Discussion:
4G on the tube
Add Reply
Roland Perry
2019-07-19 06:41:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."

<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/19/calling-at-all-
stations-tube-passengers-to-get-4g-reception-from-next-year>

A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
--
Roland Perry
John Williamson
2019-07-19 10:09:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
MissRiaElaine
2019-07-19 13:49:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-07-19 14:52:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing. And on Virgin
(perhaps others, too?), WhatsApp data is free. And texts themselves are
also free on any monthly contract.
Roland Perry
2019-07-19 15:05:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing.
The ability to set up small (in effect) cc groups makes it a genuine
killer app.

Also now that bandwidth is so much more readily available it
effortlessly does what MMS never did manage to popularise.

For many users it has also replaced not just Skype, but voice calls in
general (especially International).
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2019-07-19 15:16:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing.
The ability to set up small (in effect) cc groups makes it a genuine
killer app.
Yes, that seems to be the key feature. It also compresses so they transmit
quickly, using little data.
Post by Roland Perry
Also now that bandwidth is so much more readily available it
effortlessly does what MMS never did manage to popularise.
For many users it has also replaced not just Skype, but voice calls in
general (especially International).
Yes, much cheaper, or even effectively free.
Recliner
2019-07-19 15:19:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing.
The ability to set up small (in effect) cc groups makes it a genuine
killer app.
Yes, that seems to be the key feature. It also compresses so they transmit
quickly, using little data.
I meant to say, compresses *images*.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Also now that bandwidth is so much more readily available it
effortlessly does what MMS never did manage to popularise.
For many users it has also replaced not just Skype, but voice calls in
general (especially International).
Yes, much cheaper, or even effectively free.
MissRiaElaine
2019-07-19 22:38:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing. And on Virgin
(perhaps others, too?), WhatsApp data is free. And texts themselves are
also free on any monthly contract.
Inclusive, not free. And for anyone on a low income, £10 a month is a
lot of money which could better be spent on other things, like food or
electricity. Which is why PAYG with no requirement to regularly top up
is essential.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-07-19 22:51:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
Or another reason not to go for EE. ;-)
Especially not at 15p for a text message, when I can send one for 2p on O2.
I think, for a lot of people, WhatsApp has replaced testing. And on Virgin
(perhaps others, too?), WhatsApp data is free. And texts themselves are
also free on any monthly contract.
Inclusive, not free. And for anyone on a low income, £10 a month is a
lot of money which could better be spent on other things, like food or
electricity. Which is why PAYG with no requirement to regularly top up
is essential.
But as I showed, SIM-only deals can be cheaper than £10pm. £7pm gets you a
perfectly usable deal, with more bundled minutes than most people could
use. People who can't afford food or electricity would be much better off
ditching their overpriced land lines (and most probably already have).
Recliner
2019-07-19 15:02:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."
<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/19/calling-at-all-
stations-tube-passengers-to-get-4g-reception-from-next-year>
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
I'm not clear how you work that out? The article says:

"While TfL is picking up the bill for initial trial on the Jubilee line
extension between Canning Town and Westminster, it will soon award a
contract to a private operator which will install 4G equipment within all
of London’s tube tunnels by the mid-2020s. Mobile phone networks will then
pay the private operator for access to the network, with the transport
authority receiving a cut of profits."

That implies that the kit will be installed by a third party, who then
charges mobile phone operators to use it, and shares the profits with TfL.
There's no suggestion that only one operator will have access. One way or
another, I'm sure all the major, and probably all, operators will provide
connectivity in the tunnels.
Roland Perry
2019-07-19 20:20:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."
<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/19/calling-at-all-
stations-tube-passengers-to-get-4g-reception-from-next-year>
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
"While TfL is picking up the bill for initial trial on the Jubilee line
extension between Canning Town and Westminster, it will soon award a
contract to a private operator which will install 4G equipment within all
of London’s tube tunnels by the mid-2020s. Mobile phone networks will then
pay the private operator for access to the network, with the transport
authority receiving a cut of profits."
Just before that it says:

"The upgrade, which will ultimately require around 2,000km of
new cabling, is being installed in conjunction with a
much-delayed Home Office-mandated 4G telephone network for the
emergency services, saving the need to fit two different sets of
equipment."

