Rating: Is there a sinister reason behind it?
Regular readers of GoMobile News will know we’ve long been a harsh critic of the lack of cellular connectivity on London’s Underground rail network (affectionately known as The Tube). As reported previously here and here Virgin Media is deploying Wi-Fi on London Underground stations ahead of this Summer’s Olympic Games. That system will only serve those standing on London Underground platforms. So, Ian Brown, CEO with wireless coverage specialists, Axell Wireless has made an impassioned plea to extend wireless connectivity on-board the trains as well. This would provide coverage for the full range of mobile voice, messaging and data s ervices. Why hasn’t it happen? Well, GoMobile News thinks there’s a sinister reason behind it. And the Chinese could be to blame.You have to concede that the conspiracy theorists have got some really convincing arguments. As Axell says, the company has installed wireless coverage systems in over 80 Metro Networks and its technology has also even been deployed in the Channel Tunnel. But not in London.
What’s more, Axell is a British company so the-powers-that-be can’t claim to be ignorant of the technology’s existence. (Axell isn’t the only company in this sector with British developed technology, either.)
It’s especially odd since Axell’s equipment has already been installed to provide public safety communications throughout the Tube.
Furthermore, Axell’s technology is designed to support multiple standards (GSM, 3G, LTE).
OK. So we’ve established that there are public services communications on the Tube but no cellular.
Why? Because the public safety networks conform to a specialist standard known as TETRA (Terrestrial Trunked Radio). Which is very definitely not the same as GSM.
If you are going to run GSM in the Underground tunnels, then you are going to need GSM base stations.
But the London authorities even turned down the offer of such base stations for free. Why? Well the official reason is different. But the company which offered to supply said base stations was Huawei.
Not only is Huawei Chinese, it has extremely strong links to China’s Red Army. The thought of a Chinese company installing gear which would make it possible to listen into cellular calls made on the Tube was too much for the British powers-that-be.
Don’t try to deny that listening in over GSM is possible, the conspiracy theorists argue. Britain recently just got back four British hostages in Afghanistan because the UK and USA intercepted a GSM call.
GoMobile News suspects that the London authorities are waiting for the dust to settle after the Olympic Games when everybody has forgotten the feeble excuses put forward against taking Huawei up on its generous offer.
Then we might actually get cellular to work on London’s Underfground. Talking of which, doesn’t cellular work on the Heathrow-Paddington Express? We seem to recall that it does.
*sigh* The real reason is that Londoners overwhelmingly still don’t want phones working on the tube. It’s bad enough listening to some twerp or twerpess shouting down the phone on the overground sections when the carriages have emptied out a bit. A whole new level of anti social phone use in rush hour would lead to murder…
I worked on the Connect project which provided digital radio communications to the trains and emergency services between 2000 and 2007. The tube provides many obstacles to the provision of radio coverage within its tunnels.
1. Space – Finding space for equipment on the network was a major obstacle. Much of the network was constructed over 100 years ago with no allowance for the provision of communication services. Cable routes are already close to full capacity.
2. Heat – keeping the tube cool is difficult at the best of times. Adding heat producing equipment will only make matters worse.
3. Power – providing power to equipment in tunnels is an issue as there is no existing power that can easily be tapped into.
4. Cable loss – The Tetra system operates around 400Mhz and the radiating cables used need to be amplified every 700m. Mobile phones operate at much lower powers and the cable losses are much higher at 900MHz and above. More amplifiers will be needed and these need power.
5. Access – The system will need to be built during engineering hours _ about 3 hours each night. Access to the tunnels can only be granted during this period. Core transport work will always take priority, so many nights will be lost due to other projects and maintenance work. All staff must be trained and hold the necessary safety certificates.
6. Approvals – All equipment on the underground must meet stringent fire and safety standards. These are far more demanding than anything used on the surface.
I do not think that these issues are insurmountable but will take time to build and will be very expensive. The Connect system cost over £1Bn to implement. Mobile phone coverage is likely to cost much more.
The majority of underground passengers enjoy traveling in a mobile phone free zone and are against the introduction of mobile phone coverage. I am sure that TFL will only introduce the service if it can make them lots of money.
Before I comment I must make it clear that I do not currently work for any company involved with any telecommunication projects in London Underground and I have no commercial interests. These are my own personal views based on many years of experience.
There is NO sinister reason as to why there are no phone signals on the underground. Just financial, logicistical, bureaucratic and technical ones.
Since 1998 I have heard a range of different reasons why Cellular communications have not been extended to the tunnels. One was safety – People would be concentrating on their phones too much to notice the edge of the platform, would fall off and get run over. This is not of course a problem on the newer end of the Jubilee Line.
