WCDMA 900 MHz vs WCDMA 2100 MHz?

[roots]

Dears


Can anyone list the pros and cons of having the WCDMA planned on 900 Mhz or on the 2100 Mhz band.

Thx :)

[tremalnike]

Both together is best approach - 900 for coverage (better propagation, useful to provide CS&R99 services and even more at high distance) and 2100 for voice and high speeds (in ubran and good radio conditions ).
For more info check this document: http://www.qualcomm.com/common/documents/white_papers/UMTS900_Overview_Deployment_Guidelines.pdf


BR

[coursekec]

Overlaying of 2100 MHZ band over 900 MHZ band is a proper approach as this will allow both coverage and capacity ....problem with the 2100 MHZ band is it's poor indoor performance...

[dekili]

900MHz is a great for propagation. It provides good from outdoor to indoor coverage. This is great if you are coverage limited but since being capacity limited it is becoming less important since you have to go with indoor nodes.
Separation could be made in that way that part of the spectrum left from analog TV switch to digital TV (DVB-T/T2), so called digital dividend, could be used with 900MHz spectrum to cover wide areas to gain in coverage, while using 2.1GHz for a hot spots.
One problem might be the wish of national regulators to charge again for frequnecy band (refarming). Second problem is that many operators do have 5MHz of 900MHz GSM band so without digital dividend they will not have to much of the additional spectrum available to them...

[dekili]

Hi roots,

I have found a doc describing UMTS900 implementation (NSN document) named WCDMA900 planning guide. It is available on the forum as well so you try to download it. If you can't find it I can post it here or you can pm for the doc.