(Although why a new installation is called an "upgrade", only the
sub-editors can say).
Post by Recliner
That implies that the kit will be installed by a third party,
It's hardly likely to be done by TfL themselves. No budget for that kind
of thing, or something would have happened years ago.
Post by Recliner
who then charges mobile phone operators to use it, and shares the
profits with TfL. There's no suggestion that only one operator will
have access.
"Although the UK’s four mobile phone networks are is still in
negotiations about accessing the new equipment in London's tube
tunnels, TfL expects that customer demand will ensure they all
provide services on the move."

Well, EE is going to, but are-is(sic, well it is the Grauniad) the other
three going to follow suit. Who will blink first over the cost.
Post by Recliner
One way or another, I'm sure all the major, and probably all,
You expect there to perhaps be an "O2 - yes, Tesco - no" kind of
discrimination (which in another thread I think is what applies to the
wifi).
Post by Recliner
operators will provide connectivity in the tunnels.
Let's wait and see what happens.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2019-07-19 20:39:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."
<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/19/calling-at-all-
stations-tube-passengers-to-get-4g-reception-from-next-year>
A spin-off from the 4g replacement for Airwave, it says. Which could
mean only EE customers will benefit. [Heigh ho, another reason for
getting a dual-SIM phone].
"While TfL is picking up the bill for initial trial on the Jubilee line
extension between Canning Town and Westminster, it will soon award a
contract to a private operator which will install 4G equipment within all
of London’s tube tunnels by the mid-2020s. Mobile phone networks will then
pay the private operator for access to the network, with the transport
authority receiving a cut of profits."
"The upgrade, which will ultimately require around 2,000km of
new cabling, is being installed in conjunction with a
much-delayed Home Office-mandated 4G telephone network for the
emergency services, saving the need to fit two different sets of
equipment."
(Although why a new installation is called an "upgrade", only the
sub-editors can say).
Post by Recliner
That implies that the kit will be installed by a third party,
It's hardly likely to be done by TfL themselves. No budget for that kind
of thing, or something would have happened years ago.
I meant that the equipment will be installed by a company other than the
networks or TfL.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
who then charges mobile phone operators to use it, and shares the
profits with TfL. There's no suggestion that only one operator will
have access.
"Although the UK’s four mobile phone networks are is still in
negotiations about accessing the new equipment in London's tube
tunnels, TfL expects that customer demand will ensure they all
provide services on the move."
Well, EE is going to, but are-is(sic, well it is the Grauniad) the other
three going to follow suit. Who will blink first over the cost.
Where does it say that EE is committed to providing access? I could see no
mention of it.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
One way or another, I'm sure all the major, and probably all,
You expect there to perhaps be an "O2 - yes, Tesco - no" kind of
discrimination (which in another thread I think is what applies to the
wifi).
I suppose it's possible that some cheapo virtual networks won't include it.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
operators will provide connectivity in the tunnels.
Let's wait and see what happens.
Indeed, and it's going to be a while.
Roland Perry
2019-07-20 07:20:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
the kit will be installed by a third party,
It's hardly likely to be done by TfL themselves. No budget for that kind
of thing, or something would have happened years ago.
I meant that the equipment will be installed by a company other than the
networks or TfL.
Sounds like it'll be someone like Ericsson who are betting on getting
more than EE as a customer.

But we know networks already lease some of their infrastructure from
such organisations, so this is not a great surprise. Look on it more
like TfL providing a wayleave for their tunnels (rather than a tall
building renting out some roof-space).

They also share it (so at last one of the partners didn't install it
themselves). See RAN sharing:

