Jump to content

Clearwire Spectrum


Recommended Posts

I've read about Sprint acquiring Clearwire and their 2.5GHz spectrum, but does anyone know exactly what frequencies / how big of a pipe they acquired from Clearwire?  Does it vary from city to city in the US?

 

The FCC Reboot site should have the answer, but it's been broken for me last 2 days : /

 

Thought I'd ask here, any info greatly appreciated!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read about Sprint acquiring Clearwire and their 2.5GHz spectrum, but does anyone know exactly what frequencies / how big of a pipe they acquired from Clearwire?  Does it vary from city to city in the US?

 

The FCC Reboot site should have the answer, but it's been broken for me last 2 days : /

 

Thought I'd ask here, any info greatly appreciated!

 

It varies from market to market.  But it's nationwide.  It's between 60MHz and 160MHz.  Most Top 100 markets are over 120MHz.  But it is an aggregate of dozens of pieces that may or may not be conjoining.  It is two bands from the FCC, EBS and BRS.  It runs from 2496MHz to 2690MHz.  Conjoined into one band for 3GPP...Band 41.

 

BRS is directly licensed from the FCC.  EBS is owned by Educational Institutions and subleased to Sprint (and Clearwire formerly).  BRS licenses are easier to track in the FCC database.  EBS leases are very difficult to track and they are only for 35 miles from the licensed institution.  In places where two EBS licenses overlap, they "split the football."  It is a very messy licensing scheme and hard to track.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It varies from market to market.  But it's nationwide.  It's between 60MHz and 160MHz.  Most Top 100 markets are over 120MHz.  But it is an aggregate of dozens of pieces that may or may not be conjoining.  It is two bands from the FCC, EBS and BRS.  It runs from 2496MHz to 2690MHz.  Conjoined into one band for 3GPP...Band 41.

 

BRS is directly licensed from the FCC.  EBS is owned by Educational Institutions and subleased to Sprint (and Clearwire formerly).  BRS licenses are easier to track in the FCC database.  EBS leases are very difficult to track and they are only for 35 miles from the licensed institution.  In places where two EBS licenses overlap, they "split the football."  It is a very messy licensing scheme and hard to track.

Thank you!   That's incredibly useful info.

 

Do you know if the Sprint Spark network will utilize all of those 120MHz in the top markets or is it something they only use as needed and/or sell to other carriers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you! That's incredibly useful info.

 

Do you know if the Sprint Spark network will utilize all of those 120MHz in the top markets or is it something they only use as needed and/or sell to other carriers?

It will all be utilized.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you! That's incredibly useful info.

 

Do you know if the Sprint Spark network will utilize all of those 120MHz in the top markets or is it something they only use as needed and/or sell to other carriers?

Sprint has no plans to get rid of any BRS/EBS holdings at this point. I can only imagine this ever happening to try to get under the spectrum screen in a future auction. And then, it still is not likely. Once Sprint moves to have the infrastructure and cell placement for a good 2.5 network, then it makes no sense to get rid of the vast spectrum they have that they can use to keep intensifying capacity and performance through additional B41 carriers.

 

And in many instances, the amount of EBS/BRS spectrum they would have to shed to get under the spectrum screen to pick up an additional 5 or 10MHz here or there just would not likely be worth it. I just don't see this spectrum going anywhere anytime soon.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that all makes sense... is the reason Sprint is able to offer 50-60 Mbps downloads because the 2.5 network allows faster download speeds than 880MHz/1.9GHz, or because they're able to allow downloads from all three bands at once, or something else entirely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that all makes sense... is the reason Sprint is able to offer 50-60 Mbps downloads because the 2.5 network allows faster download speeds than 880MHz/1.9GHz, or because they're able to allow downloads from all three bands at once, or something else entirely?

20 MHz TDD LTE carriers vs 5x5 mhz FDD lte carriers.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that all makes sense... is the reason Sprint is able to offer 50-60 Mbps downloads because the 2.5 network allows faster download speeds than 880MHz/1.9GHz, or because they're able to allow downloads from all three bands at once, or something else entirely?

The 2.5 network is wide enough to support 20MHz channels. Sprint's 800/1900MHz LTE network currently can support only 5MHz wide channels. This is the biggest difference.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that all makes sense... is the reason Sprint is able to offer 50-60 Mbps downloads because the 2.5 network allows faster download speeds than 880MHz/1.9GHz, or because they're able to allow downloads from all three bands at once, or something else entirely?

