bts competition gudie - cosconor.fr competition.pdf · bts competition guide ... 2.1 moveout of...

Guide

LR/MG 98:241 Rev A 1998-09-25 © Ericsson. For internal use only LR/MG Christian Hedelin

BTS Competition Guide

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 3

2 CHANGE- OR MOVE-OUTS ................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 MOVEOUT OF COMPETITORS BSS EQUIPMENT ........................................................................................ 4

2.2 MOVEOUT OF ERICSSON BSS EQUIPMENT .............................................................................................. 5

3 MICRO CELL REFERENCE LIST ......................................................................................................... 7

4 RADIO PERFORMANCE ......................................................................................................................... 8

5 DATA APPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 9

6 BTS COMPETITORS .............................................................................................................................. 11

6.1 ALCATEL ............................................................................................................................................. 11

6.2 LUCENT (AT&T) ................................................................................................................................. 14

6.3 MOTOROLA ......................................................................................................................................... 15

6.4 NOKIA ................................................................................................................................................. 17

6.5 NORTEL............................................................................................................................................... 19

6.6 SIEMENS .............................................................................................................................................. 21

7 SMALL BASE STATION VENDORS .................................................................................................... 23

7.1 ADC ................................................................................................................................................... 23

7.2 AIR NET .............................................................................................................................................. 23

7.3 INTERWAVE ......................................................................................................................................... 23

8 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................. 24

Guide 2 (23)

© Ericsson. For internal use only Rev A 1998-09-25 LR/MG 98:241 LR/MG Christian Hedelin

Guide 3 (23)


1 Introduction This document describes information about competitors BTSs, their strengths and

weaknesses. More detailed technical specifications , reports and OH-presentations can

be found on the intranet BTS competition homepage:

http://www2.eral.ericsson.se/marketing/Competition/Comp.htm

Reports: PML Competition

How to argue on 1/3 fractional reuse

Competitive Advantages against competition in Hungary

How to beat Nokia

Comparison of Ericsson RBS and Nokia base stations,

TRU 900: Comparison Ericsson against competition

TRU 900: Comparison Ericsson against competition

How to argue Against Motorola's Indoor Solutions

OH-presentations:

Ericsson's RBS 2000 family versus Competition Ericsson versus Motorola

Ericsson versus Nokia

Ericsson versus Nortel

Feature Comparisons:

BTS Competitors compared to Ericsson (Excel arch, feature by feature,

Ericsson versus Motorola

Table 1. BTS Market Share in percent for GSM-based Systems in December 1997, based on

number of subscribers (not updated!)

The following notations could serve to give a rough idea of the competitiveness:

Alcatel Weak competitor to Ericsson

Lucent Weak competitor to Ericsson

Motorola Competitor to Ericsson

Nokia Strong competitor to Ericsson

Nortel Strong Competitor to Ericsson in GSM 1800 and 1900

Siemens Competitor to Ericsson

Operator Subscr. Ericsson Alcatel Lucent Motorola Nokia Nortel Siemens

(Philips) (Italtel)

Total LF: 41 281 000 37 8 9 13 20 4 9

Total LD. 6 675 490 39 6 0 15 23 3 15

Total LN: 7 240 920 41 5 2 12 22 10 7

Total LP: 7 050 250 42 5 5 25 12 2 6

Total GSM 900: 62 247 660 38 7 7 14 20 4 9

Total LF: 3 872 800 19 0 0 0 55 20 5

Total LD: 241 000 31 0 2 8 34 25 0

Total LN: 869 000 20 13 0 30 24 14 0

Total LP: 4 140 0 0 0 100 0 0 0

Total GSM 1800: 4 986 940 20 2 0 6 49 19 4

Total LJ: 1 357 760 58 0 0 0 10 32 0

Total GSM 1900: 1 357 760 58 0 0 0 10 32 0

Total GSM 68 592 360 37 7 6 13 22 6 8


Guide 4 (23)


2 Change- or Move-outs

2.1 Moveout of competitors BSS equipment

When an operator decides to change their equipment to another supplier it means a lot of

planning and costs. It also means that the operator is struggling with serious problems

concerning existing suppliers.

Below are some of the change- or move-outs that have happened in the GSM arena in

favour for Ericsson:

Table 2

Year Supplier Operator Move out Main reason

1992 Philips (Lucent) Mannesmann, Ger. Kicked out Bad quality

1993 Alcatel Telstra, Australia Change out Delayed GA-dates

1995 Motorola Etisalat, UAE Change out Capacity growth problem

1995 Siemens Marconi Ole TIM, Italy Change out Technical problems

1996 Nortel PTA in Hebei, China Change out Capacity growth problem

1997 Nokia Europolitan, Sweden Change out Capacity growth problem

1997 Siemens GTO, Oman Change out Indoor problems

One conclusion is that the move- or kick outs - depend on bad technical level of

competitor equipment or problems with capacity growth. For capacity growth Ericsson’s

BSC is undoubtedly the most powerful on the market.