The major problems with ANY new project is the lack of space to install and the lack of time to install. The lack of space prevents any antennas being installed in most of the deep level tubes, Space for Radiating cables is also very very limited. Space on platforms/stations for BTS Equipment is also very limited.
Engineering hours are typically 3-4 hours in the early hours of the day. Not much can be done in this time and all your staff have to be paid extra money to work these hours. The cost to install anything in the tunnels can be 10-20 times that of a normal surface project. FREE BTS from china does not make it a cheap project – just a cheaper one.
The TETRA system you talk of in the article is a UHF system. The design and many of the components used will not pass Cellular Frequencies. The system is used for safety and as such will probably never be allowed to shared with a cellular system. Even if it was possible to combine everyone on the same system there are major design problems based on basic maths laws on frequency and distance. The higher the frequency = the smaller the distance the signal will travel.
The radiating infrastructure in the tunnel was designed for <500MHz systems. This means that 50-75% of the tunnels would have NO usable signal as the signal level would be too low. As for high speed 3G that would only be available on the platforms and upto 50m into the tunnels. – not much use.
I am not saying it’s impossible to install a Cellular system in the tunnels – it is possible and I have developed some ideas on how this can be achieved.
However even when the logicistical, technical and financial issues are resolved there is still a problem convincing Transport for London that they should support this.
You guys really should read this story which we previously published … http://www.gomonews.com/wrong-kind-of-mobile-network-on-the-line/
Why are you guys disputing cellular’s ability to run on underground railways when Axell Wireless has a mere 80 working examples? There’s being in denial but this really takes the biscuit. Oh, and one of the reasons given for not allowing cellular on the underground is the ability to trigger a bomb via a mobile phone. Entirely possible but you can trigger a bomb with a cellular phone everywhere else and you can use all manner of other detonators. That argument is therefore untenable.
In response to your comments: –
I am not disputing Cellular’s ability to be run on Underground railways. Personally I have been involved with 3 other Metro projects around the world which had Cellular distributon. It is possible and can be done. All the other metros were much newer than our London Underground, plus more importantly the were larger. (wider tunnels, more space on platforms e.t.c.)
The article you linked to is interesting, and yes an Optical fibre system is a useful way of distributing RF signals over long distances. However the radiating elemement used is typically an Antenna.
On the deep level tubes there is simply no room to install an antenna. Some tunnels only have a gap of a few cm between tunnel wall and train. What you can install here is carfully managed by LUL safety teams who know the track position, train speed and other factors. SAFETY is the priority with any project.
If you were to put an antenna in the tunnel instead of radiating cable then the RF power would be concentrated at the antenna. If the train was stopped (very likely) then its probable that someone would then be just a few cm away from the antenna. This would create additonal RF Safety issues.
As for triggering a bomb.. YES of course this is possible, and as the other article mentions there are other ways of triggering a bomb as well.
In Summary – London Underground’s deep level tube lines (e.g. Northern, Bakerloo, Central, Jubilee) are simply not able to take off the shelf systems such as the Zinwave, Commsope and Axell fibre systems. But some of the other lines such as District could. Some stations are already full up with equipment and there is no spare space available for any more. A london wide system using conventional technology is not possible without a lot of money being invested.
I can however see that if there was a carefully constructed group of companies, with lots of money using some ideas that I have then it would be possible to provide a high speed cellular radio network in the London Underground.
You’re right. We seem to recall reading a story about an Underground train driver having to stop his train because it had hit something installed during engineering works. Still, it seems strange that the British can build a world leading train network in the Victoria era but can’t seem to install a bunch of antennae to provide cellular coverage in the 21st Century
I believe that a system such as the Zinwave option could provide good coverage on platforms and concourses but would not be suitable for tunnel communications. Jeremy was spot on regarding the restrictions of the environment. The shielding effect of the train would require an antenna every few meters. Couple this to the the user being located in a vehicle moving at around 40mph, you will need hundreds of seamless handovers between the active antennas to maintain a call without dropping out. I do believe that there will eventually be mobile phone coverage on the LUL network but it will not be quick or easy to implement and will certainly be very expensive compared to a surface solution. The final decision will come down to economics. The mobile operators will want a good return on their investment and TFL would also want a generous share of the income to fund other improvements to the tube. I agree that the solution is likely to involve an RF over fibre solution with the bulk of the equipment located away from the railway network. LUL and its contractors are currently upgrading the track, signalling and safety systems to improve their service. All these projects compete for the little spare space on the sub surface lines. Mobile phone coverage understandably is pretty low down on their list of priorities.