Google Fiber to Test 3.5 GHz Wireless in Kansas City Google Fiber has received Kansas City council approval to conduct tests of next-generation wireless broadband in the city. According to the Kansas City Star, the city council voted 11-2 to let Google attach experimental antenna on light poles scattered around the city to test the viability of 3.5 GHz wireless broadband. The trial will take place over a period of eighteen months, according to publicly available city documents.

The move comes on the heels of an FCC policy action a year ago to make 150 MHz of spectrum available for wireless broadband. The FCC dubs this particular swath of spectrum, which was until now used by the Department of Defense, the "innovation band" for its potential as an alternative broadband delivery method. The FCC has been working to open this spectrum up to the public since 2012, and its proposal involves letting some companies share the spectrum alongside the federal government and other users. "The Citizens Broadband Radio Service is governed by a three-tiered spectrum authorization framework to accommodate a variety of commercial uses on a shared basis with incumbent federal and non-federal users of the band," noted the FCC at the time. "Access and operations will be managed by a dynamic spectrum access system, conceptually similar to the databases used to manage Television White Spaces devices." Google's been busy pushing the envelope in the hopes of finding a cheaper alternative to fiber. Under the guidance of former Atheros CEO Craig Barratt, Google has filed applications with the FCC to conduct trials in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz millimeter wave bands, and is also conducting a variety of different tests in the 3.5 GHz band, the 5.8 GHz band and the 24 GHz band. Google's been busy pushing the envelope in the hopes of finding a cheaper alternative to fiber. Under the guidance of former Atheros CEO Craig Barratt, Google has filed applications with the FCC to conduct trials in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz millimeter wave bands, and is also conducting a variety of different tests in the 3.5 GHz band, the 5.8 GHz band and the 24 GHz band.







News Jump California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more Cogeco Rejects Altice USA's Atlantic Broadband Bid; AT&T Is Astroturfing The FCC In Support Of Trump Attack; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed view:

topics flat nest existenz

join:2014-02-12 1 recommendation existenz Member Could be good, could be bad... Good where fixed wireless can reach expensive/hard to reach areas, potentially bad if they use wireless for last mile when FTTH is still doable.



Good to rollout quickly, bad that capacity/latency much worse than FTTH.



Good to explore options, if used where it makes sense.

GTAXL

join:2013-09-11

Mount Vernon, OH GTAXL Member Re: Could be good, could be bad... Not to mention reliability too, wireless can be susceptible to interference and strong storms could potentially knock it out as well. Plus having such high frequency airwaves means your line of sight's gotta be exact and won't reach as far as low spectrum. It's a mess, if Google does wireless, please at least promise to do fiber for said area later down the road when money permits.

Anonymous_

Anonymous

Premium Member

join:2004-06-21

127.0.0.1 1 recommendation Anonymous_ Premium Member Re: Could be good, could be bad... said by GTAXL: Not to mention reliability too, wireless can be susceptible to interference and strong storms could potentially knock it out as well. Plus having such high frequency airwaves means your line of sight's gotta be exact and won't reach as far as low spectrum. It's a mess, if Google does wireless, please at least promise to do fiber for said area later down the road when money permits. this is licensed spectrum which allows over 1 watt of power...

GTAXL

join:2013-09-11

Mount Vernon, OH GTAXL Member Re: Could be good, could be bad... Over 1 watt of power, *claps*. xD I was comparing it similar to how cellular works and I'm sure cell towers do more than 1 watt, this is why Sprint and T-Mobile lack compared to Verizon for say, the higher frequency doesn't go as far and requires more towers per area than lower frequency. Also if higher frequency lacks the penetration qualities of lower, so mountains, trees, really rural areas will make it harder. In this case the antenna would be on top the roof, side of the house outside somewhere, but even then you would still need a pretty good line of sight for such frequency. I'm not saying wireless point to point is bad, but it does have it's cons and compared to fiber, fiber is superior. nitin00

join:2010-01-17

Stockton, CA nitin00 Member Re: Could be good, could be bad... Relax, this is a test. Google does all kinds of experiments and I am sure it will be tested thoroughly like everything they test. I hope it succeeds.

Gilitar

join:2012-02-01

Mobile, AL Gilitar Member Eventually wireless technology will be a viable replacement. I'm glad to see Google testing this. Eventually wireless technology will have the capacity to be a viable replacement for DSL technology. Fiber and coax on the other hand will always be ahead.

Anom

@comcastbusiness.net Anom Anon LTE What you are talking about !!! This is LTE which means awesome connection.

ExRolman

@rr.com 1 recommendation ExRolman Anon Nextel tried it in 2004 "Nextel Communications entered the world of wireless wide-area broadband technology in February 2004 in the Research Triangle Park NC . It was Nextel's market level trial of Flash OFDM technology. Using a PCMCIA Type II modem card in your laptop or a tethered modem, speeds of 1.5 Mbps (bursting to 3 Mbps) downstream and 375 Kbps (bursting to 750 Kbps) upstream as described here. The market test ask for trial participants, who, when selected, got the technology free of charge." jzmax73

join:2011-05-13

Tampa, FL jzmax73 Member Re: Nextel tried it in 2004



Interestingly, what Google describes in its presentation to KCMO is very similar in scope and location choices to a muni-hotspot network. It wants wireless broadband in pedestrian shopping districts, using cantennas on street lamps. What it might do with microwave antennas for point-to-point/multi-point backhaul or point-to-multi-point last mile connections is a separate issue.



»cityclerk.kcmo.org/LiveW ··· fg%3d%3d

»www.networkworld.com/art ··· ers.html Nextel's FLASH-OFDM reached up to 3.6 GHz, but the cellular-bearer protocols used were different than what Google would use. Ditto for WiMAX, which started at 3.5 GHz but had a huge LOS/NLOS delay spread that limited bandwidth.Interestingly, what Google describes in its presentation to KCMO is very similar in scope and location choices to a muni-hotspot network. It wants wireless broadband in pedestrian shopping districts, using cantennas on street lamps. What it might do with microwave antennas for point-to-point/multi-point backhaul or point-to-multi-point last mile connections is a separate issue.

Nothing

@rr.com -1 recommendation Nothing Anon No new base stations According to the FCC they are not licensing any new base stations. So how is this legally possible as far as obtaining the permits/license??? Google breaking the law again? wirelessdog

join:2008-07-15

Queen Anne, MD wirelessdog Member Re: No new base stations You can register new stations with an existing license. your comment..

