FCC denies wireless carriers, industry seeking E911 extensions

Even if all the carriers had 100% compliance, as the article states the Public Safety end isn't in full compliance. How is that right.

 

Any idea why the names of Cingular and T Mobile ar not listed above, have they met the minimum requirements?

 

Yes, thanks to taking the proper approach of TDOA, U-TDOA, and AOA network based overlay systems instead of relying on handset A-GPS and user handset upgrades to meet minimum compliance.

As for the PSAP readiness, it actually coincides with compliance for the carrier. They can not test and subsequently have results to provide in the complaince certification report without the PSAP. The public safety answering point is part of the testing. Usually a carrier doesn't have to be compliant in a PSAP until that entity requests it. The PSAP will not request unitl they have funding and resources to update their own systems to be ready and use the Phase 2 E-911 systems with the carriers.

 

I was fixing to ask that question.

 

Wirelessly posted (MOT-E815_/00.62 UP.Browser/6.2.3.4.c.1.106 (GUI) MMP/2.0)

Oh jones knows what he is doing, disguising a real news article to subconsiously promote gsm cingy/t-mo,and diss cdma. but seriously is a-gps just the cheaper way to go for the carriers?

 

None of the carriers have a financial priority for E-911 other than to avoid fines. 3G is revenue producing. The biggest issue with funding for E-911 is the money that the PSAP's are supposed to pay to the carriers as a subsidy from the Fed for the cost of the upgrades. Collecting is is a major issue.

That doesn't excuse the carriers, but believe me....the carriers aren't the obstacle.

 

Thanks for asking both questions I had, I guess then the carriers are at close to the 57% rate then which is far less then I would have thought, but as you said later E-911 isn't a money generator & not a priority for them vs 3G.

My question is, even if other carriers aren't up to the 95% + and carriers like Cingular & T-Mobile are, wouldn't the PSAP's have requested the funding to put the system in place, since they can at this point with some carriers utilize the E-911 system now, or do they need to wait for all carriers to be ready to lessen testing & interuption while being setup?

 

The 95% rate is a market, which has been open to interpretation. It's also based on calls not subscribers. They will also do it for single carriers, but usually do all at once.

 

I'm glad you brought that up. True Position (whose system is pathetic, IMO, relative to their prime competition) is a press release whore. This is nothing more than the automatic renewal of the annual services contract that lays out terms and conditions as a blanket purchase agreement. It is merely status quo.

Those guys crack me up.

Also, just as they went to True Position because of a contractual clause after the AT&T/Cingular merger 2 years ago, don't be surprised with additional announcements related to E-911 network changes with the latest merger activity.

 

I kind of figured that it was subjective to interpetation, but wasn't 100% sure how they do the calculations.

Yeah I did forget that I posted this, maybe I should slow down or stop posting articles for a while.

Do you think after they just announced this with Cingular that it will change anytime soon now that AT&T has them or do you think they will just ride it out with True Position since they are in compliance now with them?

 

I read an article where it seems regulations on wireless is going to have some heavy exposure too this year. That inlcudes the ETF (which the wireless wants to have the states to stop regulating it as they think the users dont caare for that and they want to cut the local added on taxes. Then we have the government side who want more out them. I think by June we will see some more where the Likes of Cingular and VZW will be hit hard.

 

I think if the Govt. wants to do this they should force the carriers into Lower ETF's if they think people really don't care & I am all for lower or removing the Local taxes for those that have to pay it. (Luckily I am not one of them).

It is going to be interesting to see if the Fed's go for a National Wireless regulation vs States, but I know the States are fighting hard to not let this happen, since the Wireless companies appear to want the Fed regulation & that means it will only benefit them.
Of course with the changes in the Govt as of 07, they may not like what could happen to the carriers, since it's majority Democrats now.

 

I am game for the goverment to do what could result in more things available at a lesser cost to us.

 

Way off, not even close to reality, Jones. CDMA carriers have P2 E-911, jsut using different technologies. If they didn't they would be facing millions in fines. The A-GPS and other systems used by CDMA carriers aren't as accuate, IMNSHO on the matter. Also, they originally went that router for LBS reasons, not public safety.

 

Your blind biased denial in the face of facts is astounding. Theyjave implemented it. The article that started this thread was a propoganda piece to stir the pot. It was more editorial than factual in nature.

 

From the article I gathered that the CDMA carriers have almost all covered. Just not enough yet for the FCC. Sprint had 86 percent covered, I would assume the others are right up there or higher. It's not that most cannot be found when they dial 911, just the last few percent. Which I assume they are still working on improving just not fast enough, so they will be fined.

Or am I way off base?

 

Exactly. In a defined 'market' that is beyond the compliance deadline for Phase 2 E-911, have the following accuracy requirements:

Handset-based solutions: 50 meters for 67 percent of calls, 150 meters for 95percent of calls;

Network-based solutions: 100 meters for 67 percent of calls, 300 meters for 95 percent of calls.

This call volume is usually defined/calcuted by number of erlangs.

 

All the customers have to do is trade in their old handsets for newer e911 compliant ones. The problem is that many customers don't want to get new handsets. Even so the old handsets will dial 911 which is more than anyone had before cell phones came on the scene. This whole discussion is so out of proportion.

 

And dont forget for one to trade a handset and get a new one then the customer will have to get a new contract and with that in mind many people that ahd some good deal they wouldthen loose it.. There ahs to be some incentive that needs to be given for the customers to upgrade. This argument seems to be more for the carriers who use agps