In simple English... 2.5 ghz is a 6 lane super highway during rush hour. 800 and 1900 are a 2 lane highway with the same amount of traffic as the the super highway.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 on Crapatalk

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simple English... 2.5 ghz is a 6 lane super highway during rush hour. 800 and 1900 are a 2 lane highway with the same amount of traffic as the the super highway.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 on Crapatalk

I know you know this, but to clarify for those who may not, this is true of these bands on Sprint currently based on their spectrum holdings. But it is not true to say in general terms that 2.5 is faster than 800 or 1900. It all depends on width of the channels the provider is deploying. I just felt like I should add this so someone else may come along and think that 800 and 1900 are slower than 2600 for every provider. Which, of course, is not accurate. If Sprint had 10x10 or 15x15 FDD in 800 or 1900, it would act very similarly to their 2.5 20MHz TDD channels in case of throughput download speed.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's somewhere between 10x10 and 15x15 since only about 17.8 mhz is being used. All theoretically ofcourse.

 

A 20mh TDD setup that Sprint is using is probably best compared with 10x10 FDD lte.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's somewhere between 10x10 and 15x15 since only about 17.8 mhz is being used. All theoretically ofcourse.

 

A 20mh TDD setup that Sprint is using is probably best compared with 10x10 FDD lte.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Yeah, since 10MHz FDD maxes out at 75Mbps, and we have seen faster results on Sprint 20MHz, I try to infer that it is faster than just 10MHz FDD alone. Peak real world 10MHz FDD comes in around 60-70Mbps in the most ideal situations. But we see 70-80Mbps in 20MHz TDD all the time. Also, on my very densely deployed local Verizon 15x15 network, I don't see above 30-35Mbps any more. So this sure makes Sprint's 20MHz TDD look better than 15x15 in many ways. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint has no plans to get rid of any BRS/EBS holdings at this point. I can only imagine this ever happening to try to get under the spectrum screen in a future auction. And then, it still is not likely. Once Sprint moves to have the infrastructure and cell placement for a good 2.5 network, then it makes no sense to get rid of the vast spectrum they have that they can use to keep intensifying capacity and performance through additional B41 carriers.

 

And in many instances, the amount of EBS/BRS spectrum they would have to shed to get under the spectrum screen to pick up an additional 5 or 10MHz here or there just would not likely be worth it. I just don't see this spectrum going anywhere anytime soon.

I know that Sprint has no plans to get rid of EBS/BRS holdings, but I know that the educational institutions are grumbling that they are not getting paid enough. I know of no institutions that are using the spectrum for its original purpose which was for remote learning. Is EBS counted or will it be counted in the spectrum screen since it's leased and not owned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Sprint has no plans to get rid of EBS/BRS holdings, but I know that the educational institutions are grumbling that they are not getting paid enough. I know of no institutions that are using the spectrum for its original purpose which was for remote learning. Is EBS counted or will it be counted in the spectrum screen since it's leased and not owned?

I am not certain about EBS. But BRS will for certain be included in the spectrum screen in future auctions. In the past leases have counted. But EBS is kind of like it's own thing. I'm sure Sprint will lobby that they shouldn't be counted. But I don't think they'll win that argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simple English... 2.5 ghz is a 6 lane super highway during rush hour. 800 and 1900 are a 2 lane highway with the same amount of traffic as the the super highway.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 on Crapatalk

More like a 6 lane super HOV Highway that only certain cars are allowed on and that's why there is no congestion. While in the left lanes you laugh at everyone else in the congested 2 lanes to your right.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, since 10MHz FDD maxes out at 75Mbps, and we have seen faster results on Sprint 20MHz, I try to infer that it is faster than just 10MHz FDD alone. Peak real world 10MHz FDD comes in around 60-70Mbps in the most ideal situations. But we see 70-80Mbps in 20MHz TDD all the time. Also, on my very densely deployed local Verizon 15x15 network, I don't see above 30-35Mbps any more. So this sure makes Sprint's 20MHz TDD look better than 15x15 in many ways. ;)

 

If they use 6:3 ratio then it should behave like a 12MHz download channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you know this, but to clarify for those who may not, this is true of these bands on Sprint currently based on their spectrum holdings. But it is not true to say in general terms that 2.5 is faster than 800 or 1900. It all depends on width of the channels the provider is deploying. I just felt like I should add this so someone else may come along and think that 800 and 1900 are slower than 2600 for every provider. Which, of course, is not accurate. If Sprint had 10x10 or 15x15 FDD in 800 or 1900, it would act very similarly to their 2.5 20MHz TDD channels in case of throughput download speed.

