Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Anyone know if Sprint plans to deploy downlink 5CA? As far as I know they have only 3CA on the downlink.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brad The Beast said:

Anyone know if Sprint plans to deploy downlink 5CA? As far as I know they have only 3CA on the downlink.

Doubtful.

Massive MIMO equipment only simultaneously supports 60 MHz of LTE and 60 MHz of NR (it has a 120 MHz bandwidth limit). Since this is the deployment we're seeing going forward, it's unlikely that we'll see anything greater than 3CA on LTE. This will be interesting in markets like mine (Seattle) where most 8T8Rs currently run 5 carriers at 4x4 MIMO. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RAvirani said:

Doubtful.

Massive MIMO equipment only simultaneously supports 60 MHz of LTE and 60 MHz of NR (it has a 120 MHz bandwidth limit). Since this is the deployment we're seeing going forward, it's unlikely that we'll see anything greater than 3CA on LTE. This will be interesting in markets like mine (Seattle) where most 8T8Rs currently run 5 carriers at 4x4 MIMO. 

Interesting. So how do they plan on using the remaining 2.5GHz? Are they going to install more octoport/hexadeacport antennas for LTE then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

Interesting. So how do they plan on using the remaining 2.5GHz? Are they going to install more octoport/hexadeacport antennas for LTE then?

I'm not sure. In Seattle, many sites have an active hexadecaport antenna along with an inactive 8T8R antenna (the 8T8R is not connected to a radio). They do this because swapping the 8T8R out for a massive MIMO antenna is apparently very easy from a permitting standpoint. 

I suspect that when they swap the 8T8R out for a massive MIMO antenna, they will leave LTE on the hexadecaport and dedicate the massive MIMO antenna to NR. This would allow them to have significantly more spectrum on air as well as 64x64 MIMO on NR (which is arguably more useful than 32x32 MIMO on LTE). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 8:54 PM, RAvirani said:
Doubtful.
Massive MIMO equipment only simultaneously supports 60 MHz of LTE and 60 MHz of NR (it has a 120 MHz bandwidth limit). Since this is the deployment we're seeing going forward, it's unlikely that we'll see anything greater than 3CA on LTE. This will be interesting in markets like mine (Seattle) where most 8T8Rs currently run 5 carriers at 4x4 MIMO. 

 


The IBW of the M-mimo equipment is 100 MHz. The older 8t8r is 120 MHz.

So in essence It's 60 MHz B41 + 40 MHz NR41 if they keep the current 3 CA configuration.


So yeah...



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, lilotimz said:

The IBW of the M-mimo equipment is 100 MHz. The older 8t8r is 120 MHz.

 

Is it 100 MHz for all vendors' M-MIMO equipment? For some reason I was under the impression it was 120 MHz. 

In current hexadecaport setups, do you think Sprint will leave LTE running on the existing antenna/radio set to allow them to run wider NR channels at higher order MIMO?

Also, is there any chance M-MIMO equipment ever be recertified for higher bandwidth operations? Or could Tx/Rx diversity be lowered to allow more spectrum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Is it 100 MHz for all vendors' M-MIMO equipment? For some reason I was under the impression it was 120 MHz. 
In current hexadecaport setups, do you think Sprint will leave LTE running on the existing antenna/radio set to allow them to run wider NR channels at higher order MIMO?
Also, is there any chance M-MIMO equipment ever be recertified for higher bandwidth operations? Or could Tx/Rx diversity be lowered to allow more spectrum?


- all.

- I do not believe so at least for the vast majority of sites are going the standalone 800/1.9 antenna + 2.5 once more.

- no. It's a hardware restriction. It's common with other antenna integrated radio designs. Just less room overall to pack in the radio electronics and antenna arrays. T-mobile gets around this via externally mounted Rrus connected to the passive antenna ports on the AIR/RAS units to increase capacity.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lilotimz said:


 

 


- all.

- I do not believe so at least for the vast majority of sites are going the standalone 800/1.9 antenna + 2.5 once more.

- no. It's a hardware restriction. It's common with other antenna integrated radio designs. Just less room overall to pack in the radio electronics and antenna arrays. T-mobile gets around this via externally mounted Rrus connected to the passive antenna ports on the AIR/RAS units to increase capacity.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

 

That's a shame...NR won't be as great with only 40 MHz of spectrum on air. This leaves almost half of Sprint's 2.5 GHz spectrum unused in most markets...

It sounds like we will see a big drop in LTE capacity here in Seattle with the M-MIMO launch considering we have five L2500 carriers on air throughout much of the market. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RAvirani said:

That's a shame...NR won't be as great with only 40 MHz of spectrum on air. This leaves almost half of Sprint's 2.5 GHz spectrum unused in most markets...

