Sprint Organic Network Expansion Discussion Thread

[burnout8488]

I never thought I'd read the term e-penis spectacularity tonight.  Wow.  Just wow.  

He had me at "e-penis spectacularity" too.

[Fraydog]

I never thought I'd read the term e-penis spectacularity tonight.  Wow.  Just wow.  

 

I just made it up on the fly, it's not like it's that big of a deal. Get it? Big deal? 

 

OK, I'll stop there. 

[bigsnake49]

I'm curious how complicated such a setup might get in Samsung markets where the second PCS carrier is often noticeably stronger (~4-5 dB) than the original G block one. That may confuse whatever software is responsible for the PCC/SCC switch. Upgrading B25 to 4T4R may be the simpler and perhaps superior solution.

 Why only in the Samsung markets? Why is it stronger by 4-5db? 

[lilotimz]

 Why only in the Samsung markets? Why is it stronger by 4-5db? 

 

Equipment design. Network equipment are more often than not recycled from project to project and modified accordingly. 

Wouldn't surprise me if Samsungs equipment was originally designed and optimized for PCS A-F with G block added later.

[Dkoellerwx]

 Why only in the Samsung markets? Why is it stronger by 4-5db? 

 

 

Equipment design. Network equipment are more often than not recycled from project to project and modified accordingly. 

Wouldn't surprise me if Samsungs equipment was originally designed and optimized for PCS A-F with G block added later.

 

Do any markets that aren't Samsung have a second PCS carrier yet?

[MacinJosh]

Do any markets that aren't Samsung have a second PCS carrier yet?

As far as I know, just Shentel, which is ALU.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk 3.1.1

[lilotimz]

Do any markets that aren't Samsung have a second PCS carrier yet?

 

Shentel-land. 

[Dkoellerwx]

Shentel-land. 

 

Right, forgot about Shentel. They don't count.

[WiWavelength]

I thought that all of the Samsung devices that had been previously limited to 5MHz FDD had received Class II permissive changes to support wider bandwidths in B25, all the way up to 20 MHz. They were the trouble brand in that regard from what I can recall, so what other legacy devices would be left that would need the G block carrier to remain @ 5 MHz?

 

Many early Sprint variant single band LTE devices received Class II Permissive Change filings for additional carrier bandwidths.  I do not recall if all affected devices were ultimately covered, though.  You would have to ask our FCC OET Reporter, MacinJosh.

 

Regardless, for handsets already in the field, Class II filings do not magically make it so.  Unless the undisclosed wider carrier bandwidth capabilities have always been lying there latent -- and that would be an FCC violation -- the handsets still require software patches to open up the wider carrier bandwidths.  That is a problem.

 

AJ

[MacinJosh]

Many early Sprint variant single band LTE devices received Class II Permissive Change filings for additional carrier bandwidths. I do not recall if all affected devices were ultimately covered, though. You would have to ask our FCC OET Reporter, MacinJosh.

 

Regardless, for handsets already in the field, Class II filings do not magically make it so. Unless the undisclosed wider carrier bandwidth capabilities have always been lying there latent -- and that would be an FCC violation -- the handsets still require software patches to open up the wider carrier bandwidths. That is a problem.

 

AJ

Most first generation Sprint Samsung LTE devices haven't seen an update long before those Class II filings, and I don't ever expect Sprint to push such patches, or Samsung either. The I can't recall specifics for the LG Viper or HTC EVO LTE, I'll have to look them up later after I get off work later today.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk 3.1.1

[NYC126]

China Telekom is already testing the tech of Fdd TDD carrier aggregation FDD-TDD LTE carrier aggregation demo with China Telecom:

[bigsnake49]

I have a follow up question to PCS/band 41 aggregation. Can the dowload:upload ratio change to 8:1 if used in CA to minimize the empty slots? Why not use B41 in a supplemental downlink type of scenario instead with no uplink of its own?

[jroepcke51]

I have a follow up question to PCS/band 41 aggregation. Can the dowload:upload ratio change to 8:1 if used in CA to minimize the empty slots? Why not use B41 in a supplemental downlink type of scenario instead with no uplink of its own?

If I understand AJ correctly, his point was that B41 would become the SCC and Band 25 would be the primary.  In this case, B41 would be used for only additional downlink. I didn't watch the video above but my assumption is that they are using Band 3 as the primary and B41 as supplemental downlink.

