Broadband Access Plan for Passenger Rail

Transcription

Public Act 95-0009 – Broadband Access on Passenger Rail
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Presented By: Illinois Department of Transportation
December 28, 2007
Wireless Internet Service on Trains
Ramavarapu “RS” Sreenivas
Industrial and Enterprise Systems Engineering (IESE)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
HierComm, Inc.
Feasibility Study
Broadband Wireless Communications for Chicago Metra
Instructional Guide for using the Interactive PDF Map
(Enclosed CD only – See CD Installation Instructions)
Interactive Broadband Access Plan for Passenger Rail Interactive Map
(Enclosed CD only – See Instructional Guide for using the Interactive PDF Map)
Executive Summary
Presented By: Illinois Department of Transportation
December 28, 2007
Issue Background
This Executive Summary outlines a general plan by the Illinois Department of
Transportation (IDOT) as required by Public Act 95-0009, the Broadband Access on
Passenger Rail Act. This act requires IDOT to present a plan by Dec. 31, 2007, to the
Governor and General Assembly on a way to provide future wireless network access on
passenger trains in Illinois at a fair and reasonable cost.
Following enactment of PA 95-0009 in July 2007, IDOT commissioned a study by the
University of Illinois on current technological possibilities that could meet the intent of the
legislation. The study found that providing wireless access is a viable goal using current
technologies and could indeed have positive impacts on traffic congestion, traffic safety,
the economy, and other aspects of the quality of life Illinoisans enjoy.
Primary Program Goal:
Provide wireless network service to entice commuters and business travelers who rely
on network connectivity to choose rail for Illinois travel, and increase ridership and
revenues. Such services are now provided in London, Paris, Seattle, San Francisco,
Tokyo, and Chennai, India.
Secondary Goals/Advantages:
•
•
•
•
Improved management of highway traffic congestion.
Increased revenues from additional ridership and service offerings.
Potential related business opportunities and job creation.
Better responsiveness rider needs and service expectations.
Short-Term Considerations
In the short term, state provision of wireless access on passenger trains could influence
more travelers to utilize Illinois passenger rail options including Metra commuting
services and Amtrak inter-city rail services.
By encouraging rail travel, we can:
• Discourage unnecessary roadway traffic, and improve safety and travel times,
• Decrease congestion and improve our ability to manage traffic more effectively,
• Support additional opportunities for job creation as small businesses are asked to
provide necessary related services and supplies to users and vendors.
Broadband Access Plan for Passenger Rail – Executive Summary
Page 2
Long-Term Considerations
In the long run, a more accessible wireless network entails adding to the information
technology infrastructure of the state, which in turn:
• Supports the statewide goal of accessible broadband network services to users,
• Creates more telecommuting options for workers, further decreasing vehicle
traffic and unnecessary congestion on roadways,
• Leads to more effective technology for active traffic management to reduce the
frequency and severity of roadway congestion.
Two Viable Service Options Identified through Study: Cellular 3G & Wi-Fi
Cellular 3G: Commercial Service Available by Fee From Large Telecom Vendors
•
•
•
Requires a monthly data package subscription ranging from $40 to $80 a month.
Requires no investment by the State but is cost prohibitive to many users.
No one vendor has coverage or capacity to meet the legislative intent or user
needs.
Wi-Fi: Same Service Offered Now in Many Coffee Shops, Hotels, Businesses
•
•
•
•
Most computers now can access for little or no additional cost.
Requires wireless infrastructure to be developed for broad access to the network.
Network development and ongoing maintenance costs: $12,000 to $15,000 per
rail mile. Overall cost could be phased in by specific rail line over time.
Provides adequate bandwidth capacity to meet legislative intent and user needs.
Cost Considerations
Such benefits from Wi-Fi could be attained at a small fraction of the cost of rebuilding or
adding lanes to heavily used commuter highways. The estimated wireless network cost
of $12,000 to $15,000 per rail mile in Illinois would yield a projected full implementation
cost of about $20 million on the nearly 1,600 miles of rail line in use for passenger
service (Metra and Amtrak) in Illinois, including all Metra routes in the Chicago area and
all in-state Amtrak routes (Chicago to St. Louis, Carbondale, Quincy, and the Wisconsin
border bound for Milwaukee). This total cost compares favorably with the cost of
freeway or roadway reconstruction to reduce congestion in urban areas, where
construction costs start at several million dollars per roadway mile.
Cost Recovery Options
•
•
The State could opt to provide the service to riders with no fees or cost recovery
provisions attached in order to encourage ridership.
Cost recovery options for development and ongoing maintenance:
o Added ticket charges or other fees to all riders
o Service available by subscription or on a per-use basis
Wireless Internet Service on Trains
Ramavarapu “RS” Sreenivas
Industrial and Enterprise Systems Engineering (IESE)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Urbana, IL 61801
Phone: (217) 333-7735
FAX: (217) 244-5705
E-mail: [email protected]
December 7, 2007
Summary
The Illinois legislature passed a Bill (Public Act # 095-0009) requiring the Illinois
Department of Transportation to prepare a plan for ensuring high speed data transmission
services on all passenger rail systems in Illinois at fair and reasonable prices no later than
December 31, 2007. As an aid to the preparation of this plan, this report explores the
following technologies:
1. WiFi (IEEE 802.11),
2. WiMax (IEEE 802.16) and
3. Cellular 3G
for providing Internet Access to passengers on trains. The report also outlines the
infrastructural support required for these technologies to deliver an acceptable quality-ofservice to a passenger using simplifying assumptions and results from the experiments
conducted at the UPN-line on December 7, 2007 and December 10, 2007.
The required access can either be provided by the State of Illinois, the Railroad industry,
or by a third-party. In either of these options there are additional non-technical issues
that have to be considered if the vision of universal access on trains is to be translated
into reality.
Introduction
The Illinois Legislature passed the “Broadband Access on Passenger Rail Law1” that
requires the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) to develop a plan for ensuring
high-speed data access in all passenger rail systems in Illinois at fair and reasonable
prices. IDOT approached the Illinois Center for Transportation (ICT) at the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to investigate competing technologies that can bring the
vision of providing internet access to passengers on trains closer to reality. To this end,
the services of HierComm, Inc. were used to conduct experiments in a 34 mile stretch of
the UPN line in the Greater Chicago area. The results of these experiments, reviewed in
this report, and presented in detail in different report to IDOT, establish the technical
feasibility of providing internet access at a reasonable infrastructural cost. However,
there non-technical issues that need to be considered before this vision can gain
acceptance in the market place. The remainder of this report is essentially an elaboration
of these conclusions.
We looked into three candidate enabling technologies:
1. WiFi (IEEE 802.11),
2. WiMax (IEEE 802.16), and
3. Cellular 3G
For WiFi technologies, with the help of the services of HierComm, Inc., we have
reasonable, base-line estimates of the infrastructural costs (measured in dollars-per-mileof-track) for a collection of viable architectures. It was not possible to arrive at similar
figures for the WiMax and Cellular 3G technologies as these services and their
supporting vendor-base are not at the level of maturity as WiFi.
We also present an incomplete set of non-technical/semi-technical issues that could
influence the feasibility of providing broadband access to passengers in trains in the state
of Illinois. These could range from ownership of the right-of-way, logistic issues
involving infrastructure, level of consumer-support required to justify different levels of
capital-investment on behalf of the service provider, technologies with a broader scope of
use as incentive to the service provider, etc. It is hoped that this report will be of use to
IDOT in forming its recommendations to the Illinois Legislature.
Enabling Technologies
Wireless devices are constrained to operate in a certain frequency band in the spectrum.
Each band has its associated bandwidth, which can be viewed as the space that is
occupied by a device in the frequency band. Higher-bandwidth translates to larger datatransfer rates but this requires appropriate signal-processing. The use of the radio
spectrum is regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC has
allocated the 5GHz frequency band to devices that adhere to the IEEE 802.11a standard.
These devices can provide data-transfer speeds up to 54 Mbps. Devices that conform to
1
(cf. http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/95/PDF/095-0009.pdf)
the IEEE 802.11g standard can also provide data-transfer speeds up to 54 Mbps, but these
devices use the 2.4GHz frequency band.
There are wireless technologies in addition to the IEEE 802 family. For instance,
Bluetooth is a standard that can be used to build small networks. A common example is
the “network” between a Bluetooth-enabled cell-phone and its associated ear-piece. In
its present form, Bluetooth is not a serious contender for providing wireless access on
trains.
Third-generation (3G) mobile telephony networks can theoretically provide data-transfer
speeds in the Mbps-range.
Several sources seem to suggest that the rollout of
commercial 3G services have experienced a serious push back.
The preliminary
experiments conducted by HierComm Inc. using cellular-cards on laptops seem to have
poor data-transfer speeds to provide a level of service that is appropriate to the passengers.
It is possible that sometime in the future, the promised 3G functionalities would be
available to the consumers at large, and when this happens 3G mobile telephony
networks can be serious contenders to providing internet access on trains.
WiFi (IEEE 802.11)
We present a short description of the terminology before we describe the capabilities and
limitations of WiFi networks for the specific application we have in mind (cf. figure 1).
An access point is a device that bridges the wired and wireless parts of the network.
Any wireless device that is within the Basic Service Area of an access point can “talk” to
it. The IEEE 802.11 standard allows for networks of arbitrarily large size by overlapping
basic service areas to form a larger Extended Service Area. The presence of the wired
backbone is essential. Customers within the extended service area can communicate with
each other; this is in addition to access to the internet.
Communication between the access points in WiFi networks is done through a process
known as the Inter-access Point Protocol (IAPP) and to the best of our knowledge there
is no standardization of this protocol and vendors use proprietary technologies that
perform this functionality.
When a customer turns her WiFi-enabled device on, her device would be associated with
an access point after the appropriate registration process is completed. When the train
she is traveling in moves out of range of one access point and into the range of the next
one, her device would initiate a re-association with the new access point, and a
disassociation with the previous access point. While this functionality should be
standard by now, there can be customers with legacy WiFi equipment that are not
equipped to perform this hand-off process. Users with such legacy equipment will not be
able to surf the internet while traveling.
WiFi networks also provide privacy of transacted communications through a service
called the Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP). It is commonly accepted that WEP does not
provide the level of security that it was originally intended for. It is not uncommon for
WEP-protected systems from being broken into. This said, several businesses use WEP
keys as a means to authenticate legitimate users on their network.
