US 700 MHz band plan Revised 700 MHz Band Plan for Commercial Services You need some organization, ‘cause ... Damn!
The industry solution – do it all? VoIP LTE Multi-band (13?) HSPA+ TD-SCDMA High batteryefficiency High spectralefficiency LTE-Advanced MIMO 1xEV-DO(B) Low cost Interferencecancellation 802.16m Operator’s Radio equirements Wants: Everything When: Now! Greenwireless Bluetooth Multi-Carrier TD-LTE EDGE-Evolution 802.16e Dongle or phone Wi-FI A-GPS MBMS Multi-RAT
All options available for no extra cost size or weight! Why we don’t have multi-format motor cars today Weight and padding for sound-proofing and ride User-switchable left/right hand drive for roaming Petrol engine for range Diesel engine for economy Light-weight for fuel economy Solar panels for ecology Electric engine for ecology Supercharger for power 4WD for grip
The industry solution - Multi-band multi-format devices
On paper these are conceptually simple, especially when using the SDR word.
Software Defined Radio is a noble goal – especially for narrow band base stations with sufficient design and cost margins
The west of the country influenced by Europe runs on 50 Hz The east influenced by the US runs on 60 Hz Recent consequence: The loss of generating capacity in the east due to the tsunami cannot be mitigated by excess capacity in the west
Australian has three different gauges of railway and have had to develop unique bogey switching equipment
Edinburgh used to be served from London by two railway companies each with their own set of tracks and matching hotels at either end of the city centre
The alternative “anti-competitive” solutionWhat about cellular communications
Cellular communications have come a long way in 20 years and are no longer considered a luxury
The history of regional regulation and competition have led to today’s often highly fragmented market which has many inherent inefficiencies
In many countries, competition laws require that relatively narrow bands are split between several operators, all required to build their own networks – Is this really sensible any more?
Governments did to cellular what they already did to power?
Instead of trying to sell off public assets to the highest bidder how about taking a more holistic approach?
But is this not just another flawed socialist idea!Is it not Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx? GSM is the most successful wireless technology ever, owned by more than 5 billion people.
It was created by an “anti-competitive” memorandum of understanding by 17 European countries
Compare this with what happened with 2G in the US – a fragmented competitive mess of five systems which eventually led to just two systems with no interoperability.
There was a quote on the White House web site some time ago praising the FCC. It went something like this: “Why can’t all our agencies emulate the FCC and generate money rather than just spend it”.
The wireless lifecycle is long, requires heavy capital investment and benefits from mobility. All this requires careful planning. In recent times regulators have taken an increasingly soft touch – this is now backfiring. Competition is needed - once the direction is set.
An alternative “anti-competitive” solutionWhat about cellular communications
Network sharing is becoming more common – the industry is figuring out the economics for themselves
The most ambitious example is Yota in Russia who have formed a consortium with competitors MegaFon, MTS, Rostelecom and VimpelCom to build a single shared LTE network.
From an engineering perspective it should be evident that if each country’s wireless assets were pooled the potential scale and benefits could look similar to the impact of the national grid
A single regulated operating company could maximize coverage and performance while reducing format and band fragmentation
The rest of us could get on with designing optimal hardware and applications just like we do with the national grid!