It sounds like we will see a big drop in LTE capacity here in Seattle with the M-MIMO launch considering we have five L2500 carriers on air throughout much of the market. 

In areas like Columbus, where Sprint controls all of the B41 spectrum except for the gaps, with FCC permission, Sprint could have 9 198MHz carriers plus a 15MHz carrier with 0.8Mhz for buffer space.   They should leave the 8T8Rs up plus the Massive MIMOs.  The real issue is likely the cost of backhaul. 

Don't forget it will be 4G LTE plus 5NR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The IBW of the M-mimo equipment is 100 MHz. The older 8t8r is 120 MHz.

So in essence It's 60 MHz B41 + 40 MHz NR41 if they keep the current 3 CA configuration.

So yeah...



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Hey Tim will it be easy or hard for TMobile to Deploy B41 on their towers when and if that time comes?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The IBW of the M-mimo equipment is 100 MHz. The older 8t8r is 120 MHz.

So in essence It's 60 MHz B41 + 40 MHz NR41 if they keep the current 3 CA configuration.

So yeah...



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


Can you explain why John Saw says differently? He is definitely saying Massive Mimo supports 120mhz.

“What’s most amazing though about this breakthrough technology is the impact it’s having on the network experience for our customers already. We’re rolling out Massive MIMO equipment in Los Angeles and other cities using 60 MHz of 2.5 GHz spectrum to dramatically increase capacity on our existing 4G LTE Advanced sites. This technology is particularly suited to high-traffic urban locations and the early performance results are exciting. For example, during the past three weeks at the LA County Fair, we’ve seen a huge up to 5X increase in our LTE capacity and speed using our newly deployed Massive MIMO radios compared to 8T8R. That’s giving Sprint customers at one of the largest county fairs in the U.S. a better network experience because we’re moving more data, more quickly, to more people.”

“And the story gets even better! In the first half of next year, our team will make a simple software upgrade to our base stations (no tower climbs needed), and we’ll also light up 5G service on these same Massive MIMO radios using an additional 60 MHz of 2.5 GHz”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Terrell352 said:

 

Man you have to give Saw credit, he has worked with so much first generation equipment, and had to use it to make due while his bosses have inflicted so many half tested solutions on their UE's. Though I do wish he would clarify this. It's not just a forum user stat, he is out there on tape and now putting it in front of the merger as this specific equipment operating as you highlighted.

Like Mr. Tim said though, the gear is the gear. So maybe he is just accounting for some spectrum usage compromisetry that he has afoot between the two airlinks. Since it is now a part of the merger argument, again he does need to address it. I suggest the executive twitter account carpet bomb solution; squeaky wheels, grease and such. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, belusnecropolis said:

Man you have to give Saw credit, he has worked with so much first generation equipment, and had to use it to make due while his bosses have inflicted so many half tested solutions on their UE's. Though I do wish he would clarify this. It's not just a forum user stat, he is out there on tape and now putting it in front of the merger as this specific equipment operating as you highlighted.

Like Mr. Tim said though, the gear is the gear. So maybe he is just accounting for some spectrum usage compromisetry that he has afoot between the two airlinks. Since it is now a part of the merger argument, again he does need to address it. I suggest the executive twitter account carpet bomb solution; squeaky wheels, grease and such. 

 

1 hour ago, Terrell352 said:


Can you explain why John Saw says differently? He is definitely saying Massive Mimo supports 120mhz.

“What’s most amazing though about this breakthrough technology is the impact it’s having on the network experience for our customers already. We’re rolling out Massive MIMO equipment in Los Angeles and other cities using 60 MHz of 2.5 GHz spectrum to dramatically increase capacity on our existing 4G LTE Advanced sites. This technology is particularly suited to high-traffic urban locations and the early performance results are exciting. For example, during the past three weeks at the LA County Fair, we’ve seen a huge up to 5X increase in our LTE capacity and speed using our newly deployed Massive MIMO radios compared to 8T8R. That’s giving Sprint customers at one of the largest county fairs in the U.S. a better network experience because we’re moving more data, more quickly, to more people.”

“And the story gets even better! In the first half of next year, our team will make a simple software upgrade to our base stations (no tower climbs needed), and we’ll also light up 5G service on these same Massive MIMO radios using an additional 60 MHz of 2.5 GHz”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for making me double check  the vendors equipment and past statements about it and 120 MHz is stated for at least the Nokia AAHC M-MIMO. 

I eat humble pie today good sire. 

Looks like I saw the specs for a 2.5 GHz M-MIMO from another related (non-Sprint) vendor which did have a 100 MHz IBW and applied it to the rest for some reason. Please correct that if you see it posted elsewhere by informing others or reminding me to cross out the inaccurate information.

