Sprint TD-LTE 2500/2600mhz Discussion

[ericdabbs]

Specifically, where did anyone say that Sprint is hitting every site with TD?

 

sent via my SIII on Tapatalk 4 beta

 

It was pretty much hinted at the Q&A session during the Q2 CC.  It was the first question asked by Jonathan Chaplin.

[iansltx]

You must have slept through the big news where Sprint said they are adding TD-LTE to all 38,000+ Sprint sites. On top of the entire Clearwire network. They said they would also expand with additional TD-LTE sites in urban areas in between Sprint NV sites where needed. Huge news.Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

Correction: "pretty much 100%" according to the transcript. I expect some rural sites to be left out. Or maybe just non-LTE NV sites. Not sure yet.

 

But huge news nonetheless. Particularly with the Galaxy S4/Mini dual mode announcement.

 

sent via my SIII on Tapatalk 4 beta

 

 

[lynyrd65]

Quote from transcript

 

Jonathan Chaplin - New Street Research

A quick question for Steve. I am wondering if you could give us some detail on how quickly you think you can deploy the 2.5 gigahertz spectrum on your network and how pervasively over the next year or two you expect to deploy that? And then you mentioned that you'd have 2.5 capable handsets in the back half of this year. How quickly do you think the device ecosystem around 2.5 for you is going to mature? So that by the end of the year, how much of your portfolio do you think will be 2.5 capable and how does that sort of progress in the first part of 2014? Thank you.

 

Steve Elfman

Hey, Jonathan. Let me start at the back first because I now remember that question. We'll have a few handsets in the fourth quarter that are 2.5 capable and that of course will be a low percentage of our overall portfolio. But beginning in '14, all of our devices that we get will be 2.5 capable. So as we sell more, it will be a higher percentage of our portfolio. In terms of the build out of 2.5, we have already begun the zoning, the leasing, on quite a number of our sites. We will get more specific as time goes on, as we are just now working with our vendors on the final contracts for 2.5. But we'll have several thousand sites up this year because of the work that Clearwire was doing before us. Next year we'll get across the nation. It will not be fully built up, but it will be quite a bit easier than the current Network Vision plan because we will already have backhaul. We will already have done most of the leasing and it will be more of an overlay effect the way you’re seeing our competitors do overlay LTE network. So it will move much faster than the current Network Vision plan. 

 

Jonathan Chaplin – New Street Research

And so when it's fully deployed, Steve, what percentage of your 38,000 sites will it ultimately be on?

 

 

Steve Elfman

I would expect it to be on close to 100% of those. The reason I say that, Jonathan is actually it requires more density for 2.5. So overall when it's fully deployed it will be more than the 38,000 sites that we'll be on once it's done. So it will be on the ones that we've got now and the ones that Clearwire has and then likely additional ones. We'll get more specific as time goes on. 

 

 

[GregSmoov]

Personally I still think that the top end speed Robert got may have been limited by the Wifi speed of the Note 2.

Surprised no one suggested this before.

I have 50Mbps DOWN by 25Mbps UP cable connection at home and my speedtest never go above 35Mbps down on my Note 2 while on my desktop i can hit 58-60Mbps down consistently.

 

When tri-band phones become available we will see the true potential of the new 2500 network. 

 

Robert why don't you go back to Denver and re-test the Netgear hotspot using your desktop 

 

Pretty please 

[jroepcke51]

Quote from transcript

 

Every time I read this, the more excited I get.

[IamMrFamous07]

Every time I read this, the more excited I get.

Same here!! 2014 will be amazing, LTE on 800 and 2.5 and Triband phones and I'm eligible for my upgrade

[Jaggrey]

 

Robert why don't you go back to Denver and re-test the Netgear hotspot using your desktop 

 

Pretty please 

LOL I can see it now.

[mhammett]

Where did it come from that Clear doesn't have sufficient backhaul capacity on their network? I've checked about a dozen links on the edge of their Chicago network and the smallest link is 212 megabit. Most are over 300 megabit. Many are 364 megabit. Now obviously this is only the microwave network as I don't have access to their fiber circuit information.

 

Now I suppose its possible that they oversubscribe the access or microwave networks ot the fiber. IE: they may have multiple 300 meg microwave links converging on a 500 meg fiber pipe or go through too many microwave hops (a 300 meg pipe that pases 6 towers before hitting fiber), but I don't have any information on the fiber network. That also wouldn't make any sense.

[mhammett]

The Clear sites may or may not have the same capacity as NV sites, but they have a lot better redundancy.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

The Clear sites may or may not have the same capacity as NV sites, but they have a lot better redundancy.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Consumers care about capacity not redundancy. Only engineers care about redundancy.

[mhammett]

Sprint knows very well what customers think of a service that doesn't work. That's why they're spending billions to rebuild a network that didn't work.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

Sprint knows very well what customers think of a service that doesn't work. That's why they're spending billions to rebuild a network that didn't work.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Cause of no fiber. Clearwire was kinda working but site density wasn't high enough.

Sprint is simply catching up on its capex, not going above and beyond.

Edited August 1, 2013 by bluespruce1901

[mhammett]

Cause of no fiber. Clearwire was kinda working but site density wasn't high enough. Sprint is simply catching up on its capex, not going above and beyond.

Well right, Clear's site density wasn't high enough, but Sprint was out of capacity many years ago and didn't really do anything about it until NV. I'm still not certain they're putting in large enough backhaul circuits. The fiber is likely scalable as is the microwave, but they didn't build their microwave links hot enough, nor with any sort of redundancy.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Well right, Clear's site density wasn't high enough, but Sprint was out of capacity many years ago and didn't really do anything about it until NV. I'm still not certain they're putting in large enough backhaul circuits. The fiber is likely scalable as is the microwave, but they didn't build their microwave links hot enough, nor with any sort of redundancy.

