OldSpottingThread (Ericsson Style) [Abandoned]

[aliensporebomb]

Some shots of some local sites - both shared with AT&T - some look like they have RRUs but they might not be Sprint RRUs. Still others? ? ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enormous picture at link below:

http://madsound.dynd...cell/side2e.JPG

[S4GRU]

I really wish I could see a Sprint or AT&T-specific detailed schematic of the RRU interfaces. How do they provide power to them? I'd hazard a guess that they run a single dedicated 48V DC line up the tower and then somehow split it out to each RRU. Any other guesses?

 

Check out this link: http://www.mywakulla.com/docs/PlanningCommunityDevelopment/TRC/11-15-12/SP12-16.pdf

 

In the Electrical drawings (E sheets) it shows RRU's and power. These are ground mounted RRU's, but the principle is still the same.

 

Robert

[doug526]

Check out this link: http://www.mywakulla...-12/SP12-16.pdf

 

In the Electrical drawings (E sheets) it shows RRU's and power. These are ground mounted RRU's, but the principle is still the same.

 

Robert

 

More or less what I was looking for. Too bad it's not in full color.

[digiblur]

Updated the first post with an additional type of panel you might see in your travels. Thanks to kevins669 for this picture.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

Check out this link: http://www.mywakulla.com/docs/PlanningCommunityDevelopment/TRC/11-15-12/SP12-16.pdf

 

In the Electrical drawings (E sheets) it shows RRU's and power. These are ground mounted RRU's, but the principle is still the same.

 

Robert

 

Now how'd u pull that there? Didn't even see a query for permits for wakulla when I glanced...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[S4GRU]

Now how'd u pull that there? Didn't even see a query for permits for wakulla when I glanced...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

It was sent to me from a member.

 

Robert

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

It was sent to me from a member.

 

Robert

 

I browsed their site a bit more and finally saw it mentioned in the agenda for one of the meetings and tracked it down that way. Had to search for cell site to pull the links up...

 

Still hunting on wakegov to see what I can dig up... About to just fold and email them asking what all has come across as it should be public record anyway.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[digiblur]

Some of those permit sites are painful. Was digging on the Mandeville city site and had to download some crazy paper vision app just to see the construction drawings for the one site.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

 

[S4GRU]

In New Mexico, building permits are run by the State. They have a website. You can pull permits if you have the actual physical address of the site. Not the one Google Maps or GeoBatch says it is. But the one used on the permit when filed with the CID. And it has to be exact. And they only give you dates, and plan review comments. They almost never have plans attached electronically.

 

Robert

[MacinJosh]

In New Mexico, building permits are run by the State. They have a website. You can pull permits if you have the actual physical address of the site. Not the one Google Maps or GeoBatch says it is. But the one used on the permit when filed with the CID. And it has to be exact. And they only give you dates, and plan review comments. They almost never have plans attached electronically.

 

Robert

 

Clark County Nevada won't show the details of the plans, in order to see them you have to walk into their offices in Vegas, supposedly due to copyright. But at least I can see the actual building permits.

[PedroDaGr8]

 

 

Those ridged antenna are likely AT&T as that's what they are installing at a new site near me.

[mrzood]

Here is an album with two San Antonio Ericsson Sites, SA03XC043 and SA13XC092:

 

http://imgur.com/a/N4NJQ#0

 

Be sure to click the cog in the top right for full sized view!

 

Notice how these two sites have different styles of panels.

 

SA03XC043 Thumbnail:

 

SA13XC092 Thumbnail:

 

 

Hopefully I'll be filling this album with more unique sites as I have time. I snapped these before heading in to work today.

[digiblur]

Interesting. At first it looked like 33 degree panels as well until I saw one of the other pics. Then I thought no 800, but I can count 5-6 TX/RX lines in one picture. Just a different panel.

 

Thanks for posting!

[4GHoward]

Here is a good close up video of AT&T LTE Antennas:

 

[digiblur]

Interesting how they have split up their upgrade to another company much like Sprint. Ericsson is doing ATT down here.

 

That video wanted to make me sick.. I got a good chuckle out of his 120 degree. Try 65 degree for most city sites.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

 

[4GHoward]

Interesting how they have split up their upgrade to another company much like Sprint. Ericsson is doing ATT down here.

 

That video wanted to make me sick.. I got a good chuckle out of his 120 degree. Try 65 degree for most city sites.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

That video shows AT&T using LTE Antennas from Alcatel-Lucent. I am not absolutely sure how the Alcatel-Lucent Antennas for Sprint Network Vision looks like because Sprint is using Ericsson Antennas in my area. Do you know if the Alcatel-Lucent Antennas from AT&T looks similar to the Alcatel-Lucent Antennas that Sprint is using?

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Interesting how they have split up their upgrade to another company much like Sprint. Ericsson is doing ATT down here.

