Jump to content

Sprint TD-LTE 2500/2600mhz Discussion


Recommended Posts

Does anybody have a good idea of how long it will take sprint to rollout 2.5 widely? I know clear itself is suppose to have 2000 site ready to go by the end of the year, any chance sprint might beat that number?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anybody have a good idea of how long it will take sprint to rollout 2.5 widely? I know clear itself is suppose to have 2000 site ready to go by the end of the year, any chance sprint might beat that number?

I doubt it. New radio heads need to be installed, new antenna panels, etc.

 

 

Sent from my Sprint iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anybody have a good idea of how long it will take sprint to rollout 2.5 widely? I know clear itself is suppose to have 2000 site ready to go by the end of the year, any chance sprint might beat that number?

I believe clearwire already has 2,000 sites ready to go.

 

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Triband compatibility will likely be reserved as a selling point for a future model (this is my opinion based on historical Apple marketing strategy).

Adding antenna support has never been a feature that Apple ever boasts about. They did not create a new iPhone number when Verizon started selling the iPhone. Sure it was CDMA based, but it had the same internals as the ATT iPhone that they started selling months prior. The new Tmobile iPhone also did not get its own special number.

 

Also, marketing new frequencies will not fly. Do you honestly believe their customers know anything about spectrum? or most wireless users?

 

I actually believe there is a good chance that the new iPhone will support Tri-Band LTE. Softbank is a key seller of the iPhone in Japan, and has TD-LTE on 2.6ghz spectrum. China Mobile and Apple have been rumored to launching a China Mobile iPhone, and of course China mobile also uses 2.6ghz TD-LTE. The 2.6Ghz frequency is becoming a very popular frequency across the globe. Now, most of those countries are Band 7(FDD), but I would not be surprised if Apple threw in TDD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adding antenna support has never been a feature that Apple ever boasts about. They did not create a new iPhone number when Verizon started selling the iPhone. Sure it was CDMA based, but it had the same internals as the ATT iPhone that they started selling months prior. The new Tmobile iPhone also did not get its own special number.

 

Also, marketing new frequencies will not fly. Do you honestly believe their customers know anything about spectrum? or most wireless users?

 

I actually believe there is a good chance that the new iPhone will support Tri-Band LTE. Softbank is a key seller of the iPhone in Japan, and has TD-LTE on 2.6ghz spectrum. China Mobile and Apple have been rumored to launching a China Mobile iPhone, and of course China mobile also uses 2.6ghz TD-LTE. The 2.6Ghz frequency is becoming a very popular frequency across the globe. Now, most of those countries are Band 7(FDD), but I would not be surprised if Apple threw in TDD.

I'm sure apple will make the iPhone TDD capable I just don't this years versions of the iPhone will have the chip. Honestly as long as the next years iPhone has TDD LTE support I'm fine since I am eligible for an upgrade next June.

 

I just hope in time that the 2.5ghz band is nationwide, I know some areas need it more than others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure apple will make the iPhone TDD capable I just don't this years versions of the iPhone will have the chip. Honestly as long as the next years iPhone has TDD LTE support I'm fine since I am eligible for an upgrade next June.

 

I just hope in time that the 2.5ghz band is nationwide, I know some areas need it more than others

 

It is not solely based on who need it the most, it is also based on site density in the city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adding antenna support has never been a feature that Apple ever boasts about. They did not create a new iPhone number when Verizon started selling the iPhone. Sure it was CDMA based, but it had the same internals as the ATT iPhone that they started selling months prior. The new Tmobile iPhone also did not get its own special number.

 

Also, marketing new frequencies will not fly. Do you honestly believe their customers know anything about spectrum? or most wireless users?

 

I actually believe there is a good chance that the new iPhone will support Tri-Band LTE. Softbank is a key seller of the iPhone in Japan, and has TD-LTE on 2.6ghz spectrum. China Mobile and Apple have been rumored to launching a China Mobile iPhone, and of course China mobile also uses 2.6ghz TD-LTE. The 2.6Ghz frequency is becoming a very popular frequency across the globe. Now, most of those countries are Band 7(FDD), but I would not be surprised if Apple threw in TDD.