<https://www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Mobile-
Infrastructure-sharing.pdf>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
who then charges mobile phone operators to use it, and shares the
profits with TfL. There's no suggestion that only one operator will
have access.
"Although the UK’s four mobile phone networks are is still in
negotiations about accessing the new equipment in London's tube
tunnels, TfL expects that customer demand will ensure they all
provide services on the move."
Well, EE is going to, but are-is(sic, well it is the Grauniad) the other
three going to follow suit. Who will blink first over the cost.
Where does it say that EE is committed to providing access? I could see no
mention of it.
Why wouldn't they, when they've got a contract with the Home Office
which requires them to provide EE coverage for the emergency services.
Their business proposition for wider public coverage than other networks
is based very heavily on the extra infrastructure required for the
emergency services contract.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2019-07-20 07:44:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
the kit will be installed by a third party,
It's hardly likely to be done by TfL themselves. No budget for that kind
of thing, or something would have happened years ago.
I meant that the equipment will be installed by a company other than the
networks or TfL.
Sounds like it'll be someone like Ericsson who are betting on getting
more than EE as a customer.
Yes
Post by Roland Perry
But we know networks already lease some of their infrastructure from
such organisations, so this is not a great surprise. Look on it more
like TfL providing a wayleave for their tunnels (rather than a tall
building renting out some roof-space).
Exactly, though financially, it looks like a profit-sharing arrangement.
Post by Roland Perry
They also share it (so at last one of the partners didn't install it
<https://www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Mobile-
Infrastructure-sharing.pdf>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
who then charges mobile phone operators to use it, and shares the
profits with TfL. There's no suggestion that only one operator will
have access.
"Although the UK’s four mobile phone networks are is still in
negotiations about accessing the new equipment in London's tube
tunnels, TfL expects that customer demand will ensure they all
provide services on the move."
Well, EE is going to, but are-is(sic, well it is the Grauniad) the other
three going to follow suit. Who will blink first over the cost.
Where does it say that EE is committed to providing access? I could see no
mention of it.
Why wouldn't they, when they've got a contract with the Home Office
which requires them to provide EE coverage for the emergency services.
Their business proposition for wider public coverage than other networks
is based very heavily on the extra infrastructure required for the
emergency services contract.
Ah, so that was just your guess?
Roland Perry
2019-07-21 12:44:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Where does it say that EE is committed to providing access? I could see no
mention of it.
Why wouldn't they, when they've got a contract with the Home Office
which requires them to provide EE coverage for the emergency services.
Their business proposition for wider public coverage than other networks
is based very heavily on the extra infrastructure required for the
emergency services contract.
Ah, so that was just your guess?
You might need to guess about such things, but the rollout of the
airwave-replacement network is sufficiently well understood in other
quarters for me not to need to.
--
Roland Perry
Jarle Hammen Knudsen
2019-07-30 10:27:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."
Wouldn't it be more forward-thinking to go for 5G?
--
jhk
Roland Perry
2019-07-30 11:13:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
"Transport for London confirmed to the Guardian that 4G mobile
phone technology would go live in tunnels on most of the Jubilee
line from March 2020 and on other lines in the coming years."
Wouldn't it be more forward-thinking to go for 5G?
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
--
Roland Perry
Jarle Hammen Knudsen
2019-07-30 11:55:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
--
jhk
Roland Perry
2019-07-30 13:04:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise for a
large government IT project!
--
Roland Perry
MissRiaElaine
2019-07-31 11:45:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise for a
large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?

Ria in Aberdeen
Roland Perry
2019-07-31 13:00:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as less
effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
--
Roland Perry
Someone Somewhere
2019-07-31 15:00:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as less
effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?

What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution when
5G is already here...
Roland Perry
2019-07-31 15:25:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing
worn out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as
less effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
Yes, that's part of it. And the new handsets are also half the price of
Airwave ones.
Post by Someone Somewhere
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution when
5G is already here...
The Emergency Network requires the whole country to be flooded with 4G.
They aren't even sufficiently close to that yet. Let alone start from
scratch with 5G.

