Jump to content

Tmobile repurposing EDGE Network for LTE


IamMrFamous07

Recommended Posts

If you look at what sprint said when they announced the two push back on NV 1.0 they blame vendor execution and lack if equipment as their number one and two reasons. They did mention backhaul but with a list of five other things. Vendor execution and supply chain problems were singled out by sprint. I don't think the back haul problem is as big a factor nation wide as it is sometimes made out to be on the forums here. I sure in some areas it's the 1 one problem but I don't think back haul issue can be the scape goat for why a project this complicated has had delays.

 

So I but tmobile being able to pull this off. Robert is exactly right sprint needs to adjust to a changing market place if they are going to stay relevant.

 

On a side note I know of two towers that have backhaul run to them, one has had NV equipment and back haul for over a month and no lte the other has no NV equipment but has had fiber for two weeks. Now that is two data points out of 40000 so it is worth what it's worth but at least in some place back haul is ahead out the curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it can be done.  Sprint could have done it too, and still can.  It depends on how much you're willing to spend, how much man power you are willing to put on it, and how creative you can be with alternatives when things go awry.

 

Robert

well if T-Mobile has edge in areas with no native sprint coverage, Maybe wait until T-Mobile gets a fiber line to the tower, and build on those locations, with the added benefit of quick backhaul, And added coverage. But build out to more sites, and use MW if possible. If sprint could kill some roaming areas it would be a HUGE plus in cost, and for getting some more customers I think.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering their 230M POP goal of 1H2014, I don't think it is completely inconceivable for them to make that goal. That covers their existing UMTS footprint.

 

As for reaching 250M by end of 2014, I have my reservations. Thats a ton of sites to get that extra 20M covered. I won't hold my breath, but I do think they will start drawing their way out of the "ink blots" and letting the pen bleed a bit. A fair amount of that old GSM only equipment isn't much longer for this world. It has a finite lifespan and its likely nudging its expiration date. I wouldn't be too surprised to see some of those sites make the jump first.

 

As for what they are upgrading to/from, a rural site is likely at most broadcasting 2 or 3 GSM channels with GPRS/EDGE services in those time slots. So thats at most 600 kHz FDD per site assuming a 3 sector rural site, which there are plenty of 2 sector sites out there on highways. It takes very little frequency reuse to keep GSM chugging along on those highways, realistically 2 MHz FDD or less should be plenty to cover a highway stretch with frequency reuse I would think.. I would expect a minimum of an AWS and/or PCS HSPA+ carrier and a 5+5 LTE carrier in AWS spectrum allowing. They have at least 10 MHz of AWS nationwide, so there will be some type of AWS service living there, and my bet is on LTE where they are constrained and both UMTS and LTE where possible. So at most you would have GSM1900, UMTS Band 2 and 4, and LTE Band 4 and 12. Doubt we will see rural Band 2 LTE except possibly on old MetroPCS markets where they didn't have AWS like Atlanta.

 

As a T-Mobile subscriber, I obviously have an optimistic slant, but I also view this realistically and with a grain of kosher salt. I want Sprint to succeed, I want T-Mobile to succeed. I think both of the 3 & 4 carriers doing well will shake up the duopoly a bit and help even the playing field a bit. I just don't want the anti Sprint label placed on me for being in the Magenta camp (I have a FreedomPop hotspot for EvDO on car rides if thats a sign of good faith).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at what sprint said when they announced the two push back on NV 1.0 they blame vendor execution and lack if equipment as their number one and two reasons. They did mention backhaul but with a list of five other things. Vendor execution and supply chain problems were singled out by sprint. I don't think the back haul problem is as big a factor nation wide as it is sometimes made out to be on the forums here. I sure in some areas it's the 1 one problem but I don't think back haul issue can be the scape goat for why a project this complicated has had delays.

 

So I but tmobile being able to pull this off. Robert is exactly right sprint needs to adjust to a changing market place if they are going to stay relevant.

 

On a side note I know of two towers that have backhaul run to them, one has had NV equipment and back haul for over a month and no lte the other has no NV equipment but has had fiber for two weeks. Now that is two data points out of 40000 so it is worth what it's worth but at least in some place back haul is ahead out the curve.

 

I know what they say publicly.  And there was a time when that was more true.  But I also talk with techs from all three vendors at times.  

 

In instances where you have a full build site converted to NV (3G accepted) and the LTE is not live, there only three issues that can cause that.  First is backhaul, second is LTE carrier cards and third is that the site has not passed inspection.  LTE 1900 carrier cards were a big problem keeping a steady stock of them back in 2012, and even some extent 2013.  But this is not a problem any more with any of the three OEM's.  The biggest obstacle for Sprint now in LTE deployment is backhaul, straight up.  And that's why we say that a lot around here.

