Softbank - New Sprint - Discussion

[Ascertion]

I hate to.say it but he might be right. Not that sprint cant build out a network to.utilize the spectrum but with fiber to be installed in basically all their towers by the middle of this year and 10000 or so clear towers that shoukd be easy to convert, a two year roll out time to cover only the top 100 markets is lack luster in the extreme. This is especially true given where the competition is and the fact that in many markets the one 1900 carrier is being overwelhemed. We will see what their plans look like after the 11th but so far they are rather disapointing.

Eh, I feel like T-Mobile management would just cover cities in LTE and leave rural areas untouched.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

 

[utiz4321]

To be honest, people can talk up the speeds of B41 but the real killer is 800mhz. When I get ubiquitous indoor LTE coverage that will be very satisfying!

800 is important, but capacity is king and it always will be in wireless. Unfortunately there is not a lot of capacity with sprint 800 holdings. Speed isn't that important in the end (at least to smart phone users) but capacity is and band 41 has a ton. The capacity on band 41 is what gives sprint the edge over the competition.

[Boosted20V]

800 is important, but capacity is king and it always will be in wireless. Unfortunately there is not a lot of capacity with sprint 800 holdings. Speed isn't that important in the end (at least to smart phone users) but capacity is and band 41 has a ton. The capacity on band 41 is what gives sprint the edge over the competition.

I disagree to an extent. All the capacity in the world won't help if it can't reach the handset. We've all seen how fragile LTE1900 is.

[jamisonshaw125]

800 is important, but capacity is king and it always will be in wireless. Unfortunately there is not a lot of capacity with sprint 800 holdings. Speed isn't that important in the end (at least to smart phone users) but capacity is and band 41 has a ton. The capacity on band 41 is what gives sprint the edge over the competition.

 

 

I disagree to an extent. All the capacity in the world won't help if it can't reach the handset. We've all seen how fragile LTE1900 is.

You took the words out of my mouth. If I can't have service in my house, then I don't care what the capacity is. I would have to stand on the roof of my apartment complex which is probably about 4 floors high at the top, just to get LTE on 1900. In my apartment I have 0 service without my airave. 800 is more important to me than b41, for now. 

 

I can't even go in my movie theater across the street which is less than .9 miles from the site I assume I am picking up without losing LTE on 1900. To go inside with Sprint and have it switch to 800 LTE would be spectacular. I wouldn't even care if I am only getting 1 or 2 down, as long as it's usable. 

[tommym65]

800 is important, but capacity is king and it always will be in wireless. Unfortunately there is not a lot of capacity with sprint 800 holdings. Speed isn't that important in the end (at least to smart phone users) but capacity is and band 41 has a ton. The capacity on band 41 is what gives sprint the edge over the competition.

 

And densification will enable Band 41 to penetrate into a lot of locations and structures which Wimax never reached, off-loading the capacity from potentially- (and in some locations, already-) overloaded Band 25 and 26 spectrum.

[S4GRU]

800 is important, but capacity is king and it always will be in wireless. Unfortunately there is not a lot of capacity with sprint 800 holdings. Speed isn't that important in the end (at least to smart phone users) but capacity is and band 41 has a ton. The capacity on band 41 is what gives sprint the edge over the competition.

Two 5MHz channels (one Band 25/one Band 26) is enough capacity for probably half Sprint's network. Maybe more.

 

Sprint was only originally planning for just capacity and deploying Band 41 on those other half. As needed. But now Sprint has the resources where it can take Band 41 much further and compete on performance too.

 

If your only concern about Band 41 is capacity, then you need not worry. The bigger problem will be getting Triband device adoption to speed up so people can spread the burden around beyond just Band 25. Band 41 is already capable of removing most of the burden off Band 25 in the 30 cities it's already live. The problem is there are not many Band 41 device owners to relieve the burden.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

 

[utiz4321]

I disagree to an extent. All the capacity in the world won't help if it can't reach the handset. We've all seen how fragile LTE1900 is.

If you get a signal that's capacity is max out it doesn't really matter how strong it is. You can have a high frequency network that penetrates buildings if you make it dense enough. With small cells and the propagation that they are getting out of TDD 2.6 they can design a network that performs very well in building.

