Rail mobile-internet speeds to get faster

[loiner91]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24332287

The rail industry plans to roll out "high-speed mobile broadband" across the busiest parts of Britain's rail network

By increasing the number of mobile phone masts to fill gaps in signal coverage, and incorporating signal boosters inside train carriages, passengers will be able to benefit from our surplus data capacity

each vehicle only has access to 2.5 megabit per second (Mbit/s) of data which must be shared among its passengers

However, this could rise to 50Mbit/s per train after the upgrade

Anyone who's brought their laptop on a train will know how bad the signal currently is.

 

[infobleep]

I think it's a good idea. I use my laptop on the train. Whether I'd pay extra for a service, if such a service cost extra, I don't know but a lot of other business people would.

 

[Carlisle]

Is this talking about better wifi or signal boosters like we currently have on pendilinos maybe boosting various networks future 4g coverage

 

[rdeez]

As I understand it GSM-R now covers all (?) of the network...shame they didn't take the opportunity to work with mobile providers to share the masts to boost coverage...or did they? I'm assuming they didn't / couldn't.

 

[Chrisgr31]

What they need to do is allow a wireless data signal, and block VOIP and voice calls!

Must agree though not sure how much extra I am prepared to pay for a data signal. However I do think they should consider a combined data/food/drink voucher as that might also encourage better food on board!

 

[JGR]

What they need to do is allow a wireless data signal, and block VOIP and voice calls!

Must agree though not sure how much extra I am prepared to pay for a data signal. However I do think they should consider a combined data/food/drink voucher as that might also encourage better food on board!

The amount of data required by a voice call is fairly minimal really.
It's people trying to watch youtube videos and the like who are the biggest consumers.

 

[Clip]

The amount of data required by a voice call is fairly minimal really.
It's people trying to watch youtube videos and the like who are the biggest consumers.

Exactly this. People streaming video content hog the hell out of it and its not right or fair on others.

I do fully get the need for some people to be connected to work but the rest of use really dont need to much bandwidth if reading the news or forums.

Any films or TV I watch are alwaays on my tablet before I travel.

 

[bb21]

I guess they can always limit the amount of data transmitted per device as a crude measure.

 

[Harlesden]

People taking laptops on long distance trains amd wishing to watch video to pass the time during the journey are every bit as much entitled to the facility as those business people using their laptop for work-related purposes.
If I could be bothered lugging my laptop around Grimsby, I'd be taking mine on the EC train tomorrow

 

[dysonsphere]

As I understand it GSM-R now covers all (?) of the network...shame they didn't take the opportunity to work with mobile providers to share the masts to boost coverage...or did they? I'm assuming they didn't / couldn't.

As I understand it they are not allowed to use that system for commerical use otherwise planning permission would be needed for masts.

 

[NSEFAN]

As I understand it they are not allowed to use that system for commerical use otherwise planning permission would be needed for masts.

GSM-R is for railway safety-critical stuff. I wouldn't imagine NR or anyone else would be keen adding other stuff to the system, especially not Facebook or cat video traffic!

 

[1e10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24332287

Anyone who's brought their laptop on a train will know how bad the signal currently is.

XC Wi-Fi is really slow, it runs at about 0.40Mbps which is slower than dial-up. Similarly the Wi-Fi systems at Bristol TM, Bristol PW and Exeter SD run slowly too. I find they average around the 1Mbps which is pretty poor seeing as their operated by The Cloud and most likely connected to backhaul by wire.

I think it's a good idea. I use my laptop on the train. Whether I'd pay extra for a service, if such a service cost extra, I don't know but a lot of other business people would.

Some operators already charge for Wi-Fi in standard class. The prices can be pretty expensive considering the terribly slow speeds. It can work out cheaper if you purchase the Wi-Fi in bulk.

As I understand it GSM-R now covers all (?) of the network...shame they didn't take the opportunity to work with mobile providers to share the masts to boost coverage...or did they? I'm assuming they didn't / couldn't.

