dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
AT&T Proposes Using WCS Band for LTE
Files Joint FCC Proposal With Sirius XM Radio
by Karl Bode 06:16PM Tuesday Jun 19 2012
AT&T and Sirius XM have filed a proposal (pdf) with the FCC in the hopes that AT&T will be able to use the 2.3 GHz Wireless Communication Service (WCS) band for LTE services. AT&T's proposal suggests a change to the rules governing that spectrum, with the intention of limiting any interference for XM radio. In a blog post, AT&T laments the history of the 2.3 GHz band as a "tortured one," saying the proposal doesn't give AT&T or Sirius XM everything they want -- but is an agreement that "will allow each service to flourish while ending the uncertainty that has plagued both bands for far too long." Tim Farrar at TMF Associates takes a good technical look at precisely what AT&T has planned here.

view:
topics flat nest 
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

What is WCS band?

Is it now used for Sirius XM as on-ground broadcast band in large cities? Whenever I am in Chicago and suburbs, I can listen to xm radio fine under bridge or trees but not so once I go to a rural area, assuming it then switches to satellite signal.
RyC

join:2007-08-18
San Luis Obispo, CA

Re: What is WCS band?

No, Sirius XM's terrestrial repeaters operate within Sirius XM's allocated spectrum
sectvfreak

join:2010-11-07
Kintnersville, PA

WHY???

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?
bofkentucky

join:2009-03-30
Louisville, KY

Re: WHY???

Any chance they can do fixed wireless with LOS to the transmitter in this band efficiently?

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by sectvfreak:

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?

A) They've already PAID for this spectrum. I supposed they would like to get some ROI on it.

B)They could offer a service like Verizon's HomeFusion which uses an antenna OUTSIDE the home so building penetration is not a issue. Also heck I can get Wi-Fi which uses 2.4 GHz from one building to another so why would 2.3 GHz have more issues? it should have slightly less.

David
I start new work on
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:101

Re: WHY???

I think your reasoning is it.... cause I can't see any other reasons than that. We (speaking in the at&t sense here) already paid for it... why not use it?

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1
said by 88615298:

said by sectvfreak:

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?

A) They've already PAID for this spectrum. I supposed they would like to get some ROI on it.

B)They could offer a service like Verizon's HomeFusion which uses an antenna OUTSIDE the home so building penetration is not a issue. Also heck I can get Wi-Fi which uses 2.4 GHz from one building to another so why would 2.3 GHz have more issues? it should have slightly less.

The mountains, trees and canyons in areas like ours though would be a HUGE obstacle to 2.3 Ghz. I mean, 1900 does okay (AT&T, T-Mobile and Metro PCS all use 100% 1900 here, Verizon uses 1900 only for EVDO, and 850 for 1X, and USCC uses 850 only) but 2.3 would take even more sites, that'd be an expensive proposition. You'd need some pretty serious line of sight, and that's a VERY difficult thing to get in a lot of places.
--
»www.amtrak.com
»www.freightrailworks.org
»www.isu.edu
»www.nwprr.net
»www.amtrakcalifornia.com
»www.cahighspeedrail.gov

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: WHY???

said by RR Conductor:

said by 88615298:

said by sectvfreak:

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?

A) They've already PAID for this spectrum. I supposed they would like to get some ROI on it.

B)They could offer a service like Verizon's HomeFusion which uses an antenna OUTSIDE the home so building penetration is not a issue. Also heck I can get Wi-Fi which uses 2.4 GHz from one building to another so why would 2.3 GHz have more issues? it should have slightly less.

The mountains, trees and canyons in areas like ours though would be a HUGE obstacle to 2.3 Ghz. I mean, 1900 does okay (AT&T, T-Mobile and Metro PCS all use 100% 1900 here, Verizon uses 1900 only for EVDO, and 850 for 1X, and USCC uses 850 only) but 2.3 would take even more sites, that'd be an expensive proposition. You'd need some pretty serious line of sight, and that's a VERY difficult thing to get in a lot of places.

Not everywhere has mountain, trees etc. Some areas are pretty flat. Just because 2.3 GHz would be impractical in SOME areas doens't mean in can't be used in ANY areas.

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1

Re: WHY???

said by 88615298:

Not everywhere has mountain, trees etc. Some areas are pretty flat. Just because 2.3 GHz would be impractical in SOME areas doens't mean in can't be used in ANY areas.

True, which is why I said in areas like mine. In the valleys here, like Ukiah, Willits, and over in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's it'd be awesome.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
To get more spectrum and to hamper competition.

cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26

Re: WHY???

Some where along the lines, I'm sure that the real reason.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by KrK:

To get more spectrum and to hamper competition.

what do you mean to get more spectrum? They already HAVE the spectrum. Quit thinking something is always something when sometimes it's nothing.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Re: WHY???

Quit denying the obvious, or thinking something is nothing when it something, you could say.

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1

Re: WHY???

said by KrK:

Quit denying the obvious, or thinking something is nothing when it something, you could say.

Huh?
zorxd

join:2010-02-05
Quebec, QC
Reviews:
·Acanac
said by sectvfreak:

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?

One of the most popular LTE band worldwide is 2600 MHz.

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1

Re: WHY???

said by zorxd:

said by sectvfreak:

Seriously why would att want to offer LTE in the WCS band? at such a high frequency with limited coverage and building penetration? Whats the real reason they want this band?

One of the most popular LTE band worldwide is 2600 MHz.

That frequency would be okay in densely populated and/or small countries, like many in Europe, or in large cities, but it wouldn't work in a lot of areas, like the Western US, most of Australia, most of Canada, etc.
--
»www.amtrak.com
»www.freightrailworks.org
»www.isu.edu
»www.nwprr.net
»www.amtrakcalifornia.com
»www.cahighspeedrail.gov

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2

No wonder Sirius XM is turning off the repeaters

And as usual they feed us the bullshit that they're improving service.