Rural mobile phone users could lose signal

bealtine

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2012/0618/ireland/rural-mobile-phone-users-could-lose-signal-197822.html

Thousands of mobile phone users in rural Ireland could be left searching for a signal due to policy decisions made by the telecom regulator ComReg.

A proposed auction of mobile facilities next month could result in a massive decline in coverage in rural areas.

An expert engineer from one of the big mobile providers, Ericsson, has warned that the failure by ComReg to push for a universal service obligation (USO) — which would require mobile phone operators to provide coverage for the whole country — will result in an inevitable decline in coverage for rural customers.

"The USO option, unless implemented quickly, fails to deal with the threat of coverage ‘erosion’ that Ericsson has highlighted and if such a trend takes hold, ComReg will be pretty powerless to do anything about it given that the licenses will have been issued with the low coverage obligations," the engineer’s submission said.

As it stands, the new licences to be issued by ComReg will only require mobile phone operators such as Vodafone, O2, Meteor, and 3 to provide a service to 70% of the population.

Broken down into geographical coverage, it could represent just 10% of Ireland’s land area — the heavily populated East coast.

However, ComReg is hoping competition for users will drive the operators to maintain their networks in rural areas.

Successive communications ministers accepted 100% coverage was impossible. Vodafone’s original licence required 85% coverage, O2 about 80%, and Meteor 53%.

A spokesperson for the regulator said: "ComReg considered that actual coverage levels are expected to exceed this 70% population obligation, given the competitive nature of the market and the limited risk of roll-back of coverage from the existing levels."

However, within ComReg’s own consultation documents, the commission admitted that if it doesn’t force mobile phone operators to provide rural coverage, consumers will suffer.

"The end result could be that the overall level of coverage provided by the market could be much reduced from current levels. This would potentially be very damaging for consumers who would no longer have the ubiquity of mobile coverage in rural areas that they are accustomed to," ComReg said in a consultation document.

A spokesperson for lobby group Ireland Offline said: "Investment decisions will be made in the UK (Vodafone) and Spain (O2) on the basis of coverage requirements set out by Comreg.

"If the operators are not required to cover rural areas this will lead to the inevitable decline in rural coverage as the operators will see no regulatory requirement to invest in rural areas and may abandon lesser- served areas."

PogMoThoin

But look at all the money ComReg are generating........./sarcasm off

bealtine

PogMoThoin wrote: »

But look at all the money ComReg are generating........./sarcasm off

It's the d4 attitude all over again, culchies don't need phone coverage as dancing cows don't need netflix and sure aren't they grand they can use string and tin-cans to communicate. Of course it's all their own fault anyway

bealtine

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/comms/item/27803-towards-4g-what-70pc-popul


A policy decision that could result in just 70pc of Ireland’s population being covered by the next generation of 4G LTE networks could cause people in rural areas to lose basic coverage over time, a lobby group has warned.

IrelandOffline has produced a map (below) that shows the areas that will be served with the next generation of spectrum. It warns that areas outside of these locations could eventually see older 2G and 3G equipment become obsolete and as a result basic coverage will be impacted.

According to Eamon Wallace of IrelandOffline the policy decision by ComReg equates to just 12pc and 6pc of geographic coverage depending on the metric chosen.

“Thousand of mobile phone users in rural Ireland could be left without coverage due to this policy decision."

He says that had a different process been chosen called shared Radio Access Network (RAN), operators would have shared infrastructure and be in a position to deliver reasonable mobile broadband services in rural locations.

“Sweden did the process right, they set up shared RAN for the more rural parts of the country, all the operators pooled and shared the infrastructure which delivered reasonable mobile broadband in remote areas.

http://irelandoffline.org/wp-content/2012/06/70pc-Map.png

“Other countries such as the UK have either reserved a spectrum block specifically for increases in Rural Coverage in their auction or as in the case of Germany in 2010 the Regulator went further and refused to allow 4G services to go active in lucrative urban areas until rural areas with patchy coverage had been covered first. This rural extension took two years once operators were forced to accelerate rural coverage to get at the high value customers," Wallace warned.

The forthcoming 4G auctions

ComReg said in March that provided there are no further objections to a current consultation should be the final step before a date for the auctions is set.
The spectrum auctions are critical because as well as paving the way for 4G technologies like LTE that are featured in the new iPad with speeds up to 73Mbps possible, former 2G bands can be used to provide 3G coverage to greater swathes of the population.

In total, 280 MHz of sub-2 GHz spectrum (ie, 140 MHz of paired spectrum) will be made available, more than doubling the currently licensed assignments in these particular bands.

ComReg said it will be a combinatorial clock auction, meaning it allows bidders to make packaged bids over multiple rounds of bidding within a prescribed timeframe.
But what can we do with the spectrum?
Wallace says the spectrum to be auctioned this summer includes the most valuable rural spectrum at around 800mhz, formerly in use for analogue television.
“It is valuable in rural areas because it reaches a longer distance and penetrates well into buildings where people may be found, a key weakness of the 2100mhz/2600Mhz spectrum in use for 3G devices.

A simple rule of thumb to measure the throughput of radio systems is the bits per Hertz measure.

“Currently (and for the foreseeable future) the value is between 3.5 to 5 bits per Hertz. This is part of the Shannon Limit and is a physical limit, even the mobile marketing departments can't break this limit, no matter how they like to spin mobile broadband successes.

“Investment decisions will be made in Madrid (O2) and Berkshire (Vodafone), the question will be asked "what are our coverage requirements?" The answer will be 70pc population only so the investment will only go to meeting that requirement. As the 2G and 3G gear becomes ever more obsolete will it ever be replaced if the coverage requirements are not there?

“The whole process was designed to maximize revenues rather than to provide coverage to consumers," Wallace warns.

Warnings of another broadband bottleneck
Wallace's views appear to be backed up by Ericsson's submission to the the ComReg consultation on the spectrum auctions. " ComReg is proposing a 70pc population coverage obligation. Ericsson strongly believes that such a target is wholly inappropriate for the following reasons: It fails to maximize the potential economic impact that the delivery of broadband in this spectrum could achieve.