Below is some more detailed information for the three earliest cases.

Why Philips Was Kicked Out from Mannesmann 1992

The public reason was of course technological. The PKI BTS was not very advanced.

For example a software change required that the operator had to go to the BTS and

change EPROMS. In 1992 the technology was not stable and consequently this had to be

performed quite often. Another main drawback for the BSC/BTS was the OMC. Keep in

mind that the PKI BSC was a small remote BSC and was connected via X.25 to a

terminal in the switch control room. It wasn't possible to route all the connections to one

terminal with several windows for example so that Nürnberg - which had 16 BSCs - had

a bank of 16 terminals in the control room.

If an alarm occurred and one of the terminals started beeping the operator had to locate

which terminal it was! The software release which was supposed to solve these problem

was known as LM1.0 but came too late to save PKI.

Why Alcatel Was Moved Out by Telstra 1993 in Australia

Please remember this information is several years old. Alcatel was selected in 1991

together with Ericsson to supply Telecom Australia’s (today Telstra) GSM network. The

split was based on geographical location with Alcatel supplying a complete network in

two of five regions and Ericsson supplying a complete network in three of five regions.

Ericsson’s equipment served only 40 percent of the population Alcatel the other 60

percent. (Now Ericsson is about 95 percent Alcatel five percent. Also Nokia is present

with around six BTSs in rural areas).

Guide 5 (23)


Some of the main benefits of Alcatel were the extended range functionality that was

available around the time. Another benefit, which was believed to be good, was an

in-built transmission solution similar functionality to the DXX.

Not only were there basic system problems such as high level of dropped calls and

roaming problems but the greatest let down to Telstra was that new software package

with certain functionality committed from the Alcatel side turned out to be missing when

tested. The problems were also related to O&M functionality both in the NSS and BSS.

To summarise the technical reasons for the change to Ericsson was that Alcatel had

problems with O&M functionality poor radio performance and delays in functionality.

Why Motorola Was Kicked Out by Etisalat in United Arab Emirates (UAE) 1995

The move out happened in the city of Dubai and Motorola’s equipment was moved out

to Sharja a neighbouring small city. AT&T (today Lucent) was contracted for Etisalat G1

and Motorola together with Siemens for Etisalat G2. Today. is it only one network -

called ETISALAT

Dubai is UAE's commercial and tourist centre so it is of great importance having a well

functional GSM system in that area. This was the main reason why Sheikh Maktoum

ordered to replace the system with Ericsson's in 1995. Capacity has always been a

Motorola problem when it comes to GSM. At that time Motorola had reached close to 25

000 subscribers. Ericsson has in early 1997 reached 50K subscribers and is growing with

about 70% a year.

At the moment we are negotiating with Etisalat about doing the same change out as

above but with the Lucent’s network.

2.2 Moveout of Ericsson BSS Equipment

Below are some of the change- or move-outs that have happened in the GSM arena in

favour for our competitor:

Table 3

Year Supplier Operator Move out Main reason

1997 Nokia Telenor, Norway. Change out Decrease our marketshare

1997 Siemens Mannesmann, Germany Change out Decrease our

marketshare-

Why Telenor changed out our BSS equipment in favour for Nokia

Ericsson’s BTS’s were moved out from the Hordaland, Bergen region at Telenor,

Norway in favour for Nokia. The main reasons for the move out are as following:

To big market share in Telenor - Ericsson covered 80% of the population with

Ericsson BSS.

New CEO with close ties to Nokia

Price War

Trade-off for winning 1800 MHz in Oslo region

Guide 6 (23)


150 Ericsson BTS’s and one BSC has been moved and installed in Oslo. The move was

finished in November 1997.

We have unconfirmed information that the rate of repair on Nokia BTS is higher than for

Ericsson BTS’s, and also that they have problems with their extended range

functionality. Thus some in the technical departments at Telenor Mobil did not support

the decision of a swop.

There was a similar challenge from Nokia in May 1996 in a county close to Oslo which

we fought off and again in 1998.

The global agreement we know Nokia has with Telenor on GSM equipment might have

offered some other incentives for Telenor Mobil to carry out the swop.