I agree that Softbank will likely push Apple to adopt the 2.6Ghz TD-LTE capabilities ASAFP, but I'd bet on this model supporting 800Mhz LTE before 2.6.  On this I would absolutely LOVE to be wrong.  The later the device is released however - the better the odds get.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Softbank will likely push Apple to adopt the 2.6Ghz TD-LTE capabilities ASAFP, but I'd bet on this model supporting 800Mhz LTE before 2.6. On this I would absolutely LOVE to be wrong. The later the device is released however - the better the odds get.

We shall see. When does Sprint plan on turning on LTE on 2.5? I know sprint had said once they get approval from the shareholders and FCC we would find out more but I wonder exactly since they plan on launching Triband LTE MBB devices this summer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We shall see. When does Sprint plan on turning on LTE on 2.5? I know sprint had said once they get approval from the shareholders and FCC we would find out more but I wonder exactly since they plan on launching Triband LTE MBB devices this summer

 

There are greater than 2000 completed TD-LTE sites situated in about 12 markets that are ready to be connected to Sprints MSC's and are slated to be  activated in the coming weeks alongside LTE 800 as part of Network Vision 2.0

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

We shall see. When does Sprint plan on turning on LTE on 2.5? I know sprint had said once they get approval from the shareholders and FCC we would find out more but I wonder exactly since they plan on launching Triband LTE MBB devices this summer

 

 

There are greater than 2000 completed TD-LTE sites situated in about 12 markets that are ready to be connected to Sprints MSC's and are slated to be activated in the coming weeks alongside LTE 800 as part of Network Vision 2.0

Do you know which 12 markets?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know which 12 markets?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

The ones off the top of my head are Houston, DFW, Chicago, St Louis, Milw., and a few other texas / chicago area markets. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not be surprised if Atlanta was on the list of first round markets. We are a pretty strapped market in terms of spectrum. limited access to lte 800, because of SoLinc; and we do not have 30Mhz A-F like many other markets. I also believe Sprint has a high marketshare here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool I read more info about their LTE network on their website and it looks like they planned to release a LTE advance network that can get about 100mbps down. I wonder sprint/SoftBank plans to same once they acquire clearwire.

 

Do I necessarily need to have at 100mbps down, absolutely not but for bragging rights it would be nice if sprint/SoftBank does plan to have those kind of speeds on that network

 

 

Capacity.

 

The speed that a tower can provide to the average user depends on the number of users connected to that tower.

Assuming the 100mbps is peak speed, that speed is divided by the number of people connected to the tower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capacity.

 

The speed that a tower can provide to the average user depends on the number of users connected to that tower.

Assuming the 100mbps is peak speed, that speed is divided by the number of people connected to the tower.

...only if ALL of them are using their connection

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Capacity.

 

The speed that a tower can provide to the average user depends on the number of users connected to that tower.

Assuming the 100mbps is peak speed, that speed is divided by the number of people connected to the tower.

 

 

...only if ALL of them are using their connection

My point was that average speed is more important than peak speed.

 

You're only gonna see peak speeds at 2am but average speeds are daytime, normal hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ones off the top of my head are Houston, DFW, Chicago, St Louis, Milw., and a few other texas / chicago area markets.

 

I highly doubt milwaukee is on that list 2 protection sites for wimax. Doesn't seem like a market that is high on clearwires todo list sadly. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think the first round of Clearwire LTE markets would be ones that have a ton of Network Vision upgraded sites.  I would think that Sprint/Softbank would want to build the TD-LTE on Network Vision sites.  I expect Chicago,  Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, LA, SF Bay, NYC, etc to be included in the first round.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even with Clearwire TD-LTE, the claim to the fastest LTE network will be questionable.  VZW and T-Mobile likely will both have some markets with 20 MHz FDD deployments.  And from a peak speed standpoint, 20 MHz FDD is definitely faster than 20 MHz TDD.  In fact, 20 MHz TDD is really more comparable to 10 MHz FDD, which VZW, AT&T, and T-Mobile already have in many/most/all markets.  So, Sprint still will not win the peak speed contests, but it may win the average speed contests -- or, at least, be far more competitive.

