IamMrFamous07 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Sprint (NYSE:S) has received LTE-enabled small cells from its infrastructure vendors Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE:ALU) and Samsung and is testing the devices for planned deployment. "We are currently testing indoor picos for both vendors. We haven't announced a deployment timeline yet," Sprint spokeswoman Kelly Schlageter told FierceWirelessTech. She added that the picocells are designed for use on Sprint's FDD LTE network in the 1.9 GHz band. Read more: Sprint testing Samsung, Alcatel-Lucent indoor small cells - FierceWirelessTech http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/sprint-testing-samsung-alcatel-lucent-indoor-small-cells/2013-10-27#ixzz2j4X2FNeT Subscribe at 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamMrFamous07 Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 I remember sprint saying the plan to deploy these cells part of network vision 2.0. Cant wait until everything is done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nickel Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 They've been talking about small cells since NV started, so this isn't exactly breaking news, but at least it's confirmation that Sprint is still going to deploy them. The real take away for me here is that they didn't list Ericsson even though they have a small cell solution (although I don't know if it would work for Sprint). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosefTor Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Let's skip indoor 1900 and go straight to 2600 :-) Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuber Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Let's skip indoor 1900 and go straight to 2600 :-) Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk I just don't get the 2600 thing. Why would ppl push so hard for a band that doesn't travel as far or have good penetration. I understand using it to offload user from other bands to free up congestion. 800 should be priority to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawvega Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I just don't get the 2600 thing. Why would ppl push so hard for a band that doesn't travel as far or have good penetration. I understand using it to offload user from other bands to free up congestion. 800 should be priority to me. For indoor small cells the 2600 thing (as well as 1900 apparently) is actually an ideal solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mc_gusto Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I just don't get the 2600 thing. Why would ppl push so hard for a band that doesn't travel as far or have good penetration. I understand using it to offload user from other bands to free up congestion. 800 should be priority to me. The indoor small cells are supposed to fill in the band 41 gaps in coverage. Having and indoor 800 site would kinda be redundant. would you want it penetrate walls to go back outside where there should already be coverage? Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destroyallcubes Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 How "big" of an area are they using small cella for, are we talking for a small neighborhood, or a high volume store, shopping centers? I think aomething that could help would residence offering to let sprint use their property, say on top of the roof, to install and feed fiber too, a small cell for lower coverage area/poor performance area? Would that even be possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuber Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 You see I live in a wooded area. Would like to have some coverage more out side of my house. 800 Could help in a place like a hospital where you might need to penetrate several walls it to get coverage through out a building and you would need less small cell sites to keep cost down. Beside if coverage to much, you can always turn down the power. I think see the benefit of this also seeing how the Airave 2.5 Plus has band 26 in it. If Band 26 wasn't a benefit then they would have just left it as Band 25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamMrFamous07 Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 I just don't get the 2600 thing. Why would ppl push so hard for a band that doesn't travel as far or have good penetration. I understand using it to offload user from other bands to free up congestion. 800 should be priority to me. Because lte 2600 is going to be the band that's going to give sprint amazing speeds. Speed wise, sprint lte on 800 and 1900 won't be able to produce amazing speeds like you see with the other carriers and lte 2600 is designed for heavy capacity which the others bands are not. Just the basis of it. Sprint plans to get more power band spectrum (600 mhz) but the auction won't be until 2014 or 2015 I think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COZisBack Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Budweiser, Scotts, Nestle, Avon and Wendy's all have Picos here in Columbus that have been 3G accepted and some have Scheduled LTE 1.9 dates. I'm not sure who the vendor is, but they have them rocking already. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillMezzetta Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I think the idea here is that the 1900 MHZ antennas will impact the highest number of subscribers with Sprint LTE. The user base at this point has been using 1900 LTE devices for over a year, and we are only now starting to see dual and tri band handsets. Also, as far as signal strength for these indoor deployments is concerned, tweaking the power settings should eliminate any shortfalls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony.spina97 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 So are we talking about maybe a new Airave or strictly for places like big buildings? I would love to get an Airave LTE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdk Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 So are we talking about maybe a new Airave or strictly for places like big buildings? I would love to get an Airave LTE! While a new airave is possible in the future, I think this testing is for larger equipment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdk Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 For indoor small cells the 2600 thing (as well as 1900 apparently) is actually an ideal solution. I think you are right. I can't see 800 being deployed anywhere but large (tower) sites. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuber Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I think you are right. I can't see 800 being deployed anywhere but large (tower) sites. From my understanding the Airave 2.5 Plus has 800 now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdk Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 From my understanding the Airave 2.5 Plus has 800 now. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hescominsoon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I have a 2.5+ right now and there's no 800mhz cdma... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill875 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I have a 2.5+ right now and there's no 800mhz cdma... I believe I've read that the 2.5+ is transmitting an 800SMR Beacon. Your device may not be able to connect to it, but it seems to be capable of it. Perhaps someone more "in-the-know" will chime in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hescominsoon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 my gnex is 800 mhz capable except for lte..and it's not there. According to multiple sprint reps the 2.5+ is basically a firmware update. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrknowitall526 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 So are we talking about maybe a new Airave or strictly for places like big buildings? I would love to get an Airave LTE! I've seen several people saying this, but if you have an Airave you already have DSL or cable broadband, so why in the world would you need LTE? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony.spina97 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I've seen several people saying this, but if you have an Airave you already have DSL or cable broadband, so why in the world would you need LTE? To abuse the network? Duh.... (Just kidding, that would be pretty stupid of me, and it aint right) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcferrin90 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 I've seen several people saying this, but if you have an Airave you already have DSL or cable broadband, so why in the world would you need LTE? Well let's take it out of the home setting and put it into the commercial setting: shopping malls, airports, subways, college campuses, corporate warehouses and distribution centers (say Limited Brands which I know for sure). These are all locations that maybe you just don't want to have public WiFi. Now you have an indoor pico type system with one connection to the internet or to the carrier. You as the facility owner don't have to worry about IP addressing, network security nor anything else because it's all on the carrier. A buddy of mine just finished deploying one of these systems for all the carriers at the Atlanta Airport. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrknowitall526 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Well let's take it out of the home setting and put it into the commercial setting: shopping malls, airports, subways, college campuses, corporate warehouses and distribution centers (say Limited Brands which I know for sure). These are all locations that maybe you just don't want to have public WiFi. Now you have an indoor pico type system with one connection to the internet or to the carrier. You as the facility owner don't have to worry about IP addressing, network security nor anything else because it's all on the carrier. A buddy of mine just finished deploying one of these systems for all the carriers at the Atlanta Airport. Okay, the concept of small cells I get and that makes perfect sense. But I don't think an actual Airave would work for that because you can only have a limited number of connections to it at once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halcyoncmdr Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I believe I've read that the 2.5+ is transmitting an 800SMR Beacon. Your device may not be able to connect to it, but it seems to be capable of it. Perhaps someone more "in-the-know" will chime in. It broadcasts essentially a beacon on 800Mhz so your phone will connect to the Airave even if there is a tower close enough for your phone to see that 800MHz signal. The actual connection made with the Airave is still 1900MHz, but that 800 beacon means the Airave will be prioritized even if another 800 signal is detected (since it will likely be more powerful than the macro signal). This is because some phones prioritize 800 over 1900, and were thus switching back and forth between a macro 800 signal and the Airave 1900 signal causing the exact issues an Airave is designed to avoid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.