Sprint and Dish Clash over 5 MHz Satellite Spectrum

[bigsnake49]

To an LTE Release 8 terminal, each component carrier will appear as an LTE carrier, while an LTE-Advanced terminal can use the total aggregated bandwidth.

 

http://lteworld.org/blog/carrier-aggregation-lte-advanced

 

Now granted this is a blog and not a spec. Unfortunately I can't raise up any of the specs at work. I have to wait till I get home tonight.

[bigsnake49]

CA may require antenna diversity of four antennas. If you need two MIMO to each different carrier, that makes four. You could have less than four, but that would reduce performance. And that would defeat the purpose. I don't see CA as a miraculous panacea for LTE in smartphones. Not while trying to cram in a whole bunch of other LTE bands, too.

 

Robert

 

Carrier aggregation is really a solution for the carrier end and not the handset end. It's already crowded in there.

[supert0nes]

They'll probably have to do something like Apple's dynamic antenna for all of the antennas in each phone soon.

[S4GRU]

Carrier aggregation is really a solution for the carrier end and not the handset end. It's already crowded in there.

 

Correct. If CA is instituted, but a device is not CA capable, it will just see two separate carriers. No harm, no foul. The device just doesn't get to experience faster speeds of CA. Which I am not sure are all that necessary.

 

However, what is the benefit on the carrier end if there are no devices to use it? That I cannot quite wrap my mind around. I guess there will be some devices that could, like hotspots and tablets. But it would be a big challenge in something the size of a smartphone.

 

Robert

[digiblur]

They'll probably have to do something like Apple's dynamic antenna for all of the antennas in each phone soon.

 

I thought it was just switchable antennas?

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

[irev210]

I actually think Sprint doesn't need 10x10 LTE at all. But I'm often in a minority with that opinion.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

It was sort of interesting to read clearwire's Hope saying that a 5x5 FD-LTE channel can do 7TB of data a year while a 10x10 FD-LTE channel can do 23TB of data a year. Hope was saying that clearwire's TD-LTE channel can do 29TB.

 

e-bragging aside, the benefits of a 10x10 channel vs. 5x5 + 5x5 seem substantial.

 

 

 

So, what does that translate to? This is just very simply put, we've got multiple telcos growing out of 4G network on a

5x5 channel. So, 5 megahertz down, 5 megahertz up. If you look at that and assume an average customer experience,

you're looking at being able to service up about 7 terabytes of data per year on that 5x5 channel.

If you increase the 5x5 to a 10 megahertz channel, so you're basically doubling the width of that channel, you get a lot

of efficiencies. Because you can see that it's not – it's much more than doubled, it's almost tripled. So you're in the 23

terabytes per year.

And then what we are looking to deploy are 20 megahertz LTE channels. Now you guys saw on the previous slide that

we have about 160 megahertz of spectrum. So my CTO always wants me to then put eight bars on this chart, but from a

scale perspective that wouldn't work very well. So I always limit it to two. But we're going to roll out 20 megahertz

 

channels. We can easily add another 20 megahertz channel, and that's when this business model really hums.

What we are able to do is put that 20 megahertz radio out there, get the 29 terabytes per year, and if that sector gets

congested, we can add another radio to that site to double the capacity of that site. Now, if we were spectrum-limited, if

we didn't have another 20, we would then have to cell split and build another site that would double our CapEx and

also, greatly increase our OpEx. That's what current telcos are having to do when they don't have another spectrum

option.

[supert0nes]

I thought it was just switchable antennas?

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

I was thinking of something where each antenna could support more than one band.

[supert0nes]

irev210 - Thanks for this info! It would have been nice for them to post per second, since a lot happens over a year and they have to be assuming full capacity all the time.

[bigsnake49]

It was sort of interesting to read clearwire's Hope saying that a 5x5 FD-LTE channel can do 7TB of data a year while a 10x10 FD-LTE channel can do 23TB of data a year. Hope was saying that clearwire's TD-LTE channel can do 29TB.

 

e-bragging aside, the benefits of a 10x10 channel vs. 5x5 + 5x5 seem substantial.

 

I don't see it. Where are the efficiencies going to come from? The internal guard band(s) add up to the same percentage.

[S4GRU]

It was sort of interesting to read clearwire's Hope saying that a 5x5 FD-LTE channel can do 7TB of data a year while a 10x10 FD-LTE channel can do 23TB of data a year. Hope was saying that clearwire's TD-LTE channel can do 29TB.

 

e-bragging aside, the benefits of a 10x10 channel vs. 5x5 + 5x5 seem substantial.

