3GPP Version 19(3gpp.org)
3gpp.org
3GPP Version 19
https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies/releases/release-19
4 コメント
You can already do that: Keyword you want to be looking for is NTN (non terrestrial networks).
The complexity is how you actually deploy this at scale and what you want the actual satellites to do: For example, there is the option of having the satellite be a "flying mirror" with minimal internal logic (transparent NTN: satellite is repeater) or a full gNB which can act as a "really tall cellphone tower" (regenerative NTN: satellite is basestation).
NTN satellites induce some quite significant challenges compared to standard 5G networks. I think most people can already imagine that delay is a considerable challenge, but that is ultimately relatively easy to deal with by adjusting the constants (like HARQ timers) in the 5G standard. A bigger issue are things like extreme doppler shifts induced by the high speed of LEO satellites (27000 km/h), which means that your UE has to continuously pre-compensate for doppler shifts. Another bit of weirdness is that cell handovers are now "reversed" compared to ground systems: In ground systems the reason you need to switch cells is usually because you moved away into a different cell. In LEO systems the "tower" and therefore cell moves. If you don't want to have constant re-negotiations with the cell, you need to have some sophisticated beamforming on the satellite to keep the cell steered onto the same ground area (i.e. the cell needs to move from the POV of the satellite to stay stationary from the ground side).
All of this is quite expensive, a lot more expensive than just having ground based hardware. From a purely economic POV these systems don't really make sense unless you have externalities like defense as a secondary argument. The catch 22 for NTN is (and arguably will always be) that it is the most worth it for regions far away from the existing network. However, since regions without cell coverage are almost surely not very affluent, they themselves cannot reasonably afford the extra expenses to justify a satellite communication system. There basically has to be governmental support from the defense or just "public good" coffers to make this reasonable. NTN will be a supplement for existing networks for the foreseeable future.
NTN satellites induce some quite significant challenges compared to standard 5G networks. I think most people can already imagine that delay is a considerable challenge, but that is ultimately relatively easy to deal with by adjusting the constants (like HARQ timers) in the 5G standard. A bigger issue are things like extreme doppler shifts induced by the high speed of LEO satellites (27000 km/h), which means that your UE has to continuously pre-compensate for doppler shifts. Another bit of weirdness is that cell handovers are now "reversed" compared to ground systems: In ground systems the reason you need to switch cells is usually because you moved away into a different cell. In LEO systems the "tower" and therefore cell moves. If you don't want to have constant re-negotiations with the cell, you need to have some sophisticated beamforming on the satellite to keep the cell steered onto the same ground area (i.e. the cell needs to move from the POV of the satellite to stay stationary from the ground side).
All of this is quite expensive, a lot more expensive than just having ground based hardware. From a purely economic POV these systems don't really make sense unless you have externalities like defense as a secondary argument. The catch 22 for NTN is (and arguably will always be) that it is the most worth it for regions far away from the existing network. However, since regions without cell coverage are almost surely not very affluent, they themselves cannot reasonably afford the extra expenses to justify a satellite communication system. There basically has to be governmental support from the defense or just "public good" coffers to make this reasonable. NTN will be a supplement for existing networks for the foreseeable future.
We're already there, it's just a matter of provisioning LEO constellations and sorting out market-fit, although Starlink Direct-to-Cell (D2C) is probably the least enticing offering.
As it stands both ASTS and Lynk Global use 3GPP standards to allow standard, unmodified mobile phones to connect directly to cell towers in space, bridging terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks (NTN) without requiring special user equipment
https://www.satellitetoday.com/connectivity/2025/11/12/analy...
https://spacenews.com/the-merger-between-satellite-and-cellu...
As it stands both ASTS and Lynk Global use 3GPP standards to allow standard, unmodified mobile phones to connect directly to cell towers in space, bridging terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks (NTN) without requiring special user equipment
https://www.satellitetoday.com/connectivity/2025/11/12/analy...
https://spacenews.com/the-merger-between-satellite-and-cellu...
A zipped DOCX at that!
Isn't a docx a bunch of formatted files and metadata inside of a zip container already?
Yo dawg...
Yo dawg...
Surprised to see 3GPP Release work on HN. Given I tried many times in the past decade to get it on front-page without success.
Still a lot of work to be done. National Security and COVID has basically delayed a lot of 5G Network improvement Rollout by 3-4 years. This is a long time for technology that has a mainstream life span of roughly 10 years.
5G SA has barely rolled out. The capacity improvement hasn't been great for various different reasons. And with Apple now making their own modem and not in a hurry to support latest 3GPP Releases the 5G-Advance roll out in the future is looking not as good as many have hoped.
May be, they will finally get it right with 6G.
Still a lot of work to be done. National Security and COVID has basically delayed a lot of 5G Network improvement Rollout by 3-4 years. This is a long time for technology that has a mainstream life span of roughly 10 years.
5G SA has barely rolled out. The capacity improvement hasn't been great for various different reasons. And with Apple now making their own modem and not in a hurry to support latest 3GPP Releases the 5G-Advance roll out in the future is looking not as good as many have hoped.
May be, they will finally get it right with 6G.
Hi Telco nerds!
It's looking like 3GPP is shifting away from faster networks and into networks that are programmable, energy-budgeted platforms.
Anybody doing experiments with components where power is transmitted by a transport provider? Ambient IoT sounds like a classic 3GPP proposal that utterly fails because every time they publish, nobody follows on with legitimate investment. Am I too cynical?
It's looking like 3GPP is shifting away from faster networks and into networks that are programmable, energy-budgeted platforms.
Anybody doing experiments with components where power is transmitted by a transport provider? Ambient IoT sounds like a classic 3GPP proposal that utterly fails because every time they publish, nobody follows on with legitimate investment. Am I too cynical?
Following on from the machinations of the O-RAN ALLIANCE, and the complete wheel-spinning nonsense that was OpenRAN, at least they're doing something nation-state agnostic. The last decade has been one long appeasement of China Telecom and Huawei by diminishing the value-add from proprietary SaaS and RAN vendor lock-in in the Euro and US Telecoms market.
How are all those promised cloudified network functions in k8s containers with the much vaunted 'AI' based orchestration and life-cycle management doing in 2026?
How are all those promised cloudified network functions in k8s containers with the much vaunted 'AI' based orchestration and life-cycle management doing in 2026?
"complete wheel-spinning nonsense that was OpenRAN" is a concise summary of 3-5 years of cargo-cult telco innovation.
I really like the improvements to satelite connectivity, brings us one step closer to a future where LEO broadband like Starlink/OneWeb is a commodity