Jump to content

Firstnet.gov / AZfirstnet.gov


Hypeo

Recommended Posts

Have you guys heard of this project by the feds??

 

https://azfirstnet.az.gov/about

 

in reading some of the literature on the project, seems like the feds are dumping a bunch of money on a public safety network and might make contracts with cell providers.

 

 

If this has been discussed please feel free to delete this post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sure sounds like an expensive project that isn't really needed. A nationwide broadband network only to be used for public safety, ugh! such a waste of tax dollars.

I'm all for cutting costs, but if done correctly it could end up very useful to the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A private Public Safety network is essential to national security and first response. Recall 9/11... Cellular networks were overwhelmed with ppl trying to call loved ones.

This is something I want my tax dollars spent on and I'm disappointed it hasn't already been built.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FirstNet will operate, to my knowledge, on LTE Band 14.  Do any consumer devices support that band?  The answer to that is the answer to your question.

 

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a laudable goal, but unless the federal government builds it and then hands it over, it will be rife with delays, cost overruns and corruption. Will it ever be inoperable? Maybe, but doubtful. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a laudable goal, but unless the federal government builds it and then hands it over, it will be rife with delays, cost overruns and corruption. Will it ever be inoperable? Maybe, but doubtful.

It'll definitely be INoperable lol.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FirstNet will operate, to my knowledge, on LTE Band 14. Do any consumer devices support that band? The answer to that is the answer to your question.

 

- Trip

Zero. Too bad we can't do band 28 like the rest of the world.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't each state responsible for their own deployments if they want to be? 

 

Seems like they should of had more spectrum.  LTE is nice and all, but range....  Im all for keeping around something like 1xAdvance just for the pure coverage area.  That way all the nooks and crannies don't have to be covered, and if that isn't even the goal, CDMA will just help fill in.

 

You'd also think that the feds could just put in some clause that if you are a two-way wireless operator, during time of emergency a tower needs to automatically reserve 30% of its capacity or something like that.  Then pass out devices that support every US band in operation be it LTE, CDMA, GSM, iDEN, WiMax, etc depending on the market area the device is going in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd also think that the feds could just put in some clause that if you are a two-way wireless operator, during time of emergency a tower needs to automatically reserve 30% of its capacity or something like that.  Then pass out devices that support every US band in operation be it LTE, CDMA, GSM, iDEN, WiMax, etc depending on the market area the device is going in.

 

The spectrum in question was originally auctioned to be used in this sort of way, where a private operator would use it unless an emergency occurred in which case the public safety communications would take priority.  The bids didn't come anywhere close to the reserve price because nobody wanted to do it.

 

- Trip

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bids didn't come anywhere close to the reserve price because nobody wanted to do it.

 

- Trip

 

This is why the Government HAS to be the entity to build the network out. It is the only party with the infrastructure and financial wherewithal to do something like this. The government isn't a corporation - despite what certain...NewsCorp...channels would lead you to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The spectrum in question was originally auctioned to be used in this sort of way, where a private operator would use it unless an emergency occurred in which case the public safety communications would take priority.  The bids didn't come anywhere close to the reserve price because nobody wanted to do it.

 

- Trip

Only a 5x5 slice was auction off that way. The other 5x5 was unencumbered. So they now have a 10x10 slice for LTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't each state responsible for their own deployments if they want to be? 

 

Seems like they should of had more spectrum.  LTE is nice and all, but range....  Im all for keeping around something like 1xAdvance just for the pure coverage area.  That way all the nooks and crannies don't have to be covered, and if that isn't even the goal, CDMA will just help fill in.

 

You'd also think that the feds could just put in some clause that if you are a two-way wireless operator, during time of emergency a tower needs to automatically reserve 30% of its capacity or something like that.  Then pass out devices that support every US band in operation be it LTE, CDMA, GSM, iDEN, WiMax, etc depending on the market area the device is going in.

