Internet Broadband Through High-altitude Drones 99
mwagner writes: Skynet is coming. But not like in the movie: The future of communications is high-altitude solar-powered drones, flying 13 miles above the ground, running microwave wireless equipment, delivering broadband to the whole planet. The articles predicts this technology will replace satellites, fiber, and copper, and fundamentally change the broadband industry. The author predicts a timescale of roughly 20 years — the same amount of time between Arthur C. Clarke predicting geosynchronous satellites and their reality as a commercial business. "Several important technology milestones need to be reached along the way. The drones that will make up Skynet have a lot more in common with satellites than the flippy-flappy helicopter drone thingies that the popular press is fixated on right now. They're really effing BIG, for one thing. And, like satellites, they go up, and stay up, pretty much indefinitely. For that to happen, we need two things: lighter, higher-capacity wireless gear; and reliable, hyper-efficient solar tech."
I'm betting on balloons (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I'm betting on balloons (Score:1)
Well, the internet IS made up of a series of tubes and mostly full of crap.
Re:I'm betting on balloons (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I'm betting on balloons (Score:5, Informative)
Have you ever seen a hurricane or a tropical storm? It means the Internet will be down during these critical events when it is often most needed. That is the reason they are talking about 13 miles altitude drones and not just zeppelins. The altitude record for a zeppelin is 7.6 km or 4.7 miles. Large hurricanes can reach an altitude of 50 000 feet or 9.5 miles or 15.25 km. Zeppelins couldn't clear a large hurricane.
The balloons Google is experimenting with do reach the stratosphere. 20 km altitude.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you? The thread started with balloons.
Re:I'm betting on balloons (Score:5, Informative)
The altitude record for a zeppelin is 7.6 km or 4.7 miles. Large hurricanes can reach an altitude of 50 000 feet or 9.5 miles or 15.25 km. Zeppelins couldn't clear a large hurricane.
All balloons are not "zeppelins". High altitude balloons can reach 32 km.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... [wikipedia.org]
Here is one that can reach between 29km and 32 km you can buy today for $60.
http://www.highaltitudescience... [highaltitudescience.com]
I would agree that drones are preferable, but we do have better balloons that we did in the 1890's
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
a zeppelin has an internal rigid structure. A balloon or blimp does not. 'nuff said.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say use all of those technologies as long as they can work together and offer the broadband Internet services.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm betting on balloons (Score:5, Interesting)
For 98% of the population, towers as used currently make even more sense.
Ground-based cellular systems can pack close together in cities, and spread out in the suburbs and rural areas.
These drones are stuck at high altitude, so except for remote areas they are wasting bandwidth and battery life on the ground.
Drones might be useful for extra large LTE cells in northern Canada or central Australia. Perhaps replace Iridium.
Must be a slow news for nerds day.
Re: (Score:2)
In the United States, a lot of /.ers like to gripe about how the existing wireline providers (DSL and cable) are monopolistic and provide poor service at high cost. They'd love to see more choice, but the barriers to entry (i.e., deploying a parallel network, including the last mile) are so high that only other megacorporations (Google Fiber, Verizon FiOS) can hope to break in, and even then it is very slow. Result: everyone gripes, but ev
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps replace Iridium.
Now that's a good point. Perhaps there are many jobs currently done by satellites that can be done more cheaply by drones. Weather monitors, etc.
Re:I'm betting on balloons (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Except what is the line of sight efficiency with zero obstructions when something is directly above you, vs traveling through buildings, trees, etc at ground level. Yeah, when indoors it would probably be about the same, but in outdoor conditions (where we're away from wifi and actually need better signal), this will be great. Oh, and also, this can simply be supplemental to existing tech, such as phones being able to pull data off both cell and wifi. Now they'll have a third option. As someone who frequent
Re: (Score:3)
OK, I can see that in mountainous areas one drone can replace many towers to give line of sight.
But the drone still needs to be near overhead, so will not cover a massive area like an Irridium satellite.
And a bunch of mass-produced solar-powered, LOS microwave-link meshed hilltop cells will likely still be easier than one mega-drone.
And safer.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole story is a balloon, a trial balloon.
Let's promise broadband everywhere and see if the sheep will buy into (pay for) our surveillance platform.
Re: (Score:2)
yeah but the surveillance blimps / black helicopters are already up there. NSA is not worried about opening up a parallel revenue stream.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
There was an article a few years back on /. about a network of weather balloons with hotspots, forget the name of the system. It is a bit labor intensive, since each unit only stays in flight 3-5 days, and the shoebox needs to be recovered and returned.
Zeppelin ROVs have also been discussed on /. before, and offer substantial improvements over the system, but not really lower costs-- just trade offs.
Traditionally, wireless always makes sense when you have limited subscriber density or portability requireme
Re: (Score:2)
There was an idea like this floated in the 1990s, called Strato station or something. Balloons at 80km altitude (in the stratosphere) providing coverage. I seem to remember that Loral and Alenia Spaziale were both involved to some extent. It was abandoned because it is too difficult to keep balloons static (even at that altitude) and this would need expensive tracking antennae on the ground (in the 1990s digital beamforming was simply not available for commercial use). Anybody else remember this? It was aro
Re: (Score:1)
They do. Otherwise the receivers will have to continuously correct the link timing and Doppler. The link capacity will be degraded.