 

AJ

 

I thought that clearwire was testing 20Mhz TDD LTE and getting a theoretical maximum of over 100Mb/s (real world testing with a van driving down a road was resulting in 90Mb/s). Now this was with a 5Mb/s upload speed but they said that they could dynamically adjust the download/upload ratio depending on usage in a given area.  And that is with only ONE 20Mhz channel! If I am to understand this correctly, they own 40Mhz of spectrum and lease the rest (which averages to them having approximately 160Mhz in the top 100 metro areas) even if it is not fully contiguous and if I account for gaurd bands etc, they should be able to fit in at least 4-5 20Mhz channels and still be able to keep the lights on the wimax network at the same time.  And with the LTE-Advanced that all of sprints network vision towers are already capable of, they will be able to aggregate all of the channels of LTE, making the peak download speeds.  This will obviously be much further down the road, but as I see it, they will have the possibility to take the crown for fastest download speeds.  

 

As for them eventually placing 2500 on every tower, I would say that it will probably not be every tower, but a vast majority of them.  This is because even if the towers are not close enough to overlap, the people on the 2500 that are close to the tower will free up capacity for the other users that are further out.  I realize that at first it will not be like this, but eventually even suburban towers will eventually have 2500, and only rural areas will not have it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take a guess and say currently where there is Wimax, that is where the Clear's flavor of LTE will be. Like where I am now. DC/Baltimore corridor. I remember when Sprint started NV, the number of Ericsson equipment being shipped out to Overland Park, Kansas from where I work out of Dulles.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that clearwire was testing 20Mhz TDD LTE and getting a theoretical maximum of over 100Mb/s (real world testing with a van driving down a road was resulting in 90Mb/s). Now this was with a 5Mb/s upload speed but they said that they could dynamically adjust the download/upload ratio depending on usage in a given area.  And that is with only ONE 20Mhz channel! If I am to understand this correctly, they own 40Mhz of spectrum and lease the rest (which averages to them having approximately 160Mhz in the top 100 metro areas) even if it is not fully contiguous and if I account for gaurd bands etc, they should be able to fit in at least 4-5 20Mhz channels and still be able to keep the lights on the wimax network at the same time.  And with the LTE-Advanced that all of sprints network vision towers are already capable of, they will be able to aggregate all of the channels of LTE, making the peak download speeds.  This will obviously be much further down the road, but as I see it, they will have the possibility to take the crown for fastest download speeds. 

 

Clearwire may have tested a number of different TD-LTE configurations for downlink:uplink symbol ratio and MIMO complexity.  But if we take the 3:2 ratio and 2x2 MIMO that will be in common use, then there is no way to hit 100 Mbps over a 20 MHz TDD carrier.

 

As for BRS/EBS spectrum, WiMAX has been occupying typically 90-120 MHz per market.  So, until some/all spectrum for WiMAX is refarmed, Clearwire should have enough available and contiguous BRS/EBS for only one or two TD-LTE carriers per market.

 

Lastly, just to be clear, LTE Advanced carrier aggregation will not allow Sprint to aggregate its LTE carriers with Clearwire's TD-LTE carriers.  Only LTE to LTE and TD-LTE to TD-LTE carrier aggregation (but not a mix) will be possible.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ, is the theory that Clear deployed WiMax using that much spectrum to protect the licenses?  I believe I read from you once that each sector on a tower is using a completely different piece of spectrum, rather than reuse to make sure they were covered for licensing.