This is only for broadband. There is a 700Mz public safety voice allocation as well (a 6x6 MHz band that's adjacent to it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The TVWS auction is largely to get the funds for building FirstNet. FirstNet has been a concept for over ten years and isn't much closer to fruition. I do like how they are engaging local partners for towers, backhauls, etc. I haven't seen much for details on the leasing of network access during non-emergencies, so it probably hasn't had much effort put into it. Undetermined if little guys have a seat at the table or if its only the national guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Firstnet project has been in discussions for years since the 700 MHz auction in 2008, hence why there is a dedicated reserved block of 700 MHz for Firstnet use. This is why the govt has been busy trying to raise a ton of money in spectrum auctions to fund it so that it can eventually be built. It will be nice to have a unified public safety system and network in the 700 MHz band so that all the different emergency services don't have to relay information the old fashioned way since they all have their own unique communication system. Personally I would love to see all public safety in the US move to Firstnet and eventually vacate the 800 MHz spectrum to be reused for other purposes but it is wishful thinking on my part.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's still a use for a voice only network as it would propagate better.

There is one in 700Mhz, adjacent to the broadband 10x10 allocation. Eventually they will merge the two into a 16x16MHz band. Six years later and nothing has been done. Having dealt with PS it's so frustrating, the delays and the bureaucratic red tape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government already has a post- disaster ready network. It's called Ham Radio! #N8SYJ

If the government is going to spend billions on a network, why not reinvest it into public use wireless that can be shared by wireless carriers, with a set aside portion of it given to governmental use.

 

This current plan seems like a ridiculous amount of money just for governmental services which already have good enough communications technologies in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the government is going to spend billions on a network, why not reinvest it into public use wireless that can be shared by wireless carriers, with a set aside portion of it given to governmental use.

 

This current plan seems like a ridiculous amount of money just for governmental services which already have good enough communications technologies in place.

Except they don't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Just revisiting the RCS issue and discussing another point I find odd.  Yeah, my family and close friends and most coworkers still mostly use whats app in our chats due to the odd RCS issues.   Some have Apple phones, some Samsung.  But using Facebook Messenger or Whats App handily eliminates those issues.   But the other thing I find odd is how all the information out there states that to use the Smart View app to mirror your phone to your TV that your TV and your phone have to be on the same wifi network.  That is 100 percent untrue.  I've historically not had wifi at home and only use it in our common areas in our community or occasionally at work.  But primarily I just use my phone for everything and do not have wifi at home.  It's because I haven't needed it.  I've been using all my Samsung phones for the better part of a decade now as my entertainment center because it's simple, effective, portable and absolutely does not require a wifi connection for my TV in order to cast all the content from my phone.  I'm not sure why it is stated that it is required.  The two devices - as we all no doubt know - create a wifi direct connection between the two devices in order for smart view to work, however, no general wifi network is required at all.  Again, I've been enjoying the feature for close to a decade but I find it odd that they say that you need wifi at home to use it.  Samsung television sets, Roku TV sets, LG TV sets (I cast to all of them at work regularly, again, sans wifi) and TCL TVs are all compatible.  There are likely more but these are the ones that I regularly screen mirror to, again, without the two devices being on the same network (this is separate from the notion of creating a wifi direct connection between the 2 in order to enable the service). This is the sole reason I only buy Samsung phones.   I tried a Pixel device before the Pixel 8 (which was the first to allow display out via wired connection for streaming) but it simply did not offer the same feature.   I wonder why they say this.  It's interesting if nothing else.  
    • Yeah, I probably see it through a Washington/Oregon market lens. And maybe a little Nebraska too.  These are the only places I have monitored Tmo overlay of USC closely. Tmo has already added service on 80% of the same towers that were unique to USC just 5 years ago around here.  The 20% left are either too close to an existing Tmo site, or, probably already on Tmo's plans to collocation.  But there is one USC site on the beach where our family likes to go that I am dying for Tmo to add service.  There won't be a lot of new coverage added here. But I have not done really any review in other USC areas.  But I definitely think it's a good move. Robert
    • Found Ericsson C-band+DoD in Brooklyn. What tipped me off was when I mapped a new eNB in this area on Halloween but I didn't see any permits for a new site in the area and the sectors I mapped matched the existing site that was there. Drove by it today and sure enough it's an Ericsson C-band + DoD site, likely one of the first in the city.  This is eNB 110340, formerly eNB 115257. — — — — — Also a T-Mobile new build in Queens. The permit for this one was submitted last year as a replacement for another monopole that got demolished nearby. It must've only recently got installed because it was offline when I drove by it.
    • Here’s What to Do If You’re Still Paying a Monthly Sprint Flex Lease Charge  Not sure this applies to anyone here but if it does ...
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...