Slashdot Mirror


UK Testing Wireless Broadband Via Airship

fruey writes "A team from York University, UK are about to test high altitude platforms, according to this article, as a way of bringing high-speed internet services to computer users in remote areas out of reach of broadband. They plan to use solar powered engines to keep the aerial platforms in position. The Capanina site have some more information about this stratospheric broadband experiment. More technical stuff can be found at the York University website This technology could deliver broadband communications at data rates up to 120Mbit/s! Screw cable and xDSL, when will stratospheric be available near me?"

163 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. Out of the way UK communities by GonzoDave · · Score: 5, Funny

    UK are about to test high altitude platforms, according to this article, as a way of bringing high-speed internet services to computer users in remote areas out of reach of broadband

    I assume this means backwards places like the Fens, Channel Islands, Welsh valleys and Liverpool. It might help to teach them what a computer and electricity are for first.

    1. Re:Out of the way UK communities by AyeFly · · Score: 1

      I think they meant the Falkland Islands... they will need lots of airships though.

      --
      Sig- http://www.dreamhost.com/rewards.cgi?ayefly
    2. Re:Out of the way UK communities by ozbon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, Liverpool certainly knows what computers are. They're the high-value items that thieving little sods can use to buy drugs.

      --
      I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
    3. Re:Out of the way UK communities by CaptainBaz · · Score: 2, Informative
      I assume this means backwards places like the Fens, Channel Islands, Welsh valleys and Liverpool. It might help to teach them what a computer and electricity are for first.
      Hmm. Would this be the same Liverpool that was recently made European City of Culture?

      Agree with you on the Channel Islands though :-)
    4. Re:Out of the way UK communities by Varitek · · Score: 2, Funny

      As a resident of the Welsh valleys, I must point out that you're wrong. We all have computers. It's the most convenient way of getting sheep pron.

    5. Re:Out of the way UK communities by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      Never mind that, I work in York and have a friend who lives within walking distance of the University... No cable or DSL on his street! It's bizzare that a reasonably large city like York has such poor broadband access. I'm not sure of the reasons for this - York has quite a huigh student population, who probably can't afford broadband, also a lot of the pavement/roads are ancient (vikings/romans etc) and you have to have archaelogosts involved any time there's any sort of excavation so the cable company is reluctant to lay the cable. I'm not sure why DSL is so hard to come by in York though - but this was a year ago, it may be better

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    6. Re:Out of the way UK communities by slipgun · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Would this be the same Liverpool that was recently made European City of Culture?

      Says more about the City of Culture award than about Liverpool.

      Baskingstoke will probably be next.

      --
      SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    7. Re:Out of the way UK communities by CaptainBaz · · Score: 1

      In the absence of hordes of raving Basingstoke residents, I shall have to tackle you alone.

      Have you ever been to Liverpool, or did you just watch an episode of Harry Enfield's television programme once?

    8. Re:Out of the way UK communities by Bigman · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm a Newbury resident, just up the road from Basingstoke... which is the only place for miles that has a Goth nightclub running at all, so as far as I'm concerned it's the centre of my cultural world LOL.

      --
      *--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
    9. Re:Out of the way UK communities by slipgun · · Score: 1

      I've been to the Wirrel - my auntie lives there. (Shows what a middle class twat I am). And I've driven past hordes of Liverpool council estates with my doors locked.

      At some point I intend to do a tour of the Big Six: Slough, Grimsby, Sc*nthorpe, Milton Keynes, Basingstoke, and, of course, the jewel in the crown: Hull.

      I'm going to get flamed for this I know, but the odds of any moderators coming from any of the Six is unlikely so I should be ok.

      --
      SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    10. Re:Out of the way UK communities by CaptainBaz · · Score: 1

      Then it may amuse you to know that I no longer live in Liverpool.

      I moved to Milton Keynes :o)

    11. Re:Out of the way UK communities by slipgun · · Score: 1

      Wow, the best thing about the Internet is you can insult random people about where they come from and not get thumped...

      --
      SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    12. Re:Out of the way UK communities by CaptainBaz · · Score: 1

      No, that's the second-best thing.

      The best thing is more free porn than you can eat

    13. Re:Out of the way UK communities by bawheid · · Score: 1
      >I'm going to get flamed for this I know, but the odds of any moderators coming from any of the Six is unlikely so I should be ok.

      Wrong there. I live and work in Liverpool. It's certainly not perfect, but it's getting much better - and yes - we do have broadband. I'm not from Liverpool originally, so I wouldn't say that I'm particularly biased about the city, but in many respects I rather live in Liverpool than in many other cities in the UK.

      What about the bad areas of London, Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow, Newcastle and even York? They're certainly no better than Liverpool.

      I will admit to having driven through some parts of Liverpool with the doors locked, though.

  2. Blast from the past by Wingchild · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder if an airship (or zeppelin) based broadband modem would be appropriately called a `z-modem`... ;)

    1. Re:Blast from the past by T3kno · · Score: 1

      You AC are an idiot. Your parent poster is, on the other hand, a genius. ZModem, classic!

      --
      (B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
  3. Cheaper Broadband by AyeFly · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why don't they just use five ounce birds carrying packets inside of cocounts?

    --
    Sig- http://www.dreamhost.com/rewards.cgi?ayefly
    1. Re:Cheaper Broadband by JRSiebz · · Score: 1

      i guess that's TCIP implemented with pigeons ;-)

    2. Re:Cheaper Broadband by Alranor · · Score: 1, Funny

      I assume you've read the RFC detailing standards for IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service

    3. Re:Cheaper Broadband by krumms · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why don't they just use five ounce birds carrying packets inside of cocounts?

      black.stump: ~$ ping yonder.tree
      PING yonder.tree (10.52.96.69): 56kb
      ping: sendto: Network unreachable: hunting season
      ping: sendto: Network unreachable: hunting season
      ping: sendto: Network unreachable: hunting season

      ...

      ;)

    4. Re:Cheaper Broadband by ultrasound · · Score: 1
      Amazingly this RFC was tested in a practical implementation of CPIP (Carrier Pigeon Internet Protocol) by the Bergen Linux User Group. The site has loads of pictures of the tests, and they actually managed to generate a ping whose packets were carried by the avian carrier. Awesome hack!

      here is the actual session:

      vegard@gyversalen:~$ ping -i 450 10.0.3.1
      PING 10.0.3.1 (10.0.3.1): 56 data bytes

      64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=6165731.1 ms
      64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=3211900.8 ms
      64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=5124922.8 ms
      64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=6388671.9 ms

      --- 10.0.3.1 ping statistics ---

      9 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 55% packet loss
      round-trip min/avg/max = 3211900.8/5222806.6/6388671.9 ms

    5. Re:Cheaper Broadband by TeknoHog · · Score: 2, Funny

      African or European?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    6. Re:Cheaper Broadband by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Oh god... now run stateful TCP on that... with 55% packet loss... I shudder to think...

  4. Lag times by soapbox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Satellites always had terrible lag times for transmission, so this would be much better...but c'mon, the British weather sucks--how long before these little "microlight" planes get knocked out of the sky by wind, attacked by birds, or grounded due to foul weather? Just put money into running coax/POTS or long-distance 802.11-type service.

