Backhaul for 8T8R Band 41

[greencat]

After they have LTE 800 and 1900 at a site and it is turned on and functioning as it should is the backhaul that is at that site sufficient for band 41? Or do they have to run all new backhaul to the site before they turn on the B41?

 

What would cause them to install the B41 antennas/rrus/equipment on a site with live LTE 800 and 1900 but not turn on the B41 equipment?

[avb]

I thought once upgraded backhaul is in place, the backhaul is scalable?  Meaning once the fiber is there, if backhaul is at 100mbs then they can just dial it up to 250mbs.  Like calling up Comcast and upgrading plans.

[Destroyallcubes]

After they have LTE 800 and 1900 at a site and it is turned on and functioning as it should is the backhaul that is at that site sufficient for band 41? Or do they have to run all new backhaul to the site before they turn on the B41?

 

What would cause them to install the B41 antennas/rrus/equipment on a site with live LTE 800 and 1900 but not turn on the B41 equipment?

Someone has to provision the equipment basically. Test everything make sure it work. I asked a crew who were installing some, and they said a seperate crew comes in and fires it all up, and does testing.

[S4GRU]

When Sprint sent the initial RFP to backhaul suppliers in 2011, it requested enough to cover 3 sectors with one 5MHz LTE carrier at each site, and be scalable up from there for additional 5MHz carriers and 20MHz TDD carriers in the future.

 

However, not all sites had nearby backhaul available where that could be done.  So exceptions were made up front at many sites, with future fiber to be added where it would be scalable upon demand.  Also, later in Network Vision, they increased the base amount significantly to be ready for Band 41 wideband carriers.

 

But with ~55,000 sites now, there are so many different scenarios.  Each site is a uniquely different case with how much backhaul is currently supplied and how much more is needed.  And how quickly they can get it there.

 

My best guess is that 50% of NV sites with LTE live will have easily upgradeable backhaul that can be activated in 30-45 days from the order.

[joshnys8913]

When Sprint sent the initial RFP to backhaul suppliers in 2011, it requested enough to cover 3 sectors with one 5MHz LTE carrier at each site, and be scalable up from there for additional 5MHz carriers and 20MHz TDD carriers in the future.

 

However, not all sites had nearby backhaul available where that could be done.  So exceptions were made up front at many sites, with future fiber to be added where it would be scalable upon demand.  Also, later in Network Vision, they increased the base amount significantly to be ready for Band 41 wideband carriers.

 

But with ~55,000 sites now, there are so many different scenarios.  Each site is a uniquely different case with how much backhaul is currently supplied and how much more is needed.  And how quickly they can get it there.

 

My best guess is that 50% of NV sites with LTE live will have easily upgradeable backhaul that can be activated in 30-45 days from the order.

lot of rural places fiber is no where available, would be nice here in NY state.... It might happen sooner then we think up here because our Governor in NY state wants everyone to have faster Internet.   

[Fraydog]

Sprint is using government funded AAV here on the few sites that exist in Southern Illinois. 

 

http://www.clearwave.com/clearwave/index.cfm/broadband-project/

[shannonbrian]

They just fired up tower by house it is to over load now. 5to7mbps most time and 25mbps down at 4am. Starting see lot lower speeds even on band 41 now in delaware. Backhaul not up to par .

[mittenmitten]

Here in Grand Rapids, MI I regularly get sub-1mbps on B41 and B26 because of 'backhaul issues'. It's been like that as long as we've had LTE (we were a round 1 market iirc). I wish Sprint would talk more about backhaul : ( 

[greencat]

So potentially many sites at phase one markets need upgraded backhaul?

[S4GRU]

So potentially many sites at phase one markets need upgraded backhaul?

 

Yes.  Correct.

[stuckinohio1]

Yes.  Correct.

the problem is Sprint is still knee deep in spending ass loads of money building out B41 sites and finishing the last B25 sites so im guessing its not a high priority to go back and upgrade backhaul and wont be till at least mid 2015.

 

EDIT: i am not saying this is a bad thing thats just how it "seems" like its happening.

