Google has another run at the AR world

Google is taking another crack at the growing augmented reality segment with the launch of Glass Enterprise Edition 2.

While the first enterprise product has seemingly trundled along without fanfare, Google will be hoping the segment is ripe enough to make the desired millions. Although this is a technology area which promises huge prospects in the future, sceptics will suggest society, networks and the supporting ecosystem isn’t quite ready to make this dream a reality.

“Over the past two years at X, Alphabet’s moonshot factory, we’ve collaborated with our partners to provide solutions that improve workplace productivity for a growing number of customers – including AGCO, Deutsche Post DHL Group, Sutter Health, and H.B. Fuller,” said Jay Kothari Project, Lead for Glass. “We’ve been inspired by the ways businesses like these have been using Glass Enterprise Edition.

“X, which is designed to be a protected space for long-term thinking and experimentation, has been a great environment in which to learn and refine the Glass product. Now, in order to meet the demands of the growing market for wearables in the workplace and to better scale our enterprise efforts, the Glass team has moved from X to Google.”

This is a massive step for any Google idea. Graduating from the moonshot labs to be listed as a genuine brand in the Google family is a sign executives think there are profits to be made now, not in the future. Over the last couple of months, we’ve seen the likes of Loon and Fi make their way into the real world, and now it is time for Glass to hit the big time.

Google Glass was first brought to the market in 2013, though this wasn’t exactly a riveting success. Perhaps it was just a sign of the ecosystem and society at the time; people just weren’t ready for this type of innovation. However, Google is a company which often demonstrates innovation leadership and it was never going to completely give up on this idea. The products were taken back to the labs and refined.

What you have now is an enterprise orientated product which has the potential to run into the mass market. This makes sense for two reasons; firstly, there are more immediate usecases for the enterprise world, and secondly, businesses have more money to spend on these types of products than the consumer.

What remains to be seen is whether Google has any long-term interest in the hardware space or whether this is a game-plan to generate momentum in an embryonic segment.

When you look at the smart speaker segment, Google was always set to make more money in software and services than the hardware space. As soon as the traditional audio brands got the idea, its products were going to come up short. However, selling the hardware cheap to gain consumer buy-in while simultaneously demonstrating market appetite to the traditional brands was an excellent move.

Now there are more mainstream brands starting to develop their own smart speakers, Google can create partnerships to ensure its virtual assistance is exposed to the consumer and make money through means which are embedded in its corporate DNA; third-party relationships and online advertising.

Google might well have ambitions to take a leadership position in the AR glasses space, but you can also guarantee it has bigger plans to make profits through the supporting software and services ecosystem.

FCC Chairman convinced by T-Mobile/Sprint concessions

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has publicly stated he believes the concessions made by T-Mobile US and Sprint are enough to ensure the merger would be in the public interest.

Over the course of the weekend, rumours emerged over concessions the pair would have to make to get the support of the FCC, though rarely are sources so spot on. The merged business will now have to commit to a nationwide 5G deployment within three years, sell Sprint’s prepaid brand and promise not to raise prices during the rollout years, if it wants the greenlight of the FCC.

What is worth noting is this is not a greenlight just yet. Pai has said yes, though he will need a majority vote from the Commissioners. Commissioner Brendan Carr has already pledged his support, and we suspect Michael O’Reilly will in the immediate future also. The Democrats might want to throw a spanner in the works, but this would be largely irrelevant with O’Reilly’s support.

“In light of the significant commitments made by T-Mobile and Sprint as well as the facts in the record to date, I believe that this transaction is in the public interest and intend to recommend to my colleagues that the FCC approve it,” Pai said in a statement.

“This is a unique opportunity to speed up the deployment of 5G throughout the United States and bring much faster mobile broadband to rural Americans. We should seize this opportunity.”

As you can imagine, T-Mobile US CEO John Legere certainly has something to say on the matter.