[KD8JBF]

If you remove the GMO sites, Sprint is pretty far along and certainly can be complete with Band 25 build out on Non GMO sites this year.  When you consider how long it took Tmo to do its backhaul upgrade, there is nothing noteworthy about how long it is taking Sprint.  The problem here is that Sprint had to do it faster than everyone else because they were far behind.  And they couldn't pull a rabbit out of the hat and do it faster.

 

When you consider the scope of Network Vision compared to what the other three did, and they are finishing it front to back in about the same amount of time, it is very impressive.  But customers don't care about the details.  They want a superior network now.  They don't care about overlays versus full build outs and backhaul, etc.  I get that.  But Sprint could not defy reality to do it.

 

So Legere can bend himself over.  Tmo deserves the credit for what they did.  LTE over almost all most of its WCDMA footprint in 9-10 months was an impressive feat.  But Network Vision had to start with Sprint's financial position it had in 2011/2012.  Tmo was in a much better position financially when it started LTE deployment, coming off the spectrum and cash windfall of the AT&T breakup.  Sprint only recently got cash.  And Tmo's scope and footprint of their plan is significantly smaller.

 

Two years ago when NV started, Sprint had no choice but to plan a "just in time" backhaul plan and "just in time" equipment plan, because it did not have the cash to do things in advance.  This created a huge problem that if the backhaul slipped or equipment deliveries slipped, it had immediate and painful impacts.  Also, all the slippages caused a huge management burden/distraction as well as lost efficiencies all the way down the line.  We all watched it snowball.

 

We see how well and how fast the 4th round markets are rolling.  Some are really impressive.  Most of them are the ones that started as SoftBank took over and Sprint had the finances to run them right from the beginning.  West Iowa, the Dakotas and Rochester come to mind.

 

Sprint was limited in the beginning what it could do.  It had its hands tied financially.  And they probably under estimated how fast Tmo would build out their network.  Sprint deserves a lot of criticism.  But it needs to be within the realm of what could be done.  Most of the criticisms about what it can do now are much more fair though.

 

Superficially, it seems that a Top 100 Band 41 buildout in 2-1/2 years is kind of slow.  And the Band 41 build out on Clearwire sites is indeed slow, in my opinion.  But let's look at what Band 41 build out in the next 2-1/2 years entails.

 

It is completion of all 15,000 WiMax sites converted to Band 41 LTE.  It is adding Band 41 LTE to approximately 28,000 Network Vision sites.  And it is building about 16,000 new build macro sites to infill between existing NV/WiMax sites.  That's about 60,000 sites in 2-1/2 years.  That's almost double the size of just Network Vision.  But given it's an easier upgrade scenario, 2 to 2-1/2 years doesn't sound outlandish at all.  And it gives them an opportunity to beat their projections.

 

Also, let's keep in mind that marketwide coverage in the Top 100 markets will likely be achieved much sooner than 2-1/2 years.  The 71 WiMax markets are supposed to be complete before the end of 2014.  Not all 71 are Top 100 markets.  Cities like Stockton, Modesto, Abilene, Yakima and Amarillo are going to benefit, even though they are smaller than Top 100.  But approximately 50 are Top 100 markets.  So there will be ubiquitous coverage in most of the Top 50 markets before the completion of 2014.  And those will continue just to get denser and denser throughout 2015 and into 2016.

 

Unfortunately, the Band 41 LTE overlay on Network Vision sites will require planning approvals and permitting in 75% of their locales.  I hope they are going full speed ahead on that already.  This work is supposed to start next quarter.  Hopefully, they will focus this effort on the other Top 100 markets that do not have WiMax/Band 41 already deployed.  It shouldn't take but 2 years to do this front to back.  So they will be half done in Spring 2015.  So if that first half was focused on the non WiMax/Band 41 LTE markets, they would have complete coverage in the Top 100 markets in just one year from its start.

 

The second year would then be about continuing the new infill sites and completing the NV overlay in existing WiMax markets.  These just make the network denser and better.

 

Remember, Sprint just five short months ago still was planning on just hotspot Band 41 deployment.  To go to a full blown Band 41 deployment is a major stretch.  And the scope is enormous.  In a market that has a complete WiMax or NV overlay of Band 41 will be miraculous.  Even if the Band 41 coverage is thin or missing in between Band 41 sites initially, it will remove a huge burden off the Band 25/26 sites allowing them to work at much better speeds.  Who cares if you fall back on a 10-15Mbps Band 25 connection while they are densifying the rest of the market in Year 2?  What do you think Tmo customers fall back on when in between LTE sites?

