Universal Broadband Coverage in Ireland for a mere €30 Million

Sponge Bob

This airborne tech would be the solution to all of Ireland ills, and at reasonable cost too. It actually covers 300,000 square miles where the area of the state is about a tenth of that.

Story Here on the ever helpful Reg

It differs from the thethered Aerostat idea in that there is nothing to 'run into' anywhere and it will not be affected by the weather .......at all ....seeing as there is no weather where this thing goes .

It differs from Sat Tech in that

a) it can be serviced if necessary
b) it is 13 miles away not 23000 miles away , latency is not an issue.
c) Eircom cant get at it unless Comreg let them buy a SAM, which they probably will.
d) There are shedloads of Ghz (= Gbits) of Line of sight spectrum internationally allocated for aerostat BB already
e) you could put the entire Irish Digital TV and Digital Radio Broadcasting system on it as well, while you are at it.
f) no digging .
g) It would cost less than the E Voting fiasco and would not have to be stored thereafter.
h) It could supply Functional Internet Access at 56k for all at a fraction of what Comreg believe it will cost Eircom

damien

Sponge Bob wrote:

c) Eircom cant get at it unless Comreg let them buy a SAM, which they probably will.

There are a few spare ones about the place alright.

JohnC.

Interesting, but it would be a pain when it has to be taken down for servicing or fixing. Unless whoever operates it has a pair of them and send the second one up when the first comes down.

Dero

Kahless, the plan would be to have a pair of them, yes.

The Register wrote:

Maximum duration: 18 months (a replacement ship will be in position prior to bringing original ship down for retrofitting. The original ship will return to its position after retrofitting.

Cryos

I heard about it a few months ago on newstalk 106, they plan to have broadband, mobile, tv and phone services on it so generating income for its €30 million euro pricetag is not going to be that hard.

It will be interesting to see

nahdoic

It really is amazing technology - universal worldwide broadband/mobile/phone coverage from a single company would be very possible.

nahdoic

Another link to the story here http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050413/APA/504130516

lucernarian

I think this would be a good story to send to the DCMNR. Perhaps the Govt. might consider the idea, even though it seems absurd at first glance? It actually would be a kind of re-nationalisation. It would make Eircom redundant in one fell swoop. It might make vodafone and o2 and meteor redundant in one fell swoop. RTÉ neednt worry about the high cost of digitisation of their transmissions. Or am I being too optimistic?

Surely SOMEBODY would at least consider the idea, be it a government department or a commercial company?

Mr_Man

I doubt you'd get much interest from the Department as the Government no doubt will need the money to fund another inquiry that takes years and costs millions and ends up telling us nothing we didn't already know. The only question is which of the many topics the inquiry should focus on?

M.

Cryos

The other issue that could possibly be raised aswell is...

Well it could be deemed as an act of anti-competition, somethign like what microsoft is currently paying hundreds of millions out in...

I do hope that its a big sucsess as im not to pleased about waiting untill 2007 for confirmed bb even tho bb is already in neighbouring towns where i live.

bminish

I think the whole thing is a bit impractical.

One of the problems with using high sites (this is just a very high site without the hillwalkers and the anti-mast lobby at the gate.) is how they affect frequency reuse.

Basically the issue is that you can only use a given block of frequencies once per site without hosing performance even with big money and top notch engineering there are serious trade-offs with trying to reuse the same block twice on the same site. Sites that cover wide areas preclude the reuse of those frequencies within their coverage area. In th early days of Eircell's TACS network (088) they covered Dublin from 3 rock but they didn't have very many available channels, to expand capacity they had to move to multiple low sites, Once you get down low you Can reuse the same frequencies every few miles, look at 802.11 stuff for example.

Yes, there is plenty of millimetre wave microwave spectrum that is nearly virgin real estate, much of it would be ideal in this type of setup since it's real weakness is atmospheric absorption at sea level and nobody wants it, in this role however the distance travelled at sea level is short so it is perfect for the job and generally considered nearly worthless; if you are going up you are not at sea level for long..
However mm Wave microwave kit is tricky stuff to build, harder to keep running and not all that well understood. It's extremely expensive, making each CPE will be expensive. At these frequencies unlike the low (sub 5 ghz )spectrum there are no non-line of site gimmicks (which come with other costs) to avoid the need for installs in areas with good coverage.

Well then, how about using more currently practical bits of the microwave spectrum?
Bear in mind that a system such as this will also require an up-link of roughly equal bandwidth to it's total down-link. Whatever possible frequency reuse you have on the down-link (& I am not convinced that any frequency reuse will be possible in this type of setup..) you have none on the uplink.
Now consider that the decent, currently deployed coding systems run at no more than about 7 bits per hz of RF bandwidth (before error correction or tcp/ip overhead)
Taking into account up-link and down-link demands as well as tcp/ip overheads I would suggest 1.5 bits per hz is a practical guesstimate for a total requirement.
How much bandwidth do we, as a nation require ?
even if we only wanted a mere 2Gbs (less than the capacity of one wavelength on one fibre pair and far below even current national requirements) we still require 1.5 Ghz of microwave spectrum allocation, that simply isn't available in the practical and affordable part (sub 37 Ghz) of the microwave spectrum

Tethered balloon type proposals make somewhat more sense from a radio spectrum point of view

1/ the are lower and cover smaller areas allowing for more frequency reuse.
2/ they only require 1/2 the microwave bandwidth since they are back-hauled via fibre optic cables up the tether, only the end user side requires microwave spectrum

.Brendan

eircomtribunal

I am not sure does that fit into this thread? What will it bring?