Why Mannesman changed out our BSS equipment in favour for Siemens

Siemens have a contract with MMO for BSS deliveries since autumn 96. Siemens is

deployed in the MMO network however so far at a level of around five percent of the

annual BSS volume.

Siemens have now at least one small BSC in every OMC area (today eight) with a couple

of low capacity BTS connected. Siemens is paying for the O&M for those installations,

currently around twenty people per year.

The sites are mainly in rural areas. Some of our BTS in this rural areas are replaced by

Siemens but used elsewhere in MMO's network. It is not a swap due to technical reasons

but rather a low risk approach to get Siemens BSS on air in D2 network. Although

Siemens have offered very aggressive conditions, e.g. to replace all Ericsson sites in

Munich free of charge by Siemens equipment, the system is not in a stage to make MMO

take this offer.

We heard that there are still problems with O&M functionality of BTS and OMC-R and

that announced corrections and new functionality is over due since a couple of month.

For 1998 we know that MMO want their regions to plan more with Siemens BSS, around

twenty percent, but the forecasts show that Siemens will be below ten percent market

share.

Guide 7 (23)


3 Micro Cell Reference List Below is a reference list of operators that microcells and which supplier that use. Please

feel free to complement the list to memo ERAC.EREALRX.

Table 4

Country Operator Extent BTS Supplier

Australia Telstra High Ericsson

HongKong Smartone High Ericsson

Sweden Telia High Ericsson

France FTM Medium Motorola/Alcatel

Ireland Telecom Medium Ericsson

Spain Airtel Medium Ericsson

Sweden Europolitan Medium Nokia

UK Vodafone Medium Ericsson/Nokia

Austria PTT Some Alcatel/Motorola

Belgium Belgacom Some Motorola

Indonesia Exelcomindo Some Ericsson

Netherlands Libertel Some Ericsson

Singapore SingTe Mobile Some Ericsson/Nortel on GSM1800?

Spain Telefonica Some Ericsson/Motorola/Nokia

Thailand AIS Some. Ericsson/Nokia?

Singapore Tel Mobile use a large number of pico (indoor) cells from Ericsson, but only

some micro (outdoor).

In Paris, France, FTM use Alcatel for micro + macro and Motorola for micro

Nortel have to our knowledge no microcell network.

Guide 8 (23)


4 Radio Performance In general half of the total sum for a GSM contract are related to base stations. This

means that a decrease of the total number of BTS sites for a given area will have great

impact on the total price.

New operators normally have as a primary goal to cover a substantial part or the whole

country. Their investment and running cost must be put to a minimum as the income

from subscribers has not started. They normally look for a BTS with good radio

performance (large output power and good receiver sensitivity) as the covered area is

larger for that type of BTS.

For existing operators that already have a network of BTS sites the increased radio

performance means better speech quality and also access to the network deeper into

buildings.

All competitors except Motorola have today a solution for combining in the Air. Please

observe that Ericsson, Siemens and Nokia are the only suppliers that can have two

transceivers per cell. This is an advantage for the future growth.

The only competitor that have filter combiners (CDU-D) available today on their latest

models are Motorola and Siemens, The output power is for filter combiners normally the

same or 0.5 dB better than for hybrid combiners. Ericsson’s filter combiner was

available in Q1 1998 for GSM 900/ 1800 . For cells with many TRX, the best radio

performance in achieved with filter combiners.

More information about Ericsson’s radio performance could be found in the theme

binder Cost Effective Coverage. The document could be found on homepage:

http://www2-rmog-bts.ericsson.se/marketing/CEC/content.htm

Another good source is also the Excel sheet : “Link budget calculation tool”, available

at the “BTS Competition” web page. The sheet is updated with the latest performance

data for all competitors.

Guide 9 (23)


5 Data Applications The data penetration will take a much larger part of the GSM traffic in the future.

According to a report from Yankee Watch will the data penetration be six to ten percent

year 2000. This new business segment will help the operators to earn more revenues

without big investment costs.

Please also refer to documents from ERA/LK available at:

http://www.gsm.ericsson.se/pss/org/lkm/lkm-products.htm

HSCSD.

Ericsson have implemented HSCSD in BSS R7. Nokia had a press release on HSCSD

in Sept-98. Siemens state they will promote GPRS instead of HSCSD. Motorola will not

develop HSCSD.

GPRS

Ericsson will Implement GPRS phase one (CS-1 and CS-2) in BSS R8. All suppliers

excluding Alcatel have promoted GPRS.

Motorola and Nokia are the main competitors on the existing operators with an installed

base. For new customers without any installed base Alcatel and Cisco can be a threat.