Figure 1:
networks.
Extended Service Area with overlapping Basic Service Areas in WiFi
At the physical-layer there are two things that are important to WiFi (and every other
wireless technology): Antennas and Amplifiers. Anyone who owns a cell-phone knows
the purpose of the antenna on a receiver is to improve the quality of the incoming or
outgoing signal. A similar functionality is served by antennae on the access points. An
Omni-directional antenna sends and receives signals from any direction, while a
Directional antenna have preferred directions along which they can communicate better.
For customers traveling on trains with WiFi-enabled devices their (directional) location
relative to the access points is known. Since a directional antennae have longer reach
than omni-directional ones along their preferred directions, a properly oriented
directional antenna will permit larger spacing between access points.
Amplifiers increase the signal strength of the radio signals. The increase in signal
strength is usually measured in Decibels (dB). If an amplifier doubles the power of a
signal it is said to produce a 3-dB increase. A 1-dB increase corresponds to a 1.25-fold
increase in power. The power of a signal is measured in terms of dB above one milliwatt
(dBm). A signal strength of -80dBm at the receiver was considered to be acceptable in
the experiments conducted by HierComm, Inc. This threshold value of the received
power pre-supposes a specific infrastructure involving access points with additional
radio-frequency amplification. The relevant background and details are spelled out in the
following paragraphs.
Directional antennae with appropriate amplification at each access point can permit the
replacement of the wired-backbone in figure 1, with the wireless-backbone of figure 2.
Roughly speaking, the quality of a directional antenna is measured in terms of the signal
that needs to be generated by an omni-directional antenna to equal the power generated
by the directional antenna along the preferred direction. This is measured in unit called
Decibel-Isotropic (dBi). It is commonly acknowledged that a 3dBi improvement at the
antenna translates to a noticeable improvement at the receivers.
Figure 2: Replacement of the wired backbone of Figure 1 with a wireless backbone
involving directional antennae, amplifiers and multi-spectrum radios.
The tests conducted by HierComm, Inc. suggest that the scenario outlined in figure 2 is
indeed viable. The access points and routers used in this experiment can communicate
along the 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz frequency bands. The preliminary design involved the
access points communicating with users on the train along the 2.4 GHz band with
directional antennae and radio-frequency amplification.
The inter-access point
communications and access point to router communication was presumed to use the
5.8GHz band, without the help of directional antennae. In course of the experiments
alternate scenarios emerged which were more economical.
These scenarios are
discussed in subsequent portions of this report.
Figure 3: Current and future locations of IDOT’s fiber-optic networks.
The routers would be placed at locations in close proximity to train tracks with access to
wired network. Figure 3 shows the location of current and planned IDOT fiber-optic
cabling. There are several spots along the tracks where the routers can be placed. The
placement of the routers in the solution proposed in figure 2 is very critical. These
routers can be viewed as spots where the internet-traffic is off-loaded on the wired-
network. If the routers are few and far between, it is likely that data-transfer rates (and
consequently, performance) available to the users will worsen significantly. This is an
issue that needs to be looked at when it comes to providing access to travelers who are
not in the vicinity of Greater Chicago area where tracks and fiber optic cables are in close
proximity at many locations.
There are two scenarios in which WiFi-enabled devices could be connected to the access
points. The first, shown in figure 4, involves the direct communication between the
WiFi-enabled devices and the track-side access points. The field experiments conducted
in sections of the UPN Metra line suggest that this scenario would require an access point
approximately every 0.5 miles along the track. As per prices quoted by HierComm, Inc.,
the 34 mile length of the UPN track would cost about $900,000. While there are terrain
variations that need to be taken into account before pricing other locations, the rough
estimate for this option would be in the $27,000-$30,000 range for each mile of track.
Figure 4: Direct connection between the Access Points and the customer equipment.
Alternately, one could adopt two variations on the scenario depicted in figure 5, where
the WiFi-enabled device of the customer communicates to a transceiver that is either
fixed to the train, or, is on a portable form-factor that can be easily off-loaded from the
train if necessary. There will be a slight difference in the performance of these two
systems as the train-mounted transceiver would have it antenna on the exterior of the
train providing a stronger signal. The portable form-factor would have a slightly weaker
signal sent out to the access point due to the fact that the relevant equipment stays on the
interior of the train. Tests conducted by HierComm, Inc. suggest that the train-mounted
option would require an access point every 1.88 miles, while the portable option would
require an access point every 1.54 miles. The cost estimate for the train-mounted option
for the 34 mile stretch of the UPN line is about $250,000, while the portable option was
priced at approximately $300,000. As mentioned before, there are terrain-variations that
need to be considered before a precise estimate of cost can be obtained, but a ball-park
estimate for the train-mounted option would be in the $7,500-$8,000 range per mile of
track. The portable option would price approximately at $9,000-$10,000 range per mile
of track.
Figure 5: Connection between the Access Points and the customer equipment achieved
through a Transceiver in the Train.
The experiments conducted by HierComm, Inc. also included a test where the WiFi
devices communicated over the 5.8 GHz frequency band, instead of the 2.4 Ghz
frequency band. The 5.8 GHz band has 12 channels of 20 MHz width, and consequently
can provide better signal quality than the 2.4 GHz band. There are other devices like
microwaves, cordless phones, etc. that use the 2.4 GHz band, and could create a
significant amount of interference (with subsequent loss of signal quality) in this band. It
is highly unlikely that these sources of interference are present in significant numbers in
the train environment we are considering. The main issue with the use of 5.8 GHz
frequency bands is that only those WiFi-devices that are IEEE 802.11a compatible will
be able to use it. Devices that are IEEE 802.11b/g compatible only use the 2.4GHz
frequency band and will require additional equipment on board for complete connectivity.
The quotes from HierComm, Inc. price this option at $240,000 for a 34 mile UPN
segment. The interoperability issues with the common IEEE 802.11b/g devices would
make this, albeit cheaper option, less desirable.
In summary, ad-hoc wireless mesh architectures like the one shown in figure 5, can
provide reliable, good quality internet access (measured in terms of a signal strength of at
least -80 dBm) to customers on train at a cost of approximately $10,000 per mile of track.
This can serve as the base line for alternate scenarios described below.
WiMax (IEEE 802.16a)
WiMax, which stands for Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access, is a term
that is used to refer to the IEEE 802.16a standard. This standard uses the 2 GHz to 66
GHz frequency band and provides (theoretically) a data-transfer rate of about 75 Mbps.
Frequency bands above 11 GHz require a line-of-sight connection between
communicating hosts. The 2 GHz to 11 GHz bands permit non-line-of-sight
communication.
This technology is compatible with WiFi technologies described earlier. A typical
scenario would involve WiFi-enabled devices at the customers premise to connect to
IEEE 802.11 compliant access points, which are connected to a non-line-of-sight, pointto-multipoint IEEE 802.16a compatible access point. The 802.16a compliant access
point can communicate directly to an out-of-sight tower. These 802.16a compliant
towers are then backhauled through a series of IEEE 802.16 compliant, line-of-sight
towers to the internet, or, the local telephone company.
As of today, this technology is not available in its entirety. The infrastructural modalities
for the wide-deployment of this technology are quite involved in the context of providing
internet access to passengers on trains. In a sense, one could adopt the scenario in figure
5 for this technology too. The access points in this figure have to be replaced by IEEE
802.16a compliant towers that are spaced about 4 to 5 miles apart along the length of the
track. At locations where the tracks are close to the fiber optic networks (cf. figure 3), a
line-of-sight backhaul can be provided between the track-side IEEE 802.16a compliant
towers and the internet. Alternately, we can “mix-and-match” WiFi and WiMax
technologies to arrive at a technology-mix that is more economical. That is, portions of
the track can be served by WiFi-compliant access-points, others can be served by
WiMax-compliant non-line-of-sight access points, and this mixture of access-points
could be backhauled to the wired network using WiFi- or WiMax-compliant devices.
While this is a little bit of an over-simplification, the reason for the product-mix could be
that WiFi devices are cheaper, but have smaller range; WiMax devices are not cheap, but
have larger range.
Our preliminary search for vendors seem to suggest that this technology is not as widely
deployed as WiFi, and the standards are not completely adhered to by commercial
vendors. This is a promising, but not yet mature, technology that can be a viable option
for providing internet access to trains.
Cellular 3G
The First Generation Cellular (1G) systems were originally introduced in the early
1980’s and the service was entirely analog. The Second Generation (2G) systems
introduced in the mid-1990’s were digital. These two systems used what is known as
circuit switching, where a virtual circuit is established between the communication
parties. The virtual circuit can be thought of as a pair of wires that connected the two
parties involved in the conversation. At the end of the conversation these pair of wires
are disconnected, and made available to others who need them. The first aspect where
the Third Generation (3G) cellular systems diverged from the previous ones is that 3G
systems involved packet switching as opposed to circuit switching.
Here the voice
communication between two parties are enclosed into packets that are routed through the
network and re-assembled in the order they were sent before it is relayed to the party at
the other end. There are several “intermediate generation” systems between 2G and 3G.
The most common version of 2G systems is the Global System Mobile (GSM) system.
This system when combined with what is known as the General Packet Radio Service
(GPRS) is commonly referred to as the 2.5G cellular system. The 2.75G system is a
GSM system combined with something called the Enhanced Data Rate for GSM
Evolution (EDGE).
Reference2 contains a comprehensive tutorial on the state-of-art on 3G cellular telephony.
This reference also indicates the current roadblocks to the deployment of 3G services
within the cellular service industry, which are not repeated here in the interest of space.
The following quote from Sam May, US Bancorp Piper Jaffray, taken from this reference
says it all:
“We believe the shelf life of 2.5G and 2.75G will be significantly longer than most
pundits have predicted. Operators need to gain valuable experience in how to
market packet data services before pushing forward with the construction of new
3G networks.“
According the cited reference, if cellular 3G systems are indeed widely deployed in the
future a customer with a 3G-enabled device on the trains can see data transfer rates of
384 Kbps while moving (which is sufficient for internet access), assuming the providers
have sufficient infrastructure to cover the areas where the train tracks are located. It is
not exactly clear if and when wide-scale 3G deployment would be seen in the market
place.
