Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That tower must be providing backhaul for the other towers.

 

It's daisy chaining. It's receiving backhaul via MW and passing it on to another site too.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's daisy chaining. It's receiving backhaul via MW and passing it on to another site too.

 

Robert

 

ewww that sounds not so smart....I would think that they wouldn't do it more than once like this...setting them up in a series is way too risky imho. If one in the middle or near the beginning goes down for whatever reason, then the rest of the towers down the line are SOL...Also how do they regulate the bandwidth to each tower if in a series like that? Would make it seem that first tower in the line gets the priority and all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ewww that sounds not so smart....I would think that they wouldn't do it more than once like this...setting them up in a series is way too risky imho. If one in the middle or near the beginning goes down for whatever reason, then the rest of the towers down the line are SOL...Also how do they regulate the bandwidth to each tower if in a series like that? Would make it seem that first tower in the line gets the priority and all...

 

It's not a big deal at all. But you can "repeat" only so many times before you affect performance. It is done all the time. I am writing an article on it soon.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a big deal at all. But you can "repeat" only so many times before you affect performance. It is done all the time. I am writing an article on it soon.

 

Robert

 

Yeah, BUT whats the backup for the towers not near the front of the line? i mean its not real smart imho to leave the possibility of having 1 little device able to take out others in other areas...

 

interested in the article though, to see how they effectively evenly distribute the backhaul to all the towers in that series. This will work for now but in future they will have to get each tower its own line or at least only a few linked in a series line...Microwave has its limits on bandwidth....

dunno why but I just envision Sprint running a giant 20-50 tower series link doing this just testing the absolute max they can push it...If you stretch 1 Microwave long enough though you could have the bandwidth split up to be back down to the bundled T1 level...

 

ill try and wait till the article before I think negatively on it much more...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, BUT whats the backup for the towers not near the front of the line? i mean its not real smart imho to leave the possibility of having 1 little device able to take out others in other areas...

 

interested in the article though, to see how they effectively evenly distribute the backhaul to all the towers in that series. This will work for now but in future they will have to get each tower its own line or at least only a few linked in a series line...Microwave has its limits on bandwidth....

dunno why but I just envision Sprint running a giant 20-50 tower series link doing this just testing the absolute max they can push it...If you stretch 1 Microwave long enough though you could have the bandwidth split up to be back down to the bundled T1 level...

 

ill try and wait till the article before I think negatively on it much more...lol

 

Is it smart to delay LTE by a couple of years and spend billions more trying to do an all fiber backhaul? Also, a single line of fiber that's not redundant is not bullet proof. Fiber lines get cut all the time. And it's easier and faster to repair microwave. It's sixes IMO. And when you consider the cost and schedule to go with MW, it's a no brainer. Modern MW is so fast and so scalable.

 

Also, you can build MW in a redundant loop to improve reliability, It doesn't have to have a terminal end.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Is it smart to delay LTE by a couple of years and spend billions more trying to do an all fiber backhaul? Also, a single line of fiber that's not redundant is not bullet proof. Fiber lines get cut all the time. And it's easier and faster to repair microwave. It's sixes IMO. And when you consider the cost and schedule to go with MW, it's a no brainer. Modern MW is so fast and so scalable.

 

Also, you can build MW in a redundant loop to improve reliability, It doesn't have to have a terminal end.

 

Robert

 

Yeah I wasn't really meaning replace it with fiber but microwave to the base which I guess is not possible sometimes...nice to know loop is possible and being done when so though.

 

I guess in these areas after time they will end up having to upgrade microwave radomes if tech advances to increase bandwidth handle, OR end up coughing up for fiber...hopefully by that time there become more direct locations to connect some of the towers microwave to so not in loop.

 

Again I was thinking worst case here, given sprint track record...

You have an idea how many are being linked by chance, like longest link of towers or avg #?