 

That video wanted to make me sick.. I got a good chuckle out of his 120 degree. Try 65 degree for most city sites.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

Yeah 120 would have a ton of overlap interference between the sectors as you move out away from it... Less u had a ton of downtilt... Right?

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[WiWavelength]

Yeah 120 would have a ton of overlap interference between the sectors as you move out away from it... Less u had a ton of downtilt... Right?

 

No, 120 degrees is essentially correct. Divide 360 degrees by three, and you get 120 degrees. And the overlap between sectors would be effectively the same regardless of distance because the beam width (in degrees) is constant.

 

AJ

[digiblur]

 

No, 120 degrees is essentially correct. Divide 360 degrees by three, and you get 120 degrees. And the overlap between sectors would be effectively the same regardless of distance because the beam width (in degrees) is constant.

 

AJ

 

120 panels aren't used though is what I was getting at.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

 

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

No, 120 degrees is essentially correct. Divide 360 degrees by three, and you get 120 degrees. And the overlap between sectors would be effectively the same regardless of distance because the beam width (in degrees) is constant.

 

AJ

 

That's what I initially thought but with digiblurs post I reasoned why in my head it'd be what he said...

 

Yeah when I reasoned it I was thinking the beam being in a triangle formation and that would in turn mean the further away from the location(tower) the wider the beam is from edge to edge...which really makes sense tbh... Ugh Ima need a pic now. Lol

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

120 panels aren't used though is what I was getting at.

 

-- "Sensorly or it didn't happen!"

 

U lost me now.... As 65 panels are not used either...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

Yeah when I reasoned it I was thinking the beam being in a triangle formation and that would in turn mean the further away from the location(tower) the wider the beam is from edge to edge...which really makes sense tbh... Ugh Ima need a pic now. Lol

 

As I indicated above, you measure beam width in degrees. Take a sheet of paper and draw a large letter "V" on it. Take a protractor, and measure the angle close to the vertex and near the ends of the stems. Sure, the arc or chord length will be greater towards the end of the stems, but the angle measure will be the same.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

120 panels aren't used though is what I was getting at.

 

That depends on how you look at it. Beam width is usually specified as degrees of arc at the half power points. In other words, if it is a 65 degree panel, then the power response is -3 dB at ±32.5 degrees. But the polar response does not stop on a dime. If it did, a three sector site with 65 degree panels would produce coverage that looked a lot like a three bladed propeller -- big coverage gaps in between sectors. So, no, even though the power response is -3 dB at ±32.5 degrees, the polar response continues out to ±60 degrees and beyond to cover the entire 120 degree sector.

 

AJ

[digiblur]

U lost me now.... As 65 panels are not used either...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Sprint is actually deploying 90, 65, and 33 degree panels depending on the application needed. We've already seen this panels in New Orleans and I added them to this thread.

 

As AJ was stating it does not stop on a dime. Hence the general rule I've seen is to choose an antenna spec that is 75-85% of what you want to cover. 120 degrees * 0.75 = 90 degrees. Sites with downtilt changes that a bit as you have to think in 3D then.

 

Now based on the application whether it be for additional signal penetration in a dense urban site a 65 or even 35 degree sector will be used. As long as the sites are "meshed" to pick up the slack from the one site you'll be fine. You'll also see the 65's used in areas where only an interstate or highway coverage is needed. This allows more of focused "beam" down the interstate corridor. Of course the less coverage off the side of the narrow lobe is a downside.

 

Two links:

http://books.google.com/books?id=TQwtK5JnT04C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false (page 167)

http://docs.commscope.com/Public/electrical_and_mechanical_downtilt_effect_on_pattern_performance.pdf

[Sgt. Slaughter]

 

Sprint is actually deploying 90, 65, and 33 degree panels depending on the application needed. We've already seen this panels in New Orleans and I added them to this thread.

 

As AJ was stating it does not stop on a dime. Hence the general rule I've seen is to choose an antenna spec that is 75-85% of what you want to cover. 120 degrees * 0.75 = 90 degrees. Sites with downtilt changes that a bit as you have to think in 3D then.

 

Now based on the application whether it be for additional signal penetration in a dense urban site a 65 or even 35 degree sector will be used. As long as the sites are "meshed" to pick up the slack from the one site you'll be fine. You'll also see the 65's used in areas where only an interstate or highway coverage is needed. This allows more of focused "beam" down the interstate corridor. Of course the less coverage off the side of the narrow lobe is a downside.

 

Two links:

http://books.google.com/books?id=TQwtK5JnT04C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false (page 167)

http://docs.commscope.com/Public/electrical_and_mechanical_downtilt_effect_on_pattern_performance.pdf

 

Terminology down. Was late last night and I follow now. Lol

Thanks as usual

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2