 

This is the first time I've seen this. I've always seen/heard that the tonnage carried by one 10x10 carrier is only slightly larger than two 5x5's. And any differences only come in the fact that the number of subcarriers is slightly less in two 5x5's than one 10x10. The one 10x10 has an additional subcarrier or two in the space between the two 5x5 carriers. That's my understanding.

 

Robert

[irev210]

I don't see it. Where are the efficiencies going to come from? The internal guard band(s) add up to the same percentage.

 

No idea. Maybe she has it wrong, she is just the CFO.

 

Listening to Dr. John Saw, the CTO, was much more interesting.

 

 

bigsnake49 - take a listen to Dr. John Saw at the Clearwire/Sprint event the other month. They talk about mock hosting and some other cool things.

http://cc.talkpoint....ntity=1_X5JEDJ6

[bigsnake49]

It is switchable antennas on the iPhone. There are antennas (not on the iPhone) that are tuned to multiple frequencies simultaneously that look like branches on a tree, each branch to root length defining a different frequency (or they can be made to lokk like "F"s with multiple horizontal lines.

Edited September 20, 2012 by bigsnake49

[bigsnake49]

No idea. Maybe she has it wrong, she is just the CFO.

 

Listening to Dr. John Saw was much more interesting.

 

 

bigsnake49 - take a listen to Dr. John Saw at the Clearwire/Sprint event the other month. They talk about mock hosting and some other cool things.

http://cc.talkpoint....ntity=1_X5JEDJ6

 

Thanks, I will.

[digiblur]

It is switchable antennas on the iPhone. There are antennas (not on the iPhone) that are tuned to multiple frequencies simultaneously that look like branches on a tree, each branch to root length defining a different frequency (or they can be made to lokk like "F"s with multiple horizontal lines.

 

And the antenna is only one piece of the puzzle. People think you just hook the chip to the antenna.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

[bigsnake49]

And the antenna is only one piece of the puzzle. People think you just hook the chip to the antenna.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

There are people working to simplify and make the "RF glue" a lot more programmable that it is now. RF filters are now programmable. Other parts are getting worked on as we speak. There are also software tunable antennas (not necessarily for handsets yet)

[supert0nes]

Sprint offers Dish an olive branch in clash over spectrum shift- http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-offers-dish-olive-branch-clash-over-spectrum-shift/2012-10-04

 

Sprint Nextel (NYSE:S) said that if the FCC agrees to auction the 1900 MHz PCS H Block and agrees to protect its adjacent PCS G Block from interference, Sprint will work with standards-setting bodies to ensure that all standards work for Dish Network's spectrum can be completed within six months or less.

[Guest 503ducati]

"We really hoped when we started this project that we would actually build a network from scratch, but the timing doesn't make a lot of sense anymore," Dish Chairman Charlie Ergen said Wednesday in Orlando at the PCIA Wireless Infrastructure Show, according to Broadcasting & Cable. Dish has also considered partnerships with other mobile players, but the likelihood of that option will be reduced should the proposed merger between T-Mobile USA and MetroPCS Inc. go ahead. "We may end up selling the spectrum. I am not saying that is an impossibility," Ergen said.

 

 

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=225571&site=lr_cable&

[supert0nes]

If they sell it. My bet is AT&T buys it. Even with WCS AT&T is going to need more spectrum, even if none of us want to give it to them. I don't think Verizon is allowed to buy more spectrum yet, but I could be wrong.

[Guest 503ducati]

From today: http://www.fiercewir...ible/2012-10-10

 

Sounds like Sprint is looking to make a deal.

[Thomas L.]

Sprint does seem to be out to make a LightSquared like deal - in my opinion that would be a highly preferible alternative to that spectrum being sold to one of the big three.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

[supert0nes]

Big 3? There's only a big 2

[dedub]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/dish-relents-says-it-will-accept-5-mhz-guard-band/2012-12-04

[dedub]

more

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/12/decision-on-possible-new-lte-network-from-dish-coming-soon-fcc-says/

[ericdabbs]

I wonder if Dish will get an additional 5 Mhz of uplink spectrum since its giving up the 2000-2005 MHz spectrum to be used as a guard band. Would be nice if Dish's uplink spectrum was reallocated to 2005-2025 MHz so that they don't lose the total of 40 MHz of S-band spectrum.

 

Sprint has hinted many times that it can host another network's spectrum but I wonder how strong is Sprint trying to pursue a Lightsquared like deal with Dish.

[lynyrd65]

Does Sprint really need that large of a guard band?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2