I don't think the Network Rail radio system is used for providing internet access to passenger trains. I've read somewhere that the XC system uses standard 3G connections from the main networks (Three, O2, Vodafone and EE) and satellite links where 3G coverage isn't available. The routers onboard the train have connections to allow mobile networks and switch between them constantly to whichever is providing the best signal.

I guess they can always limit the amount of data transmitted per device as a crude measure.

XC have a FUP of 40MB an hour but don't enforce it. I've used 90MB in an hour previously.

 

[jon0844]

0.4Mbps is significantly faster than dial-up - as in almost ten times faster. My first ADSL connection was 0.5Mbps and it was revolutionary at the time (even if a mate on the original BT trial in Muswell Hill was getting 2Mbps).

The suggestion above about people having every right to stream a video is bordering on a claim that it would infringe your human right not to have fast and instant access to iPlayer/Sky Go/Netflix/LoveFilm anywhere you go. Sorry, but on a train (or plane) there will always be some limitations and you can't demand to have full access.

Or you go the way of many hotels that now offer free Wi-Fi either with a speed cap or time limit, and let you pay more for faster access. But of course, until we have a good reliable LTE network covering the railway, that extra speed might just not be available. In other words, even if the train might have a 150Mbps connection (LTE Cat 4) you might not be given access to anywhere near that much.

I'd like to see faster data speeds offered at stations though (just go down onto the tube to see how fast it can be, thanks to Virgin wanting to showcase its own broadband service). If you had a 50-100Mbps connection (down AND up) there, you could easily download the content you wished to view on your journey shortly before travel - a movie download would only take a few minutes. It's a lot easier to provide such bandwidth in a fixed location than on a moving train through tunnels and other topographical issues.

I mean, LTE at 800MHz might well provide a nice lot of coverage in rural areas - but not the capacity. To provide that, you'd still need loads of masts and the accompanying backhaul network to carry the data.

Of course it will all come one day, but I do think people are perhaps being a little too demanding. Let's stick with the aim to have good, blanket, coverage and a modest speed that is consistent for the time being.

 

[1e10]

0.4Mbps is significantly faster than dial-up - as in almost ten times faster. My first ADSL connection was 0.5Mbps and it was revolutionary at the time (even if a mate on the original BT trial in Muswell Hill was getting 2Mbps).

The suggestion above about people having every right to stream a video is bordering on a claim that it would infringe your human right not to have fast and instant access to iPlayer/Sky Go/Netflix/LoveFilm anywhere you go. Sorry, but on a train (or plane) there will always be some limitations and you can't demand to have full access.

Or you go the way of many hotels that now offer free Wi-Fi either with a speed cap or time limit, and let you pay more for faster access. But of course, until we have a good reliable LTE network covering the railway, that extra speed might just not be available. In other words, even if the train might have a 150Mbps connection (LTE Cat 4) you might not be given access to anywhere near that much.

I'd like to see faster data speeds offered at stations though (just go down onto the tube to see how fast it can be, thanks to Virgin wanting to showcase its own broadband service). If you had a 50-100Mbps connection (down AND up) there, you could easily download the content you wished to view on your journey shortly before travel - a movie download would only take a few minutes. It's a lot easier to provide such bandwidth in a fixed location than on a moving train through tunnels and other topographical issues.

I mean, LTE at 800MHz might well provide a nice lot of coverage in rural areas - but not the capacity. To provide that, you'd still need loads of masts and the accompanying backhaul network to carry the data.

Of course it will all come one day, but I do think people are perhaps being a little too demanding. Let's stick with the aim to have good, blanket, coverage and a modest speed that is consistent for the time being.

Sorry, had got my bits mixed with the bytes.

It's still slow however you look at it. The least XC could do is install some signal repeaters, their windows seem to block out the signal for mobile phones.

 

[jon0844]

East Coast just issued this release:

Train operator announces £2.2 million upgrade to its on-board wireless internet systems

Train operator East Coast today reveals a £2.2 million upgrade of its on-board wireless internet systems – 24 hours after Secretary of State for Transport Patrick McLoughlin announced plans to make high-speed mobile broadband available to 70 per cent of train passengers across the country.

East Coast’s investment will include the installation of industry-leading hardware on-board each of its 44 trains, as the operator focuses on achieving a more reliable internet connection for every user, every time.