"These bands are the only bands where high levels of coverage are economically viable. It makes no logical sense for coverage conditions to be lower in these bands relative to the higher bands, e.g. 3G services that have been licensed in the 2100 MHz band. In fact if anything it should be the other way around, with more stringent coverage obligations applying in the lower bands and more relaxed coverage obligations in the higher bands.

“There is a real danger that in the longer term operators may be forced to reduce their coverage from the current 99pc+ level we currently enjoy, down to a level at or close to 70pc of the population. This is because mobile operators in Ireland could well experience difficulty in securing access to scarce capex resources given that the financial returns to be made from such investment are significantly better in higher growth markets overseas.

“Such an outcome could lead to market failure and the resulting necessity to expand the National Broadband Scheme (NBS) from its current 10pc demographic to one as high as 30pc with consequent costs to the state.

“With regard to a minimum broadband throughput, given the right licensing conditions these bands are capable of supporting average end user-speeds of between 20Mbps and 95Mbps today. In Ericsson's opinion, it makes no sense to have a minimum average user throughput less than that required by the NBS," Ericsson's submission read.

John Kennedy

funnyname

Can everyone please email this article to Pat Rabbitte and their local representatives as this is very very serious.

I sent emails to Pat Rabbitte, Fergus O'Dowd, Enda Kenny and the 4 TDs in Galway East, not sure who monitors the email address the sent them to but hopefully someone will take notice before this turns into a total farce.


Edit

Got one reply of but not too hopeful.

On behalf of Minister Rabbitte I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence. I’ll ensure it’s brought to his attention.

The Cush

Question down for written reply on this in the Dáil tomorrow from Galway West TD Seán Kyne

*425. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he is concerned that the proposed 4G spectrum auction process which appears to cover 10% of the landmass and therefore only 70% of the population will place those citizens in rural areas at a disadvantage in terms of internet connectivity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. — Seán Kyne. [29698/12]

The Cush

Written reply to Dáil question

425. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he is concerned that the proposed 4G spectrum auction process which appears to cover 10% of the landmass, and therefore only 70% of the population, will place those citizens in rural areas at a disadvantage in terms of internet connectivity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29698/12]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte): The management of the radio spectrum is a statutory function of the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) under the Communications Regulation Act 2002 as amended. In accordance with its statutory functions, ComReg consulted extensively on its proposals for the release of spectrum rights of use in 800 MHz, 900 MHz and 1800 MHz frequency bands.

ComReg received considerable interest in this consultation process which has resulted in the decision document for the award of a number of individual rights of use in the 800 MHz, 900 MHz and 1800 MHz radio spectrum bands (ComReg Document 12/25 and Decision 04/12 published on 16 March 2012). ComReg’s Information Memorandum for this award process details the processes and procedures ComReg is employing to implement its substantive decisions (ComReg Document 12/52 published on 25 May 2012).

The reasons, analysis and other material relied upon by ComReg in support of its decisions on the minimum coverage and roll-out requirements are set out in section 5.5 of Document 12/25. Amongst other things, ComReg considered that actual coverage levels are expected to exceed this 70% population obligation by a considerable margin, given the competitive nature of the market and the limited risk of roll-back of coverage from the existing levels. It should be noted that the four existing mobile operators have achieved coverage levels exceeding those set out in their respective licences. For example, for 3G services, Vodafone’s coverage covers 90% of the population, 5% more than its obligation. Hutchison 3G, better known as “3”, covers 96% of the population, 11% more than its obligation. O2 also covers 90.5% of the population, which is also more than its obligation

ComReg also notes that coverage continues to be an important competitive differentiator. Any deterioration in coverage by any one network would undermine that network’s attractiveness to its existing and potential customers. The importance of maintaining the existing levels of mobile telephony and mobile broadband coverage has been raised with ComReg by my officials. While the outcome of the forthcoming multi-band spectrum release process can not be anticipated I understand that ComReg are not anticipating any reduction in coverage as a result of the process. It is also important to note that ComReg’s coverage proposals are designed to facilitate the possible entry of new operators in a manner that would ensure that “cherry picking” of high-density urban areas would not occur.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/06/19/00309.asp

bealtine

The Cush wrote: »

It is also important to note that ComReg’s coverage proposals are designed to facilitate the possible entry of new operators in a manner that would ensure that “cherry picking” of high-density urban areas would not occur.

what load of old twaddle...

If you make a regulation for 70% population coverage cherry picking is exactly what is going to happen

bealtine

Just in case anybody has any doubt as to what 70% population coverage looks like:

clohamon

The Cush wrote: »

Written reply to Dáil question

Just for the record.

The reasons, analysis and other material relied upon by ComReg in support of its decisions on the minimum coverage and roll-out requirements are set out in section 5.5 of Document 12/25.

ComReg did not provide any analysis. They relied on their own paid UK-based consultant who had less idea about Irish demographics than they did. There is no analysis.

Amongst other things, ComReg considered that actual coverage levels are expected to exceed this 70% population obligation by a considerable margin, given the competitive nature of the market and the limited risk of roll-back of coverage from the existing levels.

Once again, there was no analysis. They have played down the risk, ignored the risk, dissembled about the risk but they have not analysed or quantified the risk. They may as well have rolled a loaded dice or flipped a two-headed coin.

It should be noted that the four existing mobile operators have achieved coverage levels exceeding those set out in their respective licences. For example, for 3G services, Vodafone’s coverage covers 90% of the population, 5% more than its obligation. Hutchison 3G, better known as “3”, covers 96% of the population, 11% more than its obligation. O2 also covers 90.5% of the population, which is also more than its obligation

Spot the odd one out - it seems Meteor is immune to competitive pressures. "3" has fewer base stations than any other provider and 389 of them (NBS) were subsidised and are therefore not the result of competition or competitive forces. Vodafone and O2's coverage has never been measured properly.

ComReg also notes that coverage continues to be an important competitive differentiator.

All operators make claims. Advertising claims are a bust currency, ComReg know this.

Any deterioration in coverage by any one network would undermine that network’s attractiveness to its existing and potential customers.

