Aussie 3G/UMTS/HSDPA network kicks ass (200km range)

Urban Weigl

TELSTRA and its network partner Ericsson have claimed a new record for mobile data coverage, saying a cell in Telstra's 850MHz Next G mobile network can now stretch to 200km.

Telstra said "extended range" Ericsson software had been installed in several mountain-top sites around Australia, saying the upgrade was the first time a range of 200km had been achieved in a commercial mobile network.
Typical range for a cell in the network was about 50km. Telstra said data rates of 2.3Mbps at 200km had been recorded during testing.

The new software would see peak upkink speeds of 1.9Mbps and downlink speeds of 14.4Mbps, Telstra said.

New laptop data cards capable of data rates of 7.2Mbps were scheduled to be released mid-year, Telstra said. "Since launching Next G with HSDPA, Telstra has doubled the volume of total data traffic carried on all of its wireless networks," Telstra chief executive Sol Trujillo said in a statement.

Ericsson president Carl-Henric Svanberg made the announcement at the 3GSM mobile conference in Barcelona.

Source: http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,21219295%5E26559%5E%5Enbv%5E15306%2D15320,00.html

niallb

Wow.
That's what you get when you move 3G services to a frequency with a bit of punch :-)

I heard on the radio last week that there's about to be an EU directive
encouraging the rollout of 3G services on '2G frequencies'.
It sounded like it was to be put in place in a matter of weeks,
and was designed to prevent governments interfering with growth
in net access by imposing prohibitively expensive fees for spectrum licensing.

Imagine Meteor for example being able to roll out UTMS service without
needing to build a 2100 MHz network?
Vodafone and O2 could expand their network coverage at a much faster rate, and the lower frequency would give better indoor coverage as well...
I'd hate to be "Three" if there's much truth in that!
Anyone any more detail?

NiallB

watty

Its not gennerally very usefull having big range.

To have lots of people you need SMALL cells.

A 400km diameter cell can only have maybe 5 to 7 users at most at decent speed. Only usful if you have a large unihabited desert.

watty

Don't they have some of those in Austrailia?

niallb

It's not just range though, won't you get better penetration
(of walls and trees) at lower frequencies in denser populated areas?

Sponge Bob

the EU may be looking more at the LARGE amount of UHF spectrum (300mhz) than the smaller amount of 2G spectrum (50mhz) seeing as the bloody UHF is supposed to be turned off in 5 years (but not here because Dempsey is afraid of deflector candidates in the election ) while the 2g will be around another 10 years or more.

The EU proposals will in the short tem allow Voda (with both 2g and 3g ) to retire their 2g service and reuse that spectrum for a while for 3g which is what they are doing in Italy IIRC

see

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/d1d16e42-bad2-11db-bbf3-0000779e2340,_i_rssPage=61e21220-6714-11da-a650-0000779e2340.html

maceocc2

Ericsson dont actually know why there P5 project roleout has gone so well over in Australia. Because there a fair few countries that have gone for it and none of them have had even close to the same results as Australia, although the Aussie networks people reckon its to do with the fact that they have got entirely new hardware where as all others have just swopped out some boards on there exiting hardware.

Its a good sign

Sponge Bob

there would be a case for deploying some of that gear on the atlantic seaboard of Ireland seeing as vodafone use ericcson gear and have the base stations already .

paulm17781

Would the Australian results not be due to the low population density in parts of Australia? Those results could have been radically different if tested in Sydney city centre as opposed to a mountain range with 80 people in the surrounding 200km.

Urban Weigl

The typical range of a cell in the Next G network was 50km, according to the article. Obviously they'll still want to put A LOT of cells in places like Sydney, otherwise the network would get congested. However using UMTS850 (or UMTS900) in Europe in addition to UMTS2100 and even UMTS2600 could benefit rural areas with very low population densities, where it simply does not make sense to have cells with a typical radius of 2.5km as there's almost no customers (unless we sign up the sheep)!

Is it possible to install this software on, for example, Vodafone's existing UMTS2100 base stations to improve their range? For example, I have a marginal 3G signal from Vodafone at my house, anywhere between 0 bars and 4 bars out of 5 on a Nokia E61, depending on where I am. Though I doubt it, as it's probably simply the fact that 2100Mhz is too high to propagate any further.

niallb

paulm17781 wrote:

... Those results could have been radically different if tested in Sydney city centre as opposed to a mountain range with 80 people in the surrounding 200km.

