PSAP Cost Breakdown
IT Category
IT Cost Breakdown
Site Maintenance Category
Site Maintenance Cost Breakdown
Site maintenance cost varies by category
Radio Category
Radio Cost Breakdown
Software maintenance a majority of the annual cost
MDT Category
MDT Cost Breakdown
Substantial cost for supporting carrier data cards
Radio and Data Device Distributions By County
Bubble size represents volume of radio and data devices by county
This helps understand voice and data device usage in the state
Emergency Communications Budget By County
Collected published 911 budgets for each county. Compare against survey results.
911 Budgeted Funds Per Person
Total 911 Budget Divided By 2014 Census Population Per County
Budget / Population
Vendor Section
Selective Routing Vendor Map
Century Link provides a majority of the voice and IP connectivity in the state.
Selective Routing Cost By Carrier
Mobile Device Vendor Map
Geographical distribution of mobile devices by vendor
This analysis shows how counties can work together to upgrade technology and leverage better vendor pricing.
Radio/Repeater Vendor Map
Motorola supplies a majority of the radio network infrastructure, with TAIT and ICOM dominating some regions in the state.
Carrier Wireless Analysis (Statewide)
Total Statewide Spend on Carrier Wireless Data
$668,246.88
* This is a key area to evaluate where FirstNet would bring the most value.
Counties with Phone System Running on Windows Server 2003
• Teton• Nez Perce• Owyhee• Ada• Camas
End of Life OS – Phone System
Counties with Viper Phone Systems
• Canyon• Gooding, Jerome, Lincoln, Twin Falls• Valley• Ada• Adams• Kootenai• Camas
Viper Phone System
Majority:• Panasonic Toughbook• Dell (6400, XFR)
Others:• Samsung• Apple• J3500 Motion Tablets• Surface Pro
MDT Device Vendor
Majority:• Cisco• SonicWALL
Others:• Mikrotik• Watchguard• Barracuda
Firewall Vendors
Cisco typically has higher OPEX rates to support software updates, etc…
Majority:• Cisco• HP• Dell
Others:• Netgear• Adtran
Ethernet Switch Vendors
HP switches are cost effective and offer an unconditional lifetime warranty
Counties that are not P25 compliant• Payette• Minidoka• Cassia
P25 Non-Compliance
Number of Radio Channels Used By County
Survey Feedback Section
Biggest Challenges
Several systems out of date and need funding
Remote mountainous areas pose a problem for broadband and wireless
Funding Feedback
Upcoming Upgrades
Upgrades needed throughout the state over the next 24 months
MDT Performance Feedback
Cost, Reliability and Speed of wireless data networks a problem for several counties
CAD/RMS/JMS
Summary
Key Takeaways
• Telco is the source for highest spending. Opportunity to negotiate cost at state level? RFP?
• Critical Updates– Windows Server 2003– Viper– Narrow Band – Federal Mandate– MDT Fleet– EOL Serial Modem– P25 Compliance
• Common Issues: Geography, Funding, Working with State.
• Vendor selection from county to county differs in most categories.
Appendix
Simplify Your Communications Network
LMR isn’t going away anytime soon• Robust and stable radio communication platform• A big part of spending is on wireless data from carrier networks
However…..
Everything is now dependent on some form of wireless data
Problem:Commercial wireless networks are expensive and very unreliable during emergency situations
Is FirstNet the solution?
How To Get There?
Public Safety Needs FirstNet
First Responders Deserve the Best Network
Reliability Must Be Built In
Timeline
Obstacles for FirstNet
• Funding– Not a lot of funds available for FirstNet ($7 Billion)– $5 Billion needed to be raised from FCC auction– Cash won’t last long
• Vendor support– With the lack of new commercial network build-out, their
only “easy” revenue stream is FirstNet– New band, new devices = lots of bugs
• Learning curve– Who maintains?– Lots of training will be required (LTE can be quite complex)– Significant OPEX to maintain network over time
Process = TimeTime = $
Wi-Fi: Perhaps the better option?
The Failure of Muni Wi-Fi
Why earlier deployments of Muni Wi-Fi failed
• Technology wasn’t ready (802.11 bg)• Devices weren’t ready• Massive improvements in silicone
paved the way
Wi-Fi has improved 1000%
• Very high performing radios• Client devices have great chipsets• Cost per Wi-Fi chip is very economical• Top notch security• Every device supports Wi-Fi
Wi-Fi is the most cost effective way to provide high throughput wireless data
Thank You!www.valltechnologies.com