Customers will never know because they will continue to be fed advertising BS by the operators and ComReg.

The importance of maintaining the existing levels of mobile telephony and mobile broadband coverage has been raised with ComReg by my officials.

One can only imagine what was said.

While the outcome of the forthcoming multi-band spectrum release process can not be anticipated I understand that ComReg are not anticipating any reduction in coverage as a result of the process.

They simply do not know what will happen. The reason for giving regulators extensive powers is so we can have the coverage we want and need - with certainty. To then ignore those powers and instead carry out an experiment in free-market dogma, on the instruction of Colm McCarthy and the departments of Finance and Communications, is a hostile act directed at rural Ireland.

When a farm worker gets his arm ripped off by a tractor PTO-shaft in a remote area, and phones for help with his good one, he'll be gratified to know that ComReg were 'not anticipating' that the coverage, that could have saved his life, would disappear.

It is also important to note that ComReg’s coverage proposals are designed to facilitate the possible entry of new operators in a manner that would ensure that “cherry picking” of high-density urban areas would not occur.

ComReg's coverage proposals will enable exactly the opposite and they have said so themselves.

funnyname

Looks like an automated reply

Go raibh maith agat as teagmháil a dhéanamh le Roinn an Taoisigh.
Fuaireamar do theachtaireacht agus béimid ag déanamh athbhreithniú uirthi.

Thank you for contacting the Department of the Taoiseach.
Your message has been received and will be reviewed.

Regards,

Webmaster

Also just got this

The Taoiseach Enda Kenny T.D. thanks you for your recent e-mail.

The Taoiseach has noted the points you raised.

He has copied your correspondence to his colleague Pat Rabbitte T.D.,
Minister for Communications, Energy & Natural Resources for his
consideration.

The Taoiseach extends his very best wishes to you.


Yours sincerely,



Assistant Private Secretary
to the Taoiseach

Do TDs use their email?

bealtine

funnyname wrote: »

Do TDs use their email?

This new fangled intertube thing will never catch on

croo

Dail question on radio spectrum

The bit I thought interesting was

ComReg is adamant that difficulties will not arise for a number of reasons. First, the infrastructure is in place and the masts have already been erected. There will be no roll-back on that. Second, the obligations on Vodafone, 3 and O2 in respect of 3G services were greatly exceeded. Third, mobile telephone companies are already competing to provide services and there is no question of a diminution of that competition.

I would then argue that since comreg is 100% sure, including obligations in contract will not be placing any more burden on the operators. So why not? Why are they pushing back?

watty

Comreg are deluded.

For years people don't meet obligations, or Comreg doesn't do sensible audits.

Masts in place MEANS NOTHING. LTE needs more backhaul. 800MHz needs new aerials. PAs, Duplex filters and LNAs etc. LTE needs new or extra gear generally. No-one can use their alleged LTE capable 3G gear either as they need it for 3G!

clohamon

croo wrote: »

Dail question on radio spectrum

The bit I thought interesting was

ComReg is adamant that difficulties will not arise for a number of reasons. First, the infrastructure is in place and the masts have already been erected. There will be no roll-back on that. Second, the obligations on Vodafone, 3 and O2 in respect of 3G services were greatly exceeded. Third, mobile telephone companies are already competing to provide services and there is no question of a diminution of that competition.

I would then argue that since comreg is 100% sure, including obligations in contract will not be placing any more burden on the operators. So why not? Why are they pushing back?

• Local Authority planning permissions for masts last for five years in general, so there is nothing permanent about them.
• The Long Run Average Incremental Cost (LRAIC) of a mast in a rural area is €29k per year. (€25k in Urban areas) so its an expensive business not helped by the gouging of local Authorities
• The obligations of Vodafone and O2 under their 3g licences amount to 27% and 37% of area respectively.
• 3 did not achieve its coverage by competition. It was subsidised.

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

This new fangled intertube thing will never catch on

This is the typical Irish mentality it is one of the reason that I am considering leaving this country and never to return.

It is absolutely disgusting that our government and politicians after everything that has happened in this country would are still playing fire with our economic future.

football_lover

funnyname wrote: »

Can everyone please email this article to Pat Rabbitte and their local representatives as this is very very serious.

I sent emails to Pat Rabbitte, Fergus O'Dowd, Enda Kenny and the 4 TDs in Galway East, not sure who monitors the email address the sent them to but hopefully someone will take notice before this turns into a total farce.


Edit

Got one reply of but not too hopeful.

On behalf of Minister Rabbitte I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence. I’ll ensure it’s brought to his attention.

Hi funnyname

I am considering sending a group email that will include these politicians you have listed but also to include opposition such as Sinn Fein and Fianna Fail.

I will also be including the media in this email. The main reason I am sending a group email of this nature is that the receivers will see that other people have been contacted as well.

I hope that this will at least bring one person on the list to act in some manner. I am also going to include media such as radio shows and tv.

If you are sending a group email ensure that the receivers are fully aware of what is at stake here. This could potentially cost the Irish economy hundreds of billions of euros that can be generated by a smart economy. If this 70% population coverage goes ahead there will be many rural businesses that will not have access to advanced communications systems.

Also try to convey that this topic is one of the most important issue that Ireland is facing it will be even bigger than the banking scandal if this is not addressed. There is much more at stake here than people are aware of. Future automation and augmented reality technologies will require these high bandwidth capable systems as will the smart grid.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

Hi funnyname

I am considering sending a group email that will include these politicians you have listed but also to include opposition such as Sinn Fein and Fianna Fail.

That's already been done and only one politician showed any interest, the rest couldn't be bothered with the economic future of the country. I suppose as long as they get their expenses they are happy...and get to play on the TV

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

That's already been done and only one politician showed any interest, the rest couldn't be bothered with the economic future of the country. I suppose as long as they get their expenses they are happy...and get to play on the TV

Have you sent group email mails were it would be sent to several people and not just one.

The Idea of this would be to make people aware that it has been received by different people. I used to this tactic in the corporate world and found that responses and reaction are much quicker as people can see that other people have received this the mail as well.