Re: (Score:2)
Balloons cost a million to launch, and stay up a couple weeks. I could see drones having a real advantage. Then again, geostationary satellites have an even bigger advantage.
If only (Score:5, Informative)
"some work still needs to be done on the physics....[but] certainly not anything beyond the reach of hard-working American (or Chinese, or Chinese-American) engineering types."
"solar tech (which, let’s be honest, has all been a bit shit until now) "
"As usual, the "media" have completely and utterly missed this story"
an extra allocation of "stupid points" go to the editors of Wired Magazine .....Wiretards
Wired Magazine gets to continue being the authority on the Internet of Things That Don’t Matter
Re: (Score:2)
Towers fail in time to deploy. Even small scale towers- utility poles or street lights) in mesh networks take substantial time to get licensing and rights-of-way in place. Wireline services have similar constraints, but just for the initial pathway installation, which can be leveraged for decades. A wireless technology upgrade needs to happen every 2-5 years if the service is successful.
propeller driven? (Score:2)
I could be wrong, but I don't think any propeller driven aircraft has flown to 65,000 feet, or even anywhere close. There is a problem with the low density air that makes props a really poor choice for high altitude. Since a solar jet has huge tech problems as well, I think the concept is stuck with problems that it can't easily solve.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:propeller driven? OK, I'm wrong (Score:2)
As it turns out, the unofficial propeller driven altitude record is 96,863 feet. So, I guess I'm completely wrong. Nevermind.
And, it was a solar powered plane to boot.
balloons (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar powered drones (Score:2)
So what happens at night?
Re:Solar powered drones (Score:4, Funny)
The zombie drones attack.
Re: (Score:2)
We joke, but it's clearly a target for Denial of Service attacks.
Or anyone who can train a large group of Artic Terns to fly in a circle. Should be pretty easy if you just clip the left wing.
Re: (Score:2)
presumably these drones make so much electricity during the day from solar panels that they store the surplus into batteries, and run off the batteries at night.
Only problem I see is that both solar panels and lithium batteries weight too much and don't generate/store enough juice. So all this is just pipe dreaming until some super breakthroughs happen. Which might be never.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Wired Access Will Still Be Standard (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but wires will always have substantially greater bandwidth. If for no other reason than you can run one (or even several) wires into each structure and get at least as much bandwidth as is shared over a wide area by the plane.
Since bandwidth use will no doubt continue to increase by the time we have these giant broadband stationary planes everyone will want too much bandwidth to make them a reasonable competitor for fiber (and multiplexing will move down market into the home eventually).
Re: (Score:2)
And fiber has even more bandwidth than copper.
Your point is correct about fixed links providing far more bandwidth that what can be provided by any kind of wireless link. The drone concept only make sense in places like the lightly populated areas of the US or similar countries where customers are too far apart to make wireline or fiber communications affordable. The low altitude with respect to satellites means that the link frequencies can be re-used more frequently.
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming the need is infinite, if your demands are satisfied you might turn to flexibility and convenience. Last quarter we here in Norway saw a tiny dip in fixed residential broadband for the first time ever, whether that's a fluke or not is uncertain but business lines have been on the decline for some time because small 1-5 man shops use 3G/LTE to check their mail rather than having a dedicated broadband line in the office. It's just an extension of that most "normal" people I run into use wireless now i
Re: (Score:2)
in the US wireless is metered while wired connections are not metered (although they are often capped).
Re: (Score:2)
Wired is great for densely populated areas but much of the world is sparsely populated. Out here in the sticks we don't need the high bandwidth and we don't have the numbers of people to justify the expense. Drones or balloon could be a far lower cost option that would provide that coverage and would complement wired. The overlap is good.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was the rams?
bandwidth? (Score:2)
it only takes an idiot with a 'torrent running to suck up the bandwidth. A real smart idea this is not.
Partial (Score:2)
Better solution... (Score:2)
Force the CableTV companies and telcos to run Fiber and then fix the last mile mess.
Dammit, these companies are making record profits. They can get off their asses and run fiber and fix the last mile Bullshit.
SkyNet: The machines are coming (Score:2)
This is literally SkyNet
Really? (Score:1)
Really? (Score:2)
Excuse me but (Score:2)
Skynet
Could we maybe pick a different name?
Too high - need groundpowered drone - possible (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
what if ur in a city and the to of the buildings are already several hundred meters high? then if a thing is tethered to the ground it might bump into buildings.
Re: (Score:1)
what if ur in a city and the to of the buildings are already several hundred meters high? then if a thing is tethered to the ground it might bump into buildings.
Start at the building tops - cell sites already do. The issue is to get very close to LOS to the user base so that that data vs. energy is maximized. Take a look at COST231/Hata or similar real-world RF pathloss models. Anything other than LOS is a killer and can't be afforded. The present flooding model for cellular architecture is inherently broken. Montana|Idaho|etc never will get full coverage highspeed data, the present approach doesn't scale. Going too far/high doesn't work either. Satellite distrib