“Let me be clear,” Legere stated in a blog entry. “These aren’t just words, they’re verifiable, enforceable and specific commitments that bring to life how the New T-Mobile will deliver a world-leading nationwide 5G network – truly 5G for all, create more competition in broadband, and continue to give customers more choices, better value and better service.”

The first commitment made by T-Mobile US and Sprint is a nationwide 5G network. Considering Legere has been claiming his team would be the first to rollout a genuine 5G network for some time, it comes as little surprise the FCC will want to hold him accountable.

Over a three-year period, presumably starting when the greenlight is shown, the new 5G network will cover 97% of the population. 75% of the population will be covered with mid-band spectrum, while the full 97% will have low-band. This is a very traditional approach to rolling out a network, as it meets the demands of capacity and efficiency, though there is a sacrifice on speed.

Perhaps more importantly for the FCC, the plan also covers objectives to bridge the digital divide. 85% of the rural population will be connected during this period, increasing to 90% after six years. This is not to say all the farmers fields will be blanketed in 5G, though it does help provide an alternative for the complicated fixed broadband equation in the rural communities.

Moving onto the divestment, selling Sprint’s Boost prepaid brand seems to be enough to satisfy the competition cravings of Pai. What is worth noting is this will not be a complete break-away from the business as it will have to run on the T-Mobile US network. Unfortunately, MVNOs in the US are not as free to operate as those in Europe, as switching the supporting network would mean have to change out all the SIM cards.

This becomes complicated as you do not necessarily know who your customers are in a prepaid business model. The situation certainly encourages more competition, it will after all not be part of the T-Mobile US/Sprint family anymore, but it is far from a perfect scenario.

Finally, Legere has promised tariffs will not become more expensive during the deployment period, another worry for the FCC should the duo want to meet the ambitious objectives to compete with AT&T and Verizon. However, it does appear Legere is promising 5G tariffs will not include a premium either.

And now onto the other side of the aisle. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel has tweeted her opinions on the concessions and it appears she is not convinced.

“We’ve seen this kind of consolidation in airlines and with drug companies. It hasn’t worked out well for consumers. But now the @FCC wants to bless the same kind of consolidation for wireless carriers. I have serious doubts.”

Rosenworcel has also suggested the decision should be put out for public consultation. We suspect Pai will want to avoid this scenario, as it would be incredibly time-demanding; the Chairman will want the merger distraction off his desk as soon as possible.

Commissioner Geoffrey Starks is yet to make a comment, but DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT go on his Twitter page if you haven’t watched the latest Game of Thrones episode.

We understand the Democrat and Republican Commissioners are going to be at each other’s throats over pretty much every decision, however trolling any innocent individual with a GoT spoiler is a low blow.

Starks and your correspondent are going to have some issues.

Ericsson CEO: Europe needs to stop playing ‘catch up’ and take a 5G lead

Ericsson CEO Börje Ekholm spoke at the Viva Technology conference of the need for Europe to stop playing ‘catch up’ and take a lead in 5G.

Ekholm first addressed the myth that Ericsson is behind in 5G technology and rollout. He notes Ericsson’s technology is already live with multiple operators in the US and Korea, and with Swisscom in Europe.

“It’s impossible to be behind in 5G when there is no-one in front of us,” boasts Ekholm.

Ekholm claims the delay in Europe is due to regulatory policies over anything else. He goes on to say Europe is behind in 4G when compared to the US and China, let alone 5G.

“When 4G was introduced in Europe, there was a prolonged discussion about use cases. Meanwhile, China and the US raced ahead to build out 4G infrastructure; providing young and new companies with unprecedented infrastructure for innovation on a global scale.”

Early leadership enabled Chinese and American companies like Netflix, Facebook, Tencent, and Alibaba to secure their places as industry juggernauts after capitalising on 4G’s opportunities.

“Having lacked that same digital infrastructure, it is equally no surprise that Europe has a much more limited role on the world tech stage,” Ekholm states.