What we need to do is make the general population aware of this as well as making people in media aware.

I do not think people understand what is at stake here we are risking the competitiveness of Ireland as a smart economy this could cost us hundreds of billions in lost exports to the Irish economy.

The SMART economy will require a fast high bandwidth wireless communications system for embedded electronics.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

The SMART economy will require a fast high bandwidth wireless communications system for embedded electronics.

Well not to play down the importance of 4G I honestly think that with an inept regulator who has designed the 4G system in Ireland to be strangled at birth, the importance of fixed line broadband is the only way we have of getting decent service throughout the country. If we could roll out electricity to every shebeen and shack in the country we can easily roll out fibre to the very same shacks. The cost would be much less than the cost of a 4G service. We've already subsidised a 3G roll out, that money would have been far better spent on providing more fibre.
Having said all that a decent 4G service is important...

4G is a road warriors thing, after all that was the design goal, it may be well designed in other countries but not here. It is not, in general, a replacement for proper broadband.

I've tried connecting up remote PLCs on 3G but it was an unmitigated disaster. 4G does address some of the issues uncovered but not all of them.

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

Well not to play down the importance of 4G I honestly think that with an inept regulator who has designed the 4G system in Ireland to be strangled at birth, the importance of fixed line broadband is the only way we have of getting decent service throughout the country. If we could roll out electricity to every shebeen and shack in the country we can easily roll out fibre to the very same shacks. The cost would be much less than the cost of a 4G service. We've already subsidised a 3G roll out, that money would have been far better spent on providing more fibre.
Having said all that a decent 4G service is important...

4G is a road warriors thing, after all that was the design goal, it may be well designed in other countries but not here. It is not, in general, a replacement for proper broadband.

I've tried connecting up remote PLCs on 3G but it was an unmitigated disaster. 4G does address some of the issues uncovered but not all of them.

I am not disagreeing with you on importance of fixed line systems. But wireless systems would be cheaper than fixed line systems to introduce. In the long term we could build a better fixed line system but in the next 5 year 4G is the most realistic from a distribution point of view.

There is things that 4G can do from a purely physical point of view than fixed systems cannot do.

Setting up mobile data points cannot really be set up with fixed line systems. Having automated agriculture is going to need a massively distributed wireless system as are many other systems.

Augmented technologies are going to need wireless systems as opposed to fixed wire systems.


We could do a electricity based roll out like the ESB done but that will be at the expense of Wireless systems. We are addressing this issue as a nation from a top down approach. We are allowing a spectrum bandwidth structure to be dictated by special interest groups this and whole issue stinks of corruption (Maybe I am just bitter due to pass experiences of this country).

This spectrum auction is akin to our transport system or water ways it is that important to the life of this economy.

Other Successful countries have taken the complete opposite approach from Ireland why are we the only country that is doing this kind of thing. We seem to do everything the Irish way. And look what our economy is like today this issue will be even bigger as other countries will leave us behind. Everything we do in this country is going to kill SME's.

CamperMan

another plan to drive the country folks to move to the towns and cities, along with closing Gardai stations, post offices, all this septic tank nonsense

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

I am not disagreeing with you on importance of fixed line systems. But wireless systems would be cheaper than fixed line systems to introduce. In the long term we could build a better fixed line system but in the next 5 year 4G is the most realistic from a distribution point of view.

The claimed performance of mobile systems is driven by marketing departments rather than real world engineering metrics.
So don't put your faith in those claimed performance figures.
IrelandOffline did a long document a few years back which compared HSPA and Fixed wireless systems and examined some of the 4G myths. I wonder if it is still available.

There is things that 4G can do from a purely physical point of view than fixed systems cannot do.

Indeed that is very true...

We are allowing a spectrum bandwidth structure to be dictated by special interest groups this and whole issue stinks of corruption (Maybe I am just bitter due to pass experiences of this country).

If by special interests you mean a greedy regulator then yes:)

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

The claimed performance of mobile systems is driven by marketing departments rather than real world engineering metrics.
So don't put your faith in those claimed performance figures.
IrelandOffline did a long document a few years back which compared HSPA and Fixed wireless systems and examined some of the 4G myths. I wonder if it is still available.



Indeed that is very true...



If by special interests you mean a greedy regulator then yes:)

4G has the potential bandwidth of gbps as opposed to 3g mbps this is a matter of engineering as opposed to marketing. The providers do over inflate their capabilities.

4G is the next step in the digital evolution of communications it will allow for a greater distribution of wireless communications.

The issue is more than just the peak capabilities it also has the issue of distribution that the 70% population issue will create. Having a 5mbps bandwidth that is consistent is better than no coverage at all.

I my self am facing the dilemma with this 4G issue of having no coverage at all my 3G coverage is a joke. LTE has technical capabilities beyond 3G that could rectify the distribution issue. If 4G is only 70% coverage I will more than likely have to move out of Ireland as allot of my friends have already done. How many more people in my situation are going to leave. It only take one person with an idea out of the thousands to build a successful exporter.

I have seen the capability of distribution of 4G communications and the massive potential that it present to business both large and small. Germany is light years ahead of us they have adapted a much better strategy for 4G than we have.

If we do not make our government and politicians and academics wake up to this issue we are in for a 20 year economic up hill battle that will be locked in by communication agreements.

By special interests I do mean greedy regulators and a greedy governments that is hell bent on squeezing every drop of money it can make. I am also talking about network providers that can get away with cheaper built networks so as to maximizes short term profits. people talk about state assets being used to finance debts this will be the biggest of them all.

Communications is our biggest asset and has the potential to grow our GDP from about 160 billion (current) to 500 billion. Technologies such as 4G will enable industries such as personalized clothing via xbox kinnect styled scanning and high bandwidth communications will grow whole new industries that Irish rural SME's will miss out on.

PogMoThoin

football_lover wrote: »

4G has the potential bandwidth of gbps as opposed to 3g mbps this is a matter of engineering as opposed to marketing. The providers do over inflate their capabilities.