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I wasn't really meaning replace it with fiber but microwave to the base which I guess is not possible sometimes...nice to know loop is possible and being done when so though. I guess in these areas after time they will end up having to upgrade microwave radomes if tech advances to increase bandwidth handle, OR end up coughing up for fiber...hopefully by that time there become more direct locations to connect some of the towers microwave to so not in loop. Again I was thinking worst case here, given sprint track record... You have an idea how many are being linked by chance, like longest link of towers or avg #? Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

 

Typically, you wouldn't want to do more than 3 or 4 in a terminal end application with links being greater than 5-6 miles in between each. Although links of 10mi can be supported. If you were doing a loop, you could do 7 or 8. There are even newer and better improvements in MW than can support even greater distances. However, they are pretty new to market. And I'm not sure if Sprint backhaul providers are already up to speed and deploying these.

 

Sprint is using fiber backhaul where it can. Where it is easily accessible and affordable. And supposedly, the Southern Connecticut market has no microwave at all.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typically, you wouldn't want to do more than 3 or 4 in a terminal end application with links being greater than 5-6 miles in between each. Although links of 10mi can be supported. If you were doing a loop, you could do 7 or 8. There are even newer and better improvements in MW than can support even greater distances. However, they are pretty new to market. And I'm not sure if Sprint backhaul providers are already up to speed and deploying these.

 

Sprint is using fiber backhaul where it can. Where it is easily accessible and affordable. And supposedly, the Southern Connecticut market has no microwave at all.

 

Robert

 

nice thats a lot better than I expected...I just envisioned them doing a giant string of 30-40 towers just to cut costs down and all. lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talked to a gent today that works for a company that makes radomes. He said they run, like, 39 GHz. Must be able to carry quite a bit.

 

Yeah in the Backhaul thread I linked an paper where it stated they currently can carry several GB's of capacity...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talked to a gent today that works for a company that makes radomes. He said they run, like, 39 GHz. Must be able to carry quite a bit.

 

39ghz doesn't give it the ability to carry more data. All depends on the width of the channel and the modulation scheme they can pull off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

39ghz doesn't give it the ability to carry more data. All depends on the width of the channel and the modulation scheme they can pull off.

 

I figured I sounded like a noob with that post...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured I sounded like a noob with that post...

 

haha well b/w digiblur, pyroscott, Robert, and WiWavelength here on the site, personally I tend to phrase anything tower related in a question. lol

 

99.999% of the time they know 10000% the correct answer. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

haha well b/w digiblur' date=' pyroscott, Robert, and WiWavelength here on the site, personally I tend to phrase anything tower related in a question. lol

 

99.999% of the time they know 10000% the correct answer. :)[/quote']

 

And I ask you questions about devices and chips. So, it's all good. ;)

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one of my local towers. I've always thought that the top rack was just iDEN, but was just recently told that CDMA is on this tower as well.

 

 

I believe that the lower setup is Clear's WiMax. Every WiMax site in my area has those little microwave radomes pointing at another clear site, and eventually they lead back to bigger dishes. Too bad Sprint isn't using that backhaul yet... Clear gives me 8-10Mbps consistently when I'm in range.

 

DSC_0121.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing to notice is look at the downtilt between the two panel types. Shows the propagation differences there.

 

If NV has a combined 800/1900 panel, hmm...they won't be able to control the downtilt separately between the two bands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing to notice is look at the downtilt between the two panel types. Shows the propagation differences there.

 

If NV has a combined 800/1900 panel, hmm...they won't be able to control the downtilt separately between the two bands.

 

I was wondering about that. Seemed wierd to me that the darker ones would be such a vast difference and the lighter ones are virtually no downtilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice and clear pic! Yep, that looks like clear at the bottom. Looks like one of those synergy sites where they removed a nextel panel and put in a 1900 panel for cdma.

Another thing to notice is look at the downtilt between the two panel types. Shows the propagation differences there.

 

If NV has a combined 800/1900 panel, hmm...they won't be able to control the downtilt separately between the two bands.

I was wondering about that. Seemed wierd to me that the darker ones would be such a vast difference and the lighter ones are virtually no downtilt.

 

800 needs much more downtilt in an urban area because of increased propagation. And on to digi's question, I'm thinking that in a combined 800/1900 NV panel, there will have to be electronic downtilt that handles the difference. Mechanical downtilt will not be able to be different, as you point out.

 

I'm still amazed at how clear that pic is. Nice job.

 

LTE...what kind of camera was that taken with? I have never had such a clear zoomed panel close up.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
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.


×
×
  • Create New...