As the CEO of one of the world’s largest telecoms vendors, it makes sense to increase demand – but his comments aren’t unsubstantiated.

No-one can truly predict what use cases will come of 5G at this point. We can theorise on things such as remote surgery, real-time VR, and other exciting possibilities, but Europe risks falling behind for another generation without the vital infrastructure.

"5G and digitalisation must be viewed as a critical part of European national infrastructures – every bit as vital as trains and roads. The US and China already do so."

“Europe, the original leader in mobility, needs to get back in the competitive technology race – and fast. It’s innovators, businesses, industries, and citizens deserve nothing less. Europe has played ‘catch-up’ for long enough.”

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this? Attend the co-located IoT Tech Expo, Blockchain Expo, AI & Big Data Expo, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam.

The reality of mobile SD-WAN – what 4G LTE made possible

Telecoms.com periodically invites third parties to share their views on the industry’s most pressing issues. This is the first of a two piece series in which Simon Pamplin, EMEA Technical Sales Director for Silver Peak, looks at some of the enterprise benefits of the latest generations of wireless networking technology.

5G, also known as the fifth generation of mobile wireless technology, is one of the hottest topics in wireless circles today. Indeed, you can’t throw a stone without hitting a plethora of titles, potential use cases and detailed explanations about 5G. While telecommunications providers are in a heated competition to roll out 5G, it is important to reflect on current 4G LTE (long term evolution) business solutions as a preview of what has been learned and what’s possible.

At the same time, the enterprise has experienced its own networking revolution. As cloud computing has become the norm, and more applications and services have migrated for enterprise convenience and flexibility, IT departments have realised that traditional wide area network (WAN) architectures – utilising multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) circuits and conventional routers – cannot keep up. As such, to achieve the highest levels of application performance and security, many organisations have turned to software-defined WAN (SD-WAN), the networking technology that connects users directly and securely to applications using any underlying transport, including 4G and broadband internet.

SD-WAN enables enterprises to shift to a business-first networking model, where the network enables the business, rather than the business conforming to the constraints of existing WAN approaches. Instead of being a constraint, the WAN becomes a business accelerant that is fully automated and continuous, giving every application the resources it truly needs, while delivering 10 times the bandwidth for the same budget – ultimately achieving the highest quality of experience to users and IT alike.

This is part one of a two-part article series that will explore the effect of 4G and 5G on enterprise networking, as well as the SD-WAN journey through the evolution of these wireless technologies.

Mobile SD-WAN is a reality

4G LTE commercialisation is continuing to expand. According to the GSM (Groupe Spéciale Mobile) Association, 710 operators have rolled out 4G LTE in 217 countries, reaching 83 percent of the world’s population. The evolution of 4G is transforming the mobile industry and is setting the stage for the advent of 5G.

Mobile connectivity is increasingly integrated with SD-WAN, along with MPLS and broadband WAN services today. The reason being is that 4G LTE represents a very attractive transport alternative, as a backup or even an active member of the WAN transport mix to connect users to critical business applications. In some cases, 4G LTE might be the only choice in locations where fixed lines are not available or reachable. Furthermore, an SD-WAN can optimise 4G LTE connectivity, and bring new levels of performance and availability to mobile-based business use cases by bonding multiple 4G LTE connections to deliver the highest levels of network and application performance.

Increasing application performance and availability with 4G LTE

Best in class SD-WAN solutions enable customers to incorporate one or more low-cost 4G LTE services into the WAN transport mix. Indeed, all the capabilities of the SD-WAN platform – including packet-based link bonding, dynamic path control, and path conditioning – can be supported across multiple LTE links. This ensures always-consistent, always-available application performance even in the event of an outage or degraded service.