[bcltoys]

They just fired up tower by house it is to over load now. 5to7mbps most time and 25mbps down at 4am. Starting see lot lower speeds even on band 41 now in delaware. Backhaul not up to par .

At least you have LTE avalible to you I would give my right n*t to have steady signal and 5 to 7 Mbps.

[JossMan]

When Sprint sent the initial RFP to backhaul suppliers in 2011, it requested enough to cover 3 sectors with one 5MHz LTE carrier at each site, and be scalable up from there for additional 5MHz carriers and 20MHz TDD carriers in the future.

 

However, not all sites had nearby backhaul available where that could be done.  So exceptions were made up front at many sites, with future fiber to be added where it would be scalable upon demand.  Also, later in Network Vision, they increased the base amount significantly to be ready for Band 41 wideband carriers.

 

But with ~55,000 sites now, there are so many different scenarios.  Each site is a uniquely different case with how much backhaul is currently supplied and how much more is needed.  And how quickly they can get it there.

 

My best guess is that 50% of NV sites with LTE live will have easily upgradeable backhaul that can be activated in 30-45 days from the order.

I had a subcontractor tell me the site closest to my house was fed by satellite backhaul  , needless to say I had to give him S4GRU schooling.

[WiWavelength]

I had a subcontractor tell me the site closest to my house was fed by satellite backhaul  , needless to say I had to give him S4GRU schooling.

 

One of my favorite anecdotes is the story of a customer about 10 years ago at a Cingular store asking, "Hey, when are you guys gonna put up more satellites?"

 

Many customers and even industry workers have little understanding of how wireless networks actually function.  And they lack the innate curiosity or intellectual wherewithal to learn.  To them, wireless is basically black magic.

 

AJ

[Flompholph]

Is there a reason they can't use satellite (ipstar or Gilat)? Softbank uses ipstar on some of their towers they have incase of emergency. Gilat can push over 200 Mbps to the site the ping would be bad but in places like Western PA market or out West where there is very rural sites that will still take a long time to finish fiber runs.  

[S4GRU]

Is there a reason they can't use satellite (ipstar or Gilat)? Softbank uses ipstar on some of their towers they have incase of emergency. Gilat can push over 200 Mbps to the site the ping would be bad but in places like Western PA market or out West where there is very rural sites that will still take a long time to finish fiber runs.

It could be used for redundancy. But the pings are out of sight, as you noted. It would be awful for a permanent backhaul solution. A daisy chain microwave solution is much better for remote sites.

 

But even for redundancy, if dozens of sites went offline at once, the amount of traffic suddenly going to a satellite would overwhelm it. For redundancy, it could only handle a site or two at a time going down (per zone) without losing performance overall.

[joshnys8913]

It could be used for redundancy. But the pings are out of sight, as you noted. It would be awful for a permanent backhaul solution. A daisy chain microwave solution is much better for remote sites.

 

But even for redundancy, if dozens of sites went offline at once, the amount of traffic suddenly going to a satellite would overwhelm it. For redundancy, it could only handle a site or two at a time going down (per zone) without losing performance overall.

I agree satellite is just not there, microwave would be ok for certain cases but not ideal your right!!

[Flompholph]

It could be used for redundancy. But the pings are out of sight, as you noted. It would be awful for a permanent backhaul solution. A daisy chain microwave solution is much better for remote sites.

But even for redundancy, if dozens of sites went offline at once, the amount of traffic suddenly going to a satellite would overwhelm it. For redundancy, it could only handle a site or two at a time going down (per zone) without losing performance overall.

We all see how long it is taking to run fiber to the sites. I just don't see why it is not a viable option to use satellite for a time in between now (or new site being built) and a fiber run. I am sure they can make a "box" that can be rolled off a flat bed truck with the dish automatically pointing to the satellite using the "boxes" gps. All they would have to do is plug power and plug in the cable for the site for internet.

 

I am not scared of overwhelming a satellite because the newer satellites are using beamforming to reuse the same spectrum capacity can be 100+ Gbps per satellite. 