Lucent will probably not do GPRS (at least not in the current BTS's). Below are more

details about the GPRS competitors. Nortel earlier had no plans for GPRS but is not

aiming for availability during 1999.

Motorola will use the opportunity to be a fully GSM infrastructure (datacom) supplier by

introducing GPRS. They have good experience in mobile datacom and will have the

same solution as Ericsson with the PCU in the BSC and the two new nodes separate from

the BSS. The SGSN and GGSN can be co-located. They have capacity problems in their

current BSC and need therefore a big replacement of CPU’s. No HW update needed in

the BTS. They will support CS1 and CS2, only class C terminals and also probably

support X.25. Motorola will actively market GPRS 1998 and launch it 99Q2.

Nokia is developing their SGSN node on the same platform as their BSC. The SGSN

will be integrated in the BSC in the normal case. However, Nokia will also support the

open Gb interface between the BSC and SGSN. Nokia state that their solution does

not require any HW in BSC or BTS. New C7 links between the HLR and the BSC

integrated SGSN are also needed. Nokia will support CS1 and CS2. According to their

market message to Cellnet, they will be out on the market 99Q4. We question that and

believe that Nokia will be on the market 00Q2. Nokia also develops HSCSD and will

probably emphasis that more in their marketing during 1998. Nokia is marketing HSCSD

and GPRS as the way to UMTS.

Alcatel and Cisco signed a GPRS agreement in February 1998. The GSN nodes will be

based on Cisco HW and Cisco IOS SW. Alcatel will not support GPRS in the current

BTS’s. The BSC needs new SW. GPRS will be supported by the new Evolium BSS. This

means replacement of their current BTS’s. Alcatel’s Evolium will also support HSCSD.

Alcatel recommends an ATM as preferred carrier in both switching and radio parts.

Alcatel points out GPRS as the way to UMTS. GPRS will be available late 99 from

Alcatel.

Guide A (23)


Siemens is going to develop a totally new switching platform. This platform will include

IN, UMTS, GPRS and other switch based applications. This concept includes also an

enhanced TMN structure. This development project is delayed. If Siemens will use this

platform for GPRS, thy will be one and a half years behind Ericsson. A requirement

exists from the German operator T-Mobil to develop GPRS functionality on the current

platform (probably EWSD). Siemens plans to develop all GPRS related nodes (HLR,

MSC, GSGN, SGSN, BSS). Siemens will probably support CS1 and CS2. Siemens will

have difficulties to deliver GPRS before year 2000.

Lucent does not market GPRS at all. Will probably not support GPRS on their existing

BTS's.

Nortel is probably behind. Actively trying to delay standardisation. No information from

Nortel on HSCSD and GPRS. They will probably not support GPRS in their existing

BTS's. It seems like they will go directly to UMTS.

EDGE

Ericsson is planning to implement EDGE in BSS R9 (2000). EDGE will not be

supported by all manufactures today. Besides Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola are most

active in the standardisation work in ETSI.

Guide B (23)


6 BTS Competitors

6.1 Alcatel

Alcatel is based in France. Alcatel is strong in transmission but has little radio

experience. Alcatel is putting efforts on operator business opportunity tracing. They have

very small market share in GSM and zero share in analogue. Alcatel and Motorola

signed an agreement were Motorola will provide their BSS for the Alcatel IS-95 product

line. Alcatel co-operates with Cisco on GPRS.

Biggest Accounts

Table 5. Alcatel’s biggest accounts (December 1997)

Operator Country Subscribers. BTS Market Share

1) France Telecom France 2 992 000 Alcatel 40%

2) Ligne SFR France 2 126 000 Alcatel 30%

3) Austrian PTT Austria 689 000 Alcatel 60%

4) Belgacome Mobile Belgium 683 000 Alcatel 50%

5) DeTe Mobil Germany 3 300 000 Alcatel 10%

Note: All operators are GSM 900.

New generation: EVOLIUM

Alcatel launched on the 30th of September 1997 new BTS’s, BSC’s, new SW release

for the BSC and OMC under the trade mark name EVOLIUM. The press release is on

the intranet address: http://www.alcatel.com/news/pressrel/alsthom/1997/10_01.htm The

Alcatel third generation have GA in Q498 for some configurations. CDU-A

configurations are expected to come 2Q99. No GSM 1900 offering.

What Alcatel stated in the press releaser on Evolium Macro BTS’s

A twelve transceivers indoor cabinet called Indoor Medi. It could have eight

transceivers in Omni configuration and 12 transceivers (4+4+4 or 3+3+3+3) for

sector configurations. The volume is 520 litre and the weight 270 kg.