With an advanced business-driven SD-WAN edge platform, IT can also incorporate sophisticated network address translator (NAT) traversal technology to eliminate the requirement for provisioning the LTE service with extra-cost static IP addresses. Holistic solutions offer management software that enables the prioritisation of LTE bandwidth usage based on branch and application requirements – active-active or backup-only. This kind of solution is ideally suited toward retail point-of-sale and other deployment use cases where always-available WAN connectivity is critical for the business.

Mobile SD-WAN: innovative connectivity solutions to real world problems

An example of an innovative mobile SD-WAN service is swyMed’s DOT Telemedicine Backpack, powered by an SD-WAN hardware platform. This integrated telemedicine solution enables emergency services first responders to connect to doctors and communicate patient vital statistics using real-time video anywhere, anytime, thereby greatly improving and expediting care for emergency patients. Using a lifesaving backpack provisioned with two LTE services from different carriers, the SD-WAN can continuously monitor the underlying 4G LTE services for packet loss, latency and jitter. In the case of transport failure or brownout, the SD-WAN automatically initiates a sub-second failover so that voice, video and data connections continue without interruption over the remaining active 4G service. By bonding the two LTE links together with the SD-WAN, swyMed can achieve an aggregate signal quality in excess of 90 percent, bringing mobile telemedicine to areas that would have been impossible in the past due to poor signal strength.

Prepare for the 5G future

The adoption of 4G LTE is already a reality. As well as evangelising SD-WAN to end-users, service providers have a vital and value-added role in the design, installation, deployment, repair, and ongoing monitoring of managed SD-WAN services. Indeed, service providers are already taking advantage of the distinct benefits of SD-WAN to offer managed SD-WAN services that leverage flexible and mobile 4G LTE to their customers.

As the race for the 5G gains momentum in the UK – with it expected to be available in multiple cities this year – service providers will no doubt look for ways to drive new revenue streams to capitalise on their initial investments. The next article of this two-part series will discuss the rise of 5G, and how SD-WAN will help service providers to transition from 4G to 5G, as well as enable the monetisation of a new wave of managed 5G services.

 

100508_Simon Pamplin_v1Simon Pamplin is the EMEA Technical Sales Director for Silver Peak and a regular speaker at events on topics ranging from the latest storage technologies and server virtualisation to the current shift in data networking towards SD-WAN, as well as the latest developments in the technology. With over 20 years’ experience in enterprise IT, Simon has worked for IP, SAN and hyper-convergent companies and is driven by new technology and the business benefits it can bring.

UK MNOs set to claw back £200+ million in licence fees

A UK court has ruled in favour of the telcos in an on-going battle with regulator Ofcom over licence fees paid on spectrum assets between 2015 and 2017.

The legal battle concerns the process which was undertaken by Ofcom prior to increasing licence fees paid by each of the telcos for access to the airwaves. The decision to increase the licence fees was met by much criticism during the initial announcement, and you can see why.

The licence fees concern 900 MHz and 1800 MHz spectrum assets awarded to each of the telcos during a 2013 auction.

Telco Fee paid (post-2015) Fee paid (pre-2015) Difference
Vodafone £76,245,025.10 £21,865,536 £54,379,489.10
O2 £76,245,025.10 £21,865,536 £54,379,489.10
Three £44,390,398.53 £17,463,600 £26,926,798.53
EE/BT £139,823,997 £57,380,400 £82,443,597

While telcos are constantly complaining about regulation, as well as the amount paid to regulators around the world, the drastic difference in licence fees was too much to stomach here.

Following the decision to increase licence fees, EE was first to act, challenging the ruling in the courts in 2017. The other UK MNOs were quick to follow, with Ofcom being named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

“We welcome the court’s decision that finds in favour of the mobile operators,” said an O2 spokesperson. “We are however disappointed that Ofcom has been granted leave for appeal and we will strongly defend any future appeal brought by Ofcom.”

Ofcom will most likely appeal the decision.

The argument from the telcos is one which we have heard before. The more money which is demanded from Ofcom, the less which is available to invest in networks to ready the UK for the digital economy.