4G will be slightly better than 3G with less coverage and it will be great............

as long as people don't use it as a fixed broadband substitute

football_lover

PogMoThoin wrote: »

4G will be slightly better than 3G with less coverage and it will be great............

as long as people don't use it as a fixed broadband substitute

4G is many times greater than 3G technically but coverage in Ireland will destroy it completely as a communication medium.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

4G has the potential bandwidth of gbps as opposed to 3g mbps this is a matter of engineering as opposed to marketing.

Sorry but that is total nonsense and is driven by marketing not reality. Spectral efficiency will allow you to calculate the probable bandwidth for one user and one user only near the centre of the cell, the normal efficiency is about 3.5/5 bits per hertz and with 5Mhz cells you can see just how limited 4G will be in Ireland. There was talk of 20Mhz channels which would deliver more bandwidth.
They may even still be there I forget...but it's still easy to calculate the probable speed one user will get.

Also if you have no 3G signal now you will never have 4G service either again not the way Comreg have designed the auctions, remember it's 70% population coverage not 70% geographic coverage so your only hope is a fibre rollout.

Yes with unlimited bandwidth and only one user in the cell LTE will deliver reasonably high speeds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_efficiency

Here's another good explanation :http://gigaom.com/2010/03/05/whats-slowing-down-verizons-lte-speeds/

Now I'm not saying that LTE is not important and what you want to do IS definitely worthwhile go ahead and IoffL will probably support you in your endeavor, email them and ask

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

Sorry but that is total nonsense and is driven by marketing not reality. Spectral efficiency will allow you to calculate the probable bandwidth for one user and one user only near the centre of the cell, the normal efficiency is about 3.5/5 bits per hertz and with 5Mhz cells you can see just how limited 4G will be in Ireland. There was talk of 20Mhz channels which would deliver more bandwidth.
They may even still be there I forget...but it's still easy to calculate the probable speed one user will get.

Also if you have no 3G signal now you will never have 4G service either again not the way Comreg have designed the auctions, remember it's 70% population coverage not 70% geographic coverage so your only hope is a fibre rollout.

Yes with unlimited bandwidth and only one user in the cell LTE will deliver reasonably high speeds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_efficiency

Now I'm not saying that LTE is not important and what you want to do IS definitely worthwhile go ahead and IoffL will probably support you in your endeavor, email them and ask

I agree with you that I will not get a a good 4G service based upon the 70 population coverage as this will cover urban areas. I zero hope of fixed line system as just to cover my area will require many millions of investment to cover a few hundred people that are well spread out. I have seen LTE in other countries and it more feasible than fixed line systems for remote areas.

This is not a technical point of the capabilities of 4G.


If you want debate the points of 4G communications systems on a scientific level I am willing to do this. If we want to be precise we can discuss LTE and not use the term 4G which has not objective definition and is a only really a general term.

It will be a few days before I can respond to you as I do not have access to any broadband and will now be entering the digital dark zone.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

If you want debate the points of 4G communications systems on a scientific level I am willing to do this. If we want to be precise we can discuss LTE and not use the term 4G which has not objective definition and is a only really a general term.

It will be a few days before I can respond to you as I do not have access to any broadband and will now be entering the digital dark zone.

Sorry to hear you are going to the twilight zone...

There's not much to debate, LTE will not deliver Gbs, even in your dreams.
Max throughput in 20Mhz channels is clear, for one user it'll be about 30Mhz, then when many users are sharing your speeds will drop away and approach zero. So much for the wonders of LTE:)

Everything else,all the wonderful speed promises, are fantasy dreamed up in marketing departments:)

funnyname

I got this reply from Ciaran Cannon

I am aware of the ongoing debate/discussion around digital coverage across rural Ireland. I am raising these matters with Minister Rabbitte and will revert to you when I receive a response.

Best wishes,

Ciaran Cannon TD
Minister for Training and Skills

None of the other TDs in my constituency got back to me.

bealtine

funnyname wrote: »

None of the other TDs in my constituency got back to me.

If it was about TDs expenses they'd be back to you as quick as a flash but when it comes to Ireland Inc they really don't care

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

Sorry but that is total nonsense and is driven by marketing not reality. Spectral efficiency will allow you to calculate the probable bandwidth for one user and one user only near the centre of the cell, the normal efficiency is about 3.5/5 bits per hertz and with 5Mhz cells you can see just how limited 4G will be in Ireland. There was talk of 20Mhz channels which would deliver more bandwidth.
They may even still be there I forget...but it's still easy to calculate the probable speed one user will get.

Also if you have no 3G signal now you will never have 4G service either again not the way Comreg have designed the auctions, remember it's 70% population coverage not 70% geographic coverage so your only hope is a fibre rollout.

Yes with unlimited bandwidth and only one user in the cell LTE will deliver reasonably high speeds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_efficiency

Here's another good explanation :http://gigaom.com/2010/03/05/whats-slowing-down-verizons-lte-speeds/

Now I'm not saying that LTE is not important and what you want to do IS definitely worthwhile go ahead and IoffL will probably support you in your endeavor, email them and ask

I agree with you 100% that the comreg auction structure will ensure that 4G will not create a wide service.

I am not saying that LTE will be gbs but 4G which will be the next 20 year does have that capability.

Germany ensured that the 800Mhz spectrum range will be used to service rural areas. This range is perfect for rural due to it wavelength. This range is also the current analog tv and there is a reason it was used for this.

creating a wireless system that is also tied into the fiber optics systems would create even further distributions with high bandwidth capabilities. This could mean that rural areas could use shortwave length ranges so as to create high bandwidth systems.

Wireless systems that are structured as part of fiber optics could over come the last mile problem in both cities and rural communities.

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

Sorry to hear you are going to the twilight zone...

There's not much to debate, LTE will not deliver Gbs, even in your dreams.
Max throughput in 20Mhz channels is clear, for one user it'll be about 30Mhz, then when many users are sharing your speeds will drop away and approach zero. So much for the wonders of LTE:)

Everything else,all the wonderful speed promises, are fantasy dreamed up in marketing departments:)

I have not said that LTE will produce gbs I was referring to 4G which could be labelled as 5G for marketing reasons in future. 4G to imply the next 20 years as a whole.

oscarBravo

Mobile connections can't and won't deliver gigabit speeds. It just isn't going to happen. The Shannon limit and spectral efficiency dictate the physical limits.

