Whitepaper compares emergency voice systems
A whitepaper published by Analysys Mason compares TETRA and LTE-based systems for mission-critical voice communications used in public protection and disaster relief operations.
The paper is written by Charles Murray, Sviat Novik and Fabio Amann Fernández and examines whether LTE-based systems, including the Emergency Services Network (ESN), can replace TETRA for emergency service voice communications.
It assesses the two systems across coverage, resilience, operational features and future readiness.
The paper states that TETRA delivers more consistent and predictable coverage because it operates on lower-frequency spectrum, allowing signals to travel further, penetrate buildings more effectively and degrade more gradually at the edge of coverage.
LTE-based systems are described as more susceptible to attenuation, with signals weakening more abruptly, especially indoors and behind obstacles.
It adds that TETRA users already understand known weak spots through operational experience, whereas LTE coverage remains dependent on future upgrades, testing and infrastructure expansion.
Whitepaper details resilience and operational differences
According to the whitepaper, TETRA is inherently more resilient because it is designed specifically for emergency services and runs on dedicated spectrum with hardened infrastructure and redundancy across power and backhaul.
The paper states that this leads to more predictable behaviour during outages, with failures typically limited to local areas.
LTE-based systems are described as more exposed to shared infrastructure dependencies because they rely on commercial mobile networks.
The paper notes that faults affecting shared exchanges or fibre routes can cause wider disruption across multiple sites at the same time.
It also states that TETRA maintains stable voice communication during major incidents, power outages and high-demand scenarios because it does not carry public traffic.
LTE-based systems can face congestion from public users in dense areas or during large events, which may delay responders trying to connect before priority mechanisms are applied.
Whitepaper points to hybrid approach
The whitepaper identifies direct mode operation and ground-to-air communication as two operational areas where TETRA currently retains an advantage.
It states that LTE-based equivalents exist in technical standards, though they remain in development, require additional certification and have not been deployed at national scale.
The paper also reviews programme costs and delivery timelines linked to ESN, stating that deployment depends on large-scale infrastructure upgrades, extended testing periods and uncertain timelines for full operational readiness.
It includes figures showing that TETRA operates at around 400 MHz compared with around 800 MHz for LTE, and that LTE experiences 5 – 6 dB higher path loss than TETRA.
The paper also states that around 1500 buildings have already been identified for ESN in-building upgrades, that historic Airwave costs were approximately £450 million per year and that ESN costs are estimated at £370 – £420 million per year once operational.
This year marks ten years since Motorola Solutions acquired Airwave.
It concludes that TETRA remains the most reliable platform for mission-critical voice communication and presents a hybrid model, with TETRA for assured voice and LTE for data and supplementary services, as the most practical strategy for the foreseeable future.