4 transceiver indoor cabinet with an extension cabinet of eight transceivers

Guarantee receiver sensitivity of –109 dBm for both models

Support for GPRS and HSCSD

Dual band (GSM 900/ 1800) in the same BTS

Claim themselves to have 30% better coverage than a standard BTS

Only four “basic modules" (What we call Replaceable Units)

Could handle two SW versions simultaneously and downloading of SW without

interruption of the traffic

Estimated MTBF for the transceivers are eleven years. (same as RBS 2000!)

Low power consumption

9100 Micro BTS

Two transceivers, Volume total 77 litre and weight 15 kg per transceiver, Output power

two Watts, Omni or sector versions, Not GSM 1900

http://www.alcatel.com/news/pressrel/alsthom/1997/10_01.htm

Guide C (23)


The micro BTS can be equipped with one or two transceivers. The second transceiver

will be mounted in front of the first. They claim that the next version will include two

transceivers in the same cabinet as today houses one. This would give the customer the

possibility of expands from 2 transceivers up to 4 transceivers. The transceivers will just

be hanged on each other in their own cabinet. This is claimed for release in Q4-98.

BTS Products – existing generation

Alcatel offers the following Macro BTSs:

Mini 2 transceivers In- /Outdoor

Standard 4 transceivers Outdoor (single cell)

Standard 4 transceivers Indoor (single

cell)

Strengths of “existing generation”

1 Six sector is possible ( 6x8 sector)

2 30 W and 50 W TRXs from Power Amplifier are available for GSM 900.

3 Rather good MTBF, also on existing generation

Weaknesses of ““existing generation”

1 The BTS HW in field does not support GPRS – a good break-in opportunity.

2 The nominal output power at antenna port is less than Ericsson’s.

3 Indoor and outdoor versions are not based on the same replaceable units. This results

in double spare parts.

4 They need three cabinets for a three sector site.

5 They have no GSM 1900 system offerings

6 The frequency hopping does not work correctly and calls are lost.

7 No Maxite type product available

8 Maximum 12 transceivers via the A-bis interface (one E1 two Mbit link).

9 It is not possible to integrate power equipment in the radio cabinet, so external –48 V

devices are always needed.

10 Max nine transceivers per E1 transmission line

11 No dual band cabinet available

12 When adding a transceiver the BSC must be brought out of service. In a recent

revision is this improved so that only a block of 32 transceivers is brought out of

service

Alcatel offers the following Micro BTSs:

Modular class M1 1 or 2 transceivers E-GSM 0.2 / 0.4 W

Modular 2W 1 or 2 transceivers GSM 900/1800 2.0 W

Strengths of “existing product”

None

Weaknesses of “existing product”

1 For single TRX version the Maximum output power is only 0.2 W if frequency

hopping is used. It is hence not suited for microcells, only suitable for Indoor cells.

2 The receiver sensitivity is only –97 dBm in case of class M1.

Guide D (23)


3 They do not have GSM 1900 offering.

Guide E (23)


6.2 Lucent (AT&T)

Lucent is an USA based company. Sales people at Lucent are by tradition all on

commission. Lucent has a very low profile on GSM 1800. Its main focus has been on

D-AMPS and CDMA where they have a more successful product portfolio.

Biggest GSM Accounts

Table 6. Lucent’s biggest accounts (December 1997)


1) DeTe Mobil Germany 3 300 000 Lucent (Philips) 75%

2) Ligne SFR France 1 127 000 Lucent (Philips) 20%

3) Mo PTT Saudarabia 272 000 Lucent (Philips) 100%

4) Swiss PTT Switzerland 792 000 Lucent (Philips) 20%

Lucent has the following Macro BTS offering:

BTS 2000/2 2 transceivers Outdoor

BTS 2000/6 6 transceivers Outdoor

BTS 2000/6 6 transceivers Indoor

BTS 2000/12 12 transceivers Indoor

Strengths

1 12 TRXs in one cabinet for Indoor (the cabinet height is 2.3 meters).

Weaknesses

1 Low output power at antenna port, especially at 1800 MHz

2 Half rate and EFR not available.

3 Only short internal battery backup for outdoor model.(30 minutes)

4 Maximum ten transceivers via A-bis interface ( per 2 Mbit link)

5 It is not possible to integrate power equipment in the radio cabinet, so external –48 V

devices are always needed

6 No Maxite product

7 No dual band cabinet

8 No GPRS offering

Lucent has the following Micro BTS offering:

BTS 2000/2C 2 transceivers In- /Outdoor

Strengths

1 Up to 5 W output power is possible.

2 Can work up to +55 degree C with optional fan arrangement.

Weaknesses

1 Claimed to have cooling problems.

2 Internal battery backup only for 10 seconds.

3 Half rate and EFR

4 Large size, 49 litre

Guide F (23)


6.3 Motorola

Motorola is an U.S. based company. Motorola is good in radio but weak on switching

They have a cost efficient BSS, good credibility and good quality. Motorola's main

strength lies in the BTS. Alcatel and Motorola signed an agreement were Motorola will

provide their BSS for the Alcatel IS-95 product line. In the U.S. they mostly promote

CDMA and in Europe GSM 900 and 1800. Motorola doesn’t support GSM 1900.

