Jump to content

I'll say it, Wimax was a good decision.


pyroscott

Recommended Posts

So Dish got brought up...Sprint could do with them what they had planned to do with LightSquared. Would be good for both companies, and would keep AT&T and Verizon from trying to monopolize those bands as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you are proposing would turn their netwok into an overly complicated and difficult to support mess.

 

TD-LTE is the long term solution to any capacity issues that might arise in their top 100 markets & in isolated high traffic areas within their peripheral markets.

 

Converting the existing Clearwire footprint over to TD-LTE from WIMAX is basically trivial.

 

Not to mention there's an ability to add capacity and eliminate performance bottlenecks wherever they start to appear by deploying small cells in high traffic areas like malls, universities, sports arenas, and airports.

 

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors, do you?

As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors, do you?

As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.

 

You're completely missing the point.

 

Those suburban markets don't need additional spectrum as long as TD-LTE micro-cells are deployed in high traffic areas where people congregate.

 

It keeps the rest of the network, where there isn't a critical mass of people running smoothly.

 

Textbook Example: It prevents the 2500 students in a High School from dragging down the network performance in an entire neighborhood.

 

The extra capacity is only deployed where it is actually needed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors' date=' do you?

As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.[/quote']

 

This is true. But to be valuable to Sprint, it doesn't have to cover the entirety of the suburbs to be useful as additional capacity in the suburbs.

 

For instance, lets take the suburb of Richardson, Texas outside of Dallas. A LTE cell there starts to go over capacity and all PCS and SMR spectrum that can be used for an additional LTE carrier is used up. They will still deploy TD-LTE on that site for additional capacity, even though it is suburban.

 

Additional carrier capacity with TD-LTE does not need to be contiguous with other TD-LTE sites. It can be a complete island, just within the Sprint Macro FD-LTE network. And it doesn't have to cover the whole cell that is identified as approaching capacity. Because even if it covers only half the customers in that cell with a meaningful LTE signal, every one of those customers now covered can be shunted to TD-LTE, if needed.

 

Then all the customers who are remaining in the cell outside of the TD-LTE coverage can now have the 1900 LTE and 800 LTE carriers to themselves. They were near capacity before adding the TD-LTE carrier, and now with approximately half removed, lots of capacity is back available.

 

And in some instances, if there is a high demand zone right outside the edge of coverage of the TD-LTE signal island, an assisting TD-LTE picocell can be added. Sprint is in the process of finalizing a plan for urban picocells that attach to street lights, stoplights, etc.

 

Clearwire's TD-LTE is going to be a wonderful thing for Sprint and eventually us customers.

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, would it be wrong to assume that micro/pico/femto cells are going to be way more prominent in the future?

 

This looked like a huge part of clearwire's strategy going forward and that the cost of installing them in shopping malls and schools is almost minimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this nugget of information compared the spectrums building propagation.

 

verizon-wall.jpg

 

Being from Verizon, I can understand questioning the validity, but It does bring up the question of how much better is AWS or 1900mhz compared to 2.5Ghz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this nugget of information compared the spectrums building propagation.

 

verizon-wall.jpg

 

Being from Verizon, I can understand questioning the validity, but It does bring up the question of how much better is AWS or 1900mhz compared to 2.5Ghz.

 

I don't think that chart is accurate. It shows that propagation distance is inversely linear with frequency. From what I remember from my communication courses Loss = (c/(4*pi*f*d)^2. Signal loss is inversely proportional to the square of the frequency. Am I missing something or are the Verizon people wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that chart is accurate. It shows that propagation distance is inversely linear with frequency. From what I remember from my communication courses Loss = (c/(4*pi*f*d)^2. Signal loss is inversely proportional to the square of the frequency. Am I missing something or are the Verizon people wrong?

 

Free space path loss (which is not really an ideal metric in this real world scenario, but it can still serve as a general measuring stick) increases by 6 dB for every doubling of frequency (i.e. halving of wavelength) or doubling of distance.

 

I empirically derived a quick way to calculate the free space path loss difference (in dB) between two frequencies. Use this formula: 20[log(F₁/F₂)]. To illustrate, 20[log(1900/850)] = 6.99 dB, as PCS 1900 MHz experiences ~7 dB greater free space path loss than does Cellular 850 MHz.

