Last year, I wrote about the potential of using high-altitude platforms (HAPS) to deliver improved cellular coverage, especially in rural areas.
With new ways of building airborne platforms and an increased desire for better cellular coverage, my view was that after decades of undelivered promise, the time for HAPS may finally have come.
Since then, useful progress has been made.
A key milestone was the recent World Radio Conference’s (WRC-23) approval of global spectrum allocation for HAPS (which, confusingly, is also called HIBS (high-altitude IMT base stations)).
The conference voted to identify the 694-960 MHz, 1,710-1,885 MHz, and 2,500-2,690 MHz bands.
This decision gives national regulators a strong steer to enable HAPS in their countries, if they have not already done so, removing one possible impediment to deployment.
However, there will still be national spectrum issues and regulatory challenges from airspace regulations set by national aviation authorities, who will rightly want to ensure that HAPS do not lead to any reduction in flight safety.
Working through these, often on a multi-national basis, will require expert help and guidance.
2023 has broadly been a year of trials. HAPSMobile, a company funded by Softbank, flew a HAPS drone in Rwanda and demonstrated a 5G connection.
Stratospheric Platforms announced a successful trial in the UK with BT, while Sceye completed another flight test. Furthest ahead appears to be Aalto, an Airbus-sponsored company, which announced a drone hub in Kenya with the aim of having commercial customers by Q3 of this year.
Other activities are also underway; some are likely happening without publicity.
It is good to see this progress, but it also shows that developing the drone and cellular technology and bringing it into service is going to take many years. It might well be 2026 or 2027 before we have significant commercial service from HAPS.
As well as the technology, the commercial aspects of HAPS remain unresolved.
In my previous article, I noted that HAPS coverage was unlikely to be economically viable for most operators unless there was government support to deliver greater coverage.
This could be either an explicit subsidy or implicit through means such as coverage obligations (which tend to lower auction fees paid, with the money “saved” being used to pay for the more extensive coverage).
So far, only a few governments have reached a position of subsidising coverage.
There are also questions regarding who owns and operates the drones. It could be mobile operators, some neutral host, such as a towerco, or even the manufacturers of the drones themselves.
Finally, with increasing “direct-to-handset” (DTH) satellite coverage from Starlink and others, the positioning of HAPS as a solution somewhere between terrestrial towers and LEO satellites is yet to be fully defined.
I remain optimistic. The developments over the last year have all been positive, with global frequency allocation and increasing trials.
Initial commercial deployment this year looks possible. A range of different solutions can be tailored to the needs of individual countries; for example, drones for those with extensive uncovered areas and tethered aerostats for smaller areas.
I anticipate multiple providers of drones, balloons, aerostats, and similar will move to commercial operation. When coupled with DTH satellite operation, a world where we are never unconnected seems plausible within a decade.