It is important to note that although cellular coverage maps (cf.
http://www.cellphone.homestead.com/coveragemaps_deadcellzones.html) seem to
indicate a strong coverage in almost all regions in the state of Illinois, these coverage
maps are for voice calls and not for data-transfer (which will require persistent and
stronger signals).
In conclusion, if and when there is widely deployed 3G cellular coverage in the state of
Illinois, it can be a strong contender for providing internet access to passengers on trains.
The time-line for this deployment is not exactly clear. Experiments conducted using
2
http://www.nmscommunications.com/file/3G_Tutorial.pdf
wireless cards from commercial cellular service providers by HierComm, Inc. suggest
that this is not a viable option in the 34 mile segment of the UPN line. It is most likely
that a similar experiment conducted down-state (as opposed to the Greater Chicago area)
would yield less encouraging results.
Non-Technical Issues
The previous discussions have all centered around establishing the technical feasibility of
providing internet access to passengers on trains. We now turn our attention to a few
non-technical issues that can be significant roadblocks to deployment.
Security and Authentication
It is important to secure access to network irrespective of the chosen technology. This
discussion on security and management assumes WiFi technologies are chosen for
deployment. These points are equally valid, with appropriate modifications, to the
WiMax option as well. However this discussion is moot as far as cellular systems are
concerned as they have stronger authentication, security and billing procedures.
Network access can be secured through WEP key-management. This will require the
personnel on board the train to distribute and manage (i.e. change the keys on a regular
basis) the WEP keys. One could draw a parallel between this and what is usually done
in commercial eateries that provide free internet access as a value-added service to their
customers. The employers of these premises are required to distribute, and change the
WEP keys. This will require buy-in from the train service providers.
An alternative to consider would be to re-direct any access to a common gateway where
the users are authenticated (as paying customers). This is a common procedure among
hotels that provide internet access to their clientele. This will require additional backoffice support and billing-infrastructure to be handled by the service provider and could
add to the cost.
Track- and Train-Side Infrastructure
Access points for the WiFi or WiMax options would require the installation of
approximately 2’ x 1’ x 1’ form-factor that houses the relevant equipment and an external
(possibly, directional) antenna. These would have to be mounted on a pole that is at
least 20 feet off the ground in the right-of-way. The service providers might be required
to pay a rental fee for these installations to the owners of the right-of-way. This
recurring expenditure would have to be offset by revenues generated for any option to be
viable.
The fixed-train solution (cf. figure 5) would require buy-in from the train service
providers. For example, the train-cars of a train service provider could be in the state of
Illinois on a particular day and a different state the next. In effect the provider would
have to either modify all train-cars, or, manage the train-car assignments, so that internet
service can be guaranteed to all its customers in the state of Illinois. If the train service
provider is also the internet service provider there could be a strong incentive for these
modifications. This would depend on the estimated revenue generated by internet service.
Fair-Estimates of Consumer Interest
The vision of providing internet access to passengers on trains is technically feasible.
But the issues raised above require a “business-side” analysis before it can be translated
into reality. It is important to estimate the revenue that such a venture can generate for a
service provider. It is important to know if there is lack of consumer-support for any
reasonable price-structure that can provide appropriate pay-back. A thorough approach,
which will require more time, would involve conducting consumer surveys on different
segments to gauge support. This could be left to the service providers, but if there is a
very strong support, it might make more sense for the State of Illinois to take on the role
of a service provider (through an appropriate channel).
In this case appropriate
incentive schemes have to be devised to keep the train-service providers interest in the
project.
“Dual-Use” Incentives
WiMax and Cellular 3G require significant capital investment from the providers. We
view these solutions as “dual use” solutions. For instance, a provider of internet service
on trains through these technologies can also provide multi-media access to remote areas
in the state of Illinois. Assuming there no significant regulated-monopoly barriers, this
could be a better option for the citizens of Illinois. The larger consumer-base that such
“dual-use” can provide may be enough of an incentive for these service providers to enter
the market. Having said that, it is important to keep in mind that today these technologies
are no where close to what they promise.
Conclusion
The vision of providing internet access to passengers on trains is certainly technically
feasible. The experiments conducted by HeirComm, Inc., using WiFi technology suggest
that the infrastructural cost would be in the vicinity of $10,000 per mile of track.
WiMax and Cellular 3G technologies are strong contenders under ideal circumstances.
However, these technologies have suffered from pushback and are not available in their
promised-form in the market to date.
There are several non-technical issues that can become roadblocks to the vision proposed
by the Illinois Legislature. It is not hard to see that investment decisions will be based on
the estimate of the customer-base for internet service on trains. We recommend a
marketing survey of passengers as an important next step.
Biography of the Author
Professor Ramavarapu “RS” Sreenivas is an Associate Professor of Industrial and
Enterprise Systems Engineering (http://www.iese.uiuc.edu/) at the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign. He is also a Research Associate Professor at the Coordinated
Sciences Laboratory (http://www.csl.uiuc.edu/) and the Information Trust Institute
(http://www.iti.uiuc.edu/) at the University.
He received his Bachelors degree in
Electrical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) at Madras, India in
1985. He then obtained his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Carnegie Mellon University in
Pittsburgh, PA in 1987 and 1990 respectively. From 1990 to 1992 he was a Postdoctoral Fellow in Decision and Control at Harvard University in Cambridge, MA. He
has been at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign since 1992. He is a Senior
Member of the Institute of Electric and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), and has been as
Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. He has featured in
the “Incomplete list of Instructors ranked Excellent” at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign on many occasions.
His publications that are relevant to the present project include:
1. R. Gummadi, K. Jung, D. Shah and R.S. Sreenivas, “Feasible rate allocation in
wireless networks,” To appear in INFOCOM-2008.
2. N. Singh and R.S. Sreenivas, “On Distributed Algorithms that Enforce
Proportional Fairness in Ad-hoc Wireless Networks,” In Proceedings of the 5th
Intl. Symposium on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless
Networks (WiOpt-07), April 2007, Limassol, Cyprus.
3. N. Singh and R.S. Sreenivas, “Approximating Flow-Based Proportional Fairness
in Ad-hoc Wireless Networks,” Session T1s06p04, Phy/MAC Track, IEEE
Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), Hong Kong,
March, 2007.
4. V. Kawadia, S. Narayanaswamy, R. Rozovsky, R. S. Sreenivas, and P. R. Kumar,
“Protocols for Media Access Control and Power Control in Wireless Networks,”
In Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 19351940, Orlando, FL, December, 2001.
5. A. Yassine, R.S. Sreenivas and J. Zhu, “Managing the exchange of information in
product development,” European Journal of Operations Research, Volume 184,
Issue 1, January 2008, Pages 311-326.
HierComm, Inc.
744 Winston Way
Hartland, WI 53029
Phone: (262)367-5857
Fax: (262)546-1742
E-mail: [email protected]
FINAL REPORT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
BROADBAND WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
for
CHICAGO METRA
December 17, 2007
Submitted to:
Mark Kinkade, PMP
Bureau Chief – Bureau of Information Processing
Illinois Department of Transportation
2500 S. Duksen Parkway
Springfield, IL 62764
Introduction
In response to the Illinois Department of Transportation’s request for an Internet access
communications system on all passenger rail systems in Illinois, HierComm, Inc. has
conducted a feasibility study to determine the potential ability of its enhanced WiFi
communications technology to provide low cost, high speed data communications to rail
passengers in the State of Illinois beginning with initial deployment on the Metra rail
network serving the Chicago area. This WiFi-compatible but performance-enhanced
version of IEEE Standard 802.11g is known as SERT for Shannon-Enhanced Radio
Technology. Shannon’s Law determines the capacity of any communications channel
based on its bandwidth and its signal-to-noise ratio. Most advances in wireless
communications to date have been based on the more efficient use of bandwidth, but
SERT emphasizes enhancements of the signal-to-noise ratio. The SERT wireless
communications system was originally developed to provide very low cost broadband
wireless networks in rural areas where population densities are low and the deployment
economics very challenging. SERT wireless networks employ sectoral topologies and
high gain active directional antennas to extend the WiFi range and drastically lower the
costs of network deployment. In the rural town of Wayne in Southern Wisconsin,
HierComm was able to deploy a broadband wireless WiFi network with only four
antenna sites (access points) covering a 36 square mile area. This development in
advanced broadband wireless communications for rural America was sponsored by a
grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The goal of this grant was to develop a
broadband communications system suitable for cost effective deployment in low
population density rural regions. The Wayne network deployment is witness to the
success of this development. The cost of such a network would be only around $100,000.
SERT WiFi communications technology also lends itself very well to the proposed rail
line wireless network. The small antenna beamwidth requirements of a rail line network
further enhance the performance potential of a SERT/WiFi network beyond that already
achieved in rural broadband deployment. For this reason, the SERT/WiFi broadband
wireless communications system is believed to offer the most cost effective alternative
for high speed WiFi-based data transmission services for the Illinois passenger rail
network.
System Design Alternatives
Five alternative network configurations were evaluated during the feasibility study:
1. Access Point Direct Infrastructure
-In this configuration, rail passengers will communicate directly from their
laptop computers with the nearest access point along the rail line.
-This configuration because of its reduced range will require the largest
number of access points and the highest infrastructure costs.
-Network design supported by field measurements confirmed this choice as
having the highest AP density and highest cost infrastructure as detailed
below.
-22. Fixed Train-Mounted Network Infrastructure
-This configuration provides a fixed transceiver-router in each of the
passenger trains (set of rail cars).
-This configuration resulted in the lowest access point density and the lowest
infrastructure cost as shown in the design and field studies below.
3. Portable Train-Mounted Network Infrastructure
-In this configuration, the train transceiver is portable but still provides for a
high performance wireless network.
-This configuration requires only a slightly higher access point density and
infrastructure cost than the fixed mobile transceiver.
-Greater flexibility with a high performance/cost ratio results from selecting
this configuration.
4. Existing Mobile Cellular Network
-In this configuration, Internet access would be achieved using an existing
cellular network service converted to WiFi signals by conversion equipment
in each passenger train.
-This configuration option would be the slowest of all of the alternatives and
not truly broadband in throughput as defined for this operation.
5. Higher Frequency WiFiA Infrastructure
-This configuration is a variation of the first and second infrastructure options
listed above in which the 5.8 GHz frequency is used instead of 2.4 GHz to
avoid radio interference.