    1. Re:Lag times by Escape+Tangent · · Score: 5, Informative
      but c'mon, the British weather sucks--how long before these little "microlight" planes get knocked out of the sky by wind, attacked by birds, or grounded due to foul weather?

      Actually, theoretically never. Not to give you an RTFA, but the craft hovers at an altitude of about 12 miles -- well into the stratosphere. The stratosphere begins at about 15km (9mi) from the Earth's surface and is composed of less dense, relatively stable air. I say relatively because there is a lot of lateral mixing but nothing quite as turbulent as what we experience on the surface. The highest clouds form not far from the tropopause (cirrus, stratocumulus, et al), so weather and harsh winds would have no effect on the craft at all.

      --
      On Slashdot, we don't say "thank you." We say "that's enough..." -_-;
    2. Re:Lag times by -Maurice66- · · Score: 1

      weather AND BIRDS in the STRATOSPHERE? I'd like to see a bird there, it would have to do quite some flying to get there ;-]

    3. Re:Lag times by ultranova · · Score: 1

      There's not much weather or birds at 12 miles...

      What really interests me is how they plan to keep these up at night ? Batteries are heavy and need regular replacement... And what's stopping the government from putting spy cams on these things ?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:Lag times by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      It's not the weather/birds that I'm worried about. How about just pulling the 15 mile long ethernet cable. That would bring it down pretty easily. OK, I know...bad joke.

    5. Re:Lag times by ASCII+GH0ST · · Score: 1

      www.wirelesswans.com ^hubs reach upto 30 miles^

    6. Re:Lag times by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      don't think you caught the "solar powered" bit. Eventually batteries will die, and I'm sure the balloons will have safe recovery mechanisms. I'm more concerned with catastrophic failure.

      As to spy cams, what's to stop me from buying one, starting up an ISP, and installing Carnivore, Echelon and their ilk on it and spying on Natalie Portman mixing hot grits for her new Soviet Russian ant overlords?

  5. I can't wait... by kjdames · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...to hack into one of these babies and land it on my roof.

    --

    Typos... that's just how I role.

    1. Re:I can't wait... by kjdames · · Score: 1
      What's that you say, Ossifer? A huge flying transmitter on my roof? Well I'll be darned...

      On the other hand, I guess I could land it on your roof...

      --

      Typos... that's just how I role.

  6. Something tells me we'll be getting more "UFO" sightings than usual if this plan gets the green light.

    Better make those airships bulletproof.

    1. Re:UFOs by The_Mr_Flibble · · Score: 1

      I went to a seminar that this company attended and I asked exactly the same question. And because they would be using low pressure helium filled baloons the hole that you would have to create to get this thing to have an uncontrolled decent would have to be pretty big for the helium to escape. For example you can still get .22 rifles over here and you would have to hit the thing so many times you would get very very bored waiting for it to come down. Now what you need is a harpoon gun.

    2. Re:UFOs by The_Mr_Flibble · · Score: 1

      My bad. This is another pie in the sky idea from someone else (the airship one is currently looking for millions to build the infrastructure for it). Is it just me or is it these ideas come around every few years then disapear. And this is england. It's not exactly a big place. Why do we need these things when the money could be used to lay cable ?

    3. Re:UFOs by Silburn_Luke · · Score: 1

      Although the group in York are the lead team, it is actually an EU project (there's a clue to this in the project name - which was the restaurant in Italy where the idea was first kicked about). The main benefit will be achieved (assuming the project is successful) in the sparsely populated south and the former comecon countries who are joining the EU later on this year. Regards Luke

      --
      #include witty_one_liner.h
    4. Re:UFOs by Eccles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do we need these things when the money could be used to lay cable ?

      Dunno about you, but I would love competing services (and thus presumably lower prices) for broadband, or even to have redundancy in my connection. Cable costs me an arm and a leg at the moment, and is my only choice. There could be multiple airship-based providers as well as DSL and cable.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    5. Re:UFOs by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      England (capital E please) my be "small" but the population density is very high - but we do have plently of low-desity remote areas. Cable is being laid but only to the densly populated areas. Take up of cable has been very slow in the UK resulting in collapse and meger activity of the handful of cable companies. They are reluctant to lay more cable until the takeup improves. Also it can be hard to lay cable, York is a good example.. It is an ancient city, with a settlement dating back thousands of years. You have to get special permission before digging up anywhere to lay cable - in fact I beleive that you must have an archaelogist on site for ANY excavation withing the York city walls, and your work can be stopped and postponed pending firther archaeological excavation - in some cases, for years. The coppergate development being a prime example - so in circumstaces like that, they are even more reluctant to lay cable.

      So yes, there is still a need for solutions like this in the UK.

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
  7. Tech support response by Wattsman · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Why is my net connection down?"
    "The router crashed."
    "Can't you reboot it or something."
    "No, I mean it literally crashed. Some bird flew into it and the sucker fell from the sky. We'll be getting a replacement up in an hour or so."

  8. Aerial Platforms - Safe? by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It might bring a whole new meaning to "my network's gone down"

    Bob

  9. New Meaning by shlomo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Gives new meaning to the term "Server Crash".

    --
    sorry officer, left my sig in my other computer.
  10. This was an idea I wished Sun would pursue by corebreech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It would be called the Sun phone. What they'd do is launch a big balloon and have it hover over your large metropolitan areas. The phone gives you seemless voice capabiities, and then you plug it into your computer and you've got hi-speed access. And then the really cool feature... the thing lights up, just like the real Sun (only this Sun would be visible at night.)

    Yeah, it's just a marketing gimmick I guess, but it seemed like such a good fit. And besides, what else is Sun going to do? Manufacture over-priced blade servers?

    1. Re:This was an idea I wished Sun would pursue by W32.Klez.A · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but you reposted one of my comments from a couple of weeks ago. I can't find it, but jesus christ, can't you think of anything on your own?

    2. Re:This was an idea I wished Sun would pursue by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      If you coat it with a phospherescent material and illuminate it with enough UV, you might make a decent night light.

      But now I'll never get to sleep...

  11. View pollution by JRSiebz · · Score: 1

    How many of these do they need in the sky for redundancy purposes? just in case a few of them fail, and what happens when they fall to earth...*boink* I thought people liked to star gaze, not look at swarms of platforms 'floating' in the sky.

    wouldn't orbiting satelites stay 'up' longer.... oh wait they do

    1. Re:View pollution by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1
      Tried stargazing from a major city lately? The view is less than impressive. The magnificent sight of the Milky Way is sadly becoming a thing of the past for a growing part of the world's population. I housemate of mine once asked if I had ever been to the southern hemisphere and he remarked that the milky Way is the most amazing sight. I had to tell him that from the back of my parents' house in rural Ireland I used to stand and look at the thing every night.

      I digress.

      Light polution is a more pressing problem than the occasional airship getting in the way. At that altitude it's not going to block any more of the view than a commercial airliner, and there are 'swarms' of them in the sky.

      As for orbiting satelites, they're a bit expensive to launch. And god forbid if anything goes wrong with them and they need to be maintained.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  12. In production already? by Walkiry · · Score: 4, Informative

    I had heard of these things before (like here, but it's the first time I see anyone talking about it seriously other than in future, vague projects and predictions.

    It's like low-cost, low-tech satellite communications (less area covered, less powerful transmission units, but cheaper too), the only thing I see as a possible problem is the interference with air traffic in higher populated areas (probably the reason why they're starting with these more remote locations for implementation).

    Damn cool if you ask me.

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
  13. Re:LOL by grub · · Score: 2, Funny


    I'm sure it will be a badge of honour in small English villages to say "Aye, I get me pr0n from tha' big tit in the sky!"

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  14. So you're telling me... by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1, Funny

    That the British now have Airships, which previously only existed in Final Fantasy?!

    DAMN YOU.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
    1. Re:So you're telling me... by Wingchild · · Score: 1, Funny

      It got easy after they found the Float stone (it was one of the rocks atop Stonehenge, just nobody noticed it before). The sad part is that your IT tech support will be run by Tiamat. The WarMech will be the front-line helpdesk (i.e., you have to traverse that beast to actually get to where you wanna be anyway..)

    2. Re:So you're telling me... by GonzoDave · · Score: 1

      We're scrapping the RAF, replacing it with Bahamut

  15. Logical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Wi-fi using this method had to come. At some 12 miles above the earth's surface, the last-mile just became 12. Being rural is a legitamate choice but a computer is rather useless without Internet access these days.

    I can only hope DWO will be supported. Unfortunate for this otherwise solid choice otherwise, but it could become the breaking point.

    In the end the only other alternative is to create my own. A real possibility in that I can stand by my decision - win or lose.

  16. Local satellite replacement. by ursg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nasa's project Helios (the unmanned solar-powered "flying wing") has had a similar Idea behind it:
    Why clutter geostationary orbit when you can have unmanned planes circling metropolitian areas? Using solar power, these flying relays could operate nearly indefinitely at a fraction of the price.

    The biggest problem that remains: What to do at night, when there is no sun powering the Solar Cells? Helios used Fuel Cells for backup power, but the technology is not yet advanced enough to sustain flight for longer than ~1 week.

    1. Re:Local satellite replacement. by hplasm · · Score: 2, Funny
      What to do at night, when there is no sun powering the Solar Cells? Helios used Fuel Cells for backup power, but the technology is not yet advanced enough to sustain flight for longer than ~1 week.

      Where do you live?? Pluto?

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
    2. Re:Local satellite replacement. by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      In the event that continual night lasts longer than 1 week, I'd like to think that I'd become concerned about things other than high-speed bandwidth.

      But I probably wouldn't.

    3. Re:Local satellite replacement. by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      I think what he was saying is that the fuel cells don't have the capacity to run it for more than 7 nights. During the daytime, it's running on the solar panels and not using any fuel.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    4. Re:Local satellite replacement. by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Have the thing land once a week for a recharge and some general maintenance, and you're golden. 100 of these things plus operations costs (filling it with water?) would be cheaper than a single satellite blowing up 30 seconds after launch, or not reaching orbit at all.

  17. Re:{Score; -1, British} by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1, Funny

    From Texas?

    Bob

  18. It's a simple question of weight ratios by UsedToCould · · Score: 1

    If you add weight(5 ouce packets) you will alter the weight ratio, and the birds won't arrive in time, causing latency. What kind of system is this?

    "If I wanted your opinion, I would have given it to you."

    1. Re:It's a simple question of weight ratios by tommck · · Score: 1

      Perhaps if he grips it by the husk...

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  19. Re: Airship Broadband by Silwenae · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how the latency and ping time would be.

    Having used Hughes' DirecDuo / DirecPC 4 years ago before broadband was available at my home, it left the broadband experience wanting.

    It was ok for downloading large files, couldn't do online gaming at all, and surfing the web was just ok - you could feel the few seconds where you sent the URL over, but once it got it sent the browser downloaded it quickly enough.

    I guess it would depend how their NOC worked - but I still have to imagine this is only good for the same things as DirecPC (which means gaming is still out probably).

  20. Microlights by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Informative
    It's probably worth mentioning that the article is focussing on microlights for this, not airships. Microlights are very small aeroplanes, resembling (and not much different to) a hang-glider with an engine.

    I assume microlights would be superior as you wouldn't need to tether them to prevent them from being blown away.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Microlights by jgabby · · Score: 1

      that is, until thunderstorms hit. Sure, you'll get great broadband when it's sunny outside - but on those rainy days when you really want it because there's nothing else to do, you're screwed. Err, blown...(away).

    2. Re:Microlights by famebait · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you joking? The airships in question would of course not be mere blimps but dirigibles, using solar power and propellers to stay in place.

      There may be advantages to microlights, but the effect of one losing power and falling down on your head (or house) is not one of them...

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    3. Re:Microlights by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      First: I'm not "joking", I just told you what the article was saying. You can verify this for yourself by, erm, reading the article. There are "no airships in question", the article mentions airships as something else that's being tried in passing, but the article is about microlights.

      Second: Airships (an airship is a type of dirigible, not vice-versa) would require a hell of a lot of power to stay in one place using propellers, far more than you'd expect them to be able to pick up from solar power. They're very bulky and unaerodynamic by their very nature.

      A microlight at a sufficient height would certainly not simply drop on your head if it loses power. Depending on the design, it could take many hours, or even days (if the thing carries enough secondary power to be able to control its descent and make use of thermals et al) to land. It's reasonable to suggest that a small winged aircraft that merely needs to stay in the air for long periods of time in roughly the same spot can be powered directly and indirectly using solar power.

      So I can see why they're investigating microlights.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Microlights by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Informative
      It's probably worth mentioning that the article is focussing on microlights for this, not airships. Microlights are very small aeroplanes, resembling (and not much different to) a hang-glider with an engine.

      Actually that is for testing purposes, they will fly microlights at low altitude. Presumably because it takes quite a bit of time getting a blimp up to 12 miles high and they are pretty pricey. You can do much more tweakage on a cheap microlight, send it up, test, bring it down, tweak, etc.

      The production scheme would go on airships at 12 miles out. The reason for that is that they require less power to stay in place, most of the weather takes place at much lower altitudes. Thunderstorms tend to take place at under 6Km at those latitudes.

      My meterologoist is not sure what the wind factor is up there, you are probably above the jet stream (good) but hey since you don't get much weather at those levels there is not a great deal of interest in tracking it. Possibly the wind factor is small because you are so high up and the atmosphere is much thinner.

      You would need some sort of solar array to power the networking gear. One cool aspect though is that you could have directional antanae focused on a particular area. So you would not need to share the same frequency band with everyone in the 40Km service area.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    5. Re:Microlights by famebait · · Score: 1

      There are "no airships in question"

      Yes there are; the ones you said would have to be tethered, wheras existing proposals to deploy such platforms are based on free-floating solar powered ones.

      would require a hell of a lot of power to stay in one place using propellers, far more than you'd expect them to be able to pick up from solar power.

      I haven't done the math, but there seem to be qualified people who think otherwise. Remember we're in the stratosphere here. Less drag, gentle weather, practically no clouds, longer days, etc.

      So I can see why they're investigating microlights.

      Sure, I'm not really disputing that.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    6. Re:Microlights by balloonhead · · Score: 1
      You can verify this for yourself by, erm, reading the article.

      You're new around here, aren't you?

      --
      This idea was invented by Shampoo.
  21. why airships... when satellite already is here? by zorgaliscious · · Score: 2, Interesting

    services from Astra and Eutelsat and others already cover every bit of land from Iceland to Pakistan... at small prices. Try www.eutelsat.net to get some really low prices!! Just a dish, dvb modem, et voila'! Great stuff!

    1. Re:why airships... when satellite already is here? by miscGeek · · Score: 2, Informative

      Basically because ping time with satellites sux big time :( I know from experience. Like one poster already mentioned, it makes large downloads better but that's about it. It is better than modem though :)

      --
      May the source be with you!
  22. Coming to a roof near you... by jettoblack · · Score: 1

    when will stratospheric be available near me?

    Check your backyard after the next thunderstorm? :)

  23. Re: Airship Broadband by praedor · · Score: 4, Informative

    It wont be the same. There will be a latency but it wont be anything close to that with satellite internet. Think about it. They are talking balloons at, what, and altitude of 10 miles or so? (I haven't yet read the article but for this I don't need to). Your DirectPC satellites are geosynchronous at worst...you're talking ~28,000 miles.


    Let's see, speed of light traversing 20+/- miles (up and back down each way) and this being factored into latency, vs speed of light traversing 56,000+/- miles (up and back each way). See a HUGE difference there?


    The latency would be/will be a nonissue.

    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  24. Bullets? by glpierce · · Score: 1

    Civilians can't legally own/operate anti-aircraft weapons in the UK, so I doubt anyone will be shooting at it with bullets. Sarcasm is another story, of course...

    --
    G
    1. Re:Bullets? by Rhubarb+Crumble · · Score: 1
      I doubt anyone will be shooting at it with bullets.

      At 12 miles altitude, that would have to be a big gun to hit it with bullets.

      Better get one of these.

  25. Re:Blimps? by Rhubarb+Crumble · · Score: 1
    Will they sell advertising painted on the sides of the airships?

    Not painted, displayed on a huge screen mounted to the side, so the ads can be rotated/animated.

    Just wait until someone hacks it and replaces it with goatse....

  26. Already RFC documented as avian carrier by Wrexs0ul · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1149.txt

    An interesting overview in the use of avian carriers for packet transport. Seems to follow with your point nicely though I'm concerned of packet loss due to falcon hacking.

    -Matt

    --
    --- Need web hosting?
  27. If I remember correctly... by l1gunman · · Score: 1

    WIRED ran a story on a similar proposal a number of years ago. (I looked for a link but couldn't find one). As I recall, Alexander Haig (yup, that guy) was deeply involved in the project, then to be pointed towards providing ubiquitous cellular phone access across the country. They planned on using geostationary airship type platforms to get around some of the classical problems with cellular antennas and coverage. I guess it never got off the ground ;-)

    1. Re:If I remember correctly... by l1gunman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Must... choose.... better.... search terms. I found this reference, from 1997, about something then called SkyStation:

      http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,6046 ,0 0.html

  28. They fly above most aircraft, cord is the problem by blorg · · Score: 1, Funny

    These things fly in the stratosphere, "hovering at some 12 miles above the earth's surface, much higher than almost all air craft" - or birds for that matter. While the article refers to microlights at the very start, the rest of the article and the other links concentrate on blimps. The air-traffic problem here comes not from the blimp itself, but rather from the cord tethering it to the ground.

  29. Inclimate Weather by SunCrushr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sure its fast, but if its stratospheric, its usefulness may be greatly effected by inclimate weather. Even cumulus clouds can greatly lower the bandwidth of wireless communication when transmitting between the stratosphere and the ground. It will be interesting to see how they deal with this issue.

    1. Re:Inclimate Weather by SunCrushr · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the correction.
      My spelling could use some work yes. :(

    2. Re:Inclimate Weather by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      I used to live in Manchester and had Sky digital. Every time it rained, i.e. frequently, there was a 50/50 chance that the digital TV signal would break up. It used to drive me frigging crazy. Kinda makes you wonder what's the point. All this money and hype going into this digital TV technology and they can't even transmit through a shower of rain.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  30. Latency? by Queuetue · · Score: 1

    There's more than one reason that this could be better than a satellite connection - the latency from the ride to space and back makes satellite-based Internet connectivity almost useless for anything but mail and web.

    Presumably, this will be a shorter bounce with less latency, provided they don't relay packets via satellite anyway from the airship..

    1. Re:Latency? by sonoluminescence · · Score: 1

      This thing will be about 10 miles up, and assuming the signals are bi-directional (ie you talk to the balloon, it talks to you) this means a 40 mile round trip.

      You send a packet to the balloon. 10 miles.
      The balloon fowards it to the ground. 10 miles.
      The server responds and the reply is sent to the balloon. 10 miles.
      The reply is beamed down to you. 10 miles.

      Given the aproximate speed of light to be 186,282 miles a second.

      Thats 40/186282
      I get 2.15*10^-4 s.

      About a fifth of a milisecond.
      Which doesn't sound too bad, but I suspect the problems may lie in how fast the electronics on the balloon can process the incoming connections.

      --
      Karma: Bad. Calmer, good.
  31. Just to answer some questions by subjectstorm · · Score: 5, Informative

    Q. Weather problems and air traffic?

    A. It's 12 miles up. that's well above commercial air traffic, and i suspect (although i'm too lazy to check) most weather problems.

    Q. Latency TImes?

    A. According to the article, those will be a hell of a lot lower than satellite. Also, it seems to be boasting a very, very high rate of transfer.

    Q. How many are needed for redundancy?

    A. Well, none. If it crashes it does. Kind of like how, if your ISP gets blowed up, you ain't got no internet. This isn't yet considered stable enough for long term solutions. it's mainly just cheap braodband for areas that don't have it, until they get it - if that makes sense. I see more military applications than anything, to be perfectly honest.

    --
    ** Chigusaaa!!! You're the coolest girl in the WORLD!!! **
    1. Re:Just to answer some questions by fuzzybunny · · Score: 3, Funny
      If it crashes it does. Kind of like how, if your ISP gets blowed up, you ain't got no internet


      Yeah, but if my ISP explodes, I won't get half a ton of Cablecom telco equipment dropping through my skylight from 12 miles up.

      What's the terminal velocity of a wireless router anyway?

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
    2. Re:Just to answer some questions by pcraven · · Score: 1

      The problem is controlling the altitude in day vs night scenarios. During the night, you'll be much closer to the weather. The balloon can't fly nearly as high then, unless you want to control altitude by adding/dumping gas a lot.

    3. Re:Just to answer some questions by smithmc · · Score: 1

      It's 12 miles up. that's well above commercial air traffic, and i suspect (although i'm too lazy to check) most weather problems.

      Well, sure, the blimp will be above any bad weather. Meanwhile, the users will be below the aforementioned bad weather. Isn't that a problem?

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    4. Re:Just to answer some questions by zmooc · · Score: 1

      Latency: 12[miles]=19.8[km], 19.8 [km] / c [km/s] = 19.8/300000 [s] = 0.000066s=0.066ms=660ns for the light to travel up. That's 1.66ms to get back down again, maybe a bit more because it's diagonal. Add the delay for 3 times (client, platform, isp) the wireless equipment and it's still pretty damn fast.

      Weather: there will not be a lot of turbulence or real storms, but there are pretty strong winds called jet streams and it's pretty cold up there. More information especially over here and also a bit over here.

      --
      0x or or snor perron?!
    5. Re:Just to answer some questions by PPGMD · · Score: 1
      A. It's 12 miles up. that's well above commercial air traffic, and i suspect (although i'm too lazy to check) most weather problems.

      No not really above most weather, the thing to remember is that there are three things that actually affect air traffic when it comes to weather, ice, thunder storms and low level fog, both ice and thunder storms can routinely reach about FL600+ where this blimp would be flying.

      /Patiently waiting for the first one to crash so I can be right again

      Anything can happen when your in the air.

  32. "Up to" 120Mbit/s? by blorg · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Makes me sceptical - I wonder if it's shared bandwith?

    This speed figure seemed to be just thrown out of a hat, with nothing to back it up. (It's also referenced on this CAPANINA project page, but again no more details.

    1. Re:"Up to" 120Mbit/s? by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 1

      You "wonder" if it's shared bandwidth? No, genius, every yokel in backwater UK gets their own 120Mbit zeppelin. It's all part of a conspiracy to blot out the SUN!

      With the costs not only of a wireless router, but also of a blimp, I'd say that dividing it into usable hard-limit chunks with guaranteed speeds would be stupid. Therefore, bandwidth will be shared.

      But the up-to probably refers to weather conditions. A thunderstorm underneath the blimp will likely impair functions.

    2. Re:"Up to" 120Mbit/s? by blorg · · Score: 1

      Well my point was that it's not a very meaningful figure if it is shared. Saying that each Zeppelin has 120Mbit of total capacity is very different than touting speeds "a staggering 2000 faster than today's dial-up modems and more than 200 times faster than a typical "wired" broadband facility."

    3. Re:"Up to" 120Mbit/s? by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I guess. But since when are broadband providers supposed to be *clear* on what they're offering? However, all bandwidth is eventually shared. An ISP that ensures it has enough total bandwidth to the Outside World to give all their customers their maximum speeds either offers 56kbit connections while charging for true broadband, and/or goes out of business very quickly.

      Anyway, I just saw an opening for a snarky comment and took it. :P

  33. Re:Altitude? by fruey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These are going to be 10 miles up, it's only the experiments that are with tethered airships. The tests will be followed by slightly different style aircraft which will be less affected by weather systems significantly below them. Birds don't fly to those sorts of altitudes either.

    Serviceable area will be less than for geostationary orbit satellites, but lower power and higher speeds are possible. The telecoms requirements of this century will probably require a lot of deployment of new stuff, because there's only so much sense in deploying fibre optics all over the place, because the remote areas will get left out.

    --
    Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
  34. Re:Altitude? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

    Read the article....

    They say 12 miles----

    Seems awful high to me, but what do I know....

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  35. Re:Blimps? by djeaux · · Score: 1
    Just wait until someone hacks it and replaces it with goatse....

    But would anybody notice if they did that & tethered the thing over Times Square?

    --
    "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
  36. Oh, the humanity! by RealErmine · · Score: 3, Funny

    How big are these airships?

    It is appropriate that the source of one's internet might also block out the sun for short periods of time, thus rendering it safe for geeks to venture outside.

    "Natural light! Get it off!"

    --
    Dewey, you fool! Your decimal system has played right into my hands!
  37. A stupid joke by kauttapiste · · Score: 1


    So is this some sort of heavenly bandwidth??



    Man, oh man.. That's funny.

  38. Re:Blimps? by uradu · · Score: 1

    > Will they sell advertising painted on the sides of the airships?

    No, because they're too high up to be legible. But they'll insert random redirects to their marketing sites into your HTML pages.

  39. Permanent Fliers by Effugas · · Score: 5, Informative

    Heh, this made Slashdot. Cool. So, yeah. I know these guys.

    Basically, the airships is question are built by a company named Aerovironment (www.aerovironment.com). I've known about them for a while; one of my good friends works for the company. Really cool stuff; the basic idea is that this giant fixed wing circles around a rural area in the mid-to-upper atmosphere (where the air is thin enough to reduce drag, but thick enough to support lift) using solar power during the day and battery power at night. Then you drop some cell / wireless data relays on the bottom of the plane (UAV, to be more accurate), and poof: Regional visibility of a satellite relay, without the lag of communicating with a device being 22,500 miles away in geosynchronous orbit. That it's much cheaper to deploy the device (and possible to recover it as needed) is just gravy.

    Things haven't been trivial for Aerovironment -- they lost one of their fixed wings some time ago during a test flight in Hawaii -- but as far as I know, they're the leaders in developing UAV's that simply don't need to land.

    --Dan

    1. Re:Permanent Fliers by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      How long can these things actually stay up? Presumably the solar energy during the day is used to recharge the batteries, but I don't imagine they'll last forever.

    2. Re:Permanent Fliers by Effugas · · Score: 1

      Weeks certainly, months probably, years possibly. Everything degrades; what's very nice is that (noticably unlike a satellite), when you need to run maintenance on one of these things, you just tell it to land. I believe it'll even fly its way back up after you're done.

      It's pretty sweet tech. Nice to see Aero getting more exposure :-)

      --Dan

    3. Re:Permanent Fliers by glinden · · Score: 1

      Yeah. This is a very cool technology that looks like a low-cost, low-latency alternative to geosynchronous satellites.

      Nasa is apparently working on something similar.

    4. Re:Permanent Fliers by Effugas · · Score: 1


      The Helios Prototype was a unique electrically powered experimental lightweight flying wing developed by AeroVironment, Inc., under NASA's Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) program.

    5. Re:Permanent Fliers by glinden · · Score: 1

      Ah, right. Sorry, I thought it was an independent effort. They're clearly working together.

  40. Mentioned on Slashdot before? by absolut_kurant · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember that a similar (or even the same?) plan was mentioned on /. some time ago. Couldn't find the /. article, however, I found a short article on the BBC website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2932806.stm

    --
    Yes.
  41. A storm? by anethema · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I would like to see the engines keep an airship in position in a storm or gale force wind.

    Maybe a carbon nanotube tether is in order ;)

    --


    It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    1. Re:A storm? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      That would assume you're seeing thos gale force winds at 63,000 feet, above the troposphere.

  42. Can hardly wait! by uradu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is just great. Now we have to wait for two emerging technologies to mature: wireless broadband AND autonomous blimps. Not to mention the integration and ground control thereof. It's not like they're not having a hard enough time deploying wireless broadband from the top of a steel pole on a hill--pretty reliable and established mounting technology in most parts of the world--now they have to do it from a floating platform that has been pie-in-the-sky (pardon the pun) for decades. Yeah, it will happen Really Soon Now!

    1. Re:Can hardly wait! by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Those airships will never work. Hell they'll even be talking about using them to provide arial camera shots of football games next. Hang on...

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    2. Re:Can hardly wait! by uradu · · Score: 1

      The unproven technology is not the blimp itself but its autonomous control and endurance, a blimp that will reliably hover above the same spot on earth without a tether for weeks on end, possibly much longer. All while up- and downlinking high speed data streams. That combination is unproven so far on any sort of larger scale. I do appreciate your attempt at humour though.

    3. Re:Can hardly wait! by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting point, and I hate to give you an RTFA, but the blimp in the experiment was only for testing the principle of an arial platform. In practice it will be heavier-than-air UAVs that will be used, and they are a more established technology than autonomous blimps.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    4. Re:Can hardly wait! by uradu · · Score: 1

      > In practice it will be heavier-than-air UAVs that will be used,
      > they are a more established technology than autonomous blimps

      In military use perhaps, but not in reliable commercial use. Once you start charging people for this service that thing better be up there 24/7. I don't think there's any commercial precedent for this combination of technology, UAV/blimp/any-old-flying-platform and high speed bidirectional data communications. It's one thing for NASA or the military to brute-force a solution, it's quite another to advance it to off-the-shelf status for companies that have to actually make it pay for itself.

      Keep in mind I'm not saying it's not possible. In fact, I'm pretty sure this will be very common technology in the future. I'm just saying that right now, today, I'd first concentrate on making wireless broadband work without the added complexity of a flying platform. So far I'm not aware of any large-scale wireless broadband installations that would prove a company's ability to operate and make such technology profitable. Where are all these providers? We keep reading articles about its imminence, but it's a little like nanotech--always another few years in the future.

  43. Re:They fly above most aircraft, cord is the probl by Xolotl · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can't read the university or manufacturer pages at the moment (slashdotted), only the guardian article. But I would expect that only the test baloon over York will be tethered, and that will be at a fairly low altitude (York doesn't have a major airport). The stratospheric baloons will almost certainly not be tethered, because of the weight of 12 miles of cable strong enough to hold them and itself. More likely they will use engines (solar powered electric, for example, so as not to carry fuel) to hold position.

  44. Re: Airship Broadband by praedor · · Score: 2, Informative

    OK, having read the article, I was too simplistic, but not enough to change the argument. The airship operates at ~12 miles and covers a 40 mile circle. If it has a ground station directly below it (roughly speaking), then if you are on the edge of that 40 mile coverage, the max range your wireless signal would need to traverse is ~42 miles each way. So a two-way comm would traverse ~84 miles. This is still MUCH less than the ~112,000 mile range a two-way comm signal must traverse via satellite internet (28,000 mile high geostationary orbit, 56,000+ mile signal range up and down, then the return signal).


    Still - no real latency issue.

    hh
    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  45. Re:big problem...contention by man_ls · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking that it'll work similar to the way cable modems work. Bandwidth available varies with congestion...You have to remember, not everyone would be using it at the same time, and not even everyone would want to subscribe to it.

    However, it is feasible that in the worst case, it would be 120mbps at 4 AM and 60 bps at 6 PM. However, it'd probably be closer to 512 kbps at 6 PM.

  46. Gyromills... by F34nor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Gyromills would make a better platform and they would generate electricity at the same time.

    1. Re:Gyromills... by famebait · · Score: 2, Funny

      Esp. in bad weather, a lot of electricity at the same time :-)

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    2. Re:Gyromills... by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Actually you missed the point, this thing goes in the jet steam so it shouldn't be affected by ambient weather. That's the thing about a gyromill it is far more consistant than a windmill.

    3. Re:Gyromills... by famebait · · Score: 1

      The cable still needs to go through thunder clouds (from time to time) and down to the ground.

      But I'm sure they've thought of some way of handling that. I just liked the mental image...

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    4. Re:Gyromills... by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Ahhh a nod to Ben Franklin. I thought you were talking about high wind speed.

  47. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Are there pirates in small English villages?

  48. Slashdotting by chendo · · Score: 1

    "A large gathering of people have gathered to protest outside Slashdot HQ after the website linked to a test page hosted on the new wireless blimp. Within seconds, millions of geeks accessed it, crashing the blimp's navigational system, engine systems, and of course the web server itself. The blimp just missed the Pentagon by a mile or so, but people already have started to call Slashdot 'a bunch of geeky terrorists'."

    --
    Founder of Mirror Moon - Tsukihime Game Trans
  49. Al Haig sure gets around by ianscot · · Score: 1
    As I recall, Alexander Haig (yup, that guy) was deeply involved in the project,

    He was supposedly a decent candidate for "Deep Throat," the Watergate informer who helped bring Nixon down. He declared he was "in charge" at the White House (Constitution be damned) during the Reagan assassination attempt. Now he's involved with cell phone access schemes?

    These airships become more mysterious and sinister all the time, don't they?...

    --
    "Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
    1. Re:Al Haig sure gets around by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Constitution says nothing about who's in charge if the President is unconscious and unable to give notice that he's incapacitated to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, so really, who was supposed to be "in charge" was really up for grabs.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  50. Obligatory heavy metal reference..... by rosbif · · Score: 1, Funny

    ....so if these things have status lights would they be LED Zeppelins.....?

  51. The University of York by spray_john · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not "York University". York University is in Canada. The department in question is part of "The University of York".

    Might seem petty, but it's a bit like calling MIT the Technology Institute of Massachusetts.

  52. Ha ha, charade you are by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

    I'm just waiting for Pink Floyd to do a Shoutcast of their concerts from a high-altitude inflatable pig.

    --

    I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
  53. SkyLinc by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1, Interesting

    there's this company named skylinc whose name I keep seeing pop up... they call their platform "Low-Cost Integrated Broadband Radio Access (LIBRA)." it's basically the same thing... a few aerostat baloons a few km up drag a fiber-optic teather up with them... they then have the capability of covering 5000 square kilometers with approx 2Mb per person at 15,000 people.



    From their FAQ:
    When will the system be available?
    SkyLINC will launch the first LIBRA communications platform within the next 12 months. The first users of this system will be online during the second quarter of 2004.

    Where will these systems be made available?
    SkyLINC have a number of different opportunities available for the deployment of the first system. The business case and requirements for each location are being assessed and an announcement will be made in the near future. SkyLINC remain open to additional deployment opportunities and seek strategic investment/partnership to launch anywhere in the world.

    Is the system affected by weather?
    SkyLINC use a specially engineered aerostat, designed to remain in the sky for long periods of time, whilst withstanding strong wind and adverse weather conditions. However, it is expected that the aerostat would need to be grounded during a extreme conditions such as a tornado. Weather systems are monitored to ensure that the aerostat is protected.

    Can the link be made secure?
    Yes. By using Virtual Private Network (VPN) technology, any wireless network can be made secure for the transfer of confidential information. See the link for an explanation as to how a VPN operates.

    Do I need to be able to see the Aerostat?
    By using remote site distribution SkyLINC will ensure ubiquitous connectivity within the 40km foot print. Therefore line of sight to the aerostat is not necessary.

    How does LIBRA interact with aviation users?
    LIBRA will be deployed within an Air Traffic Zone(ATZ), sometime called no-fly zones, which is controlled by the Aviation authority. An ATZ appears on aero-nautical charts used by pilots and air traffic controllers.

    What is contention?
    In the case of some communication systems, multiple users connect on to a data pipe and hence, share bandwidth. This is known as Contention. Unfortunately, if all users decide to connect at the same time then the end user connection speed drops considerably. The acceptability of this 'drop' in bandwidth depends on the application of the link. Needless to say, during a video conference, a drop in bandwidth would result in loss of images. Hence, for some applications an uncontended link is essential.

    What is a symmetrical link?
    To communicate we need to transmit and receive data. The amount we can transmit and receive depends on the bandwidth for the up-link and down-link respectively. A symmetric service has the same bandwidth to receive and transmit! This is essential for some applications, such as video conferencing.

  54. Crashing ISPs by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 3, Funny

    This gives the term,"My ISP has crashed" new meaning.

  55. This seems like the expensive way by The_Revelation · · Score: 1

    This idea completely defies the KISS rule (Keep It Simple, Stupid). I can see the possible benefits: having a network zeplin flying over iraq could have brought us some really high-quality CNN footage. By the same token, taking extremely expensive, highly delicate, slow moving experimental air equipment into a warzone where the enemy posesses missiles is probably a stupid idea. This is a cool concept, but I can't fathom how it could be used as a long term set up. At best it could be used as a temporary network suppliment, but the ongoing maintenance, inspection and operation costs would be astronomically high and, ultimately, cost more than running a cable to the area that couldn't connect to broadband in the first place. having said all that, as someone else pointed out, how many subscriber cells can you fit on one airship?

    1. Re:This seems like the expensive way by Aielman · · Score: 1

      These UAVs aren't really that expensive. AeroVironment's first prototype of Helios that broke up in Hawaii (due to conditions at low altitude) cost around 3 million, which is dirt cheap. After production runs start, the cost usually drops considerably.

      "taking extremely expensive, highly delicate, slow moving experimental air equipment into a warzone where the enemy posesses missiles is probably a stupid idea."

      Helios also flew to 96,863 feet, setting a new world record for any winged flight (the SR-71 flew to 85,068 in 1976). A typical truck fired surface to air missile in Iraq has a maximum effective altitude of 32,808 feet (10,000 meters).

      " [It would] cost more than running a cable to the area that couldn't connect to broadband in the first place."

      The idea is to provide area coverage. UAVs circle high above a city to provide service to the entire city point to point. Theoretically, you could connect from any point in the city with a signal, rather than having to find a hard line that will give you access. Laying high bandwidth cable all over a large city is extremely expensive.

      Maybe unneccessary but cool is having them flying near commercial airline routes overseas to provide data service on those long flights. But would they still charge $12/minute?

      With their capability to stay aloft for more than 6 months, their design to carry a large scale telecommunications payload, the high altitude they fly at with the coverage this entails, and the low cost of production, UAV telecommunication platforms are pretty darn efficient and effective.

  56. Weight? by Joe5678 · · Score: 1

    It seems like the weight of batteries needed to power the engines at night, not to mention the transmitters, would make it far too heavy to sustain flight.

    1. Re:Weight? by ultrasound · · Score: 1

      And where did you derive these _facts_ from? The article?

      Or perhaps your awesome intellect allows you to pull statements out of thin air and state them as fact?

      Given that the work is an EU Framework 6 Project with combined EU and Industry funding I think they would have done a few simple sums before committing to the project.

    2. Re:Weight? by Joe5678 · · Score: 1

      Mostly I based it upon my experience lifting UPS's...

  57. Several places are testing these already. by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wind/storms/other aircraft: Flies at 10 miles, far above storms and other aircraft.

    What about the tether: 10 miles of rope, are you taking the piss?

    Weight: It's carrying capacity increases with the cube of it's size, the bigger the better.

    Power: Solar panels on top increase with the surface area. Batteries for holding position at night. Power increases with the square of the size, lifting capacity increases with the cube of the size, the bigger the better.

    Latency: 6x10^-8 seconds for the radio wave to travel.

    The Japanese have been testing them for a while now:

    http://www.jinjapan.org/trends98/honbun/ntj98030 6. html
    http://www.nal.go.jp/eng/newsletter/99winter /p09.h tm

    Less likely:
    http://www.worldskycat.com/markets/skycom .html

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  58. Re:Hmmmm.... by RowdyReptile · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else see the danger in this? I live in a community of people that like to shoot at things flying overhead. The last thing I need is some drunken redneck shooting down my bandwidth out of boredom.

    Are your neighbors' guns capable of shooting 12 miles straight up into the sky? I'd be more worried about the random bullets falling back to Earth than them actually reaching the airship.

    --

    You want a sig? I can get you a sig... Hell, I can get you a sig by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.
  59. Must... use... better... html. by RowdyReptile · · Score: 1

    Must... use... better... html. ;) Link provided below.

    Stratospheric Net Service Floats into Action

    --

    You want a sig? I can get you a sig... Hell, I can get you a sig by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.
    1. Re:Must... use... better... html. by l1gunman · · Score: 1

      ooops.

  60. 20-mile radius of coverage? by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1
    That seems awfully small. By my calculations, a transmitter 12 mi = 19 km = 19000 m off the surface has line-of-sight to a radius nearly 500 km out. Granted, the most usable part of that would be where it's closest to being overhead, and signal power will attenuate quickly, but that's still an awful lot of lost coverage. Even ground-based FM radio towers get better.

    Hmmm, or would the limitation be in the ground-based client transmitters? Yeah, that's probably it. Ok, never mind me.

    --
    Dyolf Knip
  61. why not kilometers? by RowdyReptile · · Score: 1

    It's 12 miles up.

    My question is... why is a British article about British scientists explaining distances for their British project in miles? Shouldn't it be "some 20 kilometers above the earth's surface"? Have we Americans already won the metric battle? ;)

    --

    You want a sig? I can get you a sig... Hell, I can get you a sig by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.
  62. RTFA before writing headline please by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1
    A tethered airship is used at lower altitudes to test the principle of an arial platform. In practice it will be heavier-than-air unmanned planes that will fly at the higher altitudes above the weather.

    What's it going to be next? Comments about airships bursting into flames?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  63. Sorry in advance... by MrNemesis · · Score: 1

    ...but I, for one, welcome our new Zeppelin bandwidth overlords. /me ducks

    --
    Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
  64. Great but I wonder... by thinkninja · · Score: 2

    How many places are "out of reach of broadband"? As opposed to "not profitable enough to enable broadband for"?

    Most places have landlines. Ok, I know there are some really remote locations that do not -- like Cwm Brefi. Isn't it just a question of upgrading the existing telephone exchanges to increase coverage? No new wires, right?

    I don't much care whether my broadband comes via cable, DSL, or wireless. This airship idea sounds great but it's years off. I think I'm going to go door to door trying to reach our DSL trigger level (35 signed up, need 100 -- damn old people!).

    --
    "The number of Unix installations has grown to ten, with more expected." (Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd ed.; june 1972)
  65. Re: Airship Broadband by infinite9 · · Score: 1

    It wont be the same. There will be a latency but it wont be anything close to that with satellite internet. Think about it. ... Let's see, speed of light traversing 20+/- miles (up and back down each way) and this being factored into latency, vs speed of light traversing 56,000+/- miles (up and back each way). See a HUGE difference there? The latency would be/will be a nonissue.

    I had satellite internet for a while and latency was a real issue. But let's do some math:

    56000 miles x 5280 feet = 295680000 feet

    1 meter = 3 feet 3 inches or 3.25 feet

    295680000 / 3.25 = 90978461.5 meters

    C = 299792458 m/s

    90978461.5 / 299792458 = 0.3 seconds for a round trip.

    I'm currently getting 30ms ping times to www.yahoo.com from here at work. 0.3 seconds is 300 milliseconds. A ping time of 330 milliseconds, while not great and maybe not enough to be a LPB, is respectable for a home internet account. When I went through a satellite, I was getting 1 second ping times, as in 1000 milliseconds. I think the bad ping time had more to do with the ISP than the distance to orbit.

    --
    Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
  66. this was predicted by stebalo · · Score: 1

    Not completely germane, but I wanted to share. There was a webpage I used to read almost 10 years ago called Messages From the Future. It was at the time one of my favorite web sites. It was written by a guy who went by Rhb who was posting messages he claimed to be receiving from persons in the future of 2005. One of thing the future Rhb had written about was that Bill Gates would launch a pirate network based on drone planes that would fly over major cities (I don't mean pirate in the warez sense. Rather in the pirate radio station sense-outside of the law and government control). In the MFTF, this was done by Gates in response to increasing government censorship over the internet. Still, this is nearly exactly what Rhb from the future said said would come to pass in 2005 or so.

    The url which no longer works was
    Link
    I just now found at least a partial archive but havn't checked it out much yet to find related material
    Link

    He made other prediction for example that Jackie Chan would be a headlining actor rather than just a stunt man or B movie actor. That was notable for me because that was the first time I had ever heard of Jackie Chan and he was indeed at that time, strictly a stunt man or B movie actor. Every person ever mentioend in the messages from the future by name, I did as much as I could to track them down and for several years, follow them. I corrosponded with Rhb and he never broke character. The page never declared itself to be a hoax or work of fiction.

    --
    "I drank what?" - Socrates
  67. Airships rule by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

    blimps and dirigibles are considered by some to be obsolete technologies, but I think they are due for a resurgence. New materials make lighter than air and helium assisted airships more feasible, especially in unmanned applications like communications. The biggest problem with lighter than air ships is wind, which makes large manned crafts dangerous. But then again, we go flying around in giant metal jumbo jets, which seems a lot more dangerous than a large craft that can hover with it's engines idling.

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  68. Britain still uses miles by blorg · · Score: 1

    Britain is somewhat unique in Europe in that they still use miles. Here in Ireland we "converted" a few years ago and hence use a mix. Of course the road signs never indicate which unit they are in, you have to estimate the age of the sign to work it out.

  69. inspiration by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    I love a megastate where giant platform ideas are hatched in Italian restaurants, rather than secure bunkers catered by Denny's. They come up with WiFi blimps, rather than bunkerbuster nukes.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  70. OldE York by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Thanks for that link to York history. I'm glad the archaeologists are "backing up" the excavations before "reformatting" them for cable. Here in New York, it's instructive to learn from the nominal root of our city. We can also learn from your solutions to the cabling impasse, especially if you choose wireless.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  71. Slow blimps for public works by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    The article (presentation) mentions they're targeting 802.16a (WMAN) as the network tech. That offers a max 155Mbps. Sounds like a lot, until you divide it among the entire city of York, which must share the band like one "wire" to the network. At 150K people, we're talking about 1Kbps per person, average - if even 1% hit the Net at once, like for WiVoIP at a football match, that's barely enough at 100Kbps per person, leaving zero bandwidth for any other activity in the city. This network would be best used by a single organization, with managed, prioritized access. Like the city's emergency and maintenance services, which could actually use this scale of bandwidth for the greatest value.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Slow blimps for public works by bhima · · Score: 1
      But...

      What about tempoary crowds. Like world cup soccer or american football superbowl.

      you have an event like this you bring in temporary help.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Slow blimps for public works by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Temporary crowds seem more an argument for adhoc mesh networking, P2P, with sparse base station repeaters to ensure "critical mass" continuity. These HAPS blimps seem more like a permanent fixture of a network infrastructure. The problem is the high-power, which means a radus of over 25Km shares 155Mbps. Lower power 802.16a can carve up an area geographically, offering more 155Mbps segments to cover the area.

      Here in NYC, we're considering powering such a network every few blocks, attenuated into cylinders through streets and avenues. So there's a chance that our extremely dense population can get sufficient bandwidth, also considering the multipath echo along our concrete canyons. We're looking for models elsewhere, from which to pick the winner.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  72. you guys are smart by stiki · · Score: 1

    you guys are smart, very smart.. I wonder what school you went to.

  73. Burning Man!! by bhima · · Score: 1

    Boy! A couple of smaller versions of this would be perfect for burning man!

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  74. Bah....not nearly as cool as.... by psyconaut · · Score: 1
  75. What I want to know... by cr0sh · · Score: 1
    Just when are we going to actually use or see this tech in use?

    It seems like on a regular occasion, we here on /. hear about wireless broadband this, blimp-based that. We have been hearing about it for what? At least 5 years. Yet the only wireless broadband I know of in my market (Phoenix, AZ) is Sprint's Broadband (ie, what was SpeedChoice), and they aren't accepting any new customers (not that I would use them - my friend down the street got it before they locked, and his upload rate is HORRIBLE).

    Come on, what is taking so long? Does the rollout for getting space on a tower somewhere really take this long? Does it really take this long to get licenses and such in place? Does is take this long to get an airship into the sky?

    Or is this all some kind of a ploy to grab money from stupid VCs who don't realize the .com bubble burst?

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  76. So how long before? by va3atc · · Score: 1

    So how long before we see on slashdot:

    Breaking news: 15-year old charged with hi-jacking a microplane via wi-fi?

    --
    Candle burns its brightest in the dark
  77. And what happens when this thing falls? by Linus+Sixpack · · Score: 1

    Its only a featherlight, fixed wing..... It'll stay in the air forever.

    What happens the first time gravity wins and this thing piles into a house? Gravity may be played with but its real patient. Without an orbit to keep them up....

  78. Gone with the wind by Jayman2 · · Score: 1

    "I'm sorry I haven't made my homework sir - but a storm last night blew away our internet airship"

    --
    -.sig sauer-
  79. Re: Airship Broadband by praedor · · Score: 1

    Ugh. As I am interested in doing some online gaming (never really having done it, just experimented via my dialup with limited success), satellite is a nonplayer. The REAL clincher, though, is the price. We pay ~$40/month for DirectTV satellite. For an internet connection to, we would have to ADD $70/month. So, pay ~$110/month for the whole ball when the satellite programing is rather weak to start with...


    Not a chance. I'll wait (as long as it takes) for an airship-based broadband connection to be available before I cough up for crappy satellite (no cable available in this rural burb). Alternatively, I am hoping that a new housing development half a dozen miles away will include someone using wlan in their house...so I can piggy-back off their cable internet connection. I have the parabolic antenna just waiting for a target to come within range.

    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.