[nexgencpu]

Im curious as to how that second B41 carrier would affect non-CA devices. If I understand Neal correctly, current generation devices would not have access to this second carrier for capacity under CA configuration.

 

Basically eliminating any potential capacity advantage and only improving peak speeds on all devices that do support CA.

 

Does Sprint have any way around this? or do they just throw more spectrum for capacity without enabling CA?

[S4GRU]

Im curious as to how that second B41 carrier would affect non-CA devices. If I understand Neal correctly, current generation devices would not have access to this second carrier for capacity under CA configuration.

 

Basically eliminating any potential capacity advantage and only improving peak speeds on all devices that do support CA.

 

Does Sprint have any way around this? or do they just throw more spectrum for capacity without enabling CA?

 

Both carriers will be available to CA and Non CA devices.  But only B41 CA devices have the ability to have up to double throughput through both carriers simultaneously.

[gnoj]

Why only in the Samsung markets? Why is it stronger by 4-5db?

 

The PCS RRU's Sprint purchased from Samsung for NV were indeed "recycled" models from previous projects.

 

Before the vendors for NV were first announced back in December 2010, C Spire (née Cellular South) and MetroPCS had already announced deals with Samsung to upgrade their networks to LTE. Prior to this, Samsung had not won any major domestic contracts. As a new entrant, they would be designing new radios from scratch for them.

 

For MetroPCS, which held licenses in the PCS C/F blocks in California, their aim was to maximize coverage from each site, which required pushing them all to max power. Therefore, the radios were tuned for the A and B blocks, which minimized distortions by weakening the max power in C/F.

 

C Spire also requested this same A/B block differential tuning, but for different reasons. In areas where they had obtained the A block from their spectrum swap with T-Mobile, having radios that performed more strongly with those frequencies made more sense in a more traditional network that is designed with sites operating at varied power. However, they would later back out of this deal and switch to Alcatel-Lucent.

 

So when Sprint came along shortly thereafter, by grabbing these already tested designs from off the shelf, so to speak, they were able to move on to deployment relatively quickly.

 

So that is why the second B25 carrier in Chicago (located toward the top of Sprint's B block disaggregation) has this small but consistent propagation advantage compared to the G block carrier, and probably won't in ALU or Ericsson markets. I had originally believed that Ericsson was to blame for yet another wonky optimization job, but for once it seems they're in the clear.

 

The boost in both capacity and coverage provided by this second B25 carrier in my primary market has definitely made a difference in some locations. For example, LTE now works reliably in my basement (it was hit-or-miss @ ~-114 dBm before). When I'm out on the road and happen to be halfway between two towers, any "3G zones" have shrunk enough that I'm back on LTE at least a minute earlier than before (with the scan timer set to 1 minute, it's more likely to catch a signal on the first rather than second attempt). A further gain from B26 is still needed to cover some more ground, particularly indoors, but every little bit really does help. Between this and the off-loading to B41 by all those who either don't mind or even realize their phones lack SVLTE, it has made the wait for a confirmed VoLTE-capable Sprint device much more bearable.

 

Most first generation Sprint Samsung LTE devices haven't seen an update long before those Class II filings, and I don't ever expect Sprint to push such patches, or Samsung either. The I can't recall specifics for the LG Viper or HTC EVO LTE, I'll have to look them up later after I get off work later today.

 

The fact that any Class II filings were submitted at all I think shows that Sprint has at least considered the idea of introducing wider B25 carriers in at least a few markets. If they do eventually decide to do so, I'm sure it wouldn't be too challenging to push out new firmware if that is the only change. Though I do wonder if they would explicitly note that in the changelog.

[bigsnake49]

The PCS RRU's Sprint purchased from Samsung for NV were indeed "recycled" models from previous projects.

 

Before the vendors for NV were first announced back in December 2010, C Spire (née Cellular South) and MetroPCS had already announced deals with Samsung to upgrade their networks to LTE. Prior to this, Samsung had not won any major domestic contracts. As a new entrant, they would be designing new radios from scratch for them.

 

For MetroPCS, which held licenses in the PCS C/F blocks in California, their aim was to maximize coverage from each site, which required pushing them all to max power. Therefore, the radios were tuned for the A and B blocks, which minimized distortions by weakening the max power in C/F.

 

C Spire also requested this same A/B block differential tuning, but for different reasons. In areas where they had obtained the A block from their spectrum swap with T-Mobile, having radios that performed more strongly with those frequencies made more sense in a more traditional network that is designed with sites operating at varied power. However, they would later back out of this deal and switch to Alcatel-Lucent.