Following EE’s decision to challenge the changes to licence fees in 2015, a move which was supported by the other MNOs, Ofcom decided to revert back to the licence fees which were paid in the previous regime. There has been another consultation since, resulting in an increase to licence fees paid moving forward, though this case is focused on the period between 2015 and November 2017.

Aside from clawing back the payments made during this period, the parties have agreed simple interest be applied on whatever sum is due, calculated at 2% above the Bank of England base rate during the period.

For the MNOs, this news will be very much welcomed considering the financial burden they face ahead of the 5G era. With billions set to be spent rolling out the networks, a bit of financial relief will go a long way.

US supply ban threatens to cripple Huawei’s global business

Another day, another escalation as Google heads a stampede of US companies apparently refusing to do business with Huawei.

As escalations go, however, this is a pretty big one. Reuters was the first report that Google has suspended some business with Huawei in response to the company being put on the US ‘entity list’, which means US companies need explicit permission from the US state before they’re allowed to sell anything to them. It seems that permission has been denied.

For Google this means denying access to those bits of Android Google licenses – mainly the Play Store and Google’s own mobile products such as the Gmail and Maps apps. Huawei can still access the core Android operating system as that has an open source license but, as companies such as Amazon have discovered, that’s pretty useless without all the other Google goodies.

We recently wrote that Huawei’s addition to the entity list is the most significant consequence of Trump’s executive order and here we have an immediate illustration of that. It looks like pretty much all other US companies are also rushing to comply with the new regulations, with Bloomberg reporting that Qualcomm and Intel are among others cutting of business with Huawei and others will presumably follow. Nikkei even reckons German chip-maker Infineon has joined the stampede.

Huawei already has an extensive chip-making operation of its own, so arguably it can cope without the likes of Qualcomm, but what about the millions of other bits and bobs that get crammed into a smartphone such as screens, cameras, memory, sensors, etc? A lot of these could be supplied by non-US companies like Samsung and, of course, Chinese ones, but there must surely be some areas in which Huawei is entirely reliant on the US supply chain.

But Google’s licensed mobile products and services are unique. An Android phone that doesn’t provide access to the Play store is massively diminished in its utility to the end user and Google Maps is the market leader. Google also has a near monopoly with YouTube and millions of people are reliant on things like Gmail, Google Pay, Play Movies. When there are so many great alternative Android smartphone vendors, why would anyone now buy a de-featured Huawei one?

In response to these reports Android moved to stress that it will continue to support existing Huawei Android phones in the following tweet.

Meanwhile Huawei issued the following statement. “Huawei has made substantial contributions to the development and growth of Android around the world. As one of Android’s key global partners, we have worked closely with their open-source platform to develop an ecosystem that has benefitted both users and the industry.

“Huawei will continue to provide security updates and after sales services to all existing Huawei and Honor smartphone and tablet products covering those have been sold or still in stock globally. We will continue to build a safe and sustainable software ecosystem, in order to provide the best experience for all users globally.”

Huawei has reportedly been working on its own smartphone OS in anticipation of this sort of thing happening but, as Microsoft, Samsung and others have found, there seems to be little public appetite for alternative to Android and iOS. Huawei may be able to sell a proprietary platform in China, where the Play Store is restricted anyway, but internationally this move will surely see Huawei smartphone sales fall off a cliff.

“If the US ban is permanent, we predict Huawei’s global smartphone shipments will tumble -25% in 2019,” Neil Mawston of Strategy Analytics told Telecoms.com. “If Huawei cannot offer Android’s wildly popular apps, like Maps or Gmail, Huawei’s smartphone demand outside China will collapse.

“If the US ban is temporary, and lifted within weeks, Huawei’s global smartphone growth will return to positive growth fairly swiftly. Huawei offers good smartphone models at decent prices through an extensive retail network, and it should recover reasonably well if it is allowed to compete.”

