
Google balloons, “cell towers in the sky,” can serve 4G to a whole state - ismavis
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/google-balloons-cell-towers-in-the-sky-can-serve-4g-to-a-whole-state/
======
vmarsy
_Google balloons, “cell towers in the sky,” can serve 4G to a state the size
of Rhode Island_ would be more accurate.

To have a minimum coverage, you would need 140 of them to cover Texas, ~2,000
to cover the USA, ~6,000 to cover Africa (each balloon covers ~5,000km²)

~~~
higherpurpose
So covering the whole of US could cost them somewhere around ~$1 billion?

~~~
mvid
Texas has a lot of uninhabited land, as does the USA and Africa. Is that being
accounted for?

~~~
vmarsy
Definitely not, it's just an estimation of what you would need to have a 4G
coverage _everywhere_.

Areas with a very low population density are not completely uninhabited,
there's at least a few persons. But yeah in a big national park or in the
middle of a big lake you probably don't need 4G as much

~~~
Tycho
would be interesting to see how people's behaviour would change if they had
fast internet no matter where they went

~~~
ioddly
It would be considered exciting and dangerous to go somewhere without the
internet. To some degree I suppose it's already true about phone service.

------
zw123456
I think the last time that the Loon project item was posted here a lot of the
same comments were made. I think it was verified that they are flying at the
60kft - 90kft range where the winds are typically mild and in the 20mph range.
I think one problem I see with it is that ordinary smart phones won't work
because they transmit at around 100mw and they won't reach that altitude, you
will need an earth station that is capable of at least a couple of watts and
presumably then it would act as perhaps a wifi hot spot to serve some remote
area. I think in that scenario, then it makes sense as a way to serve remote
sparse areas. You are simply not going to be able to get the capacity at that
distance to serve downtown San Fran. Also, the issue of backhaul is a question
mark in my mind. There is no Google fiber up there, so they will need probably
some sort of Microwave link back to earth to connect to the internet. That can
be problematic, those types of links are typically very directional so you
might have to have steerable antenna's at least on the earth end, which is
pretty expensive to do. So I am not sure how they plan on dealing with that
part.

~~~
raldi
> I think one problem I see with it is that ordinary smart phones won't work
> because they transmit at around 100mw and they won't reach that altitude,
> you will need an earth station

From the article:

 _" When Loon started, Google was testing a system that delivered Internet
service to antennas on people’s homes. Mathe explained that this was due at
least partly to technology limitations. Project Loon is now capable of sending
signals that can be picked up by the smaller antennas on phones."_

~~~
zw123456
Picking up is one thing, getting the signal back from the phone with it's
small antenna and low power transmitter seems problematic. But perhaps they
have solved that somehow. At those distances, I am guessing the uplink would
be very limited due to this. Keep in mind, that cellular carriers over time
want the signal of each phone reduced. The reason is that for cellular, to get
the capacity up, you want to have more cell site, each site re-uses the same
spectrum of the site next to it, so if all the phones had higher power they
would all be interfering with each other. They just are not designed to go
those kinds of distances. Most cell radii is in the 1 - 5 mile type of range
usually. Again, for capacity reasons. In the early days when there were fewer
towers spaced farther apart the phones had more power (remember the old "brick
phones").

~~~
sangnoir
> In the early days when there were fewer towers spaced farther apart the
> phones had more power (remember the old "brick phones").

Citation needed. What makes you think newer phones have less transmission
power than old brick phones?

The working range of a cell site (the range which mobile devices connects
reliably to the cell site).. is between between 50 to 70 km (30–45 miles)[1]

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_site#Range](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_site#Range)

------
dreamweapon
The fun begins when people start going out to places currently not well-served
by the usual mapping services -- places they normally wouldn't think of going,
without extraordinary precautions -- thinking "Hey great, looks like we have
this stuff everywhere now. Ain't everything just swell, here in The Future?"

Until of course tricky weather or something else happens, and suddenly, they
don't.

[http://www.npr.org/2011/07/26/137646147/the-gps-a-fatally-
mi...](http://www.npr.org/2011/07/26/137646147/the-gps-a-fatally-misleading-
travel-companion)

~~~
jsprogrammer
The difference with GPS is that these balloons (I assume) allow two-way
communication, so if you are in trouble you can call for help and there's a
good chance someone will actually be able to respond AND know your exact
location.

~~~
dreamweapon
Until the day comes when balloons stop working for some reason.

