# 4G LTE wifi coming to Chicago subways



## CHamilton (Jan 31, 2015)

Mayor Emanuel Announces Deal With T-Mobile, AT&T, Sprint and Verizon to Bring a Fast 4G Network to the Chicago Transit Authority's Subway



> Chicago will be the Largest Public Transit System in the U.S. with 4G Coverage in all Subway Stations and Tunnels; Targeted to be Completed by the End of 2015
> 
> Mayor Rahm Emanuel today announced a $32.5 million deal, brokered by the Chicago Infrastructure Trust,with America’s four major wireless providers – T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint – to finance a network modernization project for the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) to upgrade the wireless network in the City’s subway system. T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint have collectively agreed to fund the entire upgrade related to the design and construction of a next-generation Distributed Antenna System (DAS) capable of supporting the latest 4G wireless networks and mobile devices.


----------



## SarahZ (Jan 31, 2015)

Yay!


----------



## jis (Jan 31, 2015)

Apropos the title of this thread .... Technically speaking 4G LTE is not wifi. It is 4G LTE


----------



## Ryan (Feb 1, 2015)

That's excellent. Did WMATA ever finish their buildout? They were supposedly working on it when I left the Navy Yard a few years ago.


----------



## afigg (Feb 1, 2015)

RyanS said:


> That's excellent. Did WMATA ever finish their buildout? They were supposedly working on it when I left the Navy Yard a few years ago.


No. All of the DC Metro underground stations have at least 3G. I think some stations now have 4G/LTE, but that is probably vendor dependent. But there is no to little cell phone coverage in the tunnels at the present time.
Congress mandated that WMATA provide cell phone coverage throughout the entire underground system as part of the federal funding arrangement that was put together in the wake of the 2009 Red Line collision. With a late 2012 deadline, IIRC. Probably some Congressional staffers who take the Metro got that provision stuck in the bill. So WMATA awarded a contract to a vendor, Powerwave Technologies, to install antennas and cell phone links in the tunnels. However Powerwave Technologies fell further and further behind schedule and then filed for bankruptcy in early 2013, halting the installations and shutting off the working cell phone links that were in a few tunnel segments. Since then, there has been little news, if any, on when we may get 3G/4G connections in the tunnels. The bankruptcy proceedings may have hindered WMATA from awarding new contracts to other vendors.

So the Chicago L looks that it will beat DC Metro to complete underground cell phone coverage. Although, how many miles and stations of the L are underground?


----------



## SarahZ (Feb 1, 2015)

afigg said:


> So the Chicago L looks that it will beat DC Metro to complete underground cell phone coverage. Although, how many miles and stations of the L are underground?


Underground tracks: 11.4 miles

http://www.transitchicago.com/about/facts.aspx

Underground stations:

Red - 9

Blue - 12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chicago_'L'_stations


----------



## Ryan (Feb 1, 2015)

afigg said:


> No.


Damnit. This may be relevant to me in the upcoming future. Sucks (but completely unsurprising) that it didn't get done.


----------



## jis (Feb 1, 2015)

RyanS said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > No.
> ...


For one thing, doing just the stations is much simpler than doing all tunnels, specially in WMATA which has nice big cavernous station caverns. Doing all tunnels requires installation of leaky coax or some such throughout the system, which is a rather massive undertaking in a system with as much tunnels as the WMATA system has.


----------



## afigg (Feb 1, 2015)

RyanS said:


> Damnit. This may be relevant to me in the upcoming future. Sucks (but completely unsurprising) that it didn't get done.


I did a google search for recent news on when the DC Metro might get complete coverage, came across this WSJ blog story from February, 2013: PowerWave Bankruptcy Further Delays D.C. Metro Wireless Expansion. I made a small error in my post, the mandate from Congress for complete cell coverage in the Metro was in the 2008 PRIIA act. What Powerwave did was not only to halt installation of the antennas & hardware, but to shut down all the tunnel segments that had cell signals and stiff AT&T, Sprint, etc and the passengers in the process.

So in early 2013, WMATA told Congress they needed 2 more years to comply. Since I can't find any substantial news since then, I wonder if WMATA is going to need another 2 years for complete coverage. It might always be 2 years away. 

As I said, all of the underground stations have 3G, although there are often weak or dead spots at the areas under overhanging mezzanines, behind escalators, lower levels of the transfer stations. Not a surprise. But if one has a weak signal, easy enough towards walk to the less obstructed areas for a stronger signal while waiting for the train. On the train, I can usually get a brief connection with my phone when stopping at the station for data updates such as checking a transit app for the latest projected arrival times of the trains on other lines at the transfer stations or a news article refresh. Then its back to no signal until the next station.


----------



## afigg (Feb 1, 2015)

SarahZ said:


> Underground tracks: 11.4 miles
> 
> http://www.transitchicago.com/about/facts.aspx
> 
> ...


Just for comparison, the DC Metro has 50.5 miles of underground tracks and 47 underground stations (source: WMATA 2014 fact sheet). So it will be simpler for Chicago to add 3G/4G to the underground portions of the L. I expect Chicago and DC will have complete underground coverage long before the NYC subway system does, due to the sheer size of the NYC subway system and the huge backlog of repair and modernization projects that the MTA has to deal with.


----------



## SarahZ (Feb 1, 2015)

Did you quote me, or is that coincidence?


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 2, 2015)

Would it be easier/cheaper/faster to deploy standard WiFi than proprietary 4G/LTE? At work commercial WiFi allows my phone to function normally in elevators and secure rooms that block 3G/4G signals and the data operates at lighting speed. Does the iPhone allow for phone calls and texts over WiFi yet?


----------



## Ryan (Feb 2, 2015)

Depends on the carrier. T-Mobile yes, VZW supposedly this year. Not sure about the other two.


----------



## jis (Feb 2, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Would it be easier/cheaper/faster to deploy standard WiFi than proprietary 4G/LTE?


AFAIK 4G/LTE was blessed as a "IMT Advanced" standard by ITU-R in 2009. So while it was developed outside the formal standards process, it is now accepted as a standard by ITU-R. So currently it roughly has the same standing as WiMax as far as ITU-R is concerned.
A lot of standards are developed in this fashion, so this is nothing new. I m actually on the Board of a standards consortium that has a Class Liaison with ISO/IEC JTC-1, and has submitted and had JTC1 accept numerous standards developed by it outside of the formal development process, through a formally specified process called "transcription".


----------