 

Is there a plan to go from 5x5 to 10x10 channels on the 1900Mhz band? Would it be possible or would Sprint need to run multiple carriers per site?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a plan to go from 5x5 to 10x10 channels on the 1900Mhz band? Would it be possible or would Sprint need to run multiple carriers per site?

No there isn't.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a plan to go from 5x5 to 10x10 channels on the 1900Mhz band? Would it be possible or would Sprint need to run multiple carriers per site?

I don't think they want to do carrier aggregation on PCS. Once they free enough EVDO and 1x channels on 1900MHz, they might add more channels. There are places that Sprint has a 15x15 MHz C block allocation so in those places it will eventually do a 15x15 channel and a 5x5 channel (G block). But that assumes that they have totally refarmed their PCS spectrum which might not be for a little while. It all depends on how fast they can get people using LTE and then VOLTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint will not be doing anything as wide as 10x10 in PCS for some time.  There are not really any markets where they can deploy a 10MHz PCS channel in A-F blocks and a 5MHz G block channel...and then still provide for the needs of 1x and EVDO for the next several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint will not be doing anything as wide as 10x10 in PCS for some time.  There are not really any markets where they can deploy a 10MHz PCS channel in A-F blocks and a 5MHz G block channel...and then still provide for the needs of 1x and EVDO for the next several years.

Oh I am not hinkng the next 2 years, I am thinking 3-5 years down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I am not hinkng the next 2 years, I am thinking 3-5 years down the road.

I didn't mean to make it sound like my response was conflicting with yours. But rather, I was agreeing with you and expanding the thought a little.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Sprint adds additional channels will they all run at 6:3?  Is there a potential of running certain channels at a different ratio to service a different type of demand?  I'm thinking of sites that are near venues for big events where users may be doing more uploading than downloading.  (I have no evidence to support that assertion.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Sprint adds additional channels will they all run at 6:3? Is there a potential of running certain channels at a different ratio to service a different type of demand? I'm thinking of sites that are near venues for big events where users may be doing more uploading than downloading. (I have no evidence to support that assertion.)

Impossible with today's lte implementation.

 

Possible in future lte implementations.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

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.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Or, more simply, have a physical SIM that I can just move from one device to another.  Problem [already] solved.  Carrier doesn't have to be involved at any point in the process. I'll be among many (I'm sure) who will be glad to know if you see it.  Here in the DC area, Dish hasn't really done much yet.  I think I've seen some Dish gear around Richmond, but nothing here. - Trip
    • I like VICE.  They actually report on news no one else is willing to report. A lot of the places they go no sane person would want to be there.  They put their life on the line in many cases to get a story. From stories about the avocado wars in Mexico, being in the front lines against ISIS and Ukraine, to being embedded with terrorist organizations.   FAA might have some conspiracy 5G nut on their team or something.  At work ever year we have some one come in and say "hey, can you turn off the WIFI in my room? I don't want its radiation".  It doesn't make sense and their reasoning is always uneducated conspiracy. I can see someone coming into my office and acting crazy over C band disregarding everything else.
    • I think on esims it depends on how they implement it. If you can freely activate them on one phone while having it loaded on many that would be great.   I will let you know when I see Boost Mobile native 5g live here. So far no sign of even the plmn being active which I figure will be my first indicator. I look at changing networks with the TNX Sim and seem to get a full list of all carriers and their alternate plmns.
    • This is a result of the change I mentioned above, sparked by @PedroDaGr8 trying to log AT&T cells with a non-AT&T SIM that was reporting "out of service" but still capturing cell info. For the moment (subject to change as I keep testing and getting feedback), the "Connecting to" prefix will disappear when you connect in a scenario like that. I may adjust it to show a special prefix like "Limited LTE" or "No Data LTE" to make it more clear what is going on, but I also need to make sure that's only appearing at the proper times. When you were seeing just "LTE" in your screenshots, was there anything unusual about your connection? I see the app indicated you couldn't make calls; could you transfer data? Can you send a diagnostic report next time you see that?   I'm seeing this more frequently, unfortunately -- it has something to do with Android's power saving efforts I believe. Was the app in the foreground when it happened? When the screen updates, the notification and home screen widget are also updated -- but as seen with the widget for the past couple of years, Android doesn't always execute the update. I'm constantly trying to find ways around these limitations, since the app is useless if it's displaying stale data.
    • Bleh, hope not.  The eSIM is a huge step backwards to the bad old days and I have no desire to encourage their use. But in any event, maybe I should get Boost service, then, if people are already seeing it.  I can use it for AT&T until Dish native gear goes live in this area.  Have to ponder that a bit. - Trip
  • Recently Browsing

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