The original switch-off date for Airwave was supposed to be the end of
2019. Many don't expect that to happen for a least five years, and
that's sticking with 4G.
--
Roland Perry
b***@nhyrpwmjqzd4g5lm.net
2019-07-31 19:27:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:25:50 +0100
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing
worn out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as
less effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
Yes, that's part of it. And the new handsets are also half the price of
Airwave ones.
Post by Someone Somewhere
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution when
5G is already here...
The Emergency Network requires the whole country to be flooded with 4G.
They aren't even sufficiently close to that yet. Let alone start from
scratch with 5G.
5G is all hype. Yes it allows fantastic download speeds - as long as you're
within site of a transmitter. Go behind a wall or around a corner and the
speed soon drops off as the frequency simply doesn't penetrate matter very
well. Blanket coverage of 5G simply won't happen as it'll require far too many
base stations and associated equipment and wired links and would cost an
absolute fortune which the phone companies don't have. Its just marketing hype
to part the usual techno-suckers from their money in order to get smartphone
sales back up.
Someone Somewhere
2019-08-01 07:12:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed  upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
 I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing
worn  out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as
less  effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
Yes, that's part of it. And the new handsets are also half the price of
Airwave ones.
Post by Someone Somewhere
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution
when 5G is already here...
The Emergency Network requires the whole country to be flooded with 4G.
They aren't even sufficiently close to that yet. Let alone start from
scratch with 5G.
The original switch-off date for Airwave was supposed to be the end of
2019. Many don't expect that to happen for a least five years, and
that's sticking with 4G.
Well yes, but surely if it's layered on top of 4G it could also be
layered on top of 5G and any subsequent radio data bearer of a similar
ilk? I wasn't suggesting it could only be on 4G but made forward
compatible so it wasn't getting to be obsolete by the time rollout was
completed.
Roland Perry
2019-08-01 10:35:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed  upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a
surprise for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
 I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing
worn  out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as
less  effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
Yes, that's part of it. And the new handsets are also half the price
of Airwave ones.
Post by Someone Somewhere
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution
when 5G is already here...
The Emergency Network requires the whole country to be flooded with
4G. They aren't even sufficiently close to that yet. Let alone start
from scratch with 5G.
The original switch-off date for Airwave was supposed to be the end
of 2019. Many don't expect that to happen for a least five years, and
that's sticking with 4G.
Well yes, but surely if it's layered on top of 4G it could also be
layered on top of 5G and any subsequent radio data bearer of a similar
ilk? I wasn't suggesting it could only be on 4G but made forward
compatible so it wasn't getting to be obsolete by the time rollout was
completed.
The money to put the 4G on the tube is coming from the much-delayed
Emergency Network project. There isn't any money to install 5G, and it's
far too late to start changing the Emergency Network spec to include 5G.

That's the kind of thing which makes large government IT projects even
later and more over budget than they already are.
--
Roland Perry
Someone Somewhere
2019-08-01 10:45:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed  upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a
surprise  for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
 I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing
worn  out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded
as less  effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
 Yes, that's part of it. And the new handsets are also half the price
of  Airwave ones.
Post by Someone Somewhere
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution
when 5G is already here...
 The Emergency Network requires the whole country to be flooded with
4G.  They aren't even sufficiently close to that yet. Let alone start
from  scratch with 5G.
 The original switch-off date for Airwave was supposed to be the end
of  2019. Many don't expect that to happen for a least five years,
and that's sticking with 4G.
Well yes, but surely if it's layered on top of 4G it could also be
layered on top of 5G and any subsequent radio data bearer of a similar
ilk?  I wasn't suggesting it could only be on 4G but made forward
compatible so it wasn't getting to be obsolete by the time rollout was
completed.
The money to put the 4G on the tube is coming from the much-delayed
Emergency Network project. There isn't any money to install 5G, and it's
far too late to start changing the Emergency Network spec to include 5G.
That's the kind of thing which makes large government IT projects even
later and more over budget than they already are.
And even more out of date.

Combined base stations and aerial arrays are already available and they
should have been using those even if they aren't turning on the 5G bit
now.