The train operator’s improvements, which will begin to roll out in early 2014, will also ensure that its passengers are among the first to benefit when Network Rail upgrades its fixed line and mobile infrastructure at the trackside, delivering much faster broadband speeds and greater capacity by 2019.

East Coast Commercial and Customer Service Director Peter Williams said: “We know that Wi-Fi is one of the key reasons why people choose to travel with us, instead of driving or flying.

“It’s vital that our system keeps up with rapidly rising demand from passengers, starting with a more reliable connection into the system from the moment their journey with us begins.

“The investment we are making will upgrade the consistency of the service, by replacing on-train servers, access points and switching equipment which is used to deliver Wi-Fi in every carriage.

“We want our passengers to feel at home whenever they travel with us. A key part of that is staying connected throughout the journey – that’s why we’re investing now to ensure our Wi-Fi users can look forward to a reliable connection and faster connection speeds in years to come.”

The East Coast route was the first in the UK to offer Wi-Fi on a moving train ten years ago in 2003, when trials began using what was then groundbreaking technology.

On-train systems have been progressively improved since, but the extension of fibre optic broadband to millions of homes and the surging popularity of smartphones and tablet computers have raised customers’ expectations from on-train wireless internet.

The Government announced yesterday (30 September 2013) that investment at the trackside will focus on a series of ‘not-spots’ – areas alongside key rail routes with intermittent or poor mobile phone signals. Network Rail is already mid-way through a digital communications improvement programme to upgrade its fixed line and mobile infrastructure.

Further improvements will follow, including an increase in the number of mobile phone masts to fill in gaps in signal coverage, using the most up-to-date technology capable of delivering higher access speeds.

 

[DarloRich]

The BBC article is poor and there are errors but i think this is the key section:

Network Rail is in the middle of a £1.9bn digital communications improvement programme that is upgrading both its fixed line and mobile infrastructure.

A new fibre optic network should be capable of handling up to 192,000 gigabit per second (Gbit/s) of data once the upgrade is complete in June 2014.

The Rail Safety and Standards Board has forecast that the telecommunications demand on Britain's railways could rise to 200Gbit/s by 2018, which would still leave plenty of spare capacity on the upgraded system.

"By increasing the number of mobile phone masts to fill gaps in signal coverage, and incorporating signal boosters inside train carriages, passengers will be able to benefit from our surplus data capacity," a Network Rail spokesman told the BBC.

(This is quoted from the BBC article linked by the OP)

This is a much bigger project than just faster mobile broadband

 

[Comstock]

0

The suggestion above about people having every right to stream a video is bordering on a claim that it would infringe your human right not to have fast and instant access to iPlayer/Sky Go/Netflix/LoveFilm anywhere you go. Sorry, but on a train (or plane) there will always be some limitations and you can't demand to have full access.

I don't think anyone is going quite as far as talking about human rights, but do remember that planes have at- seat entertainment- trains generally don't.

So yeah, fast broadband might be handy for some (personally I prefer looking out of the window and listening to the radio on my headphones)

 

[Carlisle]

As I understand it they are not allowed to use that system for commerical use otherwise planning permission would be needed for masts.

I have noticed maybe one or two of the recent masts erected by the railway for gsm r communications do have Vodafone equipment on too but not many

 

[hacman]

XC Wi-Fi is really slow, it runs at about 0.40Mbps which is slower than dial-up.

XC have a FUP of 40MB an hour but don't enforce it. I've used 90MB in an hour previously.

XC will usually be faster than that for the actual throughput - if you do a Speedtest.net check or similar the results will usually not be very accurate due to the way traffic is routed to handle switching between various connectivity methods in different areas of the country.

Do remember also that where the train is also has an effect on the throughput you will get.

Whilst the speeds from onboard WiFi are not comparable to fixed line broadband, it has to be remembered that providing access to a moving vehicle is far more complicated and costly. Also, do remember that standard WiFi and networking equipment can't be used - it has to be toughened and rail approved. This all adds to the cost and slows down immediate deployment of cutting edge technologies.