ComReg just issued its proposals for licensing new spectrum, (Wideband Digital Mobile Data in the 420 MHZ and 900 MHZ bands). From the document on http://www.comreg.ie/whats_new/default.asp?ctype=5&nid=102003


"ComReg is in the process of drafting the Regulations under which the licences will be issued. These regulations will require approval from the Minister of Communications Marine and Natural Resources before ComReg can proceed with the licensing procedure. An Information Memorandum will be published at the end of June detailing the licensing procedure. It is expected that the licensing will be complete and licences issued by the end of August 2005".

P.

DonegalMan

bminish wrote:

I think the whole thing is a bit impractical.

I still think the DCMR should investigate it.

Irealnd is so far behind the rest of the world using conventional technology that it's unlikely we will ever catch up.

IMHO, our only hope is to leapfrog over existing technology to future technology, so we should be investigating all these alternatives.

dahamsta

DonegalMan wrote:

I still think the DCMR should investigate it.

I agree.

bminish

eircomtribunal wrote:

I am not sure does that fit into this thread? What will it bring?

Well not much in reality, what we have on offer here is a few Mhz of very valuable real estate due to it's significant non-los properties (particularly where trees are concerned), however in broadband provision terms it's probably only good for a few users so essentially worthless.

Possibly a handy thing for a WISP to have in it's arsenal to get to a few truly remote customers if they actually gave a damn about truly remote customers and if equipment was available (and in any way affordable) but with 2 mhz wide chunks you are not going to solve the problem for very many users nor are you going to deliver earth shattering speeds.

It's real use with the terms of this type of licence is, i suspect for building wide area medium bandwith networks (like ricochet in the US who are not famed for speed or rural coverage )
http://www.ricochet.net/
GPRS/ 3G can outdo this nicely if the pricing came down to earth..

I am very sceptical that there is in fact a need for this at all in the Irish market, and we are too small a nation for it to be cost effective to develop an Ireland only solution. This proposed new slice does not appear to tie in well with any similar allocations elsewhere.

Ultimately I think we are looking at another few Mhz of real estate that Comreg are going to regulate into non-use. Way to go ComReg.

.Brendan

cgarvey

I'm confused Brendan .. are you saying that this is impractical because of the current limitations on frequency allocation/licensing .. or are you saying that the bandwidth it could offer (given all the god damn frequency spectrum it wants) is still going to be horribly inefficient/unpractical? (yes, I confuse easily )

eircomtribunal

cgarvey wrote:

is still going to be horribly inefficient/unpractical? (yes, I confuse easily )

(As far as I understand it) This system suffers from the same limitation as two way satellite, minus the latency: A wireless single point system can only communicate effectively with so many users.
The only function of such systems is for (one-way) broadcasting, or for (two-way) communicating with a limited number of users (Say you want to give mobile phone coverage, or Internet access to a limited number of users dispersed over a wide area).

It is unlikely the silver bullet for Irish Broadband will be found in technical novelties – and the DCMNR (with due respect for their good intentions) is not the best place to investigate/understand them – but in very simple market regulatory measures.

For example:
• Regulate down the line rental charge on lines that do not offer broadband. It is not justifiable that a user on a pairgained crap line should pay the same as a user who can get 2 Mb. Eircom cannot argue that this would create a problem for them, as they'll soon have a broadband coverage of 90% anyway!*
• Regulate that customers who cannot get broadband are offered real flat-rate at a nominal fee of no more than a monthly 10 euro (which is not really nominal at all, but still much higher than the comparative adsl tariffs for what it offers). Eircom cannot argue that this would create a problem for them, as they'll soon have a broadband coverage of 90% anyway!*

In short, create virtuous circles, selfrunners, instead of the vicious circles we have to date. Why should the incumbent throw money at upgrading my line for broadband, when more profit is gained from me by leaving it as it is?
We are blessed with a regulator who discovers in 130+pages gaff* publications that Voice over IP etc is around the corner, but cannot understand the most simple things.
We need urgent political intervention from the DCMNR or higher to stop the patients running the asylum any longer.
P.

*
"Milestone, November 2004: eircom announced plans to deliver 500 000 DSL connections by December 2007 and 90% coverage by May 2006, calling on the Government to deliver the remaining 10%"
"Milestone, February 2004: Launch of broadband trigger level scheme by eircom for 150 communities of less than 1500 population"

From page 119ff of "Forward-looking Strategic Review of the Irish Telecoms Sector" under "Annex 1 – Key Milestones in the Irish Telecoms Sector"

bminish

cgarvey wrote:

I'm confused Brendan .. are you saying that this is impractical because of the current limitations on frequency allocation/licensing ..

No, usable microwave spectrum is a very finite resource, there are no large chunks of unused spectrum available for systems such as this.
There is plenty of unused spectrum that is unsuitable for most terrestrial uses that may be usable for systems such as this but it's pretty much unexplored territory.

or are you saying that the bandwidth it could offer (given all the god damn frequency spectrum it wants) is still going to be horribly inefficient/unpractical? (yes, I confuse easily )

Yes, take for example 802.11a. in the 802.11a allocation in ireland we have 5 non-overlapping channels. With sensible RF planning and the use of a mix of low and high sites it is possible to reuse those 5 channels again and again. If You are only using one site you only get to use these 5 channels once

.Brendan

DonegalMan

eircomtribunal wrote:

(As far as I understand it) This system suffers from the same limitation as two way satellite, minus the latency: A wireless single point system can only communicate effectively with so many users.

I wasn't aware of the fact that a single satellite could only serve a limited number of users - it makes sense when you point it out, I just hadn't thought about it.

Have you any idea what is the typical number of users that a single satellite can serve?

cgarvey

Ta for the info boys!

.cg