Verizon Wireless Targets LTE Build Out for 2009
Will not happed by 2009.
There is no way Verizon can have LTE launched by in a city by 2009. Verizon may be ready to deploy lte by the end of 2009 but there will be a major factor preventing them from doing so.
That is t-carrier service. Currently nationwide t-carrier service is maxed out. LTE is a broad band data service which will require multiple t1s delivered to the cell site. However there is not the current infrastructure to support it. Miles of cable will have to be laid permits will have to be obtained. Then you also have to factor in that ATT will also be building LTE at the same time. Simply put LTE will be deployed at an agonizing snails pace as both ATT and Verizon wait on Local Exchange carriers to install data back hall. This is the reason wimax to...
(continues)
That is t-carrier service. Currently nationwide t-carrier service is maxed out. LTE is a broad band data service which will require multiple t1s delivered to the cell site. However there is not the current infrastructure to support it. Miles of cable will have to be laid permits will have to be obtained. Then you also have to factor in that ATT will also be building LTE at the same time. Simply put LTE will be deployed at an agonizing snails pace as both ATT and Verizon wait on Local Exchange carriers to install data back hall. This is the reason wimax to...
(continues)
...
Many of the cable and landline operators already have a LOT of fiber run to handle their networks. The thing that will trip the deployment up will be whether these operators will be able to provide 10/100/1000 Mbps backhaul service, as opposed to the typical T service.
Keep in mind, this is going to probably be very similar to the EVDO deployment, in that it will start in major metropolitan areas first and work out to the network fringes over the course of the next 5 years.
Keep in mind, this is going to probably be very similar to the EVDO deployment, in that it will start in major metropolitan areas first and work out to the network fringes over the course of the next 5 years.
...
Current Tcarriers are operating at 90% capacity or higher. They do not have a lot of extra bandwidth just sitting around as you claim.
LTE deployment will be drastically different from evdo deployment. When evdo was deployed most towers on needed one additional t1. LTE will need a bare minimum of 6 t1s for each tower. You did also mention Ethernet back hall. In place of tcarrier. That is cheaper and faster to install, if Verizon chooses to use Ethernet in place of t carrier service they will be paying there competitors. Added to that there is still all the construction necessary for Ethernet. Not to mention all the additional equipment required to support Ethernet as well as tcarrier.
LTE deployment will be drastically different from evdo deployment. When evdo was deployed most towers on needed one additional t1. LTE will need a bare minimum of 6 t1s for each tower. You did also mention Ethernet back hall. In place of tcarrier. That is cheaper and faster to install, if Verizon chooses to use Ethernet in place of t carrier service they will be paying there competitors. Added to that there is still all the construction necessary for Ethernet. Not to mention all the additional equipment required to support Ethernet as well as tcarrier.
...
What Tcarriers are you talking about that are operating at 90% capacity or higher? VZW (as well as AT&T, Sprint, etc) are turning on thousands (combined) of sites every year across the US. I'm willing to bet each one is using more than 1 T1 (probably closer to an average of 4 or 5 per site). If the Tcarrier capacity is so high, these new sites would not be backhauled to their respective switches because they would run out of capacity.
As far as LTE backhaul, my understanding is that it CAN'T be allocated on a T1 basis. The backhaul will need to be ethernet based (be it 10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, or 1 Gbps or higher). While the providers of this connection will certainly need to upgrade their networks to provide this new, necessary bandwidth, the ...
(continues)
As far as LTE backhaul, my understanding is that it CAN'T be allocated on a T1 basis. The backhaul will need to be ethernet based (be it 10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, or 1 Gbps or higher). While the providers of this connection will certainly need to upgrade their networks to provide this new, necessary bandwidth, the ...
(continues)
...
To answer your first question I am talking specifically about ATT and Verizon when I say most tcarriers are operating at 90% capacity. And you are right wireless carriers do turn up thousands of t1s per year. And to answer your next question. The average 3g site has 2 t1s unless it is in a high traffic area then could have as many as 6 or more.
In terms of LTE back hall, a bare minimum of 10mbs is needed to power any 4g site. This is done one of 2 ways. 6 t1s or threw Ethernet. You can run 4g off tcarriers. You can ether do it threw t1 or t3 lines. However, you are correct Ethernet is a better option.
This next point is where the true rubber hits the road. There are not the necessary facilities (t1, t3, or fiber which ever is chosen)...
(continues)
In terms of LTE back hall, a bare minimum of 10mbs is needed to power any 4g site. This is done one of 2 ways. 6 t1s or threw Ethernet. You can run 4g off tcarriers. You can ether do it threw t1 or t3 lines. However, you are correct Ethernet is a better option.
This next point is where the true rubber hits the road. There are not the necessary facilities (t1, t3, or fiber which ever is chosen)...
(continues)
...
The Tcarriers will only operate at the capacity dictated by the cell site. However, once the backhaul for a site gets above 80%, extra capacity via additional spans is usually in the works for the site.
As far as the "average" 3g site, I don't know ANY site with just 2 spans. To simply meet the OTA peak bandwith of EVDO Rev A, you need 2+ spans. That's per sector, and most sites have 3 sectors. So that's 6 spans for just peak bandwith on 1 carrier of EVDO Rev A. Account for multiple EVDO carrier sites, in addition to having multiple 1x voice carriers requiring additional spans (anywhere from 1 for small sites to 8 or more for busy city site). That's why I chose 4 or 5 spans average.
I'll take your word on the needs for LTE. I think it ...
(continues)
As far as the "average" 3g site, I don't know ANY site with just 2 spans. To simply meet the OTA peak bandwith of EVDO Rev A, you need 2+ spans. That's per sector, and most sites have 3 sectors. So that's 6 spans for just peak bandwith on 1 carrier of EVDO Rev A. Account for multiple EVDO carrier sites, in addition to having multiple 1x voice carriers requiring additional spans (anywhere from 1 for small sites to 8 or more for busy city site). That's why I chose 4 or 5 spans average.
I'll take your word on the needs for LTE. I think it ...
(continues)
...
"planning to begin deploying its long term evolution (LTE) next-generation network as early as 2009"
I don't get where you get the idea they say they will have service ready by 2009.
I don't get where you get the idea they say they will have service ready by 2009.
...
He got that idea from the article.
"We expect that LTE will actually be in service somewhere here in the U.S. probably this time next year."
"We expect that LTE will actually be in service somewhere here in the U.S. probably this time next year."
...
Yes it will happen.
You know little of the VZW network infastructure.
In several areas, Verizon OWNS the majority of the backhaul network (microwave & fiber) vs. leasing it from another carrier. In those areas, VZW controls how much capcacity is available to each site and they are well on the way to provisioning each site with at least a DS3 connection.
😁
You know little of the VZW network infastructure.
In several areas, Verizon OWNS the majority of the backhaul network (microwave & fiber) vs. leasing it from another carrier. In those areas, VZW controls how much capcacity is available to each site and they are well on the way to provisioning each site with at least a DS3 connection.
😁
...
This forum is closed.