 

As for the VZW numbers referenced above, they are basically spot on. They use 2500 MHz as the baseline and calculate a ratio from there. For example, 2500/700 = 3.57, which jives with VZW's 3.5x ratio. Furthermore, plug the ratio into my formula to get the free space path loss difference then in dB: 20[log(3.57)] = 11.06 dB.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want them to buy them for their AWS spectrum. They should try to trade AWS spectrum from their acquisition for PCS spectrum. While I agree on Sprint getting PCS H block (I have been hearing about this since 2004), SMR spectrum becoming available is news to me. What SMR spectrum is this? If it's 900MHz spectrum, Sprint does not own the whole 5Mhz block so they would have to buy out the rest of the spectrum holders. Would FCC allow it? Where is the other SMR spectrum going to come from?

 

I personally think that buying the smaller regional players would not be a bad thing if they divested themselves of the AWS spectrum after they got it. The problem is that none of the smaller carriers have any significant amount of nationwide spectrum, especially not in just in PCS or AWS, as they are currently using a combination of the 2. The only way to really make it worthwhile to purchase them would be if Sprint was able to purchase multiple carriers, that together cover a significant portion of the US (or at the very least, where they have less than 30Mhz average spectrum). If they were able to purchase all the major regional carriers (and/or a consortium of smaller players) they would be able to gain a nearly nationwide blanket of new PCS spectrum, as well as a nearly nationwide blanket of AWS spectrum. Since AWS spectrum is not valuable to Sprint, they would be able to sell it to T-Mobile (or dish or whoever wants to buy it) and gain some of the losses back from purchasing the other companies.

After NV, there should be plenty of capacity to host all the new customers, and allow sprint to re-band the gained spectrum for additional LTE. The only problem is that many of these companies are pre-paid, and might not sign with sprint (possibly they could also make special promotions for them to switch to Boost/Virgin brands.

 

Another idea would be to actually work with T-Mobile to purchase the companies and split customers and spectrum. Areas that were primarily served by the AWS spectrum, the customers would go to T-Mobile; while areas that were served by PCS spectrum, customers would go to sprint. How much this would cost would depend on the percentages of Mhz of spectrum and percentages of customers each gained... but this would allow them to make sure that the big 2 couldn't overpower either of the smaller carriers individually.

I know that there is almost no chance of this actually happening, but it would be a way for each company to better compete with the big 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I don't think there is any doubt that WiMax was a good decision, as it wasn't so much a decision as something they had to do to maintain spectrum holdings.

 

What I can't understand is why Sprint ever let Clear manage themselves. With 51% ownership and ever-increasing evidence of ineptitude, wouldn't you eventually step in and take over?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I can't understand is why Sprint ever let Clear manage themselves. With 51% ownership and ever-increasing evidence of ineptitude' date=' wouldn't you eventually step in and take over?[/quote']

 

And that is the question for the ages...

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And that is the question for the ages...

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

They didn't want to be responsible for clearwire's debt load. They had they're own finances to worry about. That's why they dropped their voting power to less than 50%. They were worried if clear wire defaulted they would be forced to take over repayment.

 

Sent from my Acer A200 using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They didn't want to be responsible for clearwire's debt load. They had they're own finances to worry about. That's why they dropped their voting power to less than 50%. They were worried if clear wire defaulted they would be forced to take over repayment.

 

Sent from my Acer A200 using Forum Runner

 

I get that. However, Sprint could have upped their voting power, made some critical changes and then reduced voting power. There were other options. But Sprint was trying to keep their partner happy and not step on their toes. Any aggressive move by Sprint would have instantly soured the relationship and made things very difficult. It was a tough position to be in. Its just Monday morning quarterbacking.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you guys think Clearwire could possibly build "Carrier-Grade Service using Wi-Fi Over WiMAX"

 

Here is the article.

http://www.wimax360.com/profiles/blogs/carrier-grade-service-using-wi-fi-over-wimax

 

I read this article. I'm not sure I get what he is proposing.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this article. I'm not sure I get what he is proposing.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

I really didn't either, but I figured someone here would have some ideas. People's knowledge on this site is incredible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I agree that Wimax was a good idea. It was the reason I switched from AT&T... so they gained at least one customer because of the decision. When I have Wimax reception, I have no complaints - it's fast enough for everything that I want to do with my phone. The connection has served me well, but I wonder if the customers who complain about it are trying to use it as a replacement for their home internet connection? I can see people trying to do that with unlimited data, but I couldn't image putting up with that myself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is true. But to be valuable to Sprint, it doesn't have to cover the entirety of the suburbs to be useful as additional capacity in the suburbs.