-The need for this alternative depends on the amount of interference
encountered during field testing. If radio interference at 2.4 GHz becomes an
obstacle, one of the 5 GHz frequency bands could be used for network
communications with a radio frequency conversion unit in the train providing
2.4 GHz local data transmission for passengers.
Work Plan Activities
Work activities during the feasibility study were carried out in the following time
sequence:
1. Network Modeling-Based System Design
Preliminary network infrastructure designs for the UP-N Metra rail line for four of
the five system alternatives were completed using EDX Signal TM radio
propagation modeling software and the EGS Clutter, Terrain, Vector database.
This modeling package allows for experimental placement of access points and
subsequent determination of signal levels along the rail line to determine the
required spacing of access points for a specified level of performance and service.
-3The remote receiver signal enhancement capabilities will vary for each of the four
alternatives depending on whether a laptop computer, fixed high gain receiver or
portable high gain receiver is employed in the wireless communications system.
The end result is a set of four UP-N rail line designs that also are cognizant of the
track direction and the surrounding area conditions. In addition to producing
preliminary network infrastructure designs, network modeling also provides
guidance to field testing in establishing the approximate access point spacing for
each of the infrastructure alternatives. Without such guidance, more extensive
field measurements would be required. With this design sequence approach, field
testing provides both confirmation and parameter adjustments of the preliminary
network design.
2. Field Test Equipment Assembly and Checkout
Field testing procedures for the rail line wireless network will be similar to those
used by HierComm in its wireless plan testing for rural and suburban applications.
In previous testing, a vehicle with access point transceiver equipment including a
20 foot antenna mast was parked at a proposed access point. A second vehicle
then roamed the proposed coverage area mapping audio signal levels and signalto-noise (SNR) parameter data throughout the area. Such data would provide the
basis for evaluating the efficacy of the access point location. By mapping all of
the access points needed for community coverage, the preliminary modelingbased network plan will be both modified and confirmed.
In this rail line-oriented application, the functional characteristics of the
communication equipment used in field testing remain basically the same as in
rural wireless networks with the exception of the antennas employed. With the
fixed train-mounted network, the following antenna specifications apply:
a. Access Point Antenna
gain – 18 dBi
beamwidth – 22 degrees
b. Remote Transceiver Antenna
gain – 15 dBi
beamwidth – 30 degrees
For the portable train-mounted network, the access point antenna is the same, but
the remote antenna is omnidirectional with a gain of:
Remote Omnidirectional Antenna
Gain – 9 dBi
The test equipment configuration differs also in that the remote equipment must
be portable rather than truck mounted since it must be hand carried along the rail
-4line. The access point (AP) equipment is similar to that used in rural-suburban
networks field tests. AP equipment is truck-mounted with the directional antenna
on a 20 foot mast attached to the trailer hitch at the rear of the truck. The AP and
remote equipment were assembled in preparation for field testing.
Field Testing
The purpose of pre-deployment field testing in wireless communications system design is
to verify and/or correct the preliminary network design based on radio propagation
modeling. Although modeling-based designs have proven quite accurate particularly in
rural wireless networks, there are at least two major sources of error:
1. Physical modeling approximation
-A radio propagation model is only an approximation of radio wave
propagation behavior. Although HierComm has found the Anderson 2D
physical model that HierComm employs remarkably accurate in its estimation
of radio signal levels at varying ranges from access point sites, there are small
errors even in free space radio propagation that must that must be corrected in
field calibration testing studies.
2. Terrain/Clutter Database Resolution and Accuracy
-A larger source of error in radio propagation channels involving natural
(trees) and structural (buildings) “clutter” is the resolution and accuracy of the
database. While terrain features are typically accurately defined, clutter
definition gathered from NASA shuttle and satellite photography has
resolution and accuracy limitations that are particularly noteworthy in
urbanized areas. The narrow path corridor of a rail line is particularly subject
to model-based signal attenuation from clutter overlap that results in greater
signal attenuation than actually occurs in the rail line environment.
With such prior knowledge of radio propagation-based network design limitations, a field
testing program was carried out in which a truck vehicle with a mast-mounted antenna
served as a mobile access point. Parking the AP vehicle parallel to the tracks near a
railroad crossing made it possible to measure signal levels and signal-to-noise ratios with
a portable remote transceiver equipped with each of the two antenna types (directional
and omnidirectional) to be used in the fixed and portable train-mounted network
alternatives. The access point direct measurements can be made with a WiFi-equipped
laptop computer. The radio propagation model-based designs provided guidance on the
probable range of measurements. Such guidance greatly expedited the field testing
process.
Field testing was originally planned for two sections of the UP-N Metra rail line – on the
northern end in the Zion-Waukegan vicinity in Lake County and in the urban Chicago
area between Rogers and Ravenwood. Testing in these two locations was necessary
-5because of shortcomings in the clutter-terrain database. Because of resolution limitations
of the database, communications pathways will appear to have attenuation from buildings
and other structures that are exaggerated. This limitation is demonstrated in the closer
spacing of urban as opposed to the more open rural areas. Field measurements in both
types of environment will allow for correction factors to be applied to the preliminary
infrastructure plan that will expand the AP spacing in more populated urban areas.
Weather conditions in the Chicago area during the week of December 9th made field
measurements on the UP-N rail line extremely difficult. Such conditions along with the
need to arrange for personnel support from the Union Pacific Railroad resulted in a
decision to shift the test site area to Southeastern Wisconsin. Although weather
conditions were equally harsh in Wisconsin, abandoned rail lines in Wisconsin now used
as bike trails represented an ideal test environment for model verification. These bike
paths were also clear of snow from plowing and presented no danger to Company
personnel. A particularly ideal old rain line, the Glacial Drumlin Trail, was selected
since it offered a mixture of urban and rural settings east and west of Waukesha,
Wisconsin.
Testing was carried out on all three advanced WiFi alternatives – the fixed train-mounted,
the portable train-mounted and the access point direct. Access point spacing
measurements were based on a combination of signal levels as measured in dBmW
(decibels referenced to one milliwatt) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as measured in dB
(decibels). With a signal level standard of -65 dBmW and an SNR standard of 30 dB, the
following access point spacing distances were estimated for the three WiFi alternatives:
1. Fixed Train-Mounted – 4.0 miles
2. Portable Train-Mounted – 3.0 miles
3. Access-Point Direct – 0.75 miles
These straight line, open path distance measurements now allow for model recalibration.
The actual access point spacing distances will be model-determined based on track
direction changes, terrain and other signal attenuation factors. The preliminary (before
field testing) and the final (after field testing) network plans for the UP-N line are
detailed and illustrated in the next section of the report.
The original set of wireless communications alternatives considered for Illinois passenger
rail broadband communications were WiFi, WiMAX and existing third generation (3G)
cellular networks such as Verizon Wireless CDMA network or AT&T’s GSM network.
These networks have the advantage of already being in place and ready for use. They
have, however, significant disadvantages particularly their much slower throughput levels
especially in the upstream direction and their need for CDMA/WiFi or GSM/WiFi
conversion equipment on each passenger train. To provide a fair comparison, however,
field measurements using a Verizon Wireless Qualcomm Model V620 PC card installed
in a laptop computer were evaluated for throughput performance during the
-6week of December 9th. The CDMA technology used by Verizon Wireless is believed to
be representative of the best third generation cellular wireless data communications
offered in the U.S. market. In a comprehensive field evaluation of all of the cellular
wireless carriers performed by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission in 2006, the Verizon Wireless network out-performed the other five wireless
carriers using either second generation (2G) or third generation (3G) technology. This
field test sequence employed the broadband access (3G) option on the Verizon PC card.
Both download and upload throughput performances were evaluated with the following
results:
Download Throughput Performance
Test period - 3 hours
Data samples - 4,969
Average throughput - 1.31 megabits/second
Minimum throughput - 0.01 megabits/second
Maximum throughput - 1.69 megabits/second
Standard deviation 0.14 megabits/second
Upload Throughput Performance
Test period - 6 hours
Data samples - 5,767
Average throughput - 138.1 kilobits/second
Minimum throughput - 1.6 kilobits/second
Maximum throughput - 191.5 kilobits/second
Standard deviation 23.7 kilobits/second
From the above, it is apparent that the installed Verizon cellular option for passenger rail
broadband communications is an order of magnitude slower in the down stream direction
(1.3 vs. 13.0 Mbps) and two orders of magnitude slower in the upstream direction.
Upstream processing will be particularly frustrating for professional or business rail
travelers engaged in file transfers or other upstream-oriented communications.
UP-N Rail Line Broadband Network Designs
Fixed Train-Mounted Transceiver Network Designs
The preliminary fixed train-mounted transceiver network design for the UP-N Metra rail
line based on EDX radio propagation modeling software, the EGS terrain and clutter
database with a design signal level of -80 dBmW is shown in Map 1. Such a signal level
will provide a theoretical data throughput of at least 24 megabits per second in both
directions. The actual throughput rate will be in the 12-17 megabits per second range
based on rural Wisconsin experience. Eighteen (18) access points were required over an
approximate distance of 34 miles for AP average spacing of 1.89 miles. AP spacing is
-7much closer in urban areas because of the database limitations previously referenced.
This discrepancy is corrected below based on field measurements.
In this design, as with all of the other alternatives, backhaul links can be provided at
selected AP locations depending on the availability and location of fiber gateways. Other
AP sites not located near fiber gateways would backhaul through adjacent access points.
It is difficult to finalize the backhaul design until the fiber gateway locations are
identified. Since a 5.8 GHz backhaul radio will be located at each AP, the system is
flexible in providing numerous backhaul options.
The revised fixed train-mounted transceiver network design based on field measurementbased recalibration is shown in Map 5. The signal level threshold for access point
spacing was elevated to -65 dBmW in order to provide an increased signal loss safety
margin. Such an improvement in potential network performance was made possible by
the better than expected field measurements. The number of access points was reduced
from eighteen (18) to eight (8). The open space nature of rail line transmission results in
greatly reduced radio signal attenuation. Such low signal attenuation coupled with the
high gain active antennas employed allow for a low cost, long range WiFi infrastructure.
The average access point spacing distance expands to 4.25 miles. It is important to
reemphasize that each access point is bi-directional, so that the link distance of each of
the two transceivers at each AP is half the spacing distance or 2.12 miles.
