Jump to content

How much bandwidth does a single LTE site have?


Recommended Posts

Maybe VZW has enough cash that they will deploy a NV style project sooner rather than later with LTE-A?

 

They should. But I don't think they will in the next 12 months.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point of clarification: the A1429 iPhone (Sprint and VZW) can't do AWS LTE. Only the A1428 (AT&T) edition can do that. Hence my suggestion of refarming PCS for LTE rather than AWS. Dunno about CLR LTE support...I think that it's also another A1428-only band for LTE. The A1429 has support around that band, but the duplex gap is flipped to work with KDDI's network in Japan.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point of clarification: the A1429 iPhone (Sprint and VZW) can't do AWS LTE. Only the A1428 (AT&T) edition can do that. Hence my suggestion of refarming PCS for LTE rather than AWS. Dunno about CLR LTE support...

 

Rest assured, both A1428 and A1429 support band 5 (Cellular 850 MHz) LTE.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest assured, both A1428 and A1429 support band 5 (Cellular 850 MHz) LTE.

 

AJ

 

Okay. I heard something about the iPhone 5 needing different models because the Qualcomm chipset + radio paths can only support five LTE bands (CLR, PCS, AWS, 700-lower for A1428; 800-JP, PCS+G, 1800, 2100, 700-upper-C for A1429). But I think that this assertion was made by a journalist rather than an engineer, so it's probably incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

They should. But I don't think they will in the next 12 months.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

Wondering the difference between LTE VS. LTE-A? I know the advanced LTE will be higher speeds. Will latency improve ? Is lte advanced just basically more back haul to the towers or just different spectrums?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing to this though...we aren't sure how easy this is to implement for VZW. They do not have a Network Vision style network with multi-modal sites designed for diversity. Each AWS site will likely require its own base station and its own set of panels. There will be sites that cannot accept the new cabinets or new panels. This could be a big challenge for VZW.

 

 

I think an NV style deployment is the only option for Verizon at this point.

 

It is getting so that the number of bands and modes is going to stretch to its limits the shelf and floor space at their base stations and equipment huts.

 

VZ is probably currently under development with its hardware vendors to manufacture a pentaband 700/850/1700/1900/2100 antenna and a single-box RRU solution with CDMA/1X/EVDO/LTE capability that runs in some combination of all of those bands.

 

The labor cost is significantly lowered by having a single RRU + antenna configuration that requires the fewest amount of equipment to haul to sites and mount and requires the least real estate/wires on the structure. 3 antennas and 3 RRUs at a typical cell site as compared to Sprint's 3 antennas and 9/12/15 RRU's.

 

Cell site space is at a premium and in many places it's impossible to run new cables up through a crowded tower. If Verizon does a massive NV-scale redesign I can only envision it with the key concept that involves the lowest possible number of RRUs and antennas per cell site.

 

The disadvantage now with VZ is they use mostly huts at their sites, and can't just put up a naked (relatively speaking) freestanding rack like Sprint NV, Clear, Cricket, and TMobile usually do. But their idea may be to do an NV style deployment and then get rid of those old huts altogether. It would be hard for them to stick AWS+LTE and PCS+LTE gear inside their existing huts.

 

Sprint is not the only one with this mindset, but I think they took the multi-RRU approach because the all-in-one design has not been proven and tested fully yet... at least here in my back yard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Verizon is the standard for under promising and over delivering.

 

It was an interesting choice that they decided not to go with RRU's. It seems like they don't need the extra coverage and don't want the extra capex/opex.

 

I think the true test for Verizon (which they nailed with EVDO, relatively speaking) is to see how they add capacity as load increases.

 

Their first step was coverage, second step will be adding capacity.

 

It truly is amazing to see VZN LTE speeds take a dive though. But, as you say many many times, the average customer doesn't care about 3mbit or 30mbit... they just want it to work wherever they are - and for that, verizon scores points.

 

Verizon opted not to use RRUs because they were concerned about reliability. Their long term durability from exposure to elements, natural disasters, etc., has not been proven sufficiently for VZW to stake their "most reliable network" reputation on it.

 

Option #2
...start deploying LTE AWS. This is a good option that can start now. However, VZW still is not selling AWS devices. I have been bewildered why VZW did not start selling AWS LTE devices in Mid 2012. They could have. AT&T has. T-Mobile even has the GS3 and Nexus 4 capable of AWS LTE and they do not even have any markets running yet.

 

VZW was probably trying to keep AWS LTE devices down as long as possible trying not to give other companies any advantage in LTE bands supported. If so, that bet is now backfiring on them.

 

But at any rate, Verizon could be adding AWS LTE now as hotspot overlays throughout their network. But only iPhone 5 customers will get to appreciate it. It is not known when VZW will ever start pushing AWS LTE on its other devices.

 

One minor clarification, the VZW iPhone 5 does not support AWS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wondering the difference between LTE VS. LTE-A? I know the advanced LTE will be higher speeds. Will latency improve ? Is lte advanced just basically more back haul to the towers or just different spectrums?

 

LTEA involves carrier aggregation so where sprint doesn't have a contiguous block of spectrum they could lump pieces together... Still haven't looked into if it can be done across frequencies or not though... But if they own 5Mhz contiguous in 1900MHz freq and also another 5 non contiguous in 1900 then they can essentially put out 10Mhz.... The thing is right now the spectrum needs to be in contiguous blocks and LTEA is supposed to eliminate that need...but it does at a cost lol

 

Downfall is battery consumption at this stage is not its best from reports....

