> overlapping and hierarchies only stand a chance of helping
> you if a handset can see more than two base stations.
As I tried to explaine, there is no chance one will be
out of the reach of 2-3-4 BSTs on the 2-3Ghz bands
where there is a lot of users and the need
for accuracy is higher.
In rural, empty spaces it is anyway smarter to use
lower _carrier_ frequencies with better coverage and
there the need for positioning accuracy is much smaller.
(but is that the main usage of GPS?? antenna on the
top of the car??)
> Are providers going to install extra base stations to
> enable you to triangulate your position? Doubting it.
No, it will be done anyway in crowded places, and in
less crowded places nobody needs very high accuracy
anyway.
> Not because of the cost of the BTS itself, but because of
> challenges getting permission for an antenna site then > leasing T1/E1 lines to the central controller plus the > desire to build out coverage
Radiolinks (XXGHz, very directional) between BSTs is the
fastest and cheapest way to build the network both
in malls and deserts. (even solar power to avoid even
110/220volts on poles)
One additional reference can replace a third triangular
point, as well as directional arrays for the BST.
(I'm sure you remember that 40x capacity, with or
without adaptive, directional arrays of antennas)
Ilmarinen.
P.S. 911 calls don't bring in much cash for the
operators, not even along highways through the desert,
especially not to know which side of the road the accident
is. |