Portable Train-Mounted Network Design
The preliminary portable train-mounted transceiver network design for the same UP-N
Metra rail line using the same software, database tools and -80 dBmW design standard is
shown in Map 2. Twenty-two (22) access points were required over the same 34 mile rail
line distance for an average AP spacing of 1.54 miles. Again, this number of access
points was reduced after adjustments from field testing. Backhaul connections in this
design would be handled in the same manner as in the previous fixed remote design.
The revised portable train-mounted transceiver network design derived from field testbased model recalibration is shown in Map 6. Using the same -65 dBmW signal level
standards, the number of access points was reduced 50% from twenty-two (22) to eleven
(11) for an average AP spacing of 3.1 miles. The shorter spacing distance results from
the need to use an omnidirectional antenna rather than the higher gain directional antenna
used in the fixed transceiver design. Additional losses will result from the interior
location of the portable transceiver on the train.
Access-Point Direct Network Design
This design requires no wireless communications equipment on the moving train.
Lacking local transceivers and routers, laptop computer users will communicate directly
with access point transceivers along the rail line. The low transmit power and receiver
-8sensitivity of the laptop computer is the weak link in the communications chain. The
combined effect of these two shortcomings is the need for 65 access points to service the
34 mile line for an average AP spacing of 0.52 miles. Once again, some reduction in this
AP density may be expected after field test adjustments. The preliminary model-based
design is illustrated in Map 3.
The revised access point direct network design resulting from field test model
recalibration is shown in Map 7. Based on the same signal level standards, the number of
access points was reduced from sixty-five (65) to forty-three (43) with an average AP
spacing distance of 0.79 miles. With each AP transceiver ranging 0.40 miles (about 2100
feet), this distance exceeds normal WiFi range coverage because of the high gain
antennas at each access point.
Higher Frequency Fixed Train-Mounted Network Design
The above three network design alternatives are all based on operation in the 2.4 GHz
unlicensed frequency band. Field testing will determine the current state of radio
interference in this frequency band. Because the proposed wireless network designs are
based on high gain, narrow-beam, point-to-point network structures, it is believed that
such radio interference should not present a major problem. In the event, however, that
such interference is determined to present an unreliable noisy environment at 2.4 GHz, a
WiFiA higher frequency 5.8 GHz design has been model designed but not field tested.
This network design shown in Map 4 was prepared using the same software, database and
standards as the other 2.4 GHz band designs. Since most laptop computer WiFi
communications operate at 2.4 GHz, only those two alternatives with train-mounted
equipment are viable for this alternative design. A 5.8/2.4 GHz frequency conversion
function on the train must be provided with this alternative. Only the fixed train-mounted
network alternative was evaluated. The design requires only 16 access points along the
UP-N rail line for an average AP spacing of 2.12 miles.
It may seem somewhat surprising that the 5.8 GHz WiFiA network is lowest in
infrastructure cost since higher frequencies result in higher radio wave attenuation. This
frequency-based attenuation factor, however, is more than compensated by the increased
transmitter power allowed by the FCC in this frequency band and the higher gain
provided by the directional antenna.
Field testing was not performed in the 5.8 GHz frequency band. If radio frequency
interference problems are encountered in the pilot network operation, the frequency of
the system could be shifted from the 2.4 GHz band to the 5.8 GHz band by an exchange
of antennas at each access point since each AP transceiver is designed to operate in either
2.4 GHz or 5.8 GHz band. An option will be offered in the Pilot Project budget to
evaluate 5.8 GHz operation during the pilot demonstration period.
-9Network Design Summary
The fixed train-mounted transceiver network design with 8 access points offers the lowest
infrastructure cost alternative using either the 2.4 GHz or the 5.8 GHz band. The 5.8
GHz design would still allow the rail passenger user to employ the standard 802.11g, 2.4
GHz network interface card. The portable train-mounted transceiver network design with
11 access points, however, seems to be the most attractive alternative with only a slightly
higher infrastructure cost. The portable mobile transceiver design requires no permanent
changes to rail car equipment and offers significant flexibility in network operation.
Multiple mobile transceivers may be used on a given passenger train depending on its
length and the expected number of users. The access point direct method requires no
fixed or portable equipment on the train, but it will have an infrastructure cost at least
four times that of the other two network design alternatives. The 5.8 GHz network
alternative has advantages beyond lower susceptibility to radio interference. It should be
evaluated during the pilot demonstration program.
The WiMAX Alternative
WiMAX along with the advanced, long range version of WiFi proposed here was
suggested as an alternative technology for this passenger rail broadband application.
Evaluation of the current state of WiMAX (IEEE Standard 802.16) strongly indicates its
unsuitability for deployment at this time for the following reasons:
1. Cost
WiMAX access point infrastructure equipment currently costs about three
times the equivalent WiFi equipment with no performance advantage.
Although the access protocol on WiMAX is more sophisticated than that of
WiFi, this slight advantage would be lost in any event because of the need to
convert to WiFi in order to serve current passenger train users equipped only
with WiFi network interface cards.
2. Emphasis on Licensed Frequency Bands
Most WiMAX communications equipment is being developed for the licensed
2.5 GHz and 3.5 GHz frequency bands. Obtaining a license for these bands
would be extremely costly if it could be obtained at all. The narrow rail line
corridors of the communications channels also would not justify an area wide
license. The only justification for using licensed bands is their freedom from
radio interference. The high signal levels and the directive nature of the
broadband rail network should make it immune from 2.4 GHz band radio
interference. If significant interference is experience during the pilot
demonstration, conversion to the less used unlicensed 5.8 GHz band may be
accomplished with minor equipment changes.
-103. Ease of Future Conversion to WiMAX
The innovative features of the proposed SERT/WiFi System are all in the
radio frequency (RF) “front end” part of the system. This RF front end will
work equally well with WiMAX as with WiFi technology. If lower cost
unlicensed band WiMAX with performance advantages becomes available in
the future, the system could be converted to WiMAX at a fraction of the total
system cost.
UP-Rail Line Budget Estimates
This budget is prepared for State of Illinois planning purposes even though some items of
a UP-N Rail Line Pilot Demonstration Program such as the cost of access point mounting
structures, electrical power connections and Internet gateway connections are still
uncertain. These budget items will be verified in a formal cost proposal by HierComm,
Inc. Despite these budget item uncertainties, the overall cost per mile budget estimate is
believed to be accurate within a range of +/-10%.
Even a preliminary budget estimate on the UP-N rail line must contend with three current
unknown cost categories:
1. Backhaul – Gateway Connections
The availability and cost of Internet gateway interconnections is not yet well
defined. The cost of backhaul equipment is included in the budgetary
estimate below, but the number of backhaul connections is still unknown. The
most direct solution is a backhaul connection for each access point, but such
an approach would require gateway availability in the vicinity of each access
point. Such availability must still be determined. The budget estimates below
assume a backhaul for each AP.
2. Electric Power Connections
The availability and cost of electric power connections are still unknown.
3. Access Point Pole and Mounting Structure
Uniform positioning of access point directional antennas and the lack of other
suitable antenna mount structures make it advisable to adopt a standard access
point pole and mounting structure. Network performance critically depends
on the parallel alignment of directional antennas with the rail line.
With these uncertainties in mind, initial budget estimates for network access points and
then for each of the four alternative network designs are tabulated below:
Access Point Budget
-111. Transceiver Modules
2 @ $1500
2. Directional Antennas
2 @ $55
3. High Gain Amplifiers
2 @ $440
4. Auxiliary Components
and Equipment
5. Installation and Startup
6. Access Point Pole and
Mounting Structure
Total, AP Budget
= $3,000
=
$110
=
$880
= $850
= $3,500
= $5,000
$13,340
Fixed Train-Mounted Network Budget
1. Access Points
8 @$13,340 =
$106,720
2. Internet Gateway Connections
8 @$5,000 =
$40,000
3. Network Monitoring System = $20,000
4. Project Management
and Engineering =
$178,800
$345,520
Portable Train-Mounted Network Budget
1. Access Points
11 @$13,340 =
$146,740
11 @$5,000 =
$55,000
and Engineering =
$178,800
$400,540
Access Point Direct Network Budget
1. Access Points
43 @$13,340 =
$573,620
43 @$5,000 =
$215,000
and Engineering =
$200,000
$1,048,620
-125.8 GHz Portable Train-Mounted Network Option
Task: Modify and test network operation at 5.8 GHz frequency band.
Budget: Additional $45,000
Portable Train-Mounted Transceiver/Routers
For the portable train-mounted transceiver network design, portable remote units are
estimated at $800 per unit. A budget for 20 units or $16,000 is recommended.
A budget for the fixed train-mounted equipment is estimated at $2,000 per unit including
installation for a 20-unit budget of $40,000.
Note 1: No budgetary costs for property purchase or rental is included in this budget.
Note 2: No operating costs for fiber Internet service is included in this budget. A level
of upload and download throughput performance must be specified before these
operating costs can be estimated.
Instructional Guide
on Using the
Interactive PDF
Map
CD Installation Instructions
Windows Operating System Users
The Interactive PDF Map requires Adobe Reader for viewing. If you do not have
Adobe Reader installed, please visit www.adobe.com to install the free Adobe
Reader software.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Insert the enlcosed CD into your CD ROM drive.
Double-click the “My Computer” folder on your computer desktop.
Double-click CD ROM drive (i.e., F: under Devices with Removable Storage).
Double-click the BroadbandProject.PDF.
Using the PDF Interactive Map
1. The map opens at the statewide level with all map layers displayed. Use the
standard Adobe Reader tools to zoom in/out, and pan around the map. This
is an interactive map which contains several layers which may be “turned on”
or off to provide additional reference frames for viewing.
2. To take advantage of the ability to interactively display various layers, first leftclick on the “Layers” tab which is in the upper left of the page. Then left-click on
the “+” next to “BroadbandRailAccess.pdf” to display all the map layers.
Click on “Layers”
tab first.
Click on the
“+” button
second.
3. A list of available map layers will be displayed. At the start, all layers are
displayed. To view only selected layers, simply left-click in the check box to the
left of the layer name to toggle off display of the layer on the map.
When the “eye”
symbol is shown
in the check box,
the corresponding
layer will be
displayed on the
map.
Clicking on the
“eye” toggles it
on/off allowing you
to view only
selected layers.