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wondering the difference between LTE VS. LTE-A? I know the advanced LTE will be higher speeds. Will latency improve ? Is lte advanced just basically more back haul to the towers or just different spectrums?

 

LTE Advanced is just LTE, that happens to support additional MIMO, carrier aggregation and a few other minor items. The day your local site gets LTE Advanced, you will likely not see any difference whatsoever. Until devices are built that support greater than 2x2 MIMO or carrier aggregation, there will likely not be any performance difference. And these will likely be deployed on tablets first, where they have more room for additional antennas. There will be no increase in ping speeds either with LTE Advanced. It uses the same airlink technology and the same backhaul from the site.

 

I think LTE Advanced is much ado about nothing really. Sprint will upgrade their sites via software updates, and nothing will change. Not until Sprint either deploys carrier aggregation, or devices come out that support 4x4 MIMO or CA, nothing is really going to change.

 

Robert

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One minor clarification, the VZW iPhone 5 does not support AWS.

 

I edited that out earlier today in several places, but missed the one you reference. Thanks.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

LTE Advanced is just LTE, that happens to support additional MIMO, carrier aggregation and a few other minor items. The day your local site gets LTE Advanced, you will likely not see any difference whatsoever. Until devices are built that support greater than 2x2 MIMO or carrier aggregation, there will likely not be any performance difference. And these will likely be deployed on tablets first, where they have more room for additional antennas. There will be no increase in ping speeds either with LTE Advanced. It uses the same airlink technology and the same backhaul from the site.

 

I think LTE Advanced is much ado about nothing really. Sprint will upgrade their sites via software updates, and nothing will change. Not until Sprint either deploys carrier aggregation, or devices come out that support 4x4 MIMO or CA, nothing is really going to change.

 

Robert

 

When you say sprint will upgrade their sites via software, what do u mean by that? The sites don't have to get special equipment to upgrade the towers ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Battery consumption from regular LTE is also pretty bad. I honestly think if reg LTE was the standard with all phones it would turn into 3G speeds. But then again, they can raise that limit very easily but it's costly.

 

I have not noticed any difference in battery life with LTE on the GS3, Note 2, EVO LTE, Photon Q and the Victory. However, I did notice a reduction in battery life on the Viper and Galaxy Nexus in my device testing while using LTE. Carrier Aggregation uses LTE in two different paths having double strain on battery life during active data sessions. Carrier Aggregation does not have any impact on battery in standby, because it reverts to using data only on one carrier when not actively using data.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say sprint will upgrade their sites via software, what do u mean by that? The sites don't have to get special equipment to upgrade the towers ?

 

Sprint's LTE network is LTE Advanced ready. It is just a software upgrade for them. However, Carrier Aggregation will require a site visit. But until Sprint decides to start making devices that support CA (and they may never do so), then this is a moot point.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Battery consumption from regular LTE is also pretty bad. I honestly think if reg LTE was the standard with all phones it would turn into 3G speeds. But then again, they can raise that limit very easily but it's costly.

 

Maybe on the thunderbolt when you had separate chipset running the radios but on the EVOLTE LTE battery life is hardly any worse than 3G if at all...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sprint's LTE network is LTE Advanced ready. It is just a software upgrade for them. However, Carrier Aggregation will require a site visit. But until Sprint decides to start making devices that support CA (and they may never do so), then this is a moot point.

 

Robert

 

Yup yup... If you don't have carriers all spread out on the spectrum within the band then you really have no need really...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the key differences with Verizon and how they arrive at the "most reliable best network, blah blah" is that they overdeploy their network. Here in NYC, if I am not mistaken, Verizon has deployed every available EVDO and Voice channel/carrier. Basically if they can, they will broadcast. This allows them to basically guarantee availability and consistent user experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of the OP, which is bandwidth to each site, I can echo what has been said. Most of the backhaul being installed is in a medium that is easily opened up for more bandwidth with the "flip of a switch," so to speak. I can only speak to the way VZW is doing it, but all their sites have fiber (or other similar) backhaul which can be increased when needed. Most of the VZW sites around here (OKC) are no less than 30mbps (in rural areas) and quite a bit more in the city. It really just depends on the needs on a site by site basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing a bit of research lately on LTE Advanced and it seems the main goal is for it to manage interference between pico cells and the macro network. Aggregating carriers is nice to improve peak speeds, but the timeslot management part of LTE advanced means faster data rates for all users.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing a bit of research lately on LTE Advanced and it seems the main goal is for it to manage interference between pico cells and the macro network. Aggregating carriers is nice to improve peak speeds, but the timeslot management part of LTE advanced means faster data rates for all users.

 

 

Watching this video, you would think the pico/macrocell interference management concepts would have been implemented in wireless tech a long time ago, circa 3G. I can't believe they are just now getting this stuff in LTE R10. Planned obsolescence?

Edited by doug526
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching this video, you would think the pico/macrocell concepts would have been implemented in wireless tech a long time ago, circa 3G. I can't believe they are just now getting this stuff in LTE R10. Planned obsolescence?

 

They've had small cells for a while but managing the interference was always a problem. With LTE R10 they can partition the timeslots so that users on Picocells don't interfere with users on the Macro network, even if they are within range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing a bit of research lately on LTE Advanced and it seems the main goal is for it to manage interference between pico cells and the macro network. Aggregating carriers is nice to improve peak speeds, but the timeslot management part of LTE advanced means faster data rates for all users.

 

 

Lemme know when sprint starts deploying Pico cells and this will matter...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

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