 

I hear that LTE 800 carrier cards are somewhat of a problem now and part of the reason why there has been a rough start on getting things rolling.  ALU is particularly late in getting production really going.  But I hear that all of the OEM's have even picked up on that and shouldn't have any more supply problems and should meet their deliverables from here forward.

 

The third item is quality.  There are lots of quality control problems I am hearing with the installs.  And with a small handful, but pervasive enough, there is problems that are preventing some sites from going live with LTE.  LTE integration tech shows up to integrate the site, and the backhaul is not operating correctly.  Throughput is too low or pings way too high.  Or not working at all.  Sometimes it is equipment installed incorrectly from Sprint and OEM subcontractors.  LTE routers/controllers not working, etc.  If the LTE integration tech can't take care of the problem himself while he's there, he calls it in that he cannot integrate it and moves on his merry way to the next site.  Sometimes it takes weeks or months for them to diagnose the problem and get the responsible party back to fix it.  And sometimes they need to wait for parts.

 

But these are basically the reasons why sites sit there 3G upgraded and waiting on LTE.  But backhaul is the major remaining obstacle in most of these instances.  But Sprint can do some things about it.  And I've discussed that in several threads in many instances.  I don't need to go all into that again here.

 

Robert

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to how many sites T-Mobile has with EDGE or GPRS only. And compare that to their LTE/WCDMA towers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, I absolutely love your optimism in laying out what they must and should do.  That type of initiative would save Sprint and I think really make it take a firm jump twords long term success.

 

I think TMobile is so overly optimistic that its scary.  They came out to promise success to a bunch of people with no contracts.  Its going to go 1 of 2 ways.  Success and they become #3 and Sprint is in trouble or, they bankrupt themselves and DT sells off their spectrum to the remainders.  Can they do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, I absolutely love your optimism in laying out what they must and should do.  That type of initiative would save Sprint and I think really make it take a firm jump twords long term success.

 

I think TMobile is so overly optimistic that its scary.  They came out to promise success to a bunch of people with no contracts.  Its going to go 1 of 2 ways.  Success and they become #3 and Sprint is in trouble or, they bankrupt themselves and DT sells off their spectrum to the remainders.  Can they do that?

Don't forget Deutsche Telekom coming in with an infusion of cash (ala Softbank). That could change things quite a bit. They have been sending mixed signals about that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is a breakup fee in the Sprint-T-Mobile deal that if it doesn't get approved Sprint will have to pay T-Mobile.

 

That way T-Mobile could actually fund something like this. Either way this is a clear signal that Sprint needs to pick up the pace and make progress no matter what it takes. I sometimes feel that Sprint in it's current state is a groggy drunk that is slow to respond to insistent prodding for action. Hopefully this will give them the splash of cold water they need... even if that comes from firing top executives.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sascha Segan published an article today, interviewing "rock star" CTO Neville Ray:

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2454940,00.asp

 

The article is fine.  But here is my question:  in a similar article, would Sprint get the same kid gloves treatment?

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is a breakup fee in the Sprint-T-Mobile deal that if it doesn't get approved Sprint will have to pay T-Mobile.

 

 

 

Is there any deal at all? Or just speculation? Seeing as there currently isn't an actually deal that I know of, I doubt there's any sort of breakup fee.... yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sascha Segan published an article today, interviewing "rock star" CTO Neville Ray:

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2454940,00.asp

 

The article is fine.  But here is my question:  in a similar article, would Sprint get the same kid gloves treatment?

 

AJ

I dunno, seems pretty fair to me compared to when Sprint announced Network Vision:  http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404184,00.asp

 

These articles seem little more than prepared PR pieces to me. No real questions or anything. Just what the plan is and a feel good quote or two from the company about how great it will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The article is fine.  But here is my question:  in a similar article, would Sprint get the same kid gloves treatment?

 

AJ

 

After some consderation, I take back what I said in another thread to Santa Claus.  What I want this year is to have you become a recognized journalist on one of the major tech sites.  And in this case I'm not even joking other than the 'Santa' aspect---I would love to see you or someone else with the same combination of industry knowledge, intelligence, and ability to back up what they write with both fact/detail and logic as you writing articles for a change.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this should be interesting.

 

In my mind, this should actually end up validating Sprint's current reasons for network delays.  I think everyone understands that T-Mobile had upgraded backhaul to the sites it was converting to LTE making the upgrade much less complex.

 

If T-Mobile is able to actually upgrade legacy sites with legacy backhaul on-time/on-schedule, I'll be blown away.