4. Toggle layers on or off by left-clicking with your mouse in the check box next
to the appropriate layer. The “eye” symbol will appear/disappear as you click
with your mouse. At the same time, the corresponding map layer will display or
disappear. This function allows you to interactively view various map layers. For
example, in the view below, several layers have been toggled off (Interstate
highway shields, interstate highways, town names, towns, Illinois House District
Numbers, and Illinois House Districts). This allows for a less cluttered view of
Senate districts, Metra and Amtrak lines.
5. In the view below, other layers are toggled on/off in order to see House
districts, Amtrak lines, interstate highways, and towns.
Notice check boxes toggled
on/off to display only
selected layers.
45
34
CED ARVIL LE
ADEL INE
FOR RESTON
BELVIDER E
DIXON
ERIE
AMT
ANN AWA N
MIN ER AL
NEPON SET
DEPU E
¦
§
¨
180
TISKILWA
39
PERU
SPRIN G VAL LEY
PUTNAM
BUR EAU JU NC TION
RIO
UTICA
KNOX
ALTON A
TOU LON
38
PRINC EVILL E
AK
AM
TR
WIL LIAMSFIELD
¦
§
¨
74
KIR KWOOD
BIGGSVIL LE
RAN SOM
38
MOKENA
BUR NH AM
SS
CAL UMET C ITY
¦
§
¨
94
GL ENWOOD
FL OSSMOOR
LAN SING
LY NN WOOD
OLYM PIA FIELD S
CH IC AGO H TS FOR D HE IGH TS
MATTESON
FR ANK FOR T
RICH TON PAR K
PAR K FOR EST
SAUK VIL LAGE
SOUTH C HICAGO HTS
ME
UN IVE RSITY PAR K
STE GE R
80
CR ETE
PEOTON E
ESSEX
RED DICK
LIVINGSTON
MOMENC E
AROMA PARK
HOPKINS PAR K
IR WIN
HER SCH ER
CABER Y
FORD
ST AN NE
IROQUOIS
CH EBANS E
PAP IN EAU
BEAVERVIL LE
¦
§
¨
57
KEMPTON
CLIFTON
MARTINTON
DONOVAN
SAUN EMIN
ASHKU M
CU LLOM
PONTIAC
IR OQU OIS
106
BENSON
79
KANKA KEE
UN ION H ILL
CORN ELL
MIN ONK
40
BRAD LEY
SUN R IVER TER RAC E
EMINGTON
BRIMFIELD
GR AN T PARK
BOUR BONN AIS
BONFIELD
OD ELL
LONG POINT
FL ANA GA N
DU NLA P
29
HOMEWOOD
MANTEN O
BUC KINGHA M
RU TL AND
WOODFORD
TIN LEY PARK
NEW LEN OX
CAMP US
WAS HBU RN
HAR VEY
KANKAKEE
SOUTH WILMIN GTON
EAST BROOKLYN
DAN A
CH IL LICOTH E
19
15
30
MARK HAM
COUN TRY CL UB H IL LS SOUTH H OL LAN D
HAZEL CR EST TH ORN TON
GOD LEY
GA RD NER
VAR NA
KNOXVIL LE
34
DOLTON
MONEE
STR EATOR
PEORIA
EAST GA LESBU RG
81
37
BRAC EVILL E
VERON A
KIN SMAN
TOL UC A
GA LESBU RG
28
OR LAN D H IL LS
33
17
27
ALSIP CAL UMET PARK
BLU E ISL AN D
RIVER DAL E
CR ESTWOOD
ROBBINS
POSEN
MID LOTH IAN
OA K FOR EST
OR LAN D PAR K
BRAID WOOD
75
DWIGH T
LA ROSE
MERR ION ETTE PAR K
MANH ATTAN
WE NONA
SPA RLA ND
LAC ON
18
14
35
WOR TH
PAL OS PAR K
PAL OS HTS
CAR BON HIL L
COAL C ITY
DIAMOND
MAZON
MAGNOL IA
HOPEWEL L
GL ADS TON E
SENEC A
MARS EIL LES
MARSHALL
73
25
31EVERGR EEN PAR K
36
CH IC AGO R IDGE
BEECH ER
GR AN D RIDGE
LOSTAN T
VIC TOR IA
WATAGA
HEN DER SON
22
BEDFORD PA RK
JUSTICE
BUR BANK
BRIDGEV IEW
PAL OS HILL S
WIL MINGTON
TON IC A
HEN RY
32
SYMER TON
OGL ESBY
WY OM IN G
26
6
FOR ESTVIEW
CH ANN AHON
MCN ABB
37
LAFAYETTE
5
2
1
23
21
86
MIN OOKA
NAPL ATE
KANGL EY
ON EIDA
24
ELWOOD
LEONOR E
NORTH H END ER SON
HC
RI
43
8
WIL LOW SPRIN GS HOMETOWN
OA K L AWN
HICKOR Y H ILLS
82
41
SWS
JOL IET
SHOR EWOOD
4
10
9
OA K PAR K CH IC AGO
BROAD VIEW
HOMER GL EN
OTTAWA
HEN NEPIN
BRAD FOR D
3
78 RIVER FORE ST
7
14
13
40
11 12
39
MORR IS
80
76LASAL LE
85
EVA NSTON
16
RIVER GR OV E
LOCKP OR T
GRUNDY
¦§
§
¨
¦
¨
STARK
74
BIS HOP HILL
MONMOU TH
ROMEOVILL E
10
20 19
MELR OSE PA RK
NORTH L AKE
STON E PAR K
BELL WOOD
MAY WOOD
HILL SIDE
290
WIL LOWBROOK
BUR R RID GE
DAR IE N
18
8
7
20 6
2
4
5
12 1
3 13
11 16
NORR IDGE
LAGRA NGE
HINSD AL E
DOWNER S GROVE
WE STMONT
HODGKIN S
COUN TRYSIDE
WOOD RIDGE
84
NEWAR K
TR OY GR OVE
DAL ZE LL
24
KENILWORTH
WIL METTE
SCH IL LER PA RK
FR ANK LIN PARK
OA K B ROOK
47
CR EST H ILL
GA LVA
AK
PLAIN FIEL D
190
77
15
LINC OLN WOOD
¦
§
¨
LEMON T
MIL LIN GTON
LAD D
HOLL OWAYVIL LE
SEATON VIL LE
LISLE
NILES
BOLINGBR OOK
42
SAND WIC H
tra
k
CAMB RIDGE
ALPH A
OQU AWKA
OS WE GO
CH ERRY
MALD EN
PRINC ETON
WYAN ET
SHEFFIELD
WAR RE NVILL E
WIN NETKA
MORTON GROVE SKOKIE
39
294
41
355
42
WILL
YORKVIL LE
GOL F
§
¦
¨
¦
¨
¦21 §
§
¨
LOMBAR D VIL LA PARK
96NAPER VILL E
SHER IDAN
ARL IN GTON
ADD IS ON
CAR OL STREAM GL END AL E H TS
48
83
AUR ORA
LISBON
AK
46
9
17
GL ENV IE W
65 PAR K RIDGE
ITASCA
WH EATON
GL ENC OE
NORTH FIEL D
57
DES PL AINES
WOOD D ALE
BENSE NVILL E
45
HIGHL AND PAR K
MT PR OSPEC T
33
66
23
GL EN EL LYN
58
29
NORTH BROOK
PROSPEC T HTS
ELK GROVE
ROSEL LE
MONTGOMERY
SOMONAU K
MEND OTA
TR
AM
MANL IUS
ATKINS ON
AND OVER
LITTL E YORK
BNSF
50
COOK WH EEL IN G
53
ELMH UR ST
48
¦
§
¨
ARL IN GTON H TS
56
BLOOMINGD ALE
95
LAKE FORES T
59
PAL ATIN E
SCH AUM BUR G
MIL LB ROOK
LAMOILL E
KEWANEE
AMTR
RAK
BUREAU
OH IO
BUD A
WARREN
25
PLAN O
LEL AND
CED AR POINT
MARK GR AN VIL LE
STAN DAR D
ALEXIS
BIG ROC K
27
Am
36
SEATON
UP-W
30 94
RIVERWOOD S
DEER FIE LD
BUFFAL O GR OVE
HOFFM AN ESTATES
WIN FIEL D
NEW BED FOR D
GE NESEO
WOOD HU LL
HENDERSON
HINC KLE Y
KENDALL
PAW PAW
LASALLE
WAL NU T
HOOPPOLE
NEW BOSTON
28
WE ST C HICA GO
GE NEVA
EARLV IL LE
CLE VELA ND
SIL VIS CAR BON CL IFF
NEW WIN DS OR
90
DUPAGE
55
WAYN E
SUGAR GR OVE
MATH ERVIL LE
KEITH SBU RG
ELBU RN
WATERM AN
SHABB ON A
SUBL ETTE
SHER RAR D
VIOL A
MAPLE PAR K
AMBOY
DEER GR OVE
HENRY
VERN ON HIL LS
IN DIAN C RE EK
LONG GROVE
LINC OLN SHIRE
ROLL ING MEAD OWS
44STR EAMWOOD
NO A UR OR A
TAMPIC O
OR ION
ALED O
¦
§
¨
22
BATAVIA
90
REYN OLD S
JOY
54
ST C HAR LES
CORTL AND
LEE
COLON A
MERCER
IN VER NESS
SOUTH BAR RIN GTON
BARTLE TT HAN OVER PARK
STE WA RD
WE ST BR OOKLYN COMPTON
RAPID S C ITY
72
¦
§
¨
88
ASHTON
FR ANK LIN GROVE
HAR MON
HILL SDAL E
43
LILY L AKE
70
PROPH ETSTOWN
HAMP TON
OA K GR OVE
DEKAL B
MALTA
NEL SON
ROCK FALL S
51
SO EL GIN
VIR GIL
ROCH ELL E
