FAQ

Asked, answered.

Half the energy. Really?

Roughly, and it is a design target rather than a measurement. About three times lower power at the radio, which works out to around half the total energy at the site, because the radio is what sizes everything else. Those figures are modeled and labelled that way every time they appear. The technical brief separates what has been measured from what is projected, line by line, with the test conditions attached. Then we would like your lab to run it against your own acceptance criteria.

Will this integrate with the network we actually run?

That was the design constraint, not an afterthought: standards-based interfaces, standard tower-top mounting, −48 V DC, GNSS timing, and the crews and processes you already have. Carrier-grade integration takes work, and the brief is written to make that work predictable — exactly what changes at the site, and what deliberately does not.

What won't you claim?

That the architecture is revolutionary. That a number is measured when it is modeled. That integration is effortless. That you should buy this for sustainability. Lower energy is our mechanism, not our brand, and the ESG figures are a side effect we are happy to document.

Are you trying to replace our incumbent vendors?

We are trying to retire an assumption, not a relationship. Our equipment is built to sit inside the network you have, alongside the vendors you have. Their radios are excellent at what they were designed for: dense, grid-powered, near-peak. Our argument is with what happens when that design goes somewhere it was never drawn for.

Where are you in development?

Pre-commercial, and specific about it. The architecture, interfaces, and RAN profile are locked. The trial unit is targeted for completion around the end of 2026, and the first customer field trial is targeted with Vanu in Côte d'Ivoire in the first half of 2027. Everything we currently publish about energy is modeled; the trial is what turns modeled into measured.

Why hasn't anyone done this already?

Because for the sites the industry was designing for, nobody needed to. A radio optimized for a dense grid-powered tower running near peak is a good radio. It is only when that design goes somewhere it spends its life at a fraction of capacity, powered by panels, hours from the nearest road, that it starts costing you the site. That market was not worth redesigning for. It is now.

What about satellite?

Backhaul stopped being the hard part, and that is real: low-earth-orbit service now delivers hundreds of megabits anywhere with a view of the sky, from more than one operator. But a link from space is not coverage on its own. It weakens indoors and under tree cover, and it cannot serve the number of simultaneous users a local cell site can. You still need a tower at the edge, and something still has to power it. Satellite moved the bottleneck to us.

What happens when the site outgrows what we installed?

Nothing gets swapped. Channel bandwidth moves between 5, 10, and 20 MHz and the antenna configuration scales, all activated in software against realized demand. The hardware ships capable on day one, and nobody drives back out.

Where is it made?

North America. Engineering and development with Fidus Systems in Ontario, prototype and production integration with RaGE Systems in Lowell, Massachusetts, and a North American contract-manufacturing partner for scale production now in selection. We are deliberate about the wording: it is a North American design and manufacturing path, and we will not use stronger origin language than our bill of materials supports.

Who's behind this?

Radio engineers who have spent careers inside this industry: integrating equipment, running networks, sitting through procurement. This is the fourth company our founder has built around radio efficiency, and the first one where we kept the technology instead of selling it to the radio makers. The longer version is on the About page.