I've seen a number of 16b/s/Hz tossed around for 4G technologies; I think that's hopelessly optimistic (I'm being polite here), but let's play with it. In order to achieve 1Gb/s throughput for a single connection under ideal conditions, that would require 62MHz of downstream bandwidth. On just one sector.

Given that it's difficult to achieve 16b/s/Hz on a 256QAM licensed microwave point-to-point link with XPIC, nevermind from a crowded cell sector to a handheld device that doesn't even have line of sight, the idea that gigabit speeds are coming to your mobile any time soon is, frankly, delusional.

watty

Assuming you did have say 70MHz channels, then the real world speed for such a 1Gbps peak Base Station would be about 20MBps for only one user connect on an "average" location. With 20 simultaneous video streams you get then 1Mbps.

It's delusional. Other than Mobile Base stations replacing WiFi Hotspots, they are never going to be much more than x4 faster, peak (assuming 20Mhz channels instead of 5MHz). The spectrum doesn't exist.

Research and Base Station marketing always quotes a perfect signal (i.e. you can see the nuts & bolts on the mast) and even sometimes adds MIMO or separate channels which is misleading as that doesn't increase single user peak speed in real life.

You can get 82Mbps on 3G! But not in the real world.

football_lover

watty wrote: »

Assuming you did have say 70MHz channels, then the real world speed for such a 1Gbps peak Base Station would be about 20MBps for only one user connect on an "average" location. With 20 simultaneous video streams you get then 1Mbps.

It's delusional. Other than Mobile Base stations replacing WiFi Hotspots, they are never going to be much more than x4 faster, peak (assuming 20Mhz channels instead of 5MHz). The spectrum doesn't exist.

Research and Base Station marketing always quotes a perfect signal (i.e. you can see the nuts & bolts on the mast) and even sometimes adds MIMO or separate channels which is misleading as that doesn't increase single user peak speed in real life.

You can get 82Mbps on 3G! But not in the real world.

8x8 MIMO has shown a proof of concept that achieves up to 1 gigabit. I am not saying that this is going to happen next year but it is possible for these systems to produces wireless transfer rates up to 1 gigabyte per second.

That will occur in the next 10 to 15 years. Ireland by allowing its bandwidth to be opened up with only 70 population coverage will be years behind when this technology does take off.

There is many other promising technology innovations that will also enable 1 gigabit per second wireless data transfers.

oscarBravo

football_lover wrote: »

8x8 MIMO has shown a proof of concept that achieves up to 1 gigabit. I am not saying that this is going to happen next year but it is possible for these systems to produces wireless transfer rates up to 1 gigabyte per second.

That will occur in the next 10 to 15 years. Ireland by allowing its bandwidth to be opened up with only 70 population coverage will be years behind when this technology does take off.

There is many other promising technology innovations that will also enable 1 gigabit per second wireless data transfers.

Sorry, but that's just buzzword porridge.

8x8 MIMO just means dividing sub-carriers across multiple antennas. Yes, there's some clever stuff you can do with that sort of technology, but none of that clever stuff can exceed the Shannon limit.

Gigabit wireless data transfer can be done now. There are off-the-shelf commercial products that can achieve gigabit wireless data transfer - point-to-point, over short distances, subject to ComReg licence, and at a fairly significant price.

Gigabit point-to-multipoint wireless as a consumer solution over useful distances isn't going to happen. Please stop buying into this vapourware, it's only hurting the situation.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

There is many other promising technology innovations that will also enable 1 gigabit per second wireless data transfers.

You've swallowed the blue pill of amazing technological advances somewhere in the future, even the DECNR have swallowed that pill too.

As has been pointed out over and over again here we've almost reached the Shannon limit and "ya cannae beat the laws of physics" no matter what wishful thinking is involved

watty

Lightly loaded in a 5MHz channel Mobile wireless will never be better than five years ago. Heavily loaded on a "best possible" system you'll get 0.5Mbps versus 0.25Mbps.

A 20MHz channel lets you have x4 speed. Very few 20MHz channel systems on offer.

If we actually ran at the Shannon Limit the speed would be about 10% more than on offer 10 years ago.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80517650&postcount=14

MIMO is very expensive, always will be, as it's multiple more expensive aerials and radio sets at base and only adds capacity, about x2 on average in an Urban replacement of "WiFi" hotspots. MIMO will rarely be deployed in Rural situation as the 50% average capacity increase (not speed) on a heavily loaded cell is never worth the capex. Adding capacity mostly only improves speed on heavily loaded systems where speed is 0.120Mbps to 1Mbps. It doesn't much affect lightly loaded speeds. The signal quality (distance from mast) gives a 200:1 variation in lightly loaded speed!

On a lightly loaded sector the MIMO adds nothing at all. All the "headline" speeds are when ONLY ONE person is connecting and has a perfect signal. Divide headline speed by 4 roughly for average good signal and by 100 (no mistake!) for cell edge. Then divide speed by number of connected users (assuming a PERFECT 100% efficient system)!

A normal Mobile system to roll out with real National coverage uses more electricity and a bit more investment than a 100x faster fibre to everyone solution.

A Wireless system to give everyone a guaranteed one Fifth of UPC's entry level speed (6Mbps vs 30Mbps) would need 12 x 20MHz channels (duplex) which is 480MHz of spectrum and about x10 as many base stations. Cost about 60 Billion Euro! Electricity consumption about 200x a National Fibre to everyone solution.

Fibre to Everyone that has ESB can be done for 1.5 Billion Euro, or very well or inefficiently for 2.5 Billion.

A 90% population (not geographic) coverage LTE system about twice as good as existing 3G/HSPA is about 1.5 Billion Euro. Currently Comreg are not offering any licence deal that allows LTE to be better than 3G.

football_lover

watty wrote: »

Lightly loaded in a 5MHz channel Mobile wireless will never be better than five years ago. Heavily loaded on a "best possible" system you'll get 0.5Mbps versus 0.25Mbps.