LY ND ON
ELGIN
SYCAM ORE
LEE
CORD OVA
MD-W
LAKE BL UFF
METTAWA
HAWTHOR N WOOD S
BARR INGTON HILL S
49
NORTH C HIC AGO
LIBERTYV IL LE
DEER PAR K
CAR PENTER SVILL E
60
PAR K CITY
GR EEN OAK S
MUN DEL EIN
BARR INGTON
KANE
HILL CR EST
71
26
WAU CON DA
ALGONQU IN
OR EGON
ALBAN Y
52
GIL BERTS
EAST DU ND EE
SLEEP Y H OLL OWWE ST D UN DEE
PIN GREE GR OV E
HAMP SHIRE
GE NOA
BUR LINGTON
CR ESTON
EAST MOLINE
COAL VAL LEY
KIN GSTON
WAU KEGAN
GU RN EE
ROUN D L AKE PA RK
CARY
LAKE BAR RIN GTON
N BAR RINGTON
TR OUT VALL EY
FOX R IVE R GROVE
LAKE ZUR ICH
KIL DE ER
HU NTLEY
KIR KL AND
WHITESIDE
62
64LAKE IN THE H ILL S
POLO
STE RL IN G
VOLO
CRYS TAL L AKE
LAKEWOOD
31
ROUN D L AKE GR AYSLAK E
HAINE SVILL E
OA KWOOD H ILL S
FOX R IVE R VALL EY GARD ENS
TOWER L AKES
UN ION
DAVIS JUN CTION
MIL LE DGEVILL E
FU LTON
ROUN D L AKE HTS
ROUN D L AKE BCH
TH IRD L AKE
LAKEM OOR
HOLID AY H IL LS
DEKALB
BYRON
LEAF RIVER
CH ADWICK
TH OMSON
FOX L AKE
JOH NS BUR G
MCC UL LOM LA KE
MARE NGO
CH ERRY VAL LEY
NEW MILL FOR D
STIL LMAN VALL EY
MORR ISON
RINGWOOD
WIN TH ROP HA RBOR
ZION
BEACH PA RK
OL D MILL CR EEK
WAD SWORTH
LIND ENH UR ST
LAKE VIL LA
BUL L VALL EY
MT MOR RIS
ROCK ISLAND
MOLINE
OGLE
LAN ARK
COLETA
MD-N
MCH ENR Y
SHAN NON
SAVAN NA
WON DER LAKE
TIMBE RL ANE
POPLAR GR OVE
ROCK FOR D
67
CARROLL
MT C ARR OLL
GR EEN WOOD
UP-N
NCS
ANTIOCH
LAKE
PRAIR IE GR OV EISL AN D LAK E
WIN NEBA GO
GE RMAN VA LL EY
PORT B YRON
MIL AN
NORTH C ALE DONIA
PECATONICA
PEARL CITY
280
32
63
HAR VA RD
CAPR ON
61
SPRIN G GROVE
WOOD STOC K
HAN OVER
¦
§
¨
UP-NW
RICH MOND
HEBR ON
RIDOTT
FR EEPOR T
ROCK ISL AND
39
LOVES PARK
ELIZABETH
AND ALU SIA
¦
§
¨
MACH ESN EY PAR K
STOC KTON
Illinois
Broadband Access on
Passenger Rail
69
ROSC OE
68
DAVIS
ROCK C ITY
DAKOTA
LEN A
BOONE
35
ROCK TON
DU RAN D
89
GA LEN A
WINNEBAGO
MCHENRY
AMTRAK
STEPHENSON
OR AN GE VIL LE
NORA
SOUTH BEL OIT
RAK
WIN SLOW
JO DAVIESS
SCAL ES MOUN D
MENOMIN EE
WAR RE N
AMT
APPLE R IVER
EAST DU BUQU E
DAN FOR TH
SPRIN G BAY
BAY VIEW GARD ENS
MAQUON
YATES CITY ELMWOOD
GE RMAN TOWN HILL S
PEORIA HTS
HANCOCK
MCDONOUGH
LOND ON MILL S
FULTON
AVON
HAN NA CITY
92WE ST PE OR IA
BARTONVIL LE
NORR IS
¦
§
¨
474
BUSH NEL L
MARIETTA
BARD OLPH
CU BA
NORM AL
SOUTH PEK IN
VERM ON T
SAN JOSE
HAVANA
BOWE N
LORAIN E
LA PRAIR IE
K
OA KFOR D
CLAYTON
ELKH ART
PETERSB UR G
BEARD STOWN
LIBERTY
VERSA IL LES
TALL UL A
MERE DOSIA
50
PLEAS ANT PLA IN S
MORGAN
BAY LIS
GR IGGSV IL LE
EXETER
VAL LE Y C ITY
DAWSON
JACKS ON VILL E
GL ASGOW
HILLVIEW
MECH AN IC SBU RG
93
MANC HE STE R
TH AYER
LER NA
SHEL BYVILL E
AM
TR
MONTGOMERY
STE WA RD SON
WITT
BUTLE R
BRIGHTON
BATC HTOWN
LAKE KA- HO
DIETERIC H
WH EEL ER
102
VAN DA LIA
ROBINSON
OB LONG
WIL LOW HILL
NEWTON
BROWNS TOWN
NEW DOU GL AS
LIVINGSTON
STOY
MASON
STE M ARIE
MUL BERR Y GR OVE
PONTOON BEAC H
MADISON
VENIC E
BROOKLYN
E S T L OU IS
SAUGET
CAH OKIA
ALORTON
CEN TR EVILL E
E C AR ON DE LET
¦
§
¨
255
MARYVIL LE
57
SUMM ERFIELD
TR
AM
BECKE MEYER
AK
¦
§
¨
57
FL ORA
ALBER S
NEW BAD EN
MASC OU TAH
GE RMAN TOWN
IU KA
HOFFM AN
BARTEL SO
64
SMITH TON
VENED Y
WAYNE
JOH NS ON VILL E
107
CEN TR AL IA
WE ST SA LEM
MT ER IE
CISNE
JEFFERSON
DIX
IR VINGTON
BONE GAP
JEFFE RSON VIL LE
MT C ARM EL
ADD IE VIL LE
ALBION
FAIRFIELD
FAYETTE VILLE
RICH VIEW
KEENE S
NASH VILL E
WOOD LAWN
ASHL EY
BROWNS
GOL DEN GATE
SIM S
ST L IB OR Y
WATERL OO
BELL MONT
KEENS BUR G
WAYN E CITY
BLU FOR D
NEW ATH ENS
VAL MEYE R
ST FR ANC IS VIL LE
WABASH
EDWARDS
KELL
WAL NU T H ILL
HOYLE TON
NEW MIND EN
OK AWV IL LE
54
PAR KER SBUR G
ALL END ALE
WAM AC
WASHINGTON
¦
§
¨
FR EEBU RG
108
CEN TR AL C ITY
DAMIAN SVILL E
BRIDGEP OR T
CAL HOUN
XENIA
SALEM
JUN CTION CITY
114
BELL EVILL E
LAWRE NC EVILL E
SUMN ER
NOBLE
CLAY CITY
OD IN
SAND OVA L
HU EY
O' FAL LON
SHILOH
SWA NSEA
MIL LS TAD T
COLU MBIA
BREES E
AVISTON
TR ENTON
RU SSELL VIL LE
CLA REMON T
ALMA
CAR LYLE
LAWRENCE
SAILOR SPR INGS
OL NEY
CLINTON
ST JAC OB
LEBAN ON
LOUISVIL LE
PATOK A
KEYESPOR T
BIR DS
RICHLAND
IOL A
KIN MU ND Y
HIGHL AND
TR OY
ST. CLAIR
FAIRVIEW HTS
113
DU PO
FL AT R OC K
CLAY
MARION
PIE RR ON
55
CASEY VILLE
¦
§
¨
255
POCAH ONTA S
MARIN E
¦
§
¨
COLL INSVIL LE
FAIRMON T
WAS HINGTON PARK
EDGEWOOD
VERN ON
GL EN C ARB ON
112
70
FAR IN A
GR AN TFORK
EDWAR DSVIL LE
¦
§
¨
270
GR AN ITE CITY
¦
§
¨
ST PE TER
56
WOOD R IVER
SMITH BORO
GR EEN VILLE
OL D R IPL EY
ALH AMBR A
ROXAN A
HAR TFOR D
SOUTH R OX ANA
MT VE RN ON
HEC KER
MONROE
LEN ZB UR G
¦
§
¨
64
RAD OM
OA KDAL E
MARISSA
BELL E RIVE
MAEYSTOWN
RANDOLPH
RED B UD
TIL DEN
BALD WIN
116
FU LTS
HAMILTON
BELL E PRAIR IE
BONN IE
GR AYVILL E
BUR NT PRA IR IE
MIL L SH OA LS
WHITE
DAH LGRE N
SPRIN GE RTON
NASON
CR OS SVILLE
IN A
58
EVA NSVIL LE
WALTONV IL LE
PERRY
COULTER VILL E
SPA RTA
RU MA
TAMAR OA
115
117
SESSER
FRANKLIN
EWIN G
ENFIELD
MCL EANS BORO
CAR MI
PIN CK NEYV IL LE
MACE DONIA
CU TL ER
ELL IS GR OV E
STE ELEV IL LE
BENTON
WE ST C ITY
NORR IS C ITY
BUC KNER
CH RISTOP HER
JACKSON
CAMP BELL H ILL
CH ESTER
NORTH C ITY
DU QU OIN
WIL LISVILL E
KASKASK IA
MAUN IE
VAL IER
PERC Y
HAN AFOR D
BROU GH TON
DOWELL
OR IENT
ELKVIL LE
VERGEN NES
ZEIGL ER
AVA
TH OMPSON VIL LE
SALINE
WE ST FR ANKFORT
NEW HAVEN
GALLATIN
OM AHA
ROYALTON
FR EEMAN SPU R
WILLIAMSON
BUSH
HU RST
ROCK WOOD
GA LATIA
RAL EIGH
JOH NS TON C ITY
DESOTO
COLP
MUR PHY SBORO
ELD OR AD O
RIDGWAY
HER RIN
WH ITE ASH
CAMB RIA
CAR TE RVILL E
ENER GY
PITTSBU RG
MUD DY
SPILLE RTOWN
CR AIN VILL E
EQUAL ITY
HAR RISBU RG
JUN CTION
SHAWN EETOWN
MARION
CAR BOND ALE
GOR HAM
OL D SH AWNEETOWN
CAR RIER MIL LS
GR AN D TOWER
UNION
AMTR
STON EFORT
CR EAL SPR IN GS
MAKAN DA
ALTO PASS
AK
PRAIR IE D U ROC HER
DU BOIS