I do see NR C2PC's for the Nokia and Samsung units and a brand new Ericsson M-MIMO filing using another FCC ID. 

 

Fun Fact: Did you know Sprint / Nokia uses 2 M-MIMO Models? AAHC = Full Band 2596-2690 while AAHE is 2630-2690. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lilotimz said:

 

Fun Fact: Did you know Sprint / Nokia uses 2 M-MIMO Models? AAHC = Full Band 2596-2690 while AAHE is 2630-2690. 

I had my F35 lightning account carrying large metric tonnage of ordinance and set to maximum shit poasts per sq kilometer. Mission aborted.

Even when Mr. Tim presents humble he shares with us his amazing input and excellent knowledge base and gives us more cool facts. Were the other units Chinese or foreign? They also seem to have a lot of 2.6, and is the AAHE a possible band 7 solution for other operators or TDD only? Just curious about gear as usual. Looks like AAHE could be a sweet NR solution next to some LTE cells on differing but co-located hardware. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I had my F35 lightning account carrying large metric tonnage of ordinance and set to maximum shit poasts per sq kilometer. Mission aborted.

 

Even when Mr. Tim presents humble he shares with us his amazing input and excellent knowledge base and gives us more cool facts. Were the other units Chinese or foreign? They also seem to have a lot of 2.6, and is the AAHE a possible band 7 solution for other operators or TDD only? Just curious about gear as usual. Looks like AAHE could be a sweet NR solution next to some LTE cells on differing but co-located hardware. 

 

It was a Korean OEM model who Samsung partners with. You've probably see plenty of their sector antennas and 800 MHz Rrus (ALU rebranded) around.

 

For the AAHE it's B41 TDD. B7 is paired 2500-2570/2620-2690.

 

It's just interesting to note as usually sprint gear is set to B41H (2618-2690) or B41L (2506-2570) and then you have an AAHE that's just out there above the typical BRs high range.

 

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, lilotimz said:

 

Yeah I have seen a few now that we are getting the big rollout treatment here. They are popular with the newer, thiccer builds. Last round was MiniMacro that have four port antenna, with 2 utilized. Our site is the only one in any form of city limit without it, that gotdang monopole crushes me. We have a town named Aynor here, it has about 400 people, and an 8t8r with 4 carriers live so there is that. I believe user @Terrell352 can appreciate that the cows in SC being covered as well as the cows in FL, finally.

Anyhoo, With all the funky spacing in US band 41, is there room for 3 carriers on that model? Maybe 15 L and 40 NR or just ~50 NR? Do you know if ROK operates in the full band? Maybe they got a great deal on them. Sprint does tend to be thrifty with the gear spend lately, and that shows in how far they are making progress go so quickly.

I imagine a split sector running that bad dude in areas they are 2.5 constrained to the high end. Aynor will probably get the 120MHz model though, since we have spectrum like that to spend here ;)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

    • So I figured out there is a way to check if a phone is using Calling+ or VoLTE without root. If engineering (not SCP) reports the PLMN as 310120, then it is not VoLTE. VoLTE only runs on 312530. That being said, a phone can be on 312530 but not use VoLTE (Pixel 2 for example). So being on 312530 is not sufficient to say that it is using VoLTE, but being on 310120 IS sufficient to rule out VoLTE being used. As for the "flag" Sprint uses to enable/disable it on supported devices, I suspect that they use the TAC. I think there is a hardcoded whitelist of TACs where it will be enabled. So they can change the TACs for a market to "enable" it, but by default it's "disabled". If this is the case, then Magic Box TACs are simply not whitelisted yet, even though it works fine on them. I've verified that VoLTE works on a Magic Box with at least the 440a firmware, and possibly earlier versions as well. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
    • You're referring to this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/04/lawsuit-atts-directv-now-is-a-flop-and-att-lied-to-investors-about-it/ That's not beyond the realm of possibility for Sprint... especially given how any lawsuit would occur subsequent to the alleged "lying". Sprint's FCC Filing is supported by empirical and highly confidential data on its adds/losses, churn, etc. throughout the report. I believe it shows a serious situation. Even more so, Sprint says in the Filing that its investor statements noting certain accomplishments shouldn't detract from the seriousness of its current predicament. See Pages 36-42 of the FCC Filing, which includes this: "The recent improvements in some financial metrics simply cannot, and do not, overcome these fundamental challenges:" On balance, I'm more willing to believe the information in the FCC Filing which specifically references and dismisses the investor statements than in the investor statements alone. If the redacted "highly confidential" information in the Filing was made available to investors, I believe Sprint stock would be substantially impacted... as that information reflects the ground truth of what's happening with Sprint.
    • Then I hope whoever gets Sprint buys Dishes spectrum hell even uscc or New TMO Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    • Dish does not have any money.They spent it all on spectrum.
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...