A 20MHz channel lets you have x4 speed. Very few 20MHz channel systems on offer.

If we actually ran at the Shannon Limit the speed would be about 10% more than on offer 10 years ago.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80517650&postcount=14

MIMO is very expensive, always will be, as it's multiple more expensive aerials and radio sets at base and only adds capacity, about x2 on average in an Urban replacement of "WiFi" hotspots. MIMO will rarely be deployed in Rural situation as the 50% average capacity increase (not speed) on a heavily loaded cell is never worth the capex. Adding capacity mostly only improves speed on heavily loaded systems where speed is 0.120Mbps to 1Mbps. It doesn't much affect lightly loaded speeds. The signal quality (distance from mast) gives a 200:1 variation in lightly loaded speed!

On a lightly loaded sector the MIMO adds nothing at all. All the "headline" speeds are when ONLY ONE person is connecting and has a perfect signal. Divide headline speed by 4 roughly for average good signal and by 100 (no mistake!) for cell edge. Then divide speed by number of connected users (assuming a PERFECT 100% efficient system)!

A normal Mobile system to roll out with real National coverage uses more electricity and a bit more investment than a 100x faster fibre to everyone solution.

A Wireless system to give everyone a guaranteed one Fifth of UPC's entry level speed (6Mbps vs 30Mbps) would need 12 x 20MHz channels (duplex) which is 480MHz of spectrum and about x10 as many base stations. Cost about 60 Billion Euro! Electricity consumption about 200x a National Fibre to everyone solution.

Fibre to Everyone that has ESB can be done for 1.5 Billion Euro, or very well or inefficiently for 2.5 Billion.

A 90% population (not geographic) coverage LTE system about twice as good as existing 3G/HSPA is about 1.5 Billion Euro. Currently Comreg are not offering any licence deal that allows LTE to be better than 3G.

Germany. Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Switzerland have all rolled out LTE systems that would put the current Irish wired broadband system to shame.

They have also included massively distributed fiber optics systems to back up the wireless systems.

I am not against fiber optics but the last mile problem can be over come with wireless systems combined with fiber optics.

Your figure of 1.5 billion fiber optics systems to over come the last mile for 100% coverage is very optimistic. The only way you would achieve this and come close to UPC average minimum distribution consistencies is via wireless systems.

That is how Sweden and Finland enabled 100% consistent distribution.


And for you to say that MIMO is always going to be expensive is not true.

watty

Fixed Wireless + fibre for maybe the last 10%, Mobile doesn't give anyone Broadband.

Your figure of 1.5 billion fiber optics systems to over come the last mile for 100% coverage is very optimistic. The only way you would achieve this and come close to UPC average minimum distribution consistencies is via wireless systems.

It could even be cheaper. 1.5 Billion would be with some fixed wireless, real broadband at a real 20Mbps, not a fake 20Mbps or 100Mbps (one user and perfect signal). Quite simply the reporting about LTE speeds is so misleading and unqualified as to be a lie.

The talking down of Fibre and a proper plan is simply so the Government can do nothing. The current Broadband Plan is a plan to do nothing except mapping.

Government Lackeys and Mobile operators have a vested interest in inflating the cost of fibre. It's about as cheap and easy to deploy as copper telephone lines but about x10,000 the capacity. You can put it in water pipes, sewer pipes, on ESB or phone poles, automatically trench verges.

LTE etc is PURELY for Mobile. Operators will do it anyway. It isn't and won't be a Broadband solution. UPC will do slightly less than 1/2 the population with coax for the last part from Cabinet to house. That part can be FIXED wireless (up to 45km for maybe 5 people sharing), VDSL (up to 200m) or coax. In Urban areas people could get fibre direct which will be x10 download and x100 upload speed of UPC.

We have a DCNER, Comreg, Civil service that advise the Government to do nothing and leave it to the Market. The "Market" is only interested in a short term maximum return for a minimum capex. Not in co-operation, national planning, long term investment.

Germany. Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Switzerland have all rolled out LTE systems that would put the current Irish wired broadband system to shame.

That's simply not true. ALL Irish broadband guarantees a connection and the average speed is about 4Mbps. The minimum is about 1Mbps. For UPC & Dungarvan customers it's 30Mbps to 100Mbps. The headline LTE speeds are for ONLY ONE USER connecting with a PERFECT signal. The average speed is 2Mbps. The minimum is 0.12Mbps or no connection. Even without moving when you had 8Mbps at 6am you may find at 8pm that the speed is 0.5Mbps or you can't connect or the connection drops.

No real LTE anywhere with real customers is comparable to Broadband. If everything else was equal then on average in a 5MHz channel it's 50% better than 3G and in a 20MHz channel its about five times better. But typical 3G only gives decent speeds with only 4 or 5 users on a mast sector. If LTE is used for x4 longer or x5 as many people as LTE smart phones and tablets take off in the next two years (they basically hardly exist yet) then LTE will only be about the same performance per user as 3G today.

LTE is for MOBILITY. It's not and won't be a "last mile" Broadband solution. There are numerous far cheaper and better technologies for that.

And for you to say that MIMO is always going to be expensive is not true.

It's INHERENTLY more expensive than non-MIMO. MIMO is for the places that have UPC already. It's a method for Vendors to sell expensive upgrades when an operator can't add fill in Base stations which add genuine capacity.

Either you are in the Mobile Industry or you haven't studied this.

football_lover

watty wrote: »

Fixed Wireless + fibre for maybe the last 10%, Mobile doesn't give anyone Broadband.



It could even be cheaper. 1.5 Billion would be with some fixed wireless, real broadband at a real 20Mbps, not a fake 20Mbps or 100Mbps (one user and perfect signal). Quite simply the reporting about LTE speeds is so misleading and unqualified as to be a lie.

The talking down of Fibre and a proper plan is simply so the Government can do nothing. The current Broadband Plan is a plan to do nothing except mapping.

Government Lackeys and Mobile operators have a vested interest in inflating the cost of fibre. It's about as cheap and easy to deploy as copper telephone lines but about x10,000 the capacity. You can put it in water pipes, sewer pipes, on ESB or phone poles, automatically trench verges.