 _That 's_ when the fun begins.

~~~
anigbrowl
As someone with experience of working in remote environments like deserts for
weeks at a time, and is thus aware of both the benefits and limitations of
technology, can I suggest that you give your smug muscle a rest? I find that
people who are at pains to point out how much smarter they are than everyone
else get in the way when there's actual work to be done.

~~~
dreamweapon
Empirical evidence gleaned from day-to-day observation (not to mention
numerous news reports) suggest that a significant portion of the population
_is_ basically clueless about the limitations of this technology. They're also
basically addicted to it (as in: a fair number of otherwise intelligent, well-
educated people I know apparently can't, to save their own lives, navigate
their own neighborhoods with a mapping service -- whereas 5 years ago they may
have just been mildly impaired at the task).

But if you feel the need to attack someone you'll most likely never see or
meet as being "smug" for tangentially pointing out this fact (ironically
backed by exultations of your own vastly superior experience in both
technology remote environments) -- instead of minding whatever work someone is
presumably paying you to be doing at this time, as we speak -- well, do what
you need to do, I guess.

~~~
anigbrowl
There's a difference between pointing out that some new technology is likely
to have some negative externalities, and framing that observation within
repeated sarcastic comments about 'when the fun begins'.

~~~
dreamweapon
You're reading too much into it. The person I responded to (at the second
iteration) seemed not to be aware of precisely these externalities -- so I was
providing clarification, nothing more.

------
jessriedel
Can someone confirm my guess that this is only useful in very low density
regions? My impression is that cell phone data rates are limited more by how
dense you need to make the cells to cover the number of users in the area (so
NYC has microcells everywhere) rather than the area over which some coverage
is possible for a single user.

~~~
foobarqux
You can use directional antennas, beamforming and other techniques to achieve
sectorization.

~~~
digikata
Yes, but then you also need to stabilize the antenna platform, either
physically, or electronically or both. All that increases the cost vs a
terrestrial tower where the stabilization requirements will be lower.

Not saying it would be impossible, it would be a fun and interesting problem
to work on, but it would be interesting because it seems like there's a nice
solution in there at the intersection of all those problems...

~~~
foobarqux
It would be pretty trivial to add electronic beamsteering but it's not clear
it is even necessary: It should be okay if the cells move a little bit.

------
dguaraglia
One thing people keep overlooking is the amount of power you'd need to draw to
communicate with something that is that far. Your phone's battery would be
dead in a few hours.

The lead of the Loon project seemed pretty positive about it when I asked him,
but I guess his aim is to provide LTE to areas without any coverage at all,
instead of trying to use this as a substitute for proper infrastructure.

~~~
nknighthb
Unfortunately, that's already reality in some areas _with_ usable (though not
great) LTE coverage. Having a more direct LOS to the balloon is a significant
mitigating factor.

There's also a factor not being noted here. The population at which a cell
tower is feasible may drop substantially if the uplink consists of pointing an
antenna at these balloons, increasing the number of relatively tiny villages
that can have semi-conventional LTE service.

------
matt4077
I wonder (a) how many simultaneous connection the balloon can sustain and (b)
how they're storing power.

~~~
teraflop
I don't think energy storage is that big of a deal. Assuming you need only
need to store one night's worth of energy, the weight requirements would be
about 85 grams/watt for lead-acid batteries, or 25 grams/watt for lithium-ion.
For comparison, commodity solar panels are already about 70 g/W.

~~~
seanflyon
I think you mean 25 grams/Watt-hour and keep in mind that you need ~12 hours
of energy storage.

~~~
teraflop
No, I meant grams/watt, but I glossed over how I derived those numbers.

My back-of-the-envelope assumption was that you get 4 effective hours of
daylight per 24 hours. Which means that for every 1W of power generation at
peak, you get 1/6W of _average_ power consumption, which translates to 3.33Wh
of storage to keep things running overnight. (For a land-based installation
you would probably want a multiple-day power reserve to handle cloudy days,
but I'm assuming that's not an issue for a stratospheric balloon.)

~~~
seanflyon
So you mean 25 grams of battery per watt of solar panels?

------
mrinterweb
Considering "wind speeds as high as 291 km/h" I would think that one of the
greatest challenges of the Google Loon project is making sure there is always
a balloon above a targeted coverage area. I would wager that unless there are
an unbelievable number of balloons deployed, the coverage would be
intermittent.

~~~
josefresco
Confusing because in their FAQ they state the following:

"We are flying in the stratosphere well above commercial air traffic and
weather events, at around 18 - 27 km or 60,000 - 90,000 feet. "

I wonder if the "around the world" flight was done under different conditions?