 

The over concern about the 2-1/2 year plan for Band 41 deployment is not warranted at this time.  It just needs to be put into perspective.  And Sprint does need to execute it on time!!!

 

Robert

 

Ladies and Gentlemen...you were all just taken to school....

[S4GRU]

And densification will enable Band 41 to penetrate into a lot of locations and structures which Wimax never reached, off-loading the capacity from potentially- (and in some locations, already-) overloaded Band 25 and 26 spectrum.

Band 41 is supposed to be dense enough after complete build out in the Top 100 it should be usable everywhere CDMA 1900 is now. Just basements and deep within buildings not going to get it. Then they can fall back on 25/26.

 

And after a fully dense deployment is complete, even a weak Band 41 connection will likely outperform a strong Band 25/26 connection. There will be no need for the other bands unless you cannot connect to a usable Band 41 signal.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

[S4GRU]

If you get a signal that's capacity is max out it doesn't really matter how strong it is. You can have a high frequency network that penetrates buildings if you make it dense enough. With small cells and the propagation that they are getting out of TDD 2.6 they can design a network that performs very well in building.

Your premise is true. I agree. But I've also addressed these issues in my posts. We are not disagreeing about anything, except perhaps the timelines.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

[DaQue]

To be honest, people can talk up the speeds of B41 but the real killer is 800mhz. When I get ubiquitous indoor LTE coverage that will be very satisfying!

The real killer is we go from 1 5x5 to 2 plus a TDE 20 or room for a about 4x as many people before it's over burden again. IMHO of course.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

 

 

[digiblur]

Johnny Legere is double talking this. Basically saying that Sprint has spectrum but can't build out a network to utilize it, but then saying that his team could fix it.

There is truth to some of this. A couple sites with Tmobile and Sprint I saw Tmobile whip in, thrown the cabinets, NSN RRUs, new antennas while Sprint is still legacy there and not even NV 3g at least.

[twospirits]

As always excellent posts. 

 

Robert, question. When you say 

Superficially, it seems that a Top 100 Band 41 buildout in 2-1/2 years is kind of slow.  And the Band 41 build out on Clearwire sites is indeed slow, in my opinion.  But let's look at what Band 41 build out in the next 2-1/2 years entails.

 

It is completion of all 15,000 WiMax sites converted to Band 41 LTE.  It is adding Band 41 LTE to approximately 28,000 Network Vision sites.  And it is building about 16,000 new build macro sites to infill between existing NV/WiMax sites.  That's about 60,000 sites in 2-1/2 years.  That's almost double the size of just Network Vision.  But given it's an easier upgrade scenario, 2 to 2-1/2 years doesn't sound outlandish at all.  And it gives them an opportunity to beat their projections.

 

Any example of where on our maps that these macro sites are being built? And what type of site. eg: monopole?

 

TS

[S4GRU]

There is truth to some of this. A couple sites with Tmobile and Sprint I saw Tmobile whip in, thrown the cabinets, NSN RRUs, new antennas while Sprint is still legacy there and not even NV 3g at least.

 

And look how fast Samsung has done even a larger scope of work in each market in the 4th rounders.  Although I think you may have highlighted an Ericsson problem.  

 

Tmo did have Ericsson problems too.  Ericsson could not pump out the equipment fast enough.  Tmo did some scrambling and had to do a lot of LTE GMO's in Ericsson markets.  This was a good move and Tmo deserves credit for it.  But Tmo had the luxury of doing GMO LTE because they already had backhaul to the sites.

 

But with Sprint's "just in time backhaul" scenario, this was not possible for them.

 

Robert

[S4GRU]

As always excellent posts. 

 

Robert, question. When you say 

Any example of where on our maps that these macro sites are being built? And what type of site. eg: monopole?

 

TS

 

We don't have any specific info now about the additional sites.  I fear we will find out about them the way we do all new sites and iDEN Conversions.  After the fact when they show up on acceptance reports.

 

I imagine they will locate each infill site that is needed in the space between existing sites.  Then try to locate an existing non Sprint site in that area, contact the site Owner and see about getting a lease to the site.  When this is not possible, it will take sending out requests to tower companies to see who can build a site in their target area.