 

I know everyone would prefer fiber but for sites that are still on a single T1 connection people can survive with a 500 ms ping where they are coming from 1x speeds until fiber is run(to the site or a nearby site with microwave). Waiting 1/2 second for a download, video, or audio stream is not a problem. Only voice or websites maybe a problem to wait 1/2 a second and send that through the T1 that is already there. Satellites would also be great for COWs. You could have everything on the same trailer just turn on the generator and wait a couple minutes. It would just have to find the satellite using gps and setup where the COW is with all the macro sites.

 

Maybe I am just a space nerd but the spacecraft ladee speed was an impressive 622 Mbps using laser. Plans are to test the next nasa laser capable of 1+ Gbps in 2017.  

[caspar347]

One of my favorite anecdotes is the story of a customer about 10 years at a Cingular store asking, "Hey, when are you guys gonna put up more satellites?"

 

Many customers and even industry workers have little understanding of how wireless networks actually function. And they lack the innate curiosity or intellectual wherewithal to learn. To them, wireless is basically black magic.

 

AJ

This kinda bothers me. I met a VZ subcontractor who was installing base station cabinets and he knew quite literally nothing about the antennas at the top of the tower. I wound think they would at least try to know what Verizon's own antennas look like in the area.

[WiWavelength]

This kinda bothers me. I met a VZ subcontractor who was installing base station cabinets and he knew quite literally nothing about the antennas at the top of the tower. I wound think they would at least try to know what Verizon's own antennas look like in the area.

 

Two words:  cheap labor.  That is the free market's dirty but not so little secret.  Many workers feel under appreciated, thus feel little incentive to invest themselves in their work.  For them, it is just a paycheck.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

 

We all see how long it is taking to run fiber to the sites. I just don't see why it is not a viable option to use satellite for a time in between now (or new site being built) and a fiber run. I am sure they can make a "box" that can be rolled off a flat bed truck with the dish automatically pointing to the satellite using the "boxes" gps. All they would have to do is plug power and plug in the cable for the site for internet.

 

I am not scared of overwhelming a satellite because the newer satellites are using beamforming to reuse the same spectrum capacity can be 100+ Gbps per satellite. 

 

I know everyone would prefer fiber but for sites that are still on a single T1 connection people can survive with a 500 ms ping where they are coming from 1x speeds until fiber is run(to the site or a nearby site with microwave). Waiting 1/2 second for a download, video, or audio stream is not a problem. Only voice or websites maybe a problem to wait 1/2 a second and send that through the T1 that is already there. Satellites would also be great for COWs. You could have everything on the same trailer just turn on the generator and wait a couple minutes. It would just have to find the satellite using gps and setup where the COW is with all the macro sites.

 

Maybe I am just a space nerd but the spacecraft ladee speed was an impressive 622 Mbps using laser. Plans are to test the next nasa laser capable of 1+ Gbps in 2017.  

 

 

The best answer, by far, is microwave links for sites that are struggling to get fiber backhaul.  Even if satellite can be overcome for the reasons you cite, it would still be grossly expensive.  If Sprint could get rates from satellite providers that are 1/10th what they are to the public, that still would be way more than they currently pay for terrestrial backhaul.  When you consider the gross amounts of data a site would use in the month, it just would be insanely expensive.  There is a reason why satellite companies have relatively low data caps.  No one else is doing it.  That's evidence enough for me.

 

For a U.S. Wireless carrier to use satellite backhaul for redundancy or a permanent solution, they would most likely have to have their own satellite.  I just don't see this as a real viable backhaul solution.  At least not yet.

 

I get your point.  And it would be great to see proof of concept.  Somewhere where this is working.  It's a neat idea, and physically possible.  But we are not there yet where satellites can be a viable option for backhaul to permanent macro sites.  Deploy this on COW's or temp sites, and now maybe you have something.

 

But there isn't a site in the continental U.S. that can not be reached with a microwave bridge to fiber.  Wireless companies just do not want to do these at sites temporarily.  Because in their mind if they can get fiber in 18-36 months, why waste money on microwave now?  This is all about cost/benefit analysis.

