(Page 2 of 2)
Until a few years ago, the use of these electromagnetic frequencies that have enabled Gigabeam to build a higher-speed network, were off-limits for two reasons. First, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) approved public use of these high frequencies only in 2003, says Wells. When the FCC finalized the agreement in 2005, GigaBeam began to ship prototypes.
Second, there was no cost-effective material for making transmitters at such frequencies. Wireless transmitters that send traditional signals are made of silicon, which can't operate at frequencies in GigaBeam's range. Within the past few years, Wells says, manufacturing techniques for making high-frequency radio transmitters out of gallium arsenide have improved significantly, making the technology less cost prohibitive.
While working at these frequencies permits high-speed data rates, there's an intrinsic physical challenge: molecules in the atmosphere absorb energy at certain frequencies. To deal with this, GigaBeam exploits those frequencies that are less susceptible to absorption by air and water molecules.
But the technology is still susceptible to heavy rains. In arid conditions, Gigabeam's signal can travel about 10 miles, but in areas where heavy rains occur, says Wells, the company's radios are only guaranteed to push a signal for about a mile, with the transmission will be down for a maximum of only five minutes per year.
Even with its advances, though, Gigabeam faces the same problem as other point-to-point technologies: creating a network with an unbroken sight line. Still, it could offer some businesses an alternative to fiber optics. Currently, a GigaBeam link, which consists of a set of transmitting and receiving radios, costs around $45,000* ($30,000 for 20 or more). But Krzywicki says that improving technology is driving down costs. In addition to outfitting the Trump towers, the company has deployed a link on the campuses of Dartmouth College and Boston University, and two links for San Francisco's Public Utility Commission.
*Correction: We originally stated the cost of a link to be $30,000.
Wireless optical networks could provide gigabit-per-second data transfer.
Despite decades of experiments, big telecom companies are moving ever so sluggishly to extend fiber optics to individual residences.
Guest (Lzawit)
Why beams crossing with each other would cause any problems? Unless they do so in receiver then interference does not affect by any means any of the signals.
Guest (Spruceman)
TeraHertz frequencies near visible light? No way. The frequencies mentioned in the article are below 100 GHz -- less than a tenth of a terahertz. It's a long, long way even from 300 GHz (a millimeter) to get to visible light in the 390-750 NANOmeter part of the spectrum
Guest (Shammai Ellman)
Fixed Point Wireless is an older and better
I just want to point out that fixed point wireless technologies utilizing laser beams that connect buildings to a broadband backbone has been around for a while. In fact, I remember a company named Roqiya that had perfected the laser beam to go through any weather condition and compensate for the swaying of the buildings. I can't remember the speed they claimed to have reached, but I remember it being in the range of fiber optic cable since the data was transmitted via a laser instead of a radio frequency. The only downside, was that you had to have a line of site with the next last receiver to make it work.
I believe that the company has it's r&d in Israel but I would have to contact them for more details.
Guest (rjord1)
Like many have mentioned before me, this technology is not new. It is however a niche' application designed for line of sight applications. Distance and bandwidth are limiters however, this system is cost effective for up to gig of bandwidth up to distances of 2Km (provided LOS is acceptable) I would not compare it to distance and bandwidth capabilities of fiber.
Guest (Kovacs P., Laszlo)
mesh wireless could outperform existing FTTx technologies
Eventually very high microwave frequencies used in a mesh wireless architecture with a dense mesh structure and Gbps RF transceiver peformance on node-to-node links could outperform existing Gbps range FTTx acces networks. Scaling uo the density of a mesh wireless cloud results in incredible agregate capacities even with moderate point-to-point bitrates. There are however three problems with this unique approach:
- Price
- Site Management
- Mesh size limits inherent in the routing
Whatever a Gbps wireless solution is, whatever features and performance it offers a fiber optic transmission network will remain always the core, when building large scale terrestrial networks.
Guest (m.hamdy)
i wonder all what have said above is so reasonable so no reply from gigabeam for all that !!
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
Guest (Al Meier)
Fast than Fiber
One point - The title is slightly miss leading - This is NOT data rate faster than fiber, but, it does solve the "line of sight", high data volume link, with little concern about "right of way" and the complexities of routing fiber or copper media.
Reply
Guest (Andrew)
Not so fast
Uh, current (installed) fiber technologies are 1, 2.5, 10 and 40 Gigabits per second, soon to arrive technologies will multiply that by a factor of 4. While it's nice to see wireless enter the Gigabit range, this is nowhere near faster than fiber.
Reply
Guest (Mark)
hops
Wireless Broadband for short hops between two tall buildings is one thing...
Reply