Jump to content

Would lte rollout be quicker if light squared was allowed to use their spectrum?


Recommended Posts

I'm in no way saying sprint is slow at releasing lte, I'm just curious if light squared would be making the process faster or not?

 

Also I read an article about the government allowing the same spectrum now, so is light squared back or did they go bankrupt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in no way saying sprint is slow at releasing lte, I'm just curious if light squared would be making the process faster or not?

 

Also I read an article about the government allowing the same spectrum now, so is light squared back or did they go bankrupt?

 

Doubt it... I don't think LS had anything to do with Sprint's NetworkVision roll out. That was a common misconception in many forums. Some people even jumped to the conclusion that Sprints LTE plans were doomed. lol After looking around this forum, It doesn't appear those fallacious conclusions have much merit now. However, the cash that LS would have given Sprint for hosting would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Doubt it... I don't think LS had anything to do with Sprint's NetworkVision roll out. That was a common misconception in many forums. Some people even jumped to the conclusion that Sprints LTE plans were doomed. lol After looking around this forum, It doesn't appear those fallacious conclusions have much merit now. However, the cash that LS would have given Sprint for hosting would be nice.

I heard they were going to pay sprint to help deploy their network. I'm not sure if that means it'll be quicker or just more cost efficient.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard they were going to pay sprint to help deploy their network. I'm not sure if that means it'll be quicker or just more cost efficient.

 

In a nutshell yes but that deal has been dead in the water for a while now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lightsquared was going to pay some of the upfront costs, but most of the contract was down the road with Lightsquared sharing in the operating costs. PCmag has an article with some of the details here http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2389312,00.asp

 

Whether or not it would have sped up the rollout... Sprint has no buildout requirements, so the only thing keeping them to their aggressive rollout is the cost of losing customers. If Lightsquared was in the picture, they might have had some buildout requirements that were part of them being approved to use their spectrum. That might have forced them to hold the contractors to the planned buildout rate, and sped it up or at least kept it on the schedule that Sprint is currently using.

 

As far as Lightsquared being back or bankrupt. They are in bankrupcy protection, but there is some support to try to swap their spectrum with some DoD spectrum, so they can still deploy their network. Basically their entire future depends on that spectrum swap.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side note: LS has a LOT of spectrum...it's just kind of unusable right now. I counted 68MHz nationwide? If they can get two-thirds of that via a swap they can still build a decent network. Oh wait, they'll go bankrupt first :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about as a wholesaler or investor?

 

They are bankrupt and would need to find investors to be able to do anything like this. If someone wanted to invest in clearwire why would they go through Lightsquared first to get to clearwire? They could just invest in clearwire.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are bankrupt and would need to find investors to be able to do anything like this. If someone wanted to invest in clearwire why would they go through Lightsquared first to get to clearwire? They could just invest in clearwire.

 

I heard that LightSquared recently received approval on a $51.4 million bankruptcy loan. I wonder what that money is going to be spent on.

 

Source: http://www.bloomberg...llion-loan.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bankruptcy attorneys?

 

Is that the job for Philip Falcone's Harbinger Capital Partners?

 

Harbinger seeks investments that typically fall into the following four categories:

  1. Event – investments in companies where the Harbinger team identifies a significant opportunity to actively engage with a company to unlock value;
  2. Distressed/Bankruptcy – investments in companies that are already in default, in bankruptcy, or in some other stage of financial failure or distress;
  3. Value – passive investments in securities where Harbinger believes a positive catalyst for value realization is already present; and
  4. Corporate Shorts – passive investments where Harbinger views the security to be overvalued or believes weakening fundamental trends or identifiable negative catalysts are apparent.

Philip Falcone leads Harbinger's investment team, relying on his extensive experience in distressed debt, leveraged finance, and special situations across an array of market cycles.

 

Source: http://www.harbinger...html/about.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corporate Shorts

I got your corporate shorts right here...

 

Thanks guys, now I know why Lightsquared might be interested in clearwire. Corporate shorts... Those clearwire buys know how to party.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going to be spent on trying to get a spectrum swap (my guess).

 

That's their only hope.

 

Is there really any chance of this happening? I would like to see them approve a swap, but I was also thinking of the original problem with the GPS interference, as it will still exist for whoever would get and try to use the frequency. I have been having GPS connection problems with my phone and in-car unit, and I was wondering if they would be allowed to deploy a medium power GPS signal from the towers where the spectrum was being deployed? If there was a stronger GPS Signal and they used a 5MHz guard band, would that alleviate some of the problems with this spectrum?

 

I am not sure if that is possible, but if anyone would know, its the readers on this forum! lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there really any chance of this happening? I would like to see them approve a swap, but I was also thinking of the original problem with the GPS interference, as it will still exist for whoever would get and try to use the frequency.

 

Keep in mind that LightSquared's L band spectrum adjacent to GPS is slated for satellite downlink transmission, not terrestrial downlink transmission. LightSquared's Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) use was possible only under conditional FCC waiver. And, well, LightSquared was not able to meet those conditions. So, a potential spectrum swap would likely require that the L band spectrum adjacent to GPS be used only as satellite downlink as originally intended. LightSquared and its predecessors have been using L band spectrum for satellite downlink operations for years, coexisting just fine with GPS.