XC do enforce the FUP - when passing 40MB in an hour your speed will be restricted. The current systems in use on the UK network (and in other places for that matter) are designed for browsing, e-mail and IM only. It works for this, and the speeds and FUP are in the vast vast vast majority of cases more than adequate.

It will be interesting to see what this announcement actually means - although it is safe to say that it's less likely to be over the GSM system in the air (but sharing of fibre backhaul is probable).

Jon

 

[rdeez]

I don't think the Network Rail radio system is used for providing internet access to passenger trains

Sorry, I didn't make it very clear - I meant allowing networks to mount their equipment alongside NR's on the physical masts, saving the networks having to erect their own masts as well. I didn't mean allowing the networks to share the communications equipment that NR are using, which of course would be impossible.

 

[mrmartin]

Sorry, EC wifi is terrible and there's no excuse for this 'designed for email' stuff. I have used it a few times but now I am on three with a DC-HSPA+ phone I can easily get 10-20mbit/sec on most of the network. Yes, past Newcastle it is rubbish. I have downloaded 3GB of work data between York & Newcastle before...

 

[Clip]

People taking laptops on long distance trains amd wishing to watch video to pass the time during the journey are every bit as much entitled to the facility as those business people using their laptop for work-related purposes.
If I could be bothered lugging my laptop around Grimsby, I'd be taking mine on the EC train tomorrow

Those people who stream any sort of movie,youtube,tv at the present time are very selfish - and not just for the business people either. They hog far too much of the already scarce bandwidth thus slowing everyone elses enjoyment of viewing the web down.

If you cant grasp that then theres not much I can say or do is there?

 

[jon0844]

East Coast has this system: http://www.icomera.com/solutions/east-coast-uk/

Looking at the same site, it doesn't appear that there's any new hardware so I expect the thing they're probably going to do is to add support for 4G to the current set up, unless the plan is to switch to another company - which seems unlikely.

EE is currently the only viable 4G network in terms of coverage, and even that's not likely to be good for most of the ECML, but in the future I'd say the likes of O2 (800MHz and a licence that requires 98% population coverage by a certain date) would probably be best at giving rail users a decent 4G signal. Of course, whether there will be the capacity is another story!

 

[1e10]

East Coast has this system: http://www.icomera.com/solutions/east-coast-uk/

Looking at the same site, it doesn't appear that there's any new hardware so I expect the thing they're probably going to do is to add support for 4G to the current set up, unless the plan is to switch to another company - which seems unlikely.

EE is currently the only viable 4G network in terms of coverage, and even that's not likely to be good for most of the ECML, but in the future I'd say the likes of O2 (800MHz and a licence that requires 98% population coverage by a certain date) would probably be best at giving rail users a decent 4G signal. Of course, whether there will be the capacity is another story!

98% of the population means they need to provide a coverage to where people live and not necessarily where rail lines are located.

 

[jon0844]

98% of the population means they need to provide a coverage to where people live and not necessarily where rail lines are located.

Of course, but I did add that because they will operate at 800MHz, there's a greater chance of decent rural coverage that will cover a lot of the railway too.

Clearly to provide blanket coverage to the railway, sites will need to be located near lines and not just towns and populated areas. Bar the usual planning issues, I am sure an operator would do so if there were some financial incentives...

 

[yorkie]

People taking laptops on long distance trains amd wishing to watch video to pass the time during the journey are every bit as much entitled to the facility as those business people using their laptop for work-related purposes.
If I could be bothered lugging my laptop around Grimsby, I'd be taking mine on the EC train tomorrow

Sure, but common sense says: download the video before you board the train.

Any charges and/or limits on this service, should be made on a per bandwidth (rather than time) basis. That would solve the problem, and avoid any issue over "rights".

The current conditions for WiFi on EastCoast include:

You can access most websites, however we don’t permit video streaming and catch up Tv or other services that require excessive bandwidth. This is to ensure everyone has a good surfing experience

I can't envisage a trainload of people all being able to watch streaming video simultaneously, so even if bandwidth is massively increased, so might demand and there may need to be some method of ensuring that demand does not outstrip supply.