[lilotimz]

 

---

 

Sprint emergency reaction teams does use sattelite for backhaul if needed. 

[WiWavelength]

I am not scared of overwhelming a satellite because the newer satellites are using beamforming to reuse the same spectrum capacity can be 100+ Gbps per satellite.

 

Beamforming works great for satellite broadcast downlink areas that may be hundreds of miles apart.  But, tell me, how does beamforming work on the uplink for terrestrial transmitters that are only miles apart, if that?  In such case, the angle of incidence upon the relatively minuscule satellite is almost exactly the same for all uplink transmissions.

 

AJ

[Flompholph]

Beamforming works great for satellite broadcast downlink areas that may be hundreds of miles apart.  But, tell me, how does beamforming work on the uplink for terrestrial transmitters that are only miles apart, if that?  In such case, the angle of incidence upon the relatively minuscule satellite is almost exactly the same for all uplink transmissions.

 

AJ

I would have to ask Softbank how they handle their sites that use satellite backhaul in southern Japan and their tests in Kenya. But most likely time based if they are to close.

 

As far as the cost it looks like ViaSat cost $0.0045 per MB or $70 for 150 GB http://www.marketwatch.com/story/viasat-exede-debuts-first-virtually-unlimited-satellite-internet-service-in-us-2014-08-12 If I remember correctly Tmobile payed $0.30 per MB for roaming cost.

 

Satellite is no where near perfect but to say there is zero space for it in very remote areas where fiber runs are costly and time consuming is BS. Microwaves can only make so many hops before the airwave is full and you still need fiber run very far to the first site.

 

edit:Maybe I am just getting upset over people of the caliber of AJ brushing off satellite like there has been no improvement in the past 10 years just like sprint is viewed as there is zero improvement in their network. I will go back in the shadows.

[S4GRU]

 

 

I would have to ask Softbank how they handle their sites that use satellite backhaul in southern Japan and their tests in Kenya. But most likely time based if they are to close.

 

As far as the cost it looks like ViaSat cost $0.0045 per MB or $70 for 150 GB http://www.marketwatch.com/story/viasat-exede-debuts-first-virtually-unlimited-satellite-internet-service-in-us-2014-08-12 If I remember correctly Tmobile payed $0.30 per MB for roaming cost.

 

Satellite is no where near perfect but to say there is zero space for it in very remote areas where fiber runs are costly and time consuming is BS. Microwaves can only make so many hops before the airwave is full and you still need fiber run very far to the first site.

 

edit:Maybe I am just getting upset over people of the caliber of AJ brushing off satellite like there has been no improvement in the past 10 years just like sprint is viewed as there is zero improvement in their network. I will go back in the shadows.

Microwave doesn't need to take a hop until it loses line of sight. It can go a long, long way in between. Nowadays, even 7-8 hops for microwave wouldn't be enough to impact a remote site with the amount of usage it would receive. And it would perform better and be less expensive than satellite. It makes more sense (and cents) in the continental U.S. to use microwave. Even in remote and isolated spots in the Western U.S.

 

Where satellite may make sense is on islands, too far to reach with microwave and cost prohibitive to run undersea fiber. Which is also dropping in cost significantly BTW.

 

While it may pass a cost/benefit analysis on a remote or rural site here and there within the pricing you outline above, we would be talking about a handful of sites. Your original point was about doing something large scale to catch all the remaining sites without backhaul. This is not a solution for that. Can it be used somewhere possibly? Sure.

 

However, Sprint's backhaul issues right now aren't because it's missing a rural site here and there, it's mostly because it is missing a key urban/suburban site here and there. And if Sprint will not use easy to get microwave as a stop gap waiting for fiber, I just can't see them stretching further and getting satellite while waiting.

 

Most of Sprint's backhaul problems are due to them waiting to execute contracts for backhaul early in NV because they were trying a 'just in time' approach to preserve cash flow. If they had released all the backhaul nationwide at once and managed that early in NV, we would be in a much different position in regards to backhaul today.