This is particularly true as 5G is far better at dealing with high
densities of users which a tube station / train is a rather good example of.
Roland Perry
2019-08-01 10:57:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
The money to put the 4G on the tube is coming from the much-delayed
Emergency Network project. There isn't any money to install 5G, and
it's far too late to start changing the Emergency Network spec to
include 5G.
That's the kind of thing which makes large government IT projects
even later and more over budget than they already are.
And even more out of date.
It's less out of date than Airwave.
Post by Someone Somewhere
Combined base stations and aerial arrays are already available and they
should have been using those even if they aren't turning on the 5G bit
now.
Even with all this talk of Chinese manufacturers being banned?
Post by Someone Somewhere
This is particularly true as 5G is far better at dealing with high
densities of users which a tube station / train is a rather good example of.
Are you suggesting the same leaky feeder that might be delivering 4G on
the Tube, could one day be re-purposed to also deliver 5G? In which
case, what's wrong with pressing on installing it.
--
Roland Perry
Jarle Hammen Knudsen
2019-07-31 16:43:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:00:22 +0100, Someone Somewhere
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
 Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a  large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
out equipment and paying ongoing licence fees, was regarded as less
effective than using an 'open source' idea like 4G.
Wasn't it also the lack of development of the standard and basically
being stuck on GPRS like speeds?
What's concerning is that they are still rolling out a 4G solution when
5G is already here...
Whe haven't finished rolling out our Tetra ntework in Norway yet...
--
jhk
b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
2019-07-31 19:20:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:00:30 +0100
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Jarle Hammen Knudsen
Post by Roland Perry
No, because the emergency services contract (which this is
piggy-backed
upon) is 4G.
Is this something to replace the tetra based network in the UK?
Yes. And it's also much delayed. But that's not really a surprise
for a large government IT project!
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
Roland Perry
2019-08-01 06:08:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
--
Roland Perry
MissRiaElaine
2019-08-01 16:55:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
The push for ever-more-complicated "digital" stuff is to me totally
unnecessary. Call me old school, but I've always believed in the "If it
ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. In my last job before I retired
we used Band 3 MPT1327 trunked radios. They performed far better than
any digital systems I've seen.
b***@_lx2e2u_xmxf5c.gov.uk
2019-08-01 19:22:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 17:55:41 +0100
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Roland Perry
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
The push for ever-more-complicated "digital" stuff is to me totally
unnecessary. Call me old school, but I've always believed in the "If it
ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. In my last job before I retired
we used Band 3 MPT1327 trunked radios. They performed far better than
any digital systems I've seen.
To be fair, trunking radios are computer controlled by out of band
digital signals, only the actual speech is analogue.
MissRiaElaine
2019-08-01 21:43:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@_lx2e2u_xmxf5c.gov.uk
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 17:55:41 +0100
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Roland Perry
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
The push for ever-more-complicated "digital" stuff is to me totally
unnecessary. Call me old school, but I've always believed in the "If it
ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. In my last job before I retired
we used Band 3 MPT1327 trunked radios. They performed far better than
any digital systems I've seen.
To be fair, trunking radios are computer controlled by out of band
digital signals, only the actual speech is analogue.
Indeed, although they're not out of band, they're on a (usually)
dedicated control channel. You can hear them very clearly (and
loudly..!) on a scanner.

The audio quality is infinitely better, as it is uncompressed. Ok, so
probably not the best choice for a situation where encryption is
required, but for systems such as a large transport fleet they're ideal.
b***@9illv4.net
2019-08-02 18:00:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 22:43:28 +0100
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@_lx2e2u_xmxf5c.gov.uk
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 17:55:41 +0100
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Roland Perry
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
The push for ever-more-complicated "digital" stuff is to me totally
unnecessary. Call me old school, but I've always believed in the "If it
ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. In my last job before I retired
we used Band 3 MPT1327 trunked radios. They performed far better than
any digital systems I've seen.
To be fair, trunking radios are computer controlled by out of band
digital signals, only the actual speech is analogue.
Indeed, although they're not out of band, they're on a (usually)
dedicated control channel. You can hear them very clearly (and
loudly..!) on a scanner.
The audio quality is infinitely better, as it is uncompressed. Ok, so
probably not the best choice for a situation where encryption is
required, but for systems such as a large transport fleet they're ideal.
True. Other advantages of analogue audio is you can tell when there's
channel clash (though this shouldn't happen with a trunked system),
interference and when the other person is about to go out of range. With a
digital system all you get is silence and feck knows what the problem is.
b***@sgh4uhlpef.org
2019-08-01 19:19:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:08:36 +0100
Post by Roland Perry
Post by b***@djiribxljrl3nmu_tr.com
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
It's also going to be a total waste of time and money. Tetra just
worked, why change it..?
I think the problem is it's proprietary, and rather old. Replacing worn
Not that old in radio terms. Plod was still using motorola analogue trunking
systems only 15 years ago - I used to listen to them on a scanner. Tetra is
a lot newer than DAB!
The equipment's old, not the technology (although most would agree it's
no-longer-fit-for-purpose old.
Radio equipment can last for decades if treated with care. Though I'll grant
that might be a bit of an ask with a plod who maybe be wrestling drunks on a
saturday nmight.
MissRiaElaine
2019-08-03 12:31:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@sgh4uhlpef.org
Radio equipment can last for decades if treated with care. Though I'll grant
that might be a bit of an ask with a plod who maybe be wrestling drunks on a
saturday nmight.
Indeed, I had three Pye Westminsters (4m, 2m & 70cm) in my car at one
time, they just worked, marvellous radios they were.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Loading...