Many signs indicate that Motorola will discontinue their GSM development completely

in 1999, and that they already have stopped at 1800 MHz.

In mid 1998 Motorola started shipping new transceivers and new micro BTS. Those

new products remove many of the previous weaknesses in the Motorola offering – the

micro now have frequency hopping, and the transceiver have improved link budget on

1800 MHz.

Biggest Accounts

Table 7. Motorola’s biggest accounts (December 1997)

Operator Country Subscribers. BTS Market Share 1) Cellnet UK 2 056 000 Motorola 60%

2) Telefonica Spain 2 087 000 Motorola 40%

3) Comviq GSM Sweden 810 000 Motorola 100%

4) Vodacom South Africa 728 000 Motorola 90%

5) Ligne SFR France 2 126 000 Motorola 30%

All operators are GSM 900.

BTS Products

Motorola has the following Macro BTS offering:

M-Cell6 compact In-/Out-door 6 transceivers

M-Cell2 mini In-/Out-door 2 transceivers

Strengths

1. A good concept that is easy to sell for indoor solutions. More information on how to

meet this is found at http://www2.eral.ericsson.se/marketing/Competition/Comp.htm

in the document “How to argue Against Motorola's Indoor Solution”

2. Max. 12+12+12 is possible and Expansion up to 24 carriers is possible with

co-locating M-Cell6 logical sites.

3. The Indoor cabinet is adaptable to outdoor use. To meet the requirement of outdoor

application an identical styled ancillary cabinet is available to house accessories etc.

4. Support for E-GSM.

5. The Micro Base Controller unit (responsible for digital control functions i.e.

Ericsson’s DXU) can be configured with redundancy.

6. M-Cell6 offers transmission link redundancy.

7. The BTS cabinet also supports an integrated BSC.

8. 5+5+5 channels on one E1 link is supported by data compression on A-bis interface.

They have found a way for reaching the optimum on traffic timeslot by post

processing in the BTS instead of the BSC like other suppliers do. This means that

they are able to handle 15 transceivers via one two MBit PCM link of an 3 x 5 sector

site. The handover decision is made by the BTS and not by the BSC. For that reason

Motorola only use one timeslot for signalling per site. (RBS 2000 achieve similar

results, but not for the 5+5+5 configuration).


Guide 10 (23)


9. Concentric cells are marketed. They are different versions of the Overlay/Underlay

cell concept with option for >2 rings.

Weaknesses

1 The MTBF is low.

2 Requires external duplexers.

3 Requires external cabinet for DC powering.

4 Configuration of BTSs requires lots of commands.

5 Software can not be loaded while traffic is ON.

6 No advance fault localisation available so trouble shooting is difficult.

7 No LAPD multiplexing, i.e. not transmission efficient for small cells.

8 Negative experience on turn key projects according to global operators

9 No Maxite product

Motorola has the following Micro BTS offering

M-Cellcity 2 transceivers In- /Outdoor

M-Cellarena 2 transceivers Indoor

M-Cellaccess 1 transceiver Indoor RF-unit only

Strengths (Arena product)

1 Motorola claims that M-Cellcity can work up to +50 degree C but when tested by

Orange UK does not perform well over +35 degree C.

2 Expandable to 4 TRX (RBS 2302 can do 6 TRX)

Weaknesses

1 Heat dissipation problem, at least first half of 1998.

2 Comes only in one colour.

3 Problem with cold start up.( -20 degree C)

Indoor products

The MCellaccess is suited for indoor installations and consist of a Cluster Controller of

230 kg that could connect up to 12 RF Units. The RF unit is the showed MCellaccess

unit and consist of one transceiver output power 16mW for 900 MHz and 50 mW for

1800 MHz. The Access units does not seem to be possible to handle more than one

transceiver per cell, i.e. two M-access could not be defined as one cell using the same

BCCH carrier. The volume is 21 litre and 10 kg.

