Non-G-Block PCS LTE Carriers

[Galaxyguy]

No, they wouldn't. If the current 5x5 carrier was widened to a 10x10 carrier, the devices in question wouldn't connect at all. The only way to add the capacity without leaving said devices in the dark is to add a second 5x5 carrier. Which means there would be 2 5x5 carriers rather than 1 10x10 carrier.

 

-Anthony

That's how it is here in the Shentel market. We have 2 LTE PCS carriers and 1 LTE 800 carrier now live through most of the market. All are 5x5, obviously.

 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

[anthony.spina97]

That's how it is here in the Shentel market. We have 2 LTE PCS carriers and 1 LTE 800 carrier now live through most of the market. All are 5x5, obviously.

 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

Oh, I know. I've been following this website for a while now.

 

-Anthony

[Nickel]

No, not in St. Louis.  The PCS A-F block spectrum gained from USCC is 10 MHz (5 MHz FDD), and it is not contiguous with existing Sprint spectrum.  So, please do not make that assertion.

But according to your map, they already have 30 MHz of contiguous spectrum. Is Sprint using all of that for CDMA? 

[WiWavelength]

But according to your map, they already have 30 MHz of contiguous spectrum. Is Sprint using all of that for CDMA? 

 

Well, much of it.  But that does not matter.  A 10 MHz FDD carrier would take up 20 MHz of that spectrum, leaving only 10 MHz for CDMA2000.  That is not going to happen, as it would cut CDMA2000 down to three carriers.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

Well, much of it.  But that does not matter.  A 10 MHz FDD carrier would take up 20 MHz of that spectrum, leaving only 10 MHz for CDMA2000.  That is not going to happen, as it would cut CDMA2000 down to three carriers.

 

AJ

Which is right where it should be: one 1x channel, two EVDO channels

[WiWavelength]

Which is right where it should be: one 1x channel, two EVDO channels

 

That is not realistic for a few more years.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

That is not realistic for a few more years.

 

AJ

Maybe not in Chicago or Cali or NYC, but if Sprint make a concerted effort to get its customers to upgrade to triband handsets, that day will come real soon!

[Nickel]

Well, much of it.  But that does not matter.  A 10 MHz FDD carrier would take up 20 MHz of that spectrum, leaving only 10 MHz for CDMA2000.  That is not going to happen, as it would cut CDMA2000 down to three carriers.

 

AJ

Oh so when you say 30 MHz you mean total spectrum and not "one way".

[WiWavelength]

Oh so when you say 30 MHz you mean total spectrum and not "one way".

 

Yes, that is the appropriate convention.  Unless I append something like "FDD," "downlink," or "unpaired," then 30 MHz means total paired spectrum.  The PCS B block that Sprint has long held in St. Louis is 30 MHz or 15 MHz FDD.

 

In the traditional PCS band, 30 MHz FDD would be outrageous, as that would be 60 MHz -- fully half the PCS A-F block spectrum in the hands of one operator.  AT&T has a number of 40-50 MHz PCS markets, but the only 60 MHz PCS market that I can think of anywhere in the country is T-Mobile in Atlanta due to the MetroPCS merger.  And I wrote an article about that:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-326-newco-needs-to-drop-some-of-the-pcs-from-metropcs/

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Yes, that is the appropriate convention.  Unless I append something like "FDD," "downlink," or "unpaired," then 30 MHz means total paired spectrum.  The PCS B block that Sprint has long held in St. Louis is 30 MHz or 15 MHz FDD.

 

In the traditional PCS band, 30 MHz FDD would be outrageous, as that would be 60 MHz -- fully half the PCS A-F block spectrum in the hands of one operator.  AT&T has a number of 40-50 MHz PCS markets, but the only 60 MHz PCS market that I can think of anywhere in the country is T-Mobile in Atlanta due to the MetroPCS merger.  And I wrote an article about that:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-326-newco-needs-to-drop-some-of-the-pcs-from-metropcs/

 

AJ

Sorry, my mind just usually works the other way. For instance I would say the G block is 5 MHz while you would say it's 10.

 

Anyway, does T-Mobile still have 60 MHz in Atlanta? 

[S4GRU]

Sorry, my mind just usually works the other way. For instance I would say the G block is 5 MHz while you would say it's 10.

 

Anyway, does T-Mobile still have 60 MHz in Atlanta? 

 

Your mind is outside the industry norm for quoting spectrum licensed in a market.  However, we have seen your mind out in left field before.  

 

Robert

[Nickel]

Your mind is outside the industry norm for quoting spectrum licensed in a market.  However, we have seen your mind out in left field before.  

 

Robert

[Nickel]

Wait a minute, that means that according to your map, there are areas that only have 5 MHz FDD of PCS (excluding the G block)?

[WiWavelength]

Wait a minute, that means that according to your map, there are areas that only have 5 MHz FDD of PCS (excluding the G block)?

 

Whose map?  My Sprint PCS spectrum map?

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Whose map?  My Sprint PCS spectrum map?

 

AJ

Yes.

[WiWavelength]

Yes.

 

Remember, I created and last updated that map a decade ago while you were still a little tyke.  The gist of the map remains accurate, but some markets have changed.

 

Via Wirefree Partners III in FCC Auction 58 in 2005 and additional spectrum transactions with other operators, Sprint fixed its top 100 markets (e.g. Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, Richmond, etc.) that were previously limited to a single 10 MHz PCS A-F block license.  That was not so much of a problem during the CDMA1X era, but when EV-DV got shelved, the three carrier limitation became a real problem for EV-DO deployment.