Different but not that relevant.
How much cable and trench digging/pole erecting would it take
to get DSL/cable to for example 80 people in such an enormous area.
Testing those cable runs would also give you different results than
those given by a typical run in Sydney.

This is a useful technology, but it's not the solution to all problems.
Perhaps Dempsey could introduce a "congestion charge" for people
who try to use 3G data services in a heavily built up area :-)

rebel.ranter

Sponge Bob wrote:

there would be a case for deploying some of that gear on the atlantic seaboard of Ireland seeing as vodafone use ericcson gear and have the base stations already .

Vodafone, O2 & Meteor are all now using Ericsson BTS/Node Bs. They'll be running all the networks in this country in about 2 years IMO.
The fact that a different frequency could be used would not necessarily mean that the equipment could be rolled out any faster. The hardware/antennas, software & parameters would all be so different that it would in fact slow down the rollout of such a network, it would also mean that there would be many disruptions to the network during the change over. It would be the equivalent of changing the engine out in a car.

rebel.ranter

niallb wrote:

Wow.
That's what you get when you move 3G services to a frequency with a bit of punch :-)

I heard on the radio last week that there's about to be an EU directive
encouraging the rollout of 3G services on '2G frequencies'.
It sounded like it was to be put in place in a matter of weeks,
and was designed to prevent governments interfering with growth
in net access by imposing prohibitively expensive fees for spectrum licensing.

Imagine Meteor for example being able to roll out UTMS service without
needing to build a 2100 MHz network?
Vodafone and O2 could expand their network coverage at a much faster rate, and the lower frequency would give better indoor coverage as well...
I'd hate to be "Three" if there's much truth in that!
Anyone any more detail?

NiallB

It would indeed be good if it was possible to use the 900MHz spectrum, even better if a much lower frequency was available like 300MHz. Indeed indoor penetration would be better. The unfortunate thing is that what will happen is the networks will see this as an opportunity to reduce the amount of investment required to produce the network they intend to build. Remember there is no obligation on any of the networks to build anything more than their license decrees. Just because early adopters like ourselves see benefit in services like this and services like broadband it is no guarantee that there is sufficient demand to spur companies into action.
So far like WAP, 3G is a dismal failure, WAP is actually now useful but the horse has bolted & no-one uses it. 3G is heading for the same fate.

Urban Weigl

I'll be the first to admit that the roll out of 3G has, quite frankly, fallen years behind what was expected. However, I really do not think it's going to go the same way as WAP: Once the EU allows 900MHz to be used for UMTS, I would not be surprised if operators begin phasing out GSM, in favour of an all-UMTS network, copying what Telstra is doing in Australia (they are phasing out their legacy network, and will only have a 3G UMTS network within 12 months).

For example, O2 are already testing UMTS900. I don't think it would necessarily come as a big surprise if they announced in another year or so that they'll be switching off their GSM network within 24 months, and covering even the most remote regions of the country with UMTS. They'll be able to combine both UMTS900 and UMTS2100, as well as UMTS1800, to offer more capacity and more coverage. In very densely populated areas, UMTS2600 will likely also be used to increase capacity. It's already being auctioned in Germany, and ComReg is expected to follow suit.

Of course it's equally possible that nothing will change for years to come. I'm just saying I see this as a real possibility.

rebel.ranter

UMTS900 will bring things to a new level alright, technically it shows huge benefits, although you have to think about the financial benfit & then work out which will win out.
The only way to ensure the progress of 3G is to force people to buy it, like the networks did with MMS. Now all handsets are MMS compatible, the phones are working with the right settings out of the box & people are finally sending picture messages.
Will 3G be a success & avoid the Wap-type failure? This is still uncertain, the networks have to get it right, everything has be optimised as best as it can be, the devices have to be top quality & available, the people selling it have to be confident, the support has to be provided when things go wrong. If it is pushed too soon without all the key elements in place people will just dismiss it and it dies.
I don't think the networks can afford to let it die so let's hope it's a success!

See Digiweb now have a license in Norway, they also have a license here, there's loads of interesting things happening.