 

For instance, lets take the suburb of Richardson, Texas outside of Dallas. A LTE cell there starts to go over capacity and all PCS and SMR spectrum that can be used for an additional LTE carrier is used up. They will still deploy TD-LTE on that site for additional capacity, even though it is suburban.

 

Additional carrier capacity with TD-LTE does not need to be contiguous with other TD-LTE sites. It can be a complete island, just within the Sprint Macro FD-LTE network. And it doesn't have to cover the whole cell that is identified as approaching capacity. Because even if it covers only half the customers in that cell with a meaningful LTE signal, every one of those customers now covered can be shunted to TD-LTE, if needed.

 

Then all the customers who are remaining in the cell outside of the TD-LTE coverage can now have the 1900 LTE and 800 LTE carriers to themselves. They were near capacity before adding the TD-LTE carrier, and now with approximately half removed, lots of capacity is back available.

 

And in some instances, if there is a high demand zone right outside the edge of coverage of the TD-LTE signal island, an assisting TD-LTE picocell can be added. Sprint is in the process of finalizing a plan for urban picocells that attach to street lights, stoplights, etc.

 

Clearwire's TD-LTE is going to be a wonderful thing for Sprint and eventually us customers.

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

 

I don't know if you have been to Richardson, because I used to live there, but that would probably not be the best example in that it would require a hell of a lot of 2600MHz sites to cover all the housing developments. Now if you're trying to say that they might try to cover the malls and office buildings with 2600MHz sites, I agree with you, but it just ain't going to help you in the huge housing developments. Not unless they do some intelligent network planning and assign video to 2600MHz, turn up the power and use it strictly for downlink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this article. I'm not sure I get what he is proposing.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

He's proposing using WiMax for backhaul for WiFi hotspots. The cable cos are deploying strand mounted WiFi, so that business model is not going to fly in the US. However, they can use it for backhaul to small cells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't know if you have been to Richardson' date=' because I used to live there, but that would probably not be the best example in that it would require a hell of a lot of 2600MHz sites to cover all the housing developments. Now if you're trying to say that they might try to cover the malls and office buildings with 2600MHz sites, I agree with you, but it just ain't going to help you in the huge housing developments. Not unless they do some intelligent network planning and assign video to 2600MHz, turn up the power and use it strictly for downlink.[/quote']

 

It's a good example. Based on the Network Vision site spacing in Richardson, if Clearwire added TD-LTE to every NV site, they would still cover half the Sprint customers with a useful LTE signal. So in the cells where they are deployed, they could significantly reduce burden on the Sprint network exactly as I outlined above.

 

Another interesting tidbit I learned recently...Clearwire LTE is going to be usable farther from a site and better inside buildings. I probably should write an article about this. Here ya go:

 

WiMax coverage maps were based on a -85dBm signal received. Which, compared to most other data technologies is pretty darn low threshold. WiMax performance dives off a cliff with signals weaker than -85dBm. However a WiMax device can hold a connection to between -95dBm to -100dBm (if the user modified the WiMax settings) and if the device wasn't disturbed. But the download speeds were only approximately 10% to 25% of full strength. Upload speeds would be very poor or unusable, though in this range.

 

Now with Clearwire TD-LTE, it will be broadcast at roughly the same strength as WiMax, however, the LTE will be fully usable until approximately -101dBm. This will allow greater coverages than WiMax does now. That -101dBm will allow it to be usable in many more structures, farther from the broadcast site, and help start filling in some of the RF shadows.

 

The Clearwire LTE will still fall off the performance cliff at -85dBm. However, their LTE is planned to be deployed in 20MHz channels with speeds around 60Mbps planned. So around -93dBm, TD-LTE would still get approximately 12Mbps...a very usable speed. At -100dBm, downloads would still be in the ballpark of 5-6Mbps, however, upload will be next to nothing. Clearwire and Sprint are working on the possibility of dual LTE connections. Where a device can download on Clearwire LTE, but upload on Sprint, when in these fringe TD-LTE areas.

 

As you can see, with LTE and how it can be deployed now, it will be much more useful now with noticeably improved coverage than WiMax is currently set up. Most of the advantage really comes in the fatter pipe.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another interesting tidbit I learned recently...Clearwire LTE is going to be usable farther from a site and better inside buildings. I probably should write an article about this. Here ya go:

 

WiMax coverage maps were based on a -85dBm signal received. Which, compared to most other data technologies is pretty darn low threshold. WiMax performance dives off a cliff with signals weaker than -85dBm. However a WiMax device can hold a connection to between -95dBm to -100dBm (if the user modified the WiMax settings) and if the device wasn't disturbed. But the download speeds were only approximately 10% to 25% of full strength. Upload speeds would be very poor or unusable, though in this range.