“We still don’t have a clear understanding of what Google has told Huawei and what elements of the Android operating system may be restricted, so it remains unclear what the ramifications will be,” said Ben Wood of CCS Insight. “However, any disruption in getting updates to the software or the associated applications would have considerable implications for Huawei’s consumer device business.”

There have been very few official statements on the matter from US companies, so Wood is right to tread carefully at this stage, but it’s hard to see this news as anything other than catastrophic for Huawei. Its consumer business, which is the most successful unit in the company, relies largely on Android to run its products and will surely be severely diminished by the Google move.

And there’s no reason to assume the damage will be contained there. Last year Huawei’s contemporary ZTE was almost driven out of business by a ban on US companies doing business with it. Huawei may have hedged its position regarding networking components suppliers more effectively than ZTE but it will presumably suffer greatly once those companies follow suit.

Huawei is one of the biggest companies in the world and has become so in spite of being largely excluded from the US market. The Chinese state will do everything it can to support Huawei, but at least some of its US suppliers offer unique products. At the very least this puts Huawei in a weak negotiating position with potential replacement partners and international customers, but the implications of this latest development are potentially existential.

T-Mobile and Sprint ponder concessions to force through merger

T-Mobile US and Sprint are weighing up the sale of one of the pair’s prepaid brands in an attempt to woo decision makers into greenlighting the divisive merger.

Dating back to April 2018, you will be forgiven for forgetting this saga is still an-going debate in the US. With privacy scandals, the Huawei drama and BT’s dreadful logo stealing all the column inches, the debate over whether T-Mobile US and Sprint should be allowed to merge their operations has been relegated below the fold. But it is still a thing.

The countdown clock, the 180 days the FCC gives itself to approve mergers, spent a lot of time on pause, though the longer the process takes the more likely it appears the answer will be no. If the relevant authorities were looking at the information in front of them, an answer would surely have been given by now, but sceptics might assume the FCC is desperately searching for a reason to say no.

According to Bloomberg, the duo is prepared to make concessions to force through the deal. These concessions include the sale of one prepaid brand, a pledge to finish the rollout of a 5G network in three years and promises not to raise prices during this deployment.

In terms of the timeline, crunch day is fast approaching. The FCC 180-day review is set to come to a close at the end of June, though the deal also has to be signed-off by the Department of Justice. With decision time on the horizon, egos will have to be stroked and arguments set in stone.

The issue at the heart of this debate is focused on competition. Critics of the deal suggest consumers who are at the low-end of the tariffs scale will effectively be punished with higher prices in a market with only three providers. T-Mobile US and Sprint have suggested prices would be kept down in an attempt to compete with AT&T and Verizon, though more than paper-thin promises will be needed.

Selling off one of the prepaid brands would help to preserve competition in this segment, offering more choice for those consumers who do wish to, or cannot afford to, invest in postpaid contracts. It is believed Sprint’s Boost brand is the one facing the chop, with the Virgin Mobile and Metro brands to remain in the potentially merged operations.

Peter Adderton, who sold Boost to Sprint in 2006, has previously stated he would invest in the divested brand. Adderton has been a critic of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, though if there is a chance to make money entrepreneurs have a way of changing their tune.

Reports have been emerging over the last couple of weeks suggest regulators are still concerned over competition despite assurances made by executives. The Wall Street Journal suggests the deal would not go ahead with the proposed structure of the company, a claim which T-Mobile US CEO John Legere rejects, suggesting there is still some stroking to be done.

Although trying to figure out which way this deal will go is little more than guess work at the moment, there is a feeling it is not going the way T-Mobile and Sprint would want. Rumours are only rumours, but the familiarity of the reports is starting to add weight. It does sound like T-Mobile and Sprint will have to make some considerable concessions to get the greenlight.