I thought Sprint's current fiber specs are 100mbps scalable to higher?

[S4GRU]

Sprint knows very well what customers think of a service that doesn't work. That's why they're spending billions to rebuild a network that didn't work.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Redundancy is important, and I won't suggest it's not. Clearwire has been upgrading its backhaul the last year. Some places it is great, some places it is lacking still.

 

Case in point, in my Denver TD-LTE testing, I had lots of full signals tests with speeds around 5-10Mbps. And and a few over 30Mbps. Obviously use on a 20MHz TDD channel with only a few hotpots out there is nil. On most of these sites, I was likely the only person on that channel.

 

If Clearwire backhaul had been upgraded and up to snuff, I would have had all 35Mbps speeds (the maximum my Note 2 would have handled on WiFi). But it was about 3 sites out of approximately 30 that I tested.

 

As you suggested, it's not likely the microwave links that are impacting performance (although it might in a daisy chain deployment), but its probably the final termination point to fiber or AAV backhaul on the microwave chain that needs to be upgraded.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

 

[linhpham2]

Surprised no one suggested this before.

I have 50Mbps DOWN by 25Mbps UP cable connection at home and my speedtest never go above 35Mbps down on my Note 2 while on my desktop i can hit 58-60Mbps down consistently.

 

The speed of your wifi connection to your phone depends on your ISP and router. On my home Asus AC66U router, I get 55-60 mbps down and 25-30 mbps up on my Galaxy Note 2. I have the same internet speeds as yours, except that I have Comcast.

 

For most wifi-n routers and portable hotspots/mifi's, I'd expect speeds a fraction of an AC router.

[S4GRU]

I get approximately 35-36 down on my Note 2 in WiFi. And I occasionally will get anomalies around 40-45Mbps. But those may be speed test errors.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

 

 

[mhammett]

I thought Sprint's current fiber specs are 100mbps scalable to higher?

Technically, yes but how much problem has Sprint had with backhaul vendors taking their sweet time executing orders? Will the vendor have the ability to handle the upgrade?

 

When they add 2.5, how long will it take for usage to out-pace backhaul upgrades? Microwave dishes will need to be swapped out because they didn't use large enough ones in the first place.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[WiWavelength]

For most wifi-n routers and portable hotspots/mifi's, I'd expect speeds a fraction of an AC router.

 

That depends on the device.  The HTC One and Galaxy S4 support 802.11ac, but the Note 2 does not.  So, regardless of router type, the Note 2 is connecting at 802.11n MCS indices, at best.

 

AJ

[mhammett]

Redundancy is important

The microwave sites could have had better reliability than fiber only sites if they terminated to another fiber vendor on the other side of the chain.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

[cletus]

Redundancy is important, and I won't suggest it's not. Clearwire has been upgrading its backhaul the last year. Some places it is great, some places it is lacking still. Case in point, in my Denver TD-LTE testing, I had lots of full signals tests with speeds around 5-10Mbps. And and a few over 30Mbps. Obviously use on a 20MHz TDD channel with only a few hotpots out there is nil. On most of these sites, I was likely the only person on that channel. If Clearwire backhaul had been upgraded and up to snuff, I would have had all 35Mbps speeds (the maximum my Note 2 would have handled on WiFi). But it was about 3 sites out of approximately 30 that I tested. As you suggested, it's not likely the microwave links that are impacting performance (although it might in a daisy chain deployment), but its probably the final termination point to fiber or AAV backhaul on the microwave chain that needs to be upgraded. Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

To piggyback on this. I have a WiMax phone and I have noticed that some sites in Austin appear to have higher bandwidth available now than a year ago. Part of that is, of course, due to people moving off WiMax but it is not a consistent change among all the towers here. I am fully expecting Austin to be in the next round of cities that Clearwire LTE is launched in. If only someone in Austin had a Triband hotspot to test. . .

[linhpham2]

That depends on the device.  The HTC One and Galaxy S4 support 802.11ac, but the Note 2 does not.  So, regardless of router type, the Note 2 is connecting at 802.11n MCS indices, at best.

 

AJ

I have a Note 2, I always get 2-3x speeds on Speedtest when connected to an AC vs an n-router. Makes sense since the specs for 802.11ac requires handling more bandwidth than 802.11n.

[WiWavelength]

I have a Note 2, I always get 2-3x speeds when connected to an AC vs an n-router. Makes sense since the specs for 802.11ac requires handling more bandwidth than 802.11n

 

Define what you mean by "bandwidth" in this case.  For example, 802.11ac supports 80 MHz carrier bandwidth.  But the Note 2 does not.

 

AJ

[linhpham2]

Define what you mean by "bandwidth" in this case.  For example, 802.11ac supports 80 MHz carrier bandwidth.  But the Note 2 does not.

 

AJ

I was actually referring to an AC router needing to have a much faster processor, because of the 802.11ac specs. And not necessarily, the wifi connection from the router to the phone. So, the router's connection to the ISP and the faster CPU is going to allow faster downloads and uploads speeds for the phone.

[WiWavelength]

I was actually referring to an AC router needing to have a much faster processor, because of the 802.11ac specs. And not necessarily, the wifi connection from the router to the phone. So, the router's connection to the ISP and the faster CPU is going to allow faster downloads and uploads speeds for the phone.

 

That may be true, but nothing of it is inherent to 802.11ac.  If limited to an 802.11 device, an 802.11n router could theoretically include a faster processor and achieve the same speeds.  However, I now do understand your real world results.

 

AJ