 

The only top 100 market exception, as I recall, was Fort Wayne, but its spectrum problem got solved with the far more recent USCC transaction.  That said, yes, some rural counties scattered throughout the US still have only 10 MHz of Sprint licensed PCS A-F block spectrum.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Remember, I created and last updated that map a decade ago while you were still a little tyke.  The gist of the map remains accurate, but some markets have changed.

 

Via Wirefree Partners III in FCC Auction 58 in 2005 and additional spectrum transactions with other operators, Sprint fixed its top 100 markets (e.g. Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, Richmond, etc.) that were previously limited to a single 10 MHz PCS A-F block license.  That was not so much of a problem during the CDMA1X era, but when EV-DV got shelved, the three carrier limitation became a real problem for EV-DO deployment.

 

The only top 100 market exception, as I recall, was Fort Wayne, but its spectrum problem got solved with the far more recent USCC transaction.  That said, yes, some rural counties scattered throughout the US still have only 10 MHz of Sprint licensed PCS A-F block spectrum.

 

AJ

Ok thanks. It's crazy to think that Sprint had only 10 MHz in some of the top 100 markets at anytime at all. Although I do understand that was during a time when 10 MHz actually meant something rather than a trivial piece. 

[newyork4me]

No, they wouldn't. If the current 5x5 carrier was widened to a 10x10 carrier, the devices in question wouldn't connect at all. The only way to add the capacity without leaving said devices in the dark is to add a second 5x5 carrier. Which means there would be 2 5x5 carriers rather than 1 10x10 carrier.

 

-Anthony

 

Seriously? This is elementary stuff. 

 

The G-block isn't going to be widened anyway. It's its own little obscure block outside of Sprint's other spectrum range in Chicago. 

 

Spring inherited some nice new spectrum from US Cellular that would have been enough to deploy 10x10. And a 10x10 in PCS A-F would not have affected the ability of the other devices from connecting to PCS G.

[anthony.spina97]

Seriously? This is elementary stuff. 

 

The G-block isn't going to be widened anyway. It's its own little obscure block outside of Sprint's other spectrum range in Chicago. 

 

Spring inherited some nice new spectrum from US Cellular that would have been enough to deploy 10x10. And a 10x10 in PCS A-F would not have affected the ability of the other devices from connecting to PCS G.

Now that, I don't disagree with. That makes sense. I had a different idea in my head. I thought we were saying the existing 5x5 carrier would be extended to a 10x10, rather than having a 10x10 in PCS A-F AND a 5x5 in PCS G. I had the wrong idea in my head, I apologize. Thanks for pointing that out. 

 

-Anthony

[WiWavelength]

Seriously? This is elementary stuff.

 

The G-block isn't going to be widened anyway. It's its own little obscure block outside of Sprint's other spectrum range in Chicago.

 

Spring inherited some nice new spectrum from US Cellular that would have been enough to deploy 10x10. And a 10x10 in PCS A-F would not have affected the ability of the other devices from connecting to PCS G.

No, please do not oversimplify this -- it is not that simple.

 

The LTE carrier in the PCS G block theoretically could be expanded to 10 MHz FDD in some markets. Going on three years ago, I wrote about that:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-27-spectrum-analysisdoes-sprint-have-more-options-for-additional-lte-carriers/

 

It is not apt to happen soon, but please do not be so glib about it.

 

That said, why are you so concerned with Sprint deploying a band 25 10 MHz FDD carrier in Chicago? Not all handsets without firmware updates would be able to utilize it. Is your e-penis that big? Are you looking for peak band 25 speeds in the Windy City? Especially, when you have "New York" in your username.

 

In the end, one market does not a network make; one market does not a network break. If it did, Sprint would be kaput -- based upon the incessant complaints from our Louisiana members. The same could be said for T-Mobile, which operates a barebones license protection network in Nebraska but does not actually sell service there. Yet, both continue on as national wireless providers.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

In the end, one market does not a network make; one market does not a network break. If it did, Sprint would be kaput -- based upon the incessant complaints from our Louisiana members. The same could be said for T-Mobile, which operates a barebones license protection network in Nebraska but does not actually sell service there. Yet, both continue on as national wireless providers.

 

AJ

[avb]

With LTE Advanced carrier aggregation, in the future couldn't Sprint do carrier aggregation with it's G block and pcs spectrum?  Isn't that what AT&T plans to do with intraband carrier aggregation soon?  I would think that would be easier for Sprint since pcs and G block are much closer compared to the bands AT&T are using for carrier aggregation.  **of course I don't know as much about this stuff as some of you, so if it's not that easy please be kind 

[S4GRU]

With LTE Advanced carrier aggregation, in the future couldn't Sprint do carrier aggregation with it's G block and pcs spectrum? Isn't that what AT&T plans to do with intraband carrier aggregation soon? I would think that would be easier for Sprint since pcs and G block are much closer compared to the bands AT&T are using for carrier aggregation. **of course I don't know as much about this stuff as some of you, so if it's not that easy please be kind

Yes, this is totally plausible.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[Nickel]

Yes, this is totally plausible.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

Isn't battery drain a concern with CA or do you think that will be solved by the time it's implemented?

[S4GRU]

Isn't battery drain a concern with CA or do you think that will be solved by the time it's implemented?

 

With current management techniques, it would only be a drain during active data sessions.  CA could go to standby when not in use and not have any further battery drain.  For normal usage, it probably wouldn't be very noticeable.  But if you were streaming non stop all day, it would most likely have a noticeable drain over one carrier streaming.  Reducing your overall battery life.

 

There could be other improvements occurring to minimize the impacts to device battery life for CA devices.  But other than non active standby, I don't know of any.

 

Robert