The Ultimate 150 Points of Opportunity: A Playbook for Digital Readers

Your customers use their mobile devices over 150 times per day and each of those moments is an opportunity to drive revenue and to create advocates. Download the ebook to learn about the potential use cases in a digital economy, including:

  • On-demand personalization
  • Social sharing
  • Group and referral rewards
  • Gifting and charity

Senators call for 5G slowdown because weatherman won’t be accurate

Two US Senators have asked President Trump and the FCC to halt spectrum usage on the 24 GHz spectrum brands as it would decrease the accuracy of weather forecasts.

Democrat Senators Ron Wyden (Oregon) and Maria Cantwell (Washington) have jointly penned a letter for the Oval Office suggesting use of the 24 GHz spectrum brands should be blocked as it would interfere with the accuracy of weather forecasts. The pair claim accuracy of these forecasts could be impact by as much as 30%, similar to the guesswork offered in the 1980s.

“American advancement in 5G networks and devices is critically important to maintaining global leadership,” said Wyden. “It’s just as imperative, however, for our nation to do 5G right. If the FCC continues advocating for standards that fail to pass scientific scrutiny, their decision will lower America’s standing in this global race for 5G leadership and risk serious damage to our economy and national security.”

Although linking weather forecasts back to national security might cause some to scoff, the pair suggest this insight is used by the navy, military and coast guard to help plan operations. Some of these operations’ focus on warning and preparedness when it comes to dealing with tornadoes, hurricanes and typhoons.

“Millions of Americans live in areas under increasing threat from hurricanes, tornadoes, and other extreme weather events,” said Cantwell. “The US military and our aviation, maritime, and numerous other industries rely on accurate forecasting information every day to ensure safety and make crucial decisions.

“We can’t afford to undermine our data and set the quality of weather forecasting back to the 1970s. Instead of overruling or ignoring the experts, the FCC and the administration should look at the science, listen to experts, and take the time needed to get this right.”

While the Senators are seemingly jumping on the bandwagon in an attempt to generate PR inches, the concerns of the use of these frequencies have dated back to 2010. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine put forward a report in 2010 suggesting 30% of the data collected on the 23.8-gigahertz signal would eliminate 30% of all useful data, making a significant impact on the ability to forecast conditions accurately.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have now completed an investigation, which is yet to be made public, on the effects of interference from usage in neighbouring frequency bands.

Water vapour in the atmosphere emit very faint signal which is used by probes to monitor energy radiating from Earth at this frequency. This data offers insight to humidity in the atmosphere below helping to predict how storms and other weather systems will develop over the short- and medium-term future. The 23.8 GHz frequency is used to measure water vapour, 36-37 GHz for rain and snow, 50.2-50.4 GHz for atmospheric pressure and 86-92 GHz for clouds and ice.

During the most recent spectrum auction, the FCC sold licences for frequencies in the 24.25-24.45 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz but set noise limits on the 5G network of –20 decibel watts. The FCC might suggest this is protection enough, however the European Commission put limits of –42 decibel watts for 5G base stations, and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is recommending –55 decibel watts.

While the two Senators are not necessarily complaining about the limits, the pair are asking the FCC to clarify a few different notes:

  • Provide details on investigations that support the FCC’s assumptions that emission limits will not negatively impact applications in adjacent frequency bands
  • Provide details on the FCC’s public interest analysis, including any cost-benefit analysis, which addresses the loss of investments made in weather-sensing satellites, the costs to public safety and national security, and to the nation’s commercial activities that rely on weather data
  • Plans if the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) does not accept the emissions limits in the 24 GHz band
  • How the FCC addressed the concerns of the NOAA, NASA and other bodies

It does appear the Senators are looking for a stick to swing as opposed to any specific objections. That said, these are some valid concerns.

Numerous businesses and industries rely on accurate weather forecast, not to mention the security and safety of US citizens. In Europe, we are not at the mercy of some severe weather conditions, or not to the degree the US is. You only have to look at the $65 billion in damages caused by Hurricane Irma in 2017 or the 3,000 lives claimed during Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico to understand the importance.