 

Now with Clearwire TD-LTE, it will be broadcast at roughly the same strength as WiMax, however, the LTE will be fully usable until approximately -101dBm. This will allow greater coverages than WiMax does now. That -101dBm will allow it to be usable in many more structures, farther from the broadcast site, and help start filling in some of the RF shadows.

 

One concern that I would have is that these signal strengths are not necessarily based upon the same metrics. For example, RSSI and RSRP are not directly comparable. But, for the moment, let us assume that both of the stated WiMAX and TD-LTE thresholds are based on RSSI. If so, then I think that I can explain the surprisingly high WiMAX threshold.

 

Before I do, a little airlink tech summary may be in order. WiMAX uses OFDMA for both downlink and uplink. LTE uses OFDMA for downlink but SC-FDMA for uplink, while LTE Advanced returns closer to WiMAX with OFDMA for both downlink and uplink.

 

WiMAX:

  • downlink: OFDMA
  • uplink: OFDMA

LTE:

  • downlink: OFDMA
  • uplink: SC-FDMA

LTE Advanced:

  • downlink: OFDMA
  • uplink: OFDMA

The actual nature of these airlinks is not crucial to this discussion, so I will leave out most of the gory details. But, suffice to say, OFDMA is a bit more power hungry than is SC-FDMA. And that is why LTE uses SC-FDMA on the uplink -- it puts a lighter transmission load on power limited mobiles. Conversely, OFDMA puts a heavier transmission load on power limited mobiles, and that I believe is why Sprint configured WiMAX devices with a relatively high threshold -- it was an attempt to keep mobiles from using WiMAX in low signal situations in which the uplink would really sap their power management.

 

Since TD-LTE uses the same SC-FDMA uplink as LTE does, TD-LTE will be similarly less power hungry than WiMAX is on the uplink (not to mention, mobile power management has gotten a lot better this year). And that should allow TD-LTE mobiles to operate to lower signal levels than WiMAX mobiles do.

 

Now, before everything sounds like wine and roses, keep in mind that SC-FDMA has some drawbacks. It is not as versatile as OFDMA is and has lower max speeds than OFDMA does, especially as OFDMA allows for uplink MIMO. So, that is why LTE Advanced goes to OFDMA for its uplink. Love it or hate it, mobile WiMAX is/was in some ways just ahead of its time.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the post. I was using all RSSI for this explanation.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best solution for Clearwire/Sprint is to use the 2600Mhz spectrum strictly as downlink and pump up the power somewhat. Using it strictly as downlink also takes care of the loss of coverage you get with going TDD vs FDD (interference).

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best solution for Clearwire/Sprint is to use the 2600Mhz spectrum strictly as downlink and pump up the power somewhat. Using it strictly as downlink also takes care of the loss of coverage you get with going TDD vs FDD (interference).

 

Yep, using the ample BRS/EBS 2600 MHz spectrum for supplemental downlink is what I have long proposed. But the key problem with that plan is that it likely would require Clearwire to harmonize exclusively with Sprint, thereby cutting off Clearwire's wholesale business.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ could they just devote, let's say a 20MHz band for sprint and then use a different different 20MHz band for everybody else? It might be a pretty expensive way of doing it. The other way is for Clearwire to contract with Sprint to be the uplink provider for all of Clearwire's wholesale customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I posted this in the Nebraska Premier thread last week, but just wanted to share in this thread the progress that T-Mobile has made in filling in the great coverage gap known as Nebraska. Between late last year and this year, they have added 28 new expansion sites filling in the coverage hole, plus 11 Sprint site conversions in eastern Nebraska and far western Iowa. Notably, in the last month n41 coverage was added on over a dozen expansion sites in western Nebraska that were added to the network last year. For comparison, here is the very first map that I created in October of 2022 after we noted expansion sites outside of Sprint conversion in Lincoln and Omaha. It doesn't show any western parts of the state, but just know there was nothing besides roaming coverage and a little B12 coverage leaking down from South Dakota to the west of Valentine, NE.
    • Sent a copy of my DB in an e-mail just now.  Couldn't leave the house today but can hopefully get a screenshot when I'm out on another cell site tomorrow.
    • 76MB Google Play System update after that, bringing the date up to 3/1 from prior 2/1 date. 
    • April security patch is already out - 738.30 MB download. 
    • What do you see with the latest alpha/ beta version?
  • Recently Browsing

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