Guide 11 (23)


6.4 Nokia

Nokia is a Finland based company. Nokia is Ericsson’s major competitor a full system

supplier with a very strong market orientation. Nokia is providing a total network

solution and seems to integrate system solutions (SS BSS OSS transmission) in the same

way as Ericsson does. Currently Nokia is actively supporting GSM 900 1800 and 1900.

A special report on Nokia BTS is available at:


Nokia’s in-house resources are small. They depend on sub-suppliers. The Nokia GSM

900 product line is the result of well co-ordinated market and product strategies. The

products are heavily based on the needs as defined by a few prioritised markets:

Biggest Accounts

Table 8. Nokia’s biggest accounts (December 1997)

Operator Country Subscribers BTS Market Share

1) Omnitel Pronto Italy 2 460 000 Nokia 100%

2) Orange UK 1 200 000 Nokia 100%

3) Optus Australia 900 000 Nokia 100%

4) E-plus Germany 1 050 000 Nokia 80%

5) Cellnet UK 2 056 000 Nokia 40%

BTS Products

Nokia has the following Macro BTS offering:

Flexitalk 2 transceivers In- /Out- door third generation

Intratalk 6 transceivers Indoor third generation

Citytalk 6 transceivers Outdoor third generation

Strengths

1 A TRX with extra high output power (46 dBm) is available for 1800 MHz. It is

called “booster” and needs the cabinet space of two normal TRX. Hence, the

performance in in a way comparable with Ericsson’s “SW Power boost”.

2 Nokia's BTS has three software releases installed at the same time; an old version a

version currently used and a new version. (RBS 2000 has a similar arrangement.)

3 It is possible to bypass the Hybrid combiner with one transceiver. This gives 3 dB

more output power. (Compared to Ericsson’s Smart Range solution the power lower

and the capacity is much lower for Nokia)

4 It is very easy to replace fan trays.

5 Generally very good O&M.

6 The Channel number status and fault codes are displayed on each TRX. (This might

look nice at first glance, but we believe that the RBS 2000 arrangement with LEDs

are easier to use: you know at one what unit is affected or faulty.)

7 They have Floating TRX concept with 1+1+1 configuration i.e. if any existing TRX

fails than the spare TRX can be connected. No downtime when upgrading from

2+2+2 to 4+4+4 configuration.

8 Nokia have several features to optimise the battery usage during power failure.

Guide 12 (23)


Weaknesses

1 The output power at antenna connector is very low for 1800 MHz.

2 Six transceiver outdoor cabinet has the lowest performance in high temperatures of all

competitors.

3 If an expansion from 3x2 is required for filter combiner each shelf has to be rebuilt

since the filter combiner is bigger than the hybrid combiner. The cabinets are

prepared for this modification.

4 Have historically shown lots of delays when releasing BTS product. Filter combiner

was delayed for 18 months.

5 No Maxite type product available.

6 Bad MTBF for combiner units. Though good on other units.

7 No LAPD multiplexing availble

Nokia has the following Micro BTS to offer:

PrimeSite 1 transceiver In- /Outdoor

Nokia will come with a 4 TRX micro base station with a volume of 40 liters.

Availability during 1999. It will interwork very nicely with the Nokia microwave links.

Strengths

1 The PrimeSite could include HDSL or ISDN as future interfaces (GA?) but then

battery backup must be excluded.

2 Available in 4 different colours. (RBS 2301 is available in six colours.)

3 Can be powered by AC or DC.

4 Output power up to 5 W.

5 Easy to use MMI with LED display on the BTS.

Weaknesses

1 Low capacity. Only one TRX. Only one third of RBS 2301 capacity.

2 Cooling problems as well as cold start problem. If restarts at –20 degree C.

3 Does not work satisfactorily at high temperature.( above 35 degree C)

4 No Omni antennas available.

5 Maximum four PrimeSite cabinet’s in one cell

Nokia’s “GSM Internet Office” (GIO) was presented at CeBIT-98. It resembles “GSM

on the Net”. A main difference is that the Nokia GIO system is seen as a BSC from

outside, and GSM on the Net is seen as an MSC.

Guide 13 (23)


6.5 Nortel

Nortel is a Canada based company. Previously Nortel was called Northern Telecom/

Matra. During 1995 Nortel consolidated their organisation in preparation to make a

thrust at the GSM market (they also changed their name from Northern Telecom to

Nortel). Salespeople at Nortel, like at Lucent, are all on commission by tradition which

creates personal interest in salespeople to get deals across.

In July-98, Nortel acquired “Interwave” and hence got hold of a competitive office

solution. The solution consists of a MSC/BSC on a PC platform. Price for a 125 user

system is claimed to be in the 100 kUSD range including BTS.