 

I think this will make sprint more competitive as well, as the bar is being raised.

 

One thing that is being overlooked here is that Sprint's new network is likely putting pressure on T-Mobile to upgrade their network.

 

Bottom line: My opinion that competition is good for consumers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone understands that T-Mobile had upgraded backhaul to the sites it was converting to LTE making the upgrade much less complex.

 

I have to disagree with this point.  I think people here and possibly other tech sites who take the time to learn to any degree know that.  I don't think the general public has any clue, nor do I think the majority of the major tech site journalists at least consistently drive that point home either.  Most people have been brainwashed to think Tmo just turned things around and decided to right the ship one day, and Legere is the wizard that brought it about, and Sprint isn't capable of even imagining being capable of doing anything remotely similar, without even knowing much less considering the fact raised above or what Tmo gained from the failed AT&T venture that was a catalyst for it.

 

And this just underscores, IMO, the fact that network-aside, one of the biggest weaknesses Sprint needs to address is in marketing.  And not just in terms of commercials, but making sure in one way or another that the feet of shoddy and/or incomplete journalism is held to the fire properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks Tmo can upgrade backhaul to all its EDGE/GPRS sites in 2014?  I don't think Tmo will care if it is fiber to each of these sites.  They may even install bundled copper at many of them.  A lot of rural and low capacity sites could do just fine with bundled copper or a long daisy chain of microwave.  

 

If a rural EDGE site started running 4-6Mbps of LTE per sector instead of 100kbps connected to T1's, that would be a major triumph.  Sprint should consider something like that to their GMO's where fiber is going to be a long time coming.

 

If Tmo rushes out something to all these EDGE sites and then just organically over time upgrade them to fiber also, that wouldn't be a bad deployment strategy.  I would not be shocked if Tmo pulls this off.  All it takes is money and proper management.  I also would avoid CenturyLink and Windstream like the Plague.

 

Robert

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks Tmo can upgrade backhaul to all its EDGE sites in 2014?  I don't think Tmo will care if it is fiber to each of these sites.  They may even install bundled copper at many of them.  A lot of rural and low capacity sites could do just fine with bundled copper or a long daisy chain of microwave.  If a rural EDGE site started running 4-6Mbps of LTE instead of 100kbps connected to T1's, that would be a major triumph.

 

You might be the only one because I disagree.  If backhaul constrained, T-Mobile should -- after years and years of neglect -- deploy W-CDMA to those sites.  W-CDMA has greater utility than LTE.  If T-Mobile does otherwise, then the celebrated magentan leadership is either stupid or just pandering to the LTE-penis crowd.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be the only one because I disagree.  If backhaul constrained, T-Mobile should -- after years and years of neglect -- deploy W-CDMA to those sites.  W-CDMA has greater utility than LTE.  If T-Mobile does otherwise, then the celebrated magentan leadership is either stupid or just pandering to the LTE-penis crowd.

 

AJ

 

Also, we don't know to what extent has already been under way.  Are they starting tomorrow?  Or did they start last year?  I have no idea.  

 

But I know I could do it starting tomorrow.  It would not be conventional or uniform, and it would take a big pile of money and a lot of people.  But I could do it.  So I know Tmo can too.  But are they up for the challenge?  Or is this lip service?

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is. If they pull it off, what happens to Sprint? (Assuming no merger happens)

 

You stated a while back that if tmobile could do exactly what they are promising to do right now, sprint would be in some deep trouble.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is. If they pull it off, what happens to Sprint? (Assuming no merger happens)

 

You stated a while back that if tmobile could do exactly what they are promising to do right now, sprint would be in some deep trouble.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

 

If Tmobile pulls it off and Sprint does not change to reflect that then expect Tmobile to be #3 and Sprint to fall way behind to #4 with not much going for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Tmobile pulls it off and Sprint does not change to reflect that then expect Tmobile to be #3 and Sprint to fall way behind to #4 with not much going for it.

 

That pretty much sums it up.

 

My question is. If they pull it off, what happens to Sprint? (Assuming no merger happens)

 

You stated a while back that if tmobile could do exactly what they are promising to do right now, sprint would be in some deep trouble.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

 

Things are changing at Sprint now.  Masa is shaking things up.  I don't expect the next 12 months to be anything like the last 12 months.

 

Robert

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope these next 12 months are those month we've ALLLLL been waiting for. I want to see 2k+ site acceptances for B26 a month. I want b25 done already in all the areas it can be. Everywhere else just do what you have to do. B41 needs to become a plague. People need to start saying, wow! You're pages load so fast. Your videos are so HD, your voice is so clear. Such wow, such fast, so awe. And you're on Sprint? Who would've known ( except for that ugly spinning logo)

 

People have been waiting for Sprint to light the beacons of Spark. Break the dams, release the river of LTE!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did sprint already say 800LTE will cover 150 million Pops by end of this year?

