A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 21st 12, 09:26 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
The Natural Philosopher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,728
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

  #2  
Old November 21st 12, 09:47 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Graham J
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 620
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?

--
Graham J


  #3  
Old November 21st 12, 11:00 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Justin C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.

Damn daft the Chinese.


Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.
  #4  
Old November 21st 12, 11:27 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
The Natural Philosopher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,728
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On 21/11/12 11:00, Justin C wrote:
On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.

Damn daft the Chinese.

I really don't know the answers to these actually very interesting
questions.




Justin.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

  #5  
Old November 21st 12, 02:10 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 343
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On 21/11/2012 11:00, Justin C wrote:
On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Agreed. Although they must have thought they could get away with it but
using an unlicensed band for safety critical signalling systems on a
rail network seems like madness.

Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.


Actually cable theft is becoming a big problem on the railways with the
price of scrap metal. Newcastle Metro has been down a few times due to
cable theft and once due to fried would be nicker of cable on the line.

Damn daft the Chinese.


Wireless signalling might well be cheaper in the long run.

But not if you use an unlicensed band where every Tom Dick and Harry can
easily buy transmitters to swamp your signal.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #6  
Old November 21st 12, 02:19 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
brightside S9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 144
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:00:29 +0000, Justin C
wrote:

On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.

Damn daft the Chinese.



It may not be kust the Chinese! See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communi...l#Architecture
If reading it all is uninteresting then see section 2.5 - Risks and
Section 3 - Architecture.

The Wiki. article list the implementation date of the train control
system as 2011. So the risks were known.

--
brightside S9
  #7  
Old November 21st 12, 02:52 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
brightside S9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 144
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:00:29 +0000, Justin C
wrote:

On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.

Damn daft the Chinese.

And according to this
http://english.caijing.com.cn/2012-11-20/112296950.html
the subway company could have taken steps to avoid the problem
"if [they] take the time to learn about them"

--
brightside S9
  #8  
Old November 21st 12, 03:57 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Justin C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

On 2012-11-21, Martin Brown wrote:
On 21/11/2012 11:00, Justin C wrote:
On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/

A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Agreed. Although they must have thought they could get away with it but
using an unlicensed band for safety critical signalling systems on a
rail network seems like madness.

Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.


Actually cable theft is becoming a big problem on the railways with the
price of scrap metal. Newcastle Metro has been down a few times due to
cable theft and once due to fried would be nicker of cable on the line.


Surely that's only worthwhile when there's a lot of cable, CAT5 cable
doesn't really count does it? I suppose it depends how desperate the
thieves are.... also, we're talking about China, how easy is it for
the average Xoe to find a buyer for scrap metal, doesn't the state
have it's finger in most pies?


Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.
  #9  
Old November 21st 12, 07:35 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Invalid
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 150
Default Never mind 4G, look what Wifi interference has done..

In message , Justin C
writes
On 2012-11-21, Graham J [email protected] wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/21/wi_fi_knockout/


A philosopy of saving money at all costs is bound to backfire.

For a transport system the cost of a well-designed and licensed
telecomms system must still be trivial compared with all the other
costs, so why on earth skimp on it?


Why would a rail network need WiFi? The've got uninterupted access to
all points, it's simple to install cable along with the rails. It'd
be a closed network and no-one could interfer unless they trespassed
on the line and deliberately vandalised it.

Damn daft the Chinese.


Justin.

They use wireless probably because its damn difficult to keep a cable
connected to a train moving at 100Km/Hr over any distance, and with
multiple trains using the same tracks the resulting rats nest of tangles
would make the average network cabinet look tidy!

Its also a lot cheaper to set up and maintain long term than installing
lineside signals every few hundred metres, as well as allowing much
fancier train management & control procedures.

However choosing to implement your safety critical system using an
unlicenced and uncontrolled frequency that is known to be used by large
numbers of consumer devices does justify the use of daft or worse.


--
Invalid
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
telephone interference [email protected] uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 4 April 25th 06 07:40 PM
US Robotics modem has a mind of its own Graham uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 7 July 9th 05 01:25 PM
Need a server for your network ? Don't mind noisy ? Got a pc to swap ? Alan uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 0 April 8th 05 10:59 PM
Interference Problem Pauho uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 March 6th 05 10:31 AM
Interference Reg Edwards uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 2 August 30th 04 06:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.