UP-N
HARDIN
POPE
NEW BUR NS ID E
JOHNSON
GOR EVILL E
COBD EN
EDD YVILL E
CAVE IN ROC K
BUN COMBE
SIM PSON
ANN A
JON ESBOR O
ELIZABETHTOWN
ROSICL ARE
UP-NW
Counties
CRAWFORD
YAL E
ROSE HIL L
WATSON
ST EL MO
WIL LIAMSON
HAME L
111
Towns
JASPER
HIDAL GO
TEU TOPOLIS
EFFIN GH AM
BIN GHAM
BOND
SOREN TO
BETHALTO
EAST ALTON
Interstate Highway
SHU MWAY
ALTAMON T
PAN AMA DONN ELL SON
WOR DEN
ALTON
Amtrak
GR EEN UP
COFFE EN
¦
§
¨
GOD FREY
BEECH ER C ITY
WAL SH VIL LE
55
MADISON
CASEY
JEWETT
MONTROSE
FIL LMOR E
STAU NTON
GR AFTON
TOL EDO
EFFINGHAM
FAYETTE
RAMS EY
SAWYERVIL LE
WH ITE C ITY MT OL IVE
BUN KER H IL L
70
SIGEL
HILL SBORO
EAGERVIL LE
MT C LAR E
BENL D
MARTINSV IL LE
¦
§
¨
NEOGA
SCH RAM C ITY
GIL LESPIE
ROYAL LA KES
CUMBERLAND
TAYLOR SP RINGS
WIL SONVILL E
UP-W
COWDEN
IR VING
LITCH FIEL D
SHIPMAN
BNSF
OC ONEE
HER RICK
FID ELITY
ELSAH
OH LM AN
WE NONA H
COALTON
98
CAR LINV IL LE
CH ESTERFIELD
MARS HAL L
109
TOWER H ILL
STR ASBU RG
NOKOMIS
ELD RED
DORC HE STE R
SWS
WIN DSOR
PAN A
HAR VEL
CLARK
WE STFIEL D
GAYS
WAGGONE R
RAYMOND
CH ARL ESTON
MATTOON
NILWOOD
STAN DAR D C ITY
55
KANSA S
ASHM OR E
110
101
FIN DL AY
MORR ISON VILL E
HETTICK
OTTER VIL LE
PAR IS
VERM IL ION
ALL ENVIL LE
FAR MERS VIL LE
GIR ARD
EAST GIL LESP IE
SS
51
ASSUM PTION
CAR ROLLTON
FIEL DON
RED MON
COLES
BETHAN Y
SHELBY
MOWE AQUA
PAL MER
JERSE YVILL E
HIND SBORO
ARC OLA
87
TAYLORV IL LE
MEDOR A
RI
BROC TON
ARTHU R
SUL LIVAN
100
KANE
NCS
LOVINGTON
DALTON CITY
MACON
VIR DE N
PAL MYR A
HAR DIN
NEWMAN
CAMA RGO
TU SCOL A
CH RISMAN
MOULTRIE
BUL PITT
TOVEY KIN CA ID
JEISYVILL E
PAWN EE
JERSEY
ME
ATWOOD GA RR ETT
HAMM ON D
MT ZION
OWAN ECO
ROCK BRIDGE
BRU SSEL S
LONG CR EEK
CHRISTIAN
MT AU BUR N
MODESTO
WH ITE H ALL
97
EDGAR
METCAL F
HU ME
OA KLAN D
AUBU RN
MACOUPIN
SCOTTVILLE
HAMB UR G
RIDGEFARM
DOUGLAS
ROCH ESTER
DIVER NON
GR EEN FIEL D
SID EL L
LONGVIEW
CH ATH AM
WAVER LY
GREENE
ROODH OUSE
ALL ERTON
BROAD LAN DS
PESOTUM
HU MBOLD T
49
ALSEY
GE OR GETOWN
IN DIAN OL A
HAR RISTOWN
FR ANK LIN
CALHOUN
KAMPSVIL LE
72
STON IN GTON
WOOD SON
AK
NEBO
¦
§
¨
EDINB UR G
MILTON
PEARL
MD-W
PHILO
TOL ON O
BEMEN T
FOR SYTH
BLU E MOUN D
LOAMI
WIL MINGTON
MD-N
PIATT
OR EAN A
NEW BER LIN
MUR RAYVILL E
TIME
HC
72
LY NN VIL LE
WIN CH ESTER
FL OREN CE
DETROIT
PITTSFIELD
PLEAS ANT HIL L
¦
§
¨
BELGIUM
WE STVIL LE
DEC ATU R
NIANTIC
SO JA CKSON VILL E
¦
§
¨
ELD ARA
TILTON
FAIRMOU NT
CER RO GOR DO
BUFFAL O
LEL AND GR OVE
SOUTHER N VIEW
OA KWOOD
HOMER
SID NE Y
VIL LA GROVE
RIVERTON
DAN VILLE
104
FITHIAN
SADOR US
WAR RE NSBU RG
SPA ULD ING
BERL IN
SCOTT
72
NEW CAN TON
Metra
CISCO
SANGAMON
SHER MAN
99
74
¦
¨
52§
OGD EN
ST JOSEP H
IVE SDAL E
SPRIN GFIEL D
BLU FFS
103
UR BANA
CATLIN
WIL LIAMSVIL LE
GR AN DVIEW CLE AR LA KE
CH APIN
NAPL ES
NEW SAL EM
CH AMPAIGN
MONTICEL LO
LATH AM
CONC ORD
PERR Y
BARR Y
72
SAV OY
MACON
MT PU LA SKI
CAN TR AL L
ASHL AND
AREN ZVILLE
PIKE
PAYSON
KIN DE RH OOK
¦
§
¨
DEL AND
ARGEN TA
QU INC Y
PLAIN VIL LE
ROYAL
BOND VIL LE
MT STER LIN G
VIR GIN IA
¦
§
¨
TH OMASBOR O
MAHOME T
WE LD ON
MAROA
ATH ENS
172
44
ALVIN
HEN NING
POTOMAC
GIFFORD
MANS FIEL D
BROAD WELL
RIPLE Y
TIMEWEL L
COLU MBU S
MID DL ETOWN
GR EEN VIEW
CASS
CH AND LER VILL E
CAMP POINT
COATS BUR G
KENN EY
CHAMPAIGN
RAN TOU L
74
CLIN TON
LINC OLN
MENARD
¦
§
¨
DEWITT
KIL BOUR NE
BROWN
MEND ON
FAR MER C ITY
WAYN ESVILL E
NEW HOL LAN D
VERMILION
ROSSVIL LE
BIS MARC K
DEWITT
ATLA NTA
MASON C ITY
BROWNIN G
RU SHVIL LE
FISH ER
HEYWORTH
MCL EAN
LUD LOW
BELL FLOWER
WAP ELL A
BATH
CAMD EN
GOL DEN
LER OY
HOOPESTON
RAN KIN
PAX TON
DOWNS
EASTON
ASTOR IA
ADAMS
LIMA
LOGAN
EMDE N
HAR TS BUR G
LITTL ETON
AUGU STA
ELL IOTT
SAY BROOK
FOOSL AND
ARMIN GTON
SCHUYLER
WE ST POINT
HU LL
¦
§
¨
DEL AVAN
TOPEK A
IN DU STRY
55
155
FOR EST CITY
IPAVA
PLYMOUTH
RA
AMT
GR EEN VAL LEY
MASON
LIVER POOL
TABL E GR OVE
BENTL EY
GIBSON C ITY
ARR OWS MITH
ELL SWOR TH
¦
§
¨
HOPED ALE
MANITO
LEWISTOWN
BASCO
UR SA
88 BLOOMINGTON
STAN FOR D
MIN IER
K
HAMILTON
WAR SAW
LODA
BRYANT
47
WE LLIN GTON
COOKSVILL E
AM
T RA
TEN NE SSEE
CISSN A PAR K
MELVIN
ANC HOR
COLFAX
TOWAND A
DAN VERS
tra
k
COLC HES TE R
CAR TH AGE
CAR LOCK
MACK IN AW
TR EMON T
ST D AVID DU NFERM LINE
SMITH FIE LD
MACOMB
MIL FORD
BUC KLEY
SIB LEY
PEKIN
MAPLE TON
105
HU DSON
KIN GSTON MINES
91
FER RIS
ELVASTON
GL ASFORD
46
CAN TON
GOOD H OPE
94
TH AWVILL E
STR AWN
ROBER TS
CONGER VILL E
MORTON
Am
SCIOTA
BLAN DIN SVILL E
LEXIN GTON
DEER CR EEK
GOOD FIEL D
SHEL DON
WOOD LAN D
ON AR GA
53
EAST PEORIA
CR EVE COEU R
GIL MAN
PIP ER CITY
CH ATSWORTH
FOR REST
FAIRBU RY
MCLEAN
CH ENOA
KAPPA
MARQU ETTE H TS
NORTH PE KIN
LA HAR PE
NAU VOO
WAS HINGTON
BELL EVU E
FAIRVIEW
ELL ISV IL LE
PRAIR IE C ITY
EUR EKA
NORWOOD
FAR MIN GTON
FAR MIN GTON
GR IDL EY
EL PA SO
WATSEKA
CR ESCEN T CITY
RAK
AK
AM
TR
DAL LAS C ITY
PONTOOS UC
ST AU GU STINE
SECOR
TAZEWELL
PEORIA
ROSEVIL LE
RAR ITAN
PAN OLA
AMT
MEDIA
STR ONGH UR ST
LOMAX
ROAN OK E
METAM OR A
Am
tra k
ABINGDON
GU LFPOR T
VIE NN A
DONGOL A
MIL L CR EEK
59
118
CYPR ESS
ALEXANDER
¦
§
¨
24
GOL CON DA
BELKN AP
PULASKI
KARN AK
E C APE
GR AN D CH AIN
TAMMS
TH EBES
PUL ASKI
MASSAC
JOP PA
OL MSTED
METROPOLIS
BROOKPORT
MOUN DS
MOUN D CITY
0
10
20
´
40
CAIRO
Milton R. Sees, Secretary
Bureau of Information Processing, December 2007.
60
Miles

Broadband Access Plan for Passenger Rail

Transcription

Similar documents

view printable hirail catenary bucket truck brochure

AzureWave ARR5B95 Us..

SPEcificAtionS

Setting up my WiFi - Alaska Communications

get protected! - Pine Cellular

RMFL - Blue Force Gear

American Woodhenge: Archaeoastronoraly at Cahokia

Bartop Brochure

- Saurashtra University