 

This is why I said earlier sprint should take this announcement and really over deliver their deployments for 800/2600.

 

Do I personally think tmobile will pull it off? maybe. Who knows we'll just have to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks...getting backhaul to rural areas is often easier. Fiber runs along most major highways close to sites. Getting fiber to highway and rural sites is typically easier than urban areas. And the ones that are more difficult can be bridged with microwave.

 

If Tmo spends the money and effort, they could quite handily equip all their rural sites with upgraded backhaul before the end of 2014. Then it could spend 2015 upgrading them with their new LTE 700 spectrum, and at least AWS LTE (B4) in the places where they cannot yet do LTE 700 A Block (half the country).

 

We will see how much they actually accomplish this year. I'm with AJ...don't overread too much into this and the Tmo spin machine. Sprint could be done with their LTE 1900 and LTE 800 network wide by the end of 2014 before Tmo really gets any wind at their back. However, Masa needs to make sure of it. Tmo cannot be allowed to get ahead on this one too starting so late.

 

By the end of 2014, Sprint needs to do the following:

  • Complete upgraded backhaul to every Sprint site
  • Get LTE 1900 and LTE 800 complete
  • Get B41 (LTE 2600/Spark) at all Clearwire sites
  • Get B41 well covering non Clearwire Top 100 markets
  • Get B41 deployed on every NV B25 site that is overcapacity (no matter which market)
  • Get B25 2nd carrier installed everywhere where overcapacity and spectrum availability allows (including minor refarming if necessary)
They should also consider:
  • Add all iDEN sites that would add new coverage to include a full NV upgrade with CDMA/LTE
  • Convert all WiMax Protection Sites that would add new coverage to include a full NV upgrade with CDMA/LTE
  • Convert all Clearwire Expedience Sites that would add new coverage to include a full NV upgrade with CDMA/LTE
  • Convert the few hundred WiMax sites in urban areas that would fill in/add coverage to include a full NV upgrade with CDMA/other bands of LTE
If they need to bring in another 1,000 SoftBank employees from Japan to run this for Sprint, then so be it! Time to get on with the show. Masa cannot wait to compete with Tmo after the Feds refuse a buy out. They need to plan as if there is an all out battle for 3rd place. Because there is. Sprint will lose its 3rd place to Tmo if they don't focus on network. Network quality/coverage is now the differentiator between providers. The price difference between Tmo, Sprint and AT&T are now not very significant for most consumers.

 

Robert

I agree!!! Also adding the second lte carrier (A block) and small cells

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks Tmo can upgrade backhaul to all its EDGE/GPRS sites in 2014? I don't think Tmo will care if it is fiber to each of these sites. They may even install bundled copper at many of them. A lot of rural and low capacity sites could do just fine with bundled copper or a long daisy chain of microwave.

 

If a rural EDGE site started running 4-6Mbps of LTE per sector instead of 100kbps connected to T1's, that would be a major triumph. Sprint should consider something like that to their GMO's where fiber is going to be a long time coming.

 

If Tmo rushes out something to all these EDGE sites and then just organically over time upgrade them to fiber also, that wouldn't be a bad deployment strategy. I would not be shocked if Tmo pulls this off. All it takes is money and proper management. I also would avoid CenturyLink and Windstream like the Plague.

 

Robert

I agree, look how quickly they reached 209 million POPs with LTE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Was able to install the March 1 Android security patch. Seems slightly more accurate with 5g ca band id, but can not swear by it. Updated google play system update through the software information screen to March 1. *#73# still works. Froze updates waiting on SCP update beta to fix n41 showing as n38.
    • Just installed it. Thanks for the info.  71 mb mar 1st date.
    • There's a permit for a new 47 story building at 205 Montague St in Downtown Brooklyn. The problem is that  T-Mobile eNB 48352 is on the building next door and this new building will block two out of 3 sectors of the site. For reference, the new building will be roughly as tall as 16 Court St which is right across the street. This site is the primary site covering Cadman Plaza so I wonder what the plan is. Will they just try to change sector placement, move to a different building, or will this just speed up the conversion of the Sprint site at 25 Monroe Place?
    • At least not recently.  I think I might have seen this a year ago.  Not Sure.
    • Did they previously hop between n38 and n41 in prior version of SCP, or have you always seen n41 displayed properly?
  • Recently Browsing

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