TETRA market positioning TETRA Indian Conference Delhi February 2006 Risto Toikkanen Vice chairman / TETRA Association

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

Cellular system cannot meet these requirements - Neither can Push-To-Talk over cellular (CDMA/GPRS) Cellular system cannot meet these requirements - Neither can Push-To-Talk over cellular (CDMA/GPRS) 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

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 Backward compatibility with analog FM radios 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 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 ! TETRA 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 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 New 25 kHz TDMA proposal filed TETRA Trunked 4-slot TDMA grom 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 Traditionally assumes wider coverage and lower capacity Benefits from high power mobile radios ( 10 to 30 W and even more) Expensive when number of channels becomes high Trend towards higher user densities poses challenge Trend towards handsets dilutes the coverage benefit TETRA - TDMA 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 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... TETRA 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 Idea of international co- operation 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 TETRA Designed for cross-border operation, ISI standard Designed for international traffic, numbering, country codes Implemented efficient VPN support for multi-agency sharing TETRA network can be nationwide homogenous seamless entity - today

Radio terminals Project 25 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 TETRA Have supported full duplex for years Smaller size & weight Innovations like integral GPS, 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 colour display today? Which other PMR technology delivers handsets with web & WAP browsers today? Quick questionnaire in TETRA World Congress 2005 revealed some 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 STANDARDS MoU Operator/User Association Technical Forum Members’ Enquiry TIP SPECS TMO AI group DMO AI group ISI group (PEI group) approx 12 suppliers TEST PLANS MoU Certification Body ISCTI *) Rome/Italy ACCEPTED into OPERATION (Also need CE mark or TA) CERTIFICATE *) Istituto Superiore delle Comunicazioni e tecnologie dell'Informazione

TETRA IOP achievements Tested products from: Cleartone DeTeWe/FWK/R&S Frequentis IFR (tester) Marconi/OTE/SELEX Motorola Niros Nokia/EADS Rohde & Schwarz Rohill Simoco/Sepura Teltronic Thales Certificates at: Tested products from: Cleartone DeTeWe/FWK/R&S Frequentis IFR (tester) Marconi/OTE/SELEX Motorola Niros Nokia/EADS Rohde & Schwarz Rohill Simoco/Sepura Teltronic Thales Certificates at: *) One more company has hosted a test session, another more has signed in TETRA IOP certification results 7 companies have received TETRA infrastructure certificates for 8 systems *) 9 companies have received TETRA terminal certificates in trunked mode 6 companies have received TETRA DMO certificates

Summary, TETRA vs Project 25 TETRA makes major difference in multi-vendor support, certified interoperability and open competition In voice group call services both technologies offer about the same level of services In one-to-one calls related services TETRA clearly leads Use of data much better exploited in TETRA networks - IP data is in operational use Clear difference of innovation seen in TETRA handsets The difference in handset prices is outstanding

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?