[PVRCNC] North Dakota RF (the missing msg)

[Jim K4QPL]

Hey Pete,

Where can I buy those mushrooms?

Jim

P.S. Doesn't ND already have the world's tallest TV tower that covers half 
the state? Hang those cell repeaters on that baby.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pete Soper" <pete at soper.us>
To: "pvrcnc" <pvrcnc at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] North Dakota RF (the missing msg)


> Pete Soper wrote:
>> Hmm. I didn't actually hit "send" on that msg, but it went out anyway. 
>> Carrying the laptop out to the shack to work out a network issue must 
>> have goosed Thunderbird. I would have toned it down before sending it, 
>> but it's history now.
> What's that boy jabbering about this time?
>
> So a reply to Brian's mail didn't happen after all. I was staring at my 
> drafts folder. Duh.  Here's what I meant to send:
>
> alsopb wrote:
>>
>> Here is one idea which is being tested.  Cellular repeaters 20 miles up 
>> on unteathered balloons.
>>
>> A lot of hot air?
>
> | 
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CELLULAR_BALLOONS?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME
>
> This was surely on the cover of "Popular Science" in the 80s?  I did see 
> this idea floated in a broadband trade press article a year two back, but 
> it was written up as pure speculation.  It's good to see they may be close 
> to having a workable solution. There are quite a few attractive aspects. 
> On the one hand they leave out the ground station equipment that's got to 
> be more involved than for tower-based gear. But even taking that into 
> account the cost seems to be so drastically reduced compared to 
> conventional tower usage that even if they have to have 12 or 20 or 50 
> balloons in the air at once to keep three on task at any one time they 
> still come out ahead. Now if it was Wisconsin instead of North Dakota that 
> "in the lake" factor would be much more serious.
>
> The part I have trouble with is the notion of any kind of reasonably small 
> package and number of small balloons getting the job done over time. The 
> article effectively describes all of ND's cellphone service needs being 
> handled by three devices the size of bread toasters.  Regular celltower 
> systems operate at pretty high power levels, don't they? Like dozens of 
> watts per transceiver across relatively short distances? And there are 
> size/separation requirements for the antennas imposed by physics. So when 
> the article says they only need three balloons to cover the state, that's 
> got to be a statement of how very few simultaneous calls they expect to 
> support. But if this works it will be reasonable to expect cellphone usage 
> in ND to increase dramatically  (but still, of course, up to a very modest 
> density of people for the given area). I guess I'm making obvious the 
> notion that to yank all the towers out of New Jersey and switch to 
> balloons would take a ridiculous number of balloons and/or very much 
> larger ones. So this isn't an either/or type solution as described (not 
> that I think the article is suggesting that it is). I guess I'm skeptical 
> about whether there are hidden costs related to scaling that won't surface 
> until the first deal is done.  The next thing to look for is balloons 
> floating across Africa or China as proof that the price/performance is 
> real.
>
> Going up another several miles above the Earth we see that success is not 
> guaranteed:
>
>    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/03/aramiska_staff/
>
> This is just one mid-tier organization, but we've seen other big, 
> expensive satellite ventures like Iridium crash and burn too (Iridium 
> didn't fail completely but is now an insanely expensive solution for voice 
> and very low speed data).  I guess I'm saying a kneejerk reaction of 
> satellite services as the obvious other solution isn't clear for a number 
> of reasons.
>
> But assuming broadband is close on the heels of voice services provided by 
> the cell companies, these balloons would seem to be an interesting way to 
> close the digital divide in this country and elsewhere. I'd like nothing 
> better than to see  balloons cause Starband 's satellite broadband 
> business to be blown right off the competitive map. But only after I start 
> spotting the balloons here on the fringe of Wake county! :-)
>
> As voice moves closer to being an  "oh, it does that too" feature of 
> cellphones (as is happening in a few parts of the world already) it would 
> sure be nice to see the USA's infrastructure closer to "everywhere" and 
> "homogeneous", the latter being at least from the user's perspective.
>
> The part I thought I'd sent out both incomplete and half-baked (instead of 
> just the latter!) is the notion that communication systems here in the 
> early 21st century are kind of like transportation systems: becoming more 
> sophisticated and refined and effective over time. Depending on the 
> definition of "cool communication", we could say the average Joe in the 
> 'States in 2006 has something akin to a bicycle plus access to the odd 
> canal barge or steam driven train. I know, some would say our cellphones 
> are more like personal rocket backpacks in comparison to regular phones. 
> But that's a statement about what's being sent/received now and how much 
> more sophisticated that form of "info transportation" is now.  But if 
> "sending my voice to an arbitrary part of the world" is like a bicycle, 
> what would be equivalent to a space vehicle? Hard to guess, but with 
> several orders of magnitude more bandwidth it would seem possible to send 
> a "simulation" of yourself some day: a realtime and proper size and 
> quality version of the teeny holographic projection of Princess Leia that 
> R2D2 provides in "Star Wars", perhaps. It seems hard to imagine a need for 
> this, of course, and to maintain the analogy, who's got the price of a 
> spacecraft ride? (yet!)
>
> OK, back to contesting. If W0UCE can get get a handful of these $55 
> balloons he can put up the Loud and Amazingly Large Array for 160 (slogan 
> "Ooh, Lala!") and give W4AN a run for their money next year.  Oh wait, do 
> the rules constrain the operators to the club geographic circle, or is it 
> operator plus station? But the 1000 foot "station circle" can extend up 
> and and out to the edge of the club circle, surely? N1ND is a reasonable 
> guy and would allow a "tilted columnar" station configuration, right? And 
> can a few toasters full of NiMH batteries pump 1.5kw for the whole test, 
> or would less power and more antenna gain at stratosphere height be enough 
> to blow W8JI's headphones right off his head?  But this would not be 
> terribly much more enthusiastic and effective a project for K2AV to 
> accomplish than his past year's work, assuming he avoids large toroids!
>
>
> -Pete AD4L
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc