Slashdot Mirror


Alcatel-Lucent Shrinks Mobile Cell Tower To Small Cube

pbahra writes "French mobile telephone infrastructure manufacturer Alcatel-Lucent today unveiled technology that shrinks a mobile cell tower to a box the size of a Rubik's cube, potentially changing the structure of the cellular network, reducing greenhouse emissions and bringing mobile broadband into new areas. According to Wim Sweldens, president of wireless activities for Alcatel-Lucent, by reducing the technology from something the size of a filing cabinet, networks would reduce the total cost of ownership by half, as well as halving the global CO2 emissions from the mobile industry — currently equivalent of 15 million cars a year."

16 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Just another microcell by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    They have a microcell, one about the same size as everybody else's microcells. Big deal.

    1. Re:Just another microcell by Locke2005 · · Score: 3

      Speak for yourself... my microcell is much, much bigger!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  2. um... bad title? by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Informative

    The title says they reduced a cell TOWER to the size of a cube, then they show a picture of a guy holding a cube and say it replaces the filing cabinet behind him. Is the tower still required or no? Because I'm fairly sure than most of the cost in a cell tower is the land required by the tower and feeder trunks. If this doesn't replace either then it's pretty much worthless.

    1. Re:um... bad title? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Informative

      The title says they reduced a cell TOWER to the size of a cube, then they show a picture of a guy holding a cube and say it replaces the filing cabinet behind him. Is the tower still required or no? Because I'm fairly sure than most of the cost in a cell tower is the land required by the tower and feeder trunks. If this doesn't replace either then it's pretty much worthless.

      There are two parts to this: smaller, modular baseband radios that can be (somehow, magically) clumped together so you can put the electronics in a central spot and minimize the 'shack' below the antenna mast and wider frequency antennas that minimize the number of 'funny rectangular things' hanging off the mast which, as a bonus, have an integral microwave amplifier. Sounds basically like they've managed to rackmount the radios and put the microwave amplifiers up in the mast so you don't lose as much power.

      Remember, cable losses at microwave frequencies is a big, big deal. I'm rather surprised that the amps haven't been mast mounted. Of course, TFA is light on useful details but it sounds like some reasonably advanced incremental engineering efforts.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  3. Cubes are in style! by danbert8 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is that what they were wearing on their heads during the halftime show?

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
  4. Not another microcell by Aqualung812 · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    Other manufacturers have previously offered what are known as micro, femto or pico cell devices, which typically are used to take cellular traffic off congested 3G networks and delivered over broadband connections. Alcatel-Lucent claims their offering differs in that existing devices are mainly used to supplement existing cell towers in areas of high demand, such as railway stations and sports events, rather than replace them.

    Also, elsewhere in TFA they talk (without much detail) about how these devices scale from just two in small usage cases or can be stacked somehow to have the same number of connections as a full cell tower. Most microcells I've seen are only connecting double-digit subscribers, at best.

    --
    Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    1. Re:Not another microcell by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was installing something similar when working for NZ telecom mobile back in about 2000. It was a bit bigger (50cmX50cmX25cm IIRC) and we were using them as "main" towers. Not supplements. I am not surprised that they are than much smaller now.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
  5. No substitute for human ingenuity by handy_vandal · · Score: 4, Funny

    Perhaps the guy holding the cube is the replacement for the tower.

    Say the reception is not so good on a rainy day. With a tower, there's nothing you can do, the tower is bolted to the ground.

    But the guy holding the cube, you can tell him "Turn a little bit more to the right ... sorry, I meant my right, not your right ... okay, that's better."

    --
    -kgj
    1. Re:No substitute for human ingenuity by by+(1706743) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And when the guy holding it gets bored, reception in the nearest pub probably becomes fantastic!

    2. Re:No substitute for human ingenuity by necro81 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does mean we can get the annoying Verizon wireless guy to hold this way up high in the middle of a thunderstorm?

  6. Shrinks antenna not tower by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the reason they have cellphone 'towers' is to get the antenna up high so it covers a wider area and is less affected by buildings and stuff blocking the signal. They are still going to need towers unless they find some way of elevating those cubes above the surroundings. Maybe tethered balloons would work in some areas which don't have wind.

  7. We are one step closer by jollyreaper · · Score: 3, Funny

    Jen: [Moss has a small plastic box with a flashing light] What is it?
    Moss: This, Jen, is the Internet.
    Jen: What?
    Moss: That's right.
    Jen: This is the Internet? The whole Internet?
    Moss: Yep. I asked for a loan of it so that you could use it in your speech.
    Jen: It's so small.
    Moss: That's one of the surprising things about it.
    Jen: Hang on, it doesn't have any wires or anything.
    Moss: It's wireless.
    Jen: Oh, yes, everything's wireless nowadays, isn't it... yeah. So, I can really use it in my speech? What if someone needs it?
    Moss: Oh, no, no, people will still be able to go online and everything. It will still work.
    Jen: Oh, good, good...
    Moss: I tell you, you present this to the shareholders and you will get quite the response.
    Jen: Can I touch it? It's so light!
    Moss: Of course it is, Jen. The Internet doesn't weigh anything.
    Jen: No, of course it doesn't.
    [laughs nervously]
    Roy: Hey! What is Jen doing with the Internet?
    Jen: Moss said I could use it for my speech.
    Roy: Are you insane? What if she drops it?
    Jen: I won't drop it, I'll look after it.
    Roy: No. No, no, no, no, Jen. No, this needs to go straight back to Big Ben.
    Jen: Big Ben?
    Moss: Yep. It goes on top of Big Ben. That's where you get the best reception.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  8. More like a Hellraiser Puzzlebox by Sir_Dill · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't know about anyone else, but it looked more like a hellraiser puzzle box than a rubiks cube.

  9. Disaster response by grassy_knoll · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Perhaps a goofy question, but could the Alcatel-Lucent device in TFA be used to establish cellular coverage in an disaster area?

    Seems like small cube + antenna + battery bank + solar panels || generators would be portable enough for, say, a red cross disaster response team...

  10. A series of cubes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So the Internet is now a series of cubes?

  11. Re:1 industry emits as much as 6% of US vehicles by radl33t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since when can we only work on one issue at a time? What kind of psycho would completely neglect one important "piece of pie" because another "pie slice" is 10% larger? What kind of psycho neglects thermal efficiency when comparing stationary power generation to ICE? or the ease and pace at which we replace ICE technology compared to coal plants? Why should we work on any earthly problems at all, when we all know the sun will die and matter will decay? Please go spend time ranting about things you know more about. Thanks.