 

I have been having GPS connection problems with my phone and in-car unit, and I was wondering if they would be allowed to deploy a medium power GPS signal from the towers where the spectrum was being deployed? If there was a stronger GPS Signal and they used a 5MHz guard band, would that alleviate some of the problems with this spectrum?

 

No. GPS operates on the basic principle of time of arrival -- the greater the distance from the GPS satellite, the later the time of arrival. A pseudo GPS signal broadcast from a cell site would have a much earlier time of arrival than would the signal broadcast from any of the GPS satellites, not to mention that it would likely swamp the signal from any/all GPS satellites. Thus, a cell site based geolocation system would have to be separate from GPS.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that LightSquared's L band spectrum adjacent to GPS is slated for satellite downlink transmission, not terrestrial downlink transmission. LightSquared's Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) use was possible only under conditional FCC waiver. And, well, LightSquared was not able to meet those conditions. So, a potential spectrum swap would likely require that the L band spectrum adjacent to GPS be used only as satellite downlink as originally intended. LightSquared and its predecessors have been using L band spectrum for satellite downlink operations for years, coexisting just fine with GPS.

 

 

 

No. GPS operates on the basic principle of time of arrival -- the greater the distance from the GPS satellite, the later the time of arrival. A pseudo GPS signal broadcast from a cell site would have a much earlier time of arrival than would the signal broadcast from any of the GPS satellites, not to mention that it would likely swamp the signal from any/all GPS satellites. Thus, a cell site based geolocation system would have to be separate from GPS.

 

AJ

Don't we have terrestrial GPS sites that augment the satellite signals? How are those used?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

None that I know of. Are you thinking of SDARS (e.g. Sirius XM) terrestrial repeaters?

 

AJ

 

Maybe they are thinking of LORAN?

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None that I know of. Are you thinking of SDARS (e.g. Sirius XM) terrestrial repeaters?

 

AJ

 

He's probably thinking about about WAAS (http://www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/waas.html) and the European equivalent EGNOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Geostationary_Navigation_Overlay_Service) - I won't be redudant and repeat what the links say, but they essentially work to increase the accuracy of exisiting GPS:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Sounds like an awesome project—keep us posted on how it’s going! Also—if you’re able to figure out logging, I can work with you to get the data uploaded to SignalCheck. 
    • Yesterday, I saw a post on Facebook from an old friend about the Evolve III Maestro, a $60 laptop (at Micro Center) that apparently has an LTE modem in it.  Specifically, the Quectel EC25-AF*.  The nearest Micro Center was sold out of new ones, but offered open box at $48.  So for $51 after tax, I walked out this morning with one.  An absolute steal. I backed up the Windows product key and then put Kubuntu 22.04 on it.  I spent a lot of time today trying to get the build tools installed so I could get the wifi module installed and running, and once I did that, I pretty quickly got to sending it modem commands, which I've never done before.  I don't have a SIM in it yet, but it does seem to function as it should.  (I figured out the command to get Timing Advance values out of it, but without a SIM, I doubt it would have such values.) Now I'm trying to puzzle out how to write some kind of script or small program to use it for logging purposes.  I think I've worked out how to send commands to it from bash using socat, but I need to pick specific commands to run.  I'd actually like to replace some of my phones with this if I can get it to record cells, with GPS, and cycle through a set of bands repeatedly.  My current phone collection consists of 9 phones other than my main S21FE, and they require babysitting while I'm logging.  It'd be nice to pare that down to a more reasonable number and let the computer do the work, hopefully in the back seat with less babysitting. - Trip ===== * Per the spec sheet, it supports B2/4/5/12/13/14/66/71.  That'd cover all of Verizon and US Cellular LTE, all but B29/30 on AT&T, and all but B41 and Sprint Keep on B26 for T-Mobile. 
    • More bizarre.  I just updated my other Ace without issue. - Trip  
    • Looking over the data so far, bidders can go back and reopen bidding on licenses that appeared settled. In the list below, not all counties are listed and only states with excess demand.  Typically 3 licenses per county for rural areas and some urban areas. Here is how many licenses per state had demand greater than supply: State count AK 3 AL 14 AR 3 AS 6 AZ 9 CA 12 CO 76 DE 6 FL 10 GA 66 GU 3 HI 3 IA 99 ID 47 IL 39 IN 43 KS 231 KY 23 LA 14 MA 5 MD 16 ME 1 MI 86 MN 9 MO 79 MP 12 MS 73 MT 69 NC 26 ND 109 NE 18 NH 13 NJ 6 NM 51 NV 24 NY 13 OH 29 OK 9 OR 30 PA 24 PR 25 SC 20 SD 83 TN 76 TX 236 UT 49 VA 22 VT 5 WA 65 WI 59 WV 26 WY 29
    • Looks like Dish has already taken back the 5x5 of n71 they leased to T-Mobile, and instead of narrowing NR here T-Mobile has gone for broke and made 600 NR-only. They can afford to do that here thanks to B12, and don't need to do that west of here because they weren't leasing 600 from Dish. Does mean that Dish is 10x10 for n71 here (which explains the 30ish Mbps upload peak I saw yesterday). Darned speculators hogging the remainder of the band So T-Mobile is running 140 + 15x15 MHz sub-6 NR here. AT&T is 40 + 15-45x15-45 (15x15 n5, occasional 15x15 DSS on n2 and/or n66 though I haven't seen both in the same area). VZW is 60 + 15x15, with the latter being n2 DSS. Wonder how soon VZW will try n48.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...