 

So when Sprint came along shortly thereafter, by grabbing these already tested designs from off the shelf, so to speak, they were able to move on to deployment relatively quickly.

 

So that is why the second B25 carrier in Chicago (located toward the top of Sprint's B block disaggregation) has this small but consistent propagation advantage compared to the G block carrier, and probably won't in ALU or Ericsson markets. I had originally believed that Ericsson was to blame for yet another wonky optimization job, but for once it seems they're in the clear.

 

The boost in both capacity and coverage provided by this second B25 carrier in my primary market has definitely made a difference in some locations. For example, LTE now works reliably in my basement (it was hit-or-miss @ ~-114 dBm before). When I'm out on the road and happen to be halfway between two towers, any "3G zones" have shrunk enough that I'm back on LTE at least a minute earlier than before (with the scan timer set to 1 minute, it's more likely to catch a signal on the first rather than second attempt). A further gain from B26 is still needed to cover some more ground, particularly indoors, but every little bit really does help. Between this and the off-loading to B41 by all those who either don't mind or even realize their phones lack SVLTE, it has made the wait for a confirmed VoLTE-capable Sprint device much more bearable.

 

 

 

The fact that any Class II filings were submitted at all I think shows that Sprint has at least considered the idea of introducing wider B25 carriers in at least a few markets. If they do eventually decide to do so, I'm sure it wouldn't be too challenging to push out new firmware if that is the only change. Though I do wonder if they would explicitly note that in the changelog.

Thank you for your very thorough explanation. 

[Fraydog]

Google? Haha. But, seriously, this is old news. 

 

Here's one: http://ipcarrier.blogspot.com/2013/11/at-to-deploy-40000-small-cells-as-part.html

 

AT&T said on their recent conference call they are ahead of schedule. And it's 40,000 small cells and 10,000 new macros for Project VIP (the 2014-2015 network investment)

 

The point is that Sprint's investment is very welcome--and will help a great deal---but it's not going to alter the landscape materially when their competitors are doing even more.

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/...-de/2015-03-05

 

Yeah, that's just probably a little cruel on my part to bump this since you had no way of knowing, but AT&T backing out of their small cell commitment is not good for consumers. 

[lilotimz]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/...-de/2015-03-05

 

Yeah, that's just probably a little cruel on my part to bump this since you had no way of knowing, but AT&T backing out of their small cell commitment is not good for consumers.

Remember they're the nation's strongest network.

 

They don't need some puny small cells. They already have big cells to lift the load burden on the network. Att is America's strongest network! Heh

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

[utiz4321]

Remember they're the nation's strongest network.

 

They don't need some puny small cells. They already have big cells to lift the load burden on the network. Att is America's strongest network! Heh

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

How much can small cells lift any ways.

[S4GRU]

How much can small cells lift any ways.

How many sites does Leap have in how many ATT markets? And how many are colocated with ATT? It's kind of like saying Sprint doesn't need small cells because of Clearwire and Nextel.

 

This isn't about Leap's sites. It's about spectrum. ATT isn't in the precarious spectrum crunch it was in before Leap's spectrum. Not in the short term, anyway. They can just deploy that spectrum far and wide on existing sites for capacity. And then AWS-3 and WCS and B29 will help relieve beyond that.

 

I think ATT is being a little disingenuous here.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

How much can small cells lift any ways.

 

How many cells would a small cell sell if a small cell could sell cells?

 

AJ

[utiz4321]

How many cells would a small cell sell if a small cell could sell cells?

 

AJ

I think 5.

[Fraydog]

How many sites does Leap have in how many ATT markets? And how many are colocated with ATT? It's kind of like saying Sprint doesn't need small cells because of Clearwire and Nextel.

 

This isn't about Leap's sites. It's about spectrum. ATT isn't in the precarious spectrum crunch it was in before Leap's spectrum. Not in the short term, anyway. They can just deploy that spectrum far and wide on existing sites for capacity. And then AWS-3 and WCS and B29 will help relieve beyond that.

 

I think ATT is being a little disingenuous here.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

 

That's classic Southwestern Bell/SBC/AT&T Inc. mentality, though. They always would rather deploy spectrum over densifying their network. This is how they have rolled forever and ever. 

[WiWavelength]

I think 5.

 

Check or chuck that with the woodchuck.

 

AJ