~~~
mrinterweb
Wind speeds in the upper atmosphere can be very fast. These balloons will not
be stationary. Based on my limited knowledge of the project, the only way they
could have consistent coverage would be to have evenly spaced balloons around
the Earth. That assumes that wind currents would cause the balloons to travel
around the Earth in a dependable pattern. Considering the circumference of the
Earth 40,008km and 80km coverage diameter, 40008 / 80 = 500 balloons would be
required at minimum if all the balloons traveled at the same speed and in a
dependable pattern. I would imagine the wind currents the balloons would
travel on would be greater than the Earth's circumference, so more than 500
balloons would be required. Also, I doubt the balloons could maintain a
perfect 80km spacing. I can think of other factors that would make dependable
coverage difficult.

~~~
coderzach
Here's a wikipedia article explaining it.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_balloon_satellite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_balloon_satellite)

~~~
seanflyon
These balloons will not be geostationary.

~~~
zo1
At least read the link that was posted? Because otherwise, you miss parts like
this from the linked article:

 _" This is the ideal height because Air density is 1/10th of what it is at
Sea level. This makes the wind at these altitudes 10 times less potent."_

~~~
teraflop
No, independent of whether it's _possible_ to make a geostationary balloon,
Google's balloons are not going to be stationary. They are steered purely by
changing altitude and riding high-altitude winds.

~~~
zo1
Sure, except, the context of this sub-thread was started by someone claiming
that winds in the upper atmosphere "can be very fast." So the link was to
correct/explain to them, not to claim that the Google Balloons would be
stationary.

~~~
mrinterweb
Stratospheric wind speeds are very fast. Look it up if you don't believe me. I
was just basing this from a quote in the original article "wind speeds as high
as 291 km/h".

------
veb
I wonder if they solved the whole issue of the balloons... lost to sea off the
coast of NZ?

[http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-
living/9012282/Goo...](http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-
living/9012282/Googles-Project-Loon-balloons-lost-at-sea)

[http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10182174/Google-to-
reimburse...](http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10182174/Google-to-reimburse-
rescue-chopper)

[http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-
living/60107516/go...](http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-
living/60107516/googles-project-loon-balloons-fly-far-and-wide)

------
josephschmoe
Wow. Rhode Island is 1/5th the size of San Diego County, and 1/3rd the
population.

~~~
refurb
If I remember correctly, you can drive across RI (east to west) in about 30-35
min. And that route isn't a straight line. RI is a super tiny state.

------
Rainymood
This has always been an idea/fantasy of mine. This just shows how utterly
worthless an (very valuable) idea is without execution behind it.

I hope that access to the web will become available for everyone as soon as
possible.

~~~
danellis
It's either worthless or very valuable. It can't be both.

------
droidist2
Sounds perfect for North Korea. _twirls moustache_

------
BorisMelnik
I thought this was called the "loon" program, not Google baloons?

Either way, I love this type of innovation and this is what makes me really
respect Google. Yes, I know it is all about bottom line and they will profit
handsomely from it, but they are also helping the world become a better and
safer place.

------
dubcanada
Does anyone know why this has not been done already? Having a ton of cell
towers on the ground and trying to send signal through mountains and other
various terrain does not work. So why not put one tower on the ground in a
central area and have an array of balloons floating around?

------
spiritplumber
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX21nHv47ZY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX21nHv47ZY)
Nice! Here's my little cell phone blimp. Can't do a proper altitude test right
now because of wind.

------
amyjess
...and this network of cell towers in the sky will be dubbed "Skynet".

------
exabrial
A whole state... as long as you're not talking about 75% of states in the USA.

:)

------
hberg
Please append this to the headline:

... when that state is Rhode Island.

------
walshemj
For how many simultaneous users

------
malkia
What if the balloon "pops"? Falling down might still be a risk if there is
heavily populated area...

~~~
josefresco
In the event of an unexpected landing, every Loon balloon is equipped with a
parachute to slow its descent

[http://www.google.com/loon/faq/](http://www.google.com/loon/faq/)

~~~
yohui
Their FAQ also links to a video demonstrating the parachute:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y5AUHw8pRk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y5AUHw8pRk)

Project Loon also has a "blooper reel" showing a... somewhat different
parachute test:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW5PS7lRXwI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW5PS7lRXwI)