 

If that is correct, couldn't the WiMax carrrers be reconfigured for spectrum reuse, thus freeing up additional BRS/EBS for LTE?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ, is the theory that Clear deployed WiMax using that much spectrum to protect the licenses?  I believe I read from you once that each sector on a tower is using a completely different piece of spectrum, rather than reuse to make sure they were covered for licensing.

 

If that is correct, couldn't the WiMax carrrers be reconfigured for spectrum reuse, thus freeing up additional BRS/EBS for LTE?

 

Clearwire WiMAX is definitely using differently assigned carriers on adjacent sectors/sites.  If all carriers are 10 MHz TDD, then that means at least 30 MHz utilization per site, and probably 90-120 MHz utilization per frequency reuse cluster.  Now, if any of those carriers currently are or will be cut back to 5 MHz FDD, then the WiMAX spectrum utilization drops accordingly.

 

The non unity frequency reuse could be due to regulatory or technical concerns.  At least one poster here has called Clearwire "lazy" for doing so.  But no one has stepped up with any legitimate evidence to support that assertion.  Instead, by using non unity frequency reuse, WiMAX gets better sector and cell edge performance, since co channel interference becomes almost eradicated.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • This site is built but not live. eNB 41150 is still live. eNB 41188 is decommissioned but as far as I can tell the site at 200 West 55th is not built yet. This site is live gNB 1346302. This site is live gNB 1092074 This site is live gNB 1371671 This site is live gNB 1371860 — — — — — Sprint eNB 6156 -> T-Mobile gNB 1349260 Sprint eNB Unknown -> T-Mobile gNB 1325016 — — — — — Bonus T-Mobile 5G small cell, gNB 1348688 in Queens:  
    • FTTH JVs are city by city as well, so it's not going to really be sector by sector. It sounds like TMo wants to be able to sell everyone home broadband, but if that requires building additional infrastructure that infra will take the form of FTTH builds rather than mobile densification. Which involves tradeoffs, but the product is better than e.g. what AT&T is doing for me right now, which is offering only Internet Air in an area where they have 100/20 DSL available but not (yet) fiber.
    • Hopefully they do not wait until these sectors get so overloaded that they start getting nasty reviews and people abandon them. Getting fiber coverage to the area of a overloaded sector can take a year or more. I also question if this can all be managed.  Lots of sectors all over the country can get congested fairly quick.  Lots of work and money to get fiber installed and there goes the profitability on the venture.
    • MoffetNathanson Conference This is a conference where the CFO talks telecom financial analysts so obviously it takes a return on investment approach.  Broadly T-Mobile divides there world into top 100 markets (60%) and small town/rural (40%). They ultimately want to have at least 1/3 market share in rural. They also look at demographics like 50+ and Hispanic.  Reputation is now starting to help them with CIOs.  Did mention c-band buildout beginning in major cities as well as continued band migration to 5g. IMO they may become more aggressive at offering 5g phones to LTE holdover and 5g users without VoNR at a future date. mmWave not discussed. Price increases not discussed iirc. Did mention spectrum purchases from speculators. $9 billion all goes through same ROI process. FWA is down to hexagonal patterns by sector of fallow spectrum. Fiber JVs will go where sectors are overloaded.
    • I am lucky to be served by an excellent fiber ISP and that is the only reason I haven't tried TMOs FWA. Once you go fiber, it is REALLY hard to go back. The choice of sub-10ms ping times is a very artificial bucket, FWA will seldom get much below 10ms ping times but fiber regularly gets me 1-3ms ping times. Basically, at around those times, the speed of light and the distance you are from the server become the limiting factors. As an aside, my internet provider, ZiplyFiber, has been awesome. They peer like crazy at all the major IX in the area and, as a result, you end up with what essentially amounts to direct fiber connections to the vast majority of major data sources. While it isn't sexy, it makes my 1Gb/1Gb connection load pages significantly faster than my works 10Gb/10Gb connection. On the "sexy" side, they are also fastest ISP in the nation. They offer up to 50Gb/50Gb via a direct fiber connection to the router, albeit for an eye watering $900/mo.
  • Recently Browsing

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