Comments on news posted 2021-12-17 07:33:05: • If 6G Becomes Just 5G+, We’ll Have Made a Big Mistake [spectrum.ieee.org]
• Faster Home Broadband Should Be Enshrined in Law [wired.co.uk]
• United Airlines CEO: 5G Rollout ‘Would Be Catastrophic’ [webpronews. ..
Not true on only the cell networks pushing 5g. CHTR and Comcast both own spectrum and are building their own networks. Ohio, Florida, LA and NY are test areas for CHTR.
I mean its the basic game of the wireless industry, make a new G before the current G is even really well deployed.
That is only half of the problem. The industry also decommissions the legacy G too soon. The problem in my rural area is when the legacy G is KIA while the new G remains MIA. No shortage of spectrum yet they still do this in areas without wireline.
Look, I am all for getting the new G, but don't turn off working legacy G before it is available. Especially if the phone or cable companies can't even provide rudimentary broadband.
Every year its the same BS. The government provides money for broadband upgrades and companies do very little or just pocket it. Things are never going to change. We just gotta live with that.
My rural government is not likely to deploy anything either. It needs to be mandated at the state level.
And we know that's not going to happen. I didn't do any searching but off top of my head, I know of no state govt's telling its county-level govt's or below they HAVE to deploy any kind of broadband infrastructure much less service.
It won't work like that, but it should, which is why I mentioned it in the original post.
State of Pennsylvania is getting at least $100 Million from the federal government for broadband; they are not intending on passing it on to local government to be deployed as a public service. They're looking for 'entrepreneurs' to suckle on the proverbial tit of the government (re: the taxpayer) instead, and then pocket whatever profits they can make for themselves.
Such is the way of things in the USA. Many industries are propped up by taxpayer subsidy only to find loopholes to avoid paying their own taxes (especially their absurdly wealthy owners and shareholders.)
Also bears mentioning that at least in Pennsylvania, local government/publicly provided internet is illegal. LOL. Take a guess who lobbied for that. Starts with a V.
Also this isn't a safety issue, you don't NEED an RA to land a plane. I'm no pilot, but small planes don't have them, nor do really old planes, and those don't have problems.
It is clear you aren't a pilot, however I am a pilot. Radio Altimeters are what enable airliners and small jets to land in near-zero and zero visibility conditions, what are called Instrument conditions, using CAT II and III instrument approaches. Without them, a significant number of flights would be delayed or diverted in poor weather, far more than occurs now.
This is what a Radio Altimeter enables pilots to do:
Without them, near zero-visibility landings like that are not possible.
Really old planes and most smaller aircraft don't have Radio Altimeters, this is true, but none of those aircraft are certified to land in near-zero and zero-visibility situations. Many of those aircraft also predate civilian Radio Altimeters and it would make no sense to put them on those aircraft because, again, the aircraft and pilots/crew would not be certified to land using them.
Pick another frequency and outfit new modules (or re-tune the existing ones assuming that's possible).
Not that simply. Aviation doesn't just outfit new avionics overnight. Learn about certification and the FAA.
Radio altimeters use 4.4Ghz specifically because rain and fog do not cause signal attentuation issues, so it isn't as simple as just picking another frequency. 4.4Ghz was picked because it works so well for range finding in bad weather.
And finally, why should the aviation industry subsidize the wireless industry by footing the bill for interference in spectrum that it had already been using for decades? If it is shown that 5G interferes were aviation, the wireless industry should pay to solve that problem.
Don't believe all the 5G hype. No one needs it that badly that we should allow wireless carriers to potentially cause problems for aviation.
·
·