LTE etc is PURELY for Mobile. Operators will do it anyway. It isn't and won't be a Broadband solution. UPC will do slightly less than 1/2 the population with coax for the last part from Cabinet to house. That part can be FIXED wireless (up to 45km for maybe 5 people sharing), VDSL (up to 200m) or coax. In Urban areas people could get fibre direct which will be x10 download and x100 upload speed of UPC.

We have a DCNER, Comreg, Civil service that advise the Government to do nothing and leave it to the Market. The "Market" is only interested in a short term maximum return for a minimum capex. Not in co-operation, national planning, long term investment.


That's simply not true. ALL Irish broadband guarantees a connection and the average speed is about 4Mbps. The minimum is about 1Mbps. For UPC & Dungarvan customers it's 30Mbps to 100Mbps. The headline LTE speeds are for ONLY ONE USER connecting with a PERFECT signal. The average speed is 2Mbps. The minimum is 0.12Mbps or no connection. Even without moving when you had 8Mbps at 6am you may find at 8pm that the speed is 0.5Mbps or you can't connect or the connection drops.

No real LTE anywhere with real customers is comparable to Broadband. If everything else was equal then on average in a 5MHz channel it's 50% better than 3G and in a 20MHz channel its about five times better. But typical 3G only gives decent speeds with only 4 or 5 users on a mast sector. If LTE is used for x4 longer or x5 as many people as LTE smart phones and tablets take off in the next two years (they basically hardly exist yet) then LTE will only be about the same performance per user as 3G today.

LTE is for MOBILITY. It's not and won't be a "last mile" Broadband solution. There are numerous far cheaper and better technologies for that.


It's INHERENTLY more expensive than non-MIMO. MIMO is for the places that have UPC already. It's a method for Vendors to sell expensive upgrades when an operator can't add fill in Base stations which add genuine capacity.

Either you are in the Mobile Industry or you haven't studied this.

Ireland does not have a 100% broad band population coverage. The countries I list all have 100% LTE population coverage capable systems. That is what I refer to as to shame.

Their mobile communications is better than our fixed line systems. Finland has 100% fiber optic coverage and there population is just as rural as ours and parts of that population are in the arctic circle. There wireless systems have better coverage than our fixed line systems there is something very wrong with that.

You cannot even compare our broadband as there is large population groups with no coverage at all in Ireland.

We require a wireless system to reach pockets not covered by by fixed lines systems.

We are allowing national spectrum's to tied into contract that only requires 30% coverage in the first 4 years and 70% in seven years. We are going to get left behind.

You stated "LTE is for MOBILITY. It's not and won't be a "last mile" Broadband solution. There are numerous far cheaper and better technologies for that" Do you have any idea how expensive it is to put cables into the ground. Using Wireless systems that part of a fiber optic distribution system can overcome the last mile issue. as can the use of 800Mhz spectrum.

watty

But using FIXED Wireless, not LTE. Fixed wireless per Mbyte of speed and G byte of cap is cheaper and up to x8 better performance than best LTE.


Also fibre is CHEAPER than LTE. Nor does fibre always have to go in the ground.

lucernarian

football_lover wrote: »

Do you have any idea how expensive it is to put cables into the ground. Using Wireless systems that part of a fiber optic distribution system can overcome the last mile issue. as can the use of 800Mhz spectrum.

This is the key point, fibre is still almost handled delicately and revered by operators in Ireland, when it can be more or less regarded like any other regular copper cable nowadays. We don't need to lay ducting to every part of Ireland to provide fibre optic coverage! It can be strung on poles or buried direct in the ground. With a little creativity and application, fibre can be wrapped around all overhead ESB wires, not just the "figure of 8" around Ireland run by ESBT.

bealtine

football_lover wrote: »

Do you have any idea how expensive it is to put cables into the ground. Using Wireless systems that part of a fiber optic distribution system can overcome the last mile issue. as can the use of 800Mhz spectrum.

Well you do realise that to rollout 4G every mast in the country would have to be fibred up in any case? The operators will have to bring fibre to every part of the country so why not bring the fibre the extra mile or two and deliver it to communities? The situation now would possibly be every operator running different fibres to every mast, seems unlikely as as there will only two mobile consortia. So the fibre will be doubled up on anyway

If the fibre is managed by the state, they can get a decent return on their investment and then decide how to hook up more rural areas, preferably using FWA for the "last mile".

football_lover

bealtine wrote: »

Well you do realise that to rollout 4G every mast in the country would have to be fibred up in any case? The operators will have to bring fibre to every part of the country so why not bring the fibre the extra mile or two and deliver it to communities? The situation now would possibly be every operator running different fibres to every mast, seems unlikely as as there will only two mobile consortia. So the fibre will be doubled up on anyway

If the fibre is managed by the state, they can get a decent return on their investment and then decide how to hook up more rural areas, preferably using FWA for the "last mile".

You could bring the fiber optics to the street cabinet and also in over head cables and also wire wrap it around mains and this could all be done for rural and urban.

And fiber optics could potentially be unlimited in bandwidth and with better switching it could also be upto 1000 times faster.

And there are also technical solutions for using wireless at street level to cover from the cabinet to the house and offer 50mbps easy and that would be real not advertise. Technically it could go much higher than this and up to hundreds of MBPS or even GBPS.

But none of this changes the fact our government has given contracts to companies that require only 70% population coverage while no other country has done anything this stupid.

This makes me want to vomit as that is how disgusting it actually is and every politician I approached was not interested and there offices made excuses about them not being in and they would call me back and guess what they never did. And I approached every party about this.

I makes me wonder if this country has ever really gotten away from its corrupt political past.

I am sorry to tell you but I think Ireland is doomed as it has no proper vision of a future and when people realize how far we are behind our competitors then it will be too late.

You may think this is an over reaction but go and have a look at the internet of things and how embedded technology is going to drive economics.

I have several business ideas around technology I have developed for home automation systems that are cheap and easy to retro fit and I am going to leave Ireland with these and develop them else where. And I have a few friends who are going to do the same.