1 / 15

Analysis and proposals (Rev. 1)

Analysis and proposals (Rev. 1). G. Marque-Pucheu EADS MESA, Boston 06. Agenda. Background Analysis of some misalignments Proposal. Background.

pooky
Download Presentation

Analysis and proposals (Rev. 1)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analysis and proposals (Rev. 1) G. Marque-Pucheu EADS MESA, Boston 06

  2. Agenda • Background • Analysis of some misalignments • Proposal

  3. Background • […]SC Chair responded with 2002 directional goal that MESA wanted to develop technical specifications for digital, mobile, broadband services for public safety. Since that Copenhagen meeting, a new concept of system-of-systems was introduced and intended to incorporate existing and legacy systems, commercially available technologies, and “ideal” systems through technical specification developments. Dan Hawkins representing APCO subsequently stated his thoughts that MESA’s best input is in creating a process by which public safety organizations can discuss requirements internationally. Craig Jorgenson then added that historically, MESA looked at the unique needs of public safety that weren’t met by commercial systems. […] • From SC minutes Edimburgh 2005]

  4. Analysis (1) This diagramm basically distinguishes three different types of link

  5. Analysis(2) • The previous diagramm is fully consistent with the « system of systems » approach and identifies several homogeneous communication realms • One between MESA nodes, one of them allowing JAN interconnection • A JAN backhaul, allowing for interconnection with the fixed infrastructure, control rooms, data bases,.. • One between the MESA nodes and the PSCD, allowing for potentially diverse, adapted interfaces • Unfortunately – according to EADS view – this approach is not consistently applied

  6. Analysis(3) • WIDENS project (EC FP6 project presented in Edimburgh) use cases has highlighted the core role of PS vehicules in emergency situation and interoperability situations • PS vehicules, carrying MESA nodes are creating a « backbone » (an interoperability backbone to be more precise) and link « their » officers to the infrastructure and others MESA nodes • In line with MESA system of systems approach

  7. Examples(1) • This diagram is highlighting the links between the nodes of the IAN local backbone (MESA nodes) and the links between them and mostly pedestrians • Two types of coverage and bandwidth have to be managed: outdoor coverage with high bandwidth between nodes and lower bandwidth with potential indoor coverage for endpoints

  8. Examples(2) • The same split is valid in this case – even if indoor does not apply • Bandwidth consideration equally apply and coverage requires link budget to fit for low power PSCD suffering from low antenna height and body losses

  9. Example(3) • Idem

  10. Issues(1) • Links between vehicules and links between one vehicule and the associated officers are not homogeneous • For practical reasons: equipment carried by officers may be (and in most case will be for some period) a narrowband voice+data equipment which is not MESA enabled • But installation of MESA enabled repeaters may be more affordable for interoperability and to be future-proof • For deep physical reasons: link between vehicule and officer shall offer reliable communication (indoor) with appropriate bandwith • Keeping in mind that coded OFDM techniques (802.11, 802.16, SAM, IOTA, TETRA TEDS) are already close from theoretical limit and that future improvement may come from compression, not radio

  11. Brick Wall—10 db loss Drywall—4.8 db loss Issues(2) - Fire Full coverage relies on carefully dropping two repeaters per floor

  12. Issues(3) – Chemical plant • Coverage exercises show practical limitations of a pure (wide) broadband approach. It make mandatory to have a large number of vehicles on site or dropping of repeaters to allow coverage • EADS is strongly questioning the feasibility and safety of such approach in stress conditions supported by officers in such scenarios Red means the path loss is less than 111 dB 5 MHz 802.11 design

  13. Recommandations (1) • Fully align on the « System of systems » approach • Careful classification of links based on coverage and bandwidth requirements • Concentrate on the inter-(MESA)node architecture and its requirements • Bandwidth • Scalability • Security • Application interoperability (assuming legacy links between nodes and in the field officers) • Not over-assessing bandwidth needs as it may lead to unnecessary coverage constraints

  14. Recommendations (2) • Although some further study will be necessary, EADS feels that local backbone between MESA nodes/routers should be based on the meshed configuration of IEEE802.16e standard • Preferred to 802.11 for: • Strong intrinsic security of the MAC layer • Better scalability for optimal trade-off between bandwidth requirements and coverage requirements • Flexibility of bandwidth scheduling in meshed configuration

  15. Recommandation (3) • Interoperable formats should be defined between MESA nodes • Voice (G.7xx ?) • Video (H.264 – frame rate, size,.. TBD) • Imaging (JPEG 2000 ?) • ….

More Related