Don't give me that ridiculous argument. 5G is harmful and many physicists have been speaking out against it's use. It offers little and affects our health. It never should have ben deployed
I would agree (mostly) if you're talking millimeter-wave 3GPP NR 5G, which is still not really that widely deployed due to the very short range of these signals. Most 3GPP NR 5G implementations are essentially upgrades from 4G LTE, for example what T-Mobile US did with the former Sprint frequencies.
Exactly this. Everyone including the media just seem to want to ignore this and hold up overseas operations as a reason that it should work in the USA as well. I heard that exact argument on CNBC this morning.
Well, that is depressing. The final statement of his presentation is that deploying 5G is 'insanity', after giving a lot of information regarding biological impacts both to humans and other species (which is not straightforward for a non biological scientist to understand, I believe).
Martin Pall is a well known and respected Physicist. As far as the clip goes I don't have any more background on it.
Frequency of a signal does not necessarily translate to data rates. 5G cellular works on a bunch of frequencies from as low as around 1ghz up to 40-50ghz. The c-band that is being discussed is in the 3-4ghz range which is just below the 5ghz used in modern wifi systems.
Read the article you quoted, it has a lot of good info about the issues. The issue is lessened, not resolved yet, mostly because those involved decided to work together to fix the problems as opposed to just playing chicken with aviation safety and public convenience.
I don't use wi-fi, although I know it goes through the walls and is impossible to completely ignore.
I have > stable 150mbps on 4G on Virgin with a "4G Modem" - it is my "backup" internet in case my "cable network" breaks down.
It still doesn't change the fact that this "issue" could have been resolved months ago but instead the FAA claimed that planes would drop out of the sky because of 5G. FAA is only now changing their tune because they got called out by carriers (and even other areas around the world that have been using C-Band for awhile) and realized they aren't going to get a handout this time.
The FAA asserted that airplane safety could be effected and prohibited operations at airports where this could be a risk. The FAA has the evidence to show the risk was plausible. The FAA works on a safety first principle, prove something is safe before permitting it instead of prove something unsafe before prohibiting it. The airlines cannot legally operate where the FAA prohibits them from operating. This is all on the FAA, not the airlines. Foreign airlines, not controlled by the FAA, also prohibited operations at those US airports.
Everyone who was involved in the technical side of things know about the problem and knew it was real. The telecoms and FCC knew this would effect aviation but wanted the aviation side to implement the equipment modification fix that everyone knew was possible, just costly and time consuming, but what the telecom side considered was the best long-term solution for their interests. This is happening, but they couldn't meet the deadline.
