First Responder Communications: Why Altitude Matters

Part 2 of a 20-Part Bridge Series on HAPS Usage and Deployment in the United States.

1. The First Responder Communications Problem – Still Not Solved

Despite billions invested in public safety networks and FirstNet, US first responders still encounter three stubborn realities:

1. Coverage gaps – rural, mountainous, coastal and forested areas where networks thin out.

2. Capacity constraints – urban and suburban cells that saturate during major incidents.

3. Infrastructure fragility – towers and backhaul links that fail just when demand spikes.

First responders have adapted by carrying multiple radios, using satellite terminals, and deploying temporary “cells on wheels,” but these are workarounds, not a coherent architecture.

HAPS introduces a simple, but powerful, idea: place a persistent communications layer above the full incident footprint, independent of the damage on the ground.

2. Why Altitude Matters for Public Safety

For emergency scenarios, altitude changes three things that terrestrial and satellite systems struggle with simultaneously:

2.1 Line of sight over complex terrain

Mountains, canyons, dense forests and high-rise clusters all block radio paths. A platform at 20 km altitude has near-continuous line of sight over a very wide area, greatly reducing shadow zones.

2.2 Single platform, multi-agency footprint

Instead of stitching together overlapping cells and repeaters, a single HAPS footprint can cover:

• The entire incident zone

• Evacuation corridors

• Staging areas

• Field hospitals

• Command centres

This simplifies planning and allows common coverage for police, fire, EMS, utilities, coastguard and federal agencies.

2.3 Lower latency than satellites

For mission-critical push-to-talk, video feeds, telemetry and drone control, latency matters. HAPS can deliver delays comparable to terrestrial LTE and 5G, which is simply not the case with many satellite solutions.

“For first responders, altitude is not a gimmick – it is the only way to maintain continuous coverage when the ground network is damaged, degraded or overloaded.”

3. HAPS as the Fourth Layer of Public Safety Networks

Public safety communications in the US are gradually moving toward a multi-layer design:

1. Terrestrial public safety LTE / 5G (e.g. FirstNet)

2. Legacy narrowband (P25, TETRA equivalents, analog systems)

3. Satellite and HF/long-range backups

4. HAPS – a persistent, incident-scale coverage layer overhead

In this picture, HAPS does not replace any existing asset.

Instead, it delivers:

• A wide-area “ceiling network” for backhaul and coordination

• An overlay for critical voice, data and video

• A temporary extension where ground network build-out is infeasible or too slow

4. Core Use Cases for HAPS in First Responder Comms

4.1 Major wildfires

Wildfires often occur in rugged terrain with poor coverage and high risk to ground infrastructure. HAPS can:

• Provide a wide-area voice and data umbrella

• Relay live video from drones and aircraft

• Connect fire teams, evacuation routes and command centres in a single footprint

4.2 Hurricanes and coastal storms

Hurricanes frequently take out:

• Cell towers

• Power lines

• Microwave backhaul

• Fibre runs to coastal communities

A HAPS platform deployed before or immediately after landfall can bridge isolated districts, maintain connectivity to emergency operations centres and enable damage assessment.

4.3 Multi-site mass-casualty incidents

In urban or regional incidents, multiple sites and agencies are involved. The existing cellular network can become congested by public usage and media. A HAPS payload dedicated to public safety:

• Provides reserved capacity

• Isolates critical traffic from public congestion

• Enables roaming of responders across multiple scenes

4.4 Cross-border cooperation

Along land borders, jurisdictional boundaries complicate roaming and interoperability. A HAPS-based overlay, governed by appropriate agreements, could provide a neutral coverage and interoperability layer that bridges agencies on both sides.

5. Interoperability: The Perennial Weak Link

The US has a long history of interoperability challenges: incompatible radios, fragmented coverage, and siloed systems. Altitude alone does not fix that, but HAPS can help in three ways:

1. Common backhaul for multiple systems – P25, LTE, and IP-based dispatch systems can all use the same airborne backbone.

2. Gateway functions on the payload – protocol and talkgroup translation can be performed at altitude, bridging legacy and IP-based networks.

3. Consistent coverage for roaming responders – responders entering the incident zone do not have to rely on patchy roaming arrangements if the HAPS platform offers a common service framework.

Crucially, none of this requires the replacement of existing equipment; it requires integration and careful planning.

6. Deployment Models – Pre-Positioned vs On-Demand

There are two broad deployment concepts for HAPS in public safety:

6.1 Pre-positioned platforms

Based near high-risk zones (e.g. wildfire or hurricane-prone states), platforms can be:

• Launched ahead of forecasted events

• Maintained over a region as a seasonal asset

• Integrated into state or federal emergency planning

6.2 On-demand national assets

A small national fleet could be activated for:

• Multi-state disasters

• Catastrophic infrastructure failures

• Major national events (elections, large public gatherings, state visits)

Boards and policymakers should view these as strategic national assets, not just telecom tools.

7. Limitations and Practical Realities

HAPS is not a magic wand. For first responder comms:

• Weather and airspace constraints must be managed.

• Spectrum coordination is essential to avoid interference.

• Payload capacity is finite – especially for early platforms.

• Governance and data ownership need clear frameworks, especially when multiple agencies and jurisdictions are involved.

The value lies in complementing the existing stack and providing capabilities that ground networks cannot – not in replacing carefully built public safety infrastructure.

8. Board-Level “So What?” for Public Safety and Policy Leaders

For public safety agencies, state governments and federal stakeholders, the key questions are:

• Where are our biggest coverage and resilience gaps today?

• Which incident types would benefit most from an overhead persistent layer?

• How would we integrate HAPS into existing communications plans and exercises?

• Which agencies would own, fund and operate such capabilities?

Forward-looking leadership will not wait for a crisis to test these models. HAPS should be considered now as part of a broader national resilience conversation.

9. Conclusion – Altitude as a Strategic Advantage

First responder communications are not just about radios and towers. They are about guaranteed, resilient, interoperable connectivity when everything else is failing.

High-altitude platforms offer a new way to achieve that. By providing wide-area, low-latency coverage above the incident zone, HAPS can become a critical fourth layer in the US public safety architecture—one that earns its place not by replacing existing networks, but by making them work when they are needed most.

If your organisation is exploring how high-altitude platforms, non-terrestrial networks or frontier communications could support your strategy, Bridge Connect US can help.

Our advisors work with executives, boards and public-sector leaders across telecoms, digital infrastructure and emerging technologies to clarify the opportunities, the risks and the practical next steps.

To discuss your priorities in confidence - or to understand where HAPS and other NTN solutions may fit within your US connectivity roadmap - contact Bridge Connect US for an initial conversation.

We help you move from uncertainty to strategic clarity.