 

Robert

[utiz4321]

Band 41 is supposed to be dense enough after complete build out in the Top 100 it should be usable everywhere CDMA 1900 is now. Just basements and deep within buildings not going to get it. Then they can fall back on 25/26.And after a fully dense deployment is complete, even a weak Band 41 connection will likely outperform a strong Band 25/26 connection. There will be no need for the other bands unless you cannot connect to a usable Band 41 signal.Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

From comments made by Dan Hesse it seems sprint is seeing TD 2.6 having the same propagation characteristics as 1900 FD. Do you or any one else know why that would be or how they are achieving this?

[bucdenny]

Newer technology.

Wimax gear vs LDD-LTE much different.

[lilotimz]

Newer technology.

Wimax gear vs LDD-LTE much different.

 

Wow.. I must be out of the loop... LDD-LTE must be the next best LTE- Super Advanced specification!

[jefbal99]

Newer technology.

Wimax gear vs TD-LTE much different.

I believe AJ has said that the LTE airlink is more stable than the WiMax airlink also.

[S4GRU]

From comments made by Dan Hesse it seems sprint is seeing TD 2.6 having the same propagation characteristics as 1900 FD. Do you or any one else know why that would be or how they are achieving this?

 

I think he is saying that LTE on 2600 will be usable everywhere that LTE on 1900 is.  In an equal deployment scenario, 1900 reaches only 30% farther than 2600.  So with densification, it is easy to see how on just that alone 2600 will be similar to 1900.

 

However, there is a way to increase the signal propagation.  Beamforming.  Clearwire and Sprint have rejected beamforming in the past.  But it's possible they are rethinking it.  Beamforming is expensive, though.  I'll explain why.

 

Beamforming is where you deploy several narrow-beam panels/sectors instead of the standard three standard beam panels.  If you deployed (9) 33-degree narrow beam panels, you could extend the reach of 2600 significantly.  Deploying three separately aimed panels per sector, creating a 9 sector site.  This would probably reach even further than 1900.  This also increases capacity by an exponential amount!

 

However, there are some drawbacks.  Number one is cost.  All those additional radios/panels/carrier cards and the associated increase in power consumption and lease costs is a huge multiplier.  Huge.  In the past, no one has bought into beamforming because there did not seem to be a cost/benefit pay off for doing it.

 

The second big issue is...the uplink.  The site beamforms a signal out past a devices ability to use the same spectrum channel to send back.  So you will have devices that are capable of receiving the beamformed signal, but not send it back.

 

The solution I have always heard to beamforming uplink problem is by having another Band carry back the uplink.  Like Band 25 or 26.  But we do not have devices or networks capable yet of downlinking on one band and uplinking on another.  And it may be problematic to downlink TDD and uplink FDD.  At a minimum it would just complicate things.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

I believe AJ has said that the LTE airlink is more stable than the WiMax airlink also.

 

Yes and no.  That is true for FDD but not for TDD.  TD-LTE is almost the spitting image of WiMAX.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

The second big issue is...the uplink.  The site beamforms a signal out past a devices ability to use the same spectrum channel to send back.  So you will have devices that are capable of receiving the beamformed signal, but not send it back.

 

That depends on the type of antenna utilized.  Some directional antennas can have high gain for both uplink and downlink.  Wi-Fi extension is a good example of this.  Ask digiblur how far he shoots a beam of his home Wi-Fi and gets usable service on his handset with its little omnidirectional antenna.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

That depends on the type of antenna utilized.  Some directional antennas can have high gain for both uplink and downlink.  Wi-Fi extension is a good example of this.  Ask digiblur how far he shoots a beam of his home Wi-Fi and gets usable service on his handset with its little omnidirectional antenna.

 

AJ

 

Are you suggesting we may have some better Tx antennas in devices if beamforming becomes the path forward.  That would be neato.  I'd love to see beamforming take shape on the Band 41 network.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

Are you suggesting we may have some better Tx antennas in devices if beamforming becomes the path forward.

 

Yes, Robert, this is you walking down the street with your device just a few years from now...

 

 

Kidding aside, I am actually talking about cell site directional antennas that are high gain on both links.  Oddly enough, the parabolic reflector in that pic is a decent example of the concept.  Put a receiver inside, such as in a satellite dish, and get high gain Rx.  Put a transmitter/emitter inside, such as in a car headlight, and get high gain Tx.

 

AJ

[bcltoys]

Beam forming will work with a fixed/home setup better they could amplifey.