Biggest Accounts

Table 9. Nortel’s biggest accounts (December 1997)


1) France Télécom France 2 992 000 Nortel 50%

2) DGPT Taiwan 750000 Nortel 100%

3) Bouygues Telecom France 502 000 Nortel 85%

4) One-2-One UK 1 014 000 Nortel 35%

5) Bellsouth U.S.A. 200 000 Nortel 100%

BTS Products

The Nortel offering consists of the following Macro BTS models:

S 2000 High Power 2 transceivers In- /Outdoor

S 4000 4 transceivers In- / Outdoor

S 4000 Smart 4 transceivers Indoor Only GSM

1900

S 8000 8 transceivers In- /Outdoor

The previous generation was called S4000.

Strengths

1 Receiver sensitivity is claimed to be –110 dBm without TMA.(or –117 dBm

measured under special conditions)

2 The outdoor cabinet can accommodate 8 TRXs.

3 The S2000 HP is a strong competitor in wide area applications.

Weaknesses

1 External duplexers are required for which there is no space left in the outdoor

cabinets or otherwise the number of antennae will be doubled.

2 Nortel does not offer half rate. They seem to be very much in the beginning of

development.

3 MTBF figures from 4000S are extremely poor. About 5 times worse than Ericsson,

according to Nortel manuals.

4 No LAPD multiplexing available.

5 No filter combiner available. Which means that large cells can not be built in an

efficient way. Output power from a cell with 5-8 cells is only about 4 Watts.

Guide 14 (23)


Nortel offers the following Micro BTS models:

S 2000 E 1 transceiver In- /Outdoor

S 2000 Low Power 2 transceivers In- /Outdoor

Strengths

1 Micro BTS can be equipped with the Power Amplifier in the antenna. The output

power at the antenna will then be 12 W according to stand personal at Cannes in

February 1997. The weight of the PA is 65 kg per cell!

2 Drop and insert connects up to eight S 2000 E cabinets on one T1 link

3 Two units can be connected to a 4 TRX cell (RBS 2302 supports up to 6 TRX)

Weaknesses

1 Big size, around 70 litres for 2 TRX, excluding spacing towards the wall, and 100

litres for 2 TRX including the spacing between the cabinet and the wall.

2 Heating problem in early 97.

3 Likely to be shipped in very small volumes still.

Guide 15 (23)


6.6 Siemens

Siemens is a Germany based company. Before 1995 Siemens was lacking expertise in

BTS technology and has relied on partnership with Motorola to overcome this shortage.

In 1995 was Italtel and Siemens merged together and Siemens got the access to Italtel's

BSS product line.

Initially the development responsibility was allocated in Italtel, Italy, but was in 1996

shifted to Siemens in Austria. Nowadays Siemens has it’s own BSS in-house and it is the

one sold and promoted by Siemens. Italtel who is 50% owned by Siemens, still has it’s

own BSS product line, which on some markets compete with Siemens BSS products.

Biggest Accounts

Table 10. Siemen’s biggest accounts (December 1997)

Operator Country Subscribers. BTS Market Share 1) TIM Italy 5 630 000 Siemens 50%

2) Guangdong MCC China 1 180 000 Siemens 20%

3) Airtel Spain 1 150 000 Siemens 20%

4) Max Mobil Austria 225 000 Siemens 100%

5) E-plus Germany 1 050 000 Siemens 20%

BTS Products

Siemens has the following Macro BTS offering:

BS20 2 transceivers Indoor

BS21 2 transceivers Outdoor

BS22 AirXpress 2 transceivers Outdoor

BS60 6 transceivers Indoor

BS61 6 transceivers Outdoor

Strength

1 Will introduce “cell enhancer” called Dulamo in Q498. Maximum eight transceivers

per cell with Dulamo. Dulamo is a high power amplifier.

Weakness

1 The six transceiver outdoor BTS is larger than RBS 2102

2 Low MTBF Siemens base stations require 2.5 times as much repair during a year than

RBS 2000.

3 Low output power at the antenna connector, especially for 1800 MHz. Even with

Dulamo (se above) is the linkbudget not better than for RBS 2000.

4 Ericsson has 10% more efficient transmission. Siemens does not have a technique

similar to Ericsson’s LAPD Concentration.

5 Less internal battery backup capacity in Outdoor cabinets.

6 No Synthesised frequency hopping available yet.

7 Software can not be loaded while traffic is ON.

8 Operation and maintenance is poor. The OMC-R is instable and has few features

9 Siemens’ BS21 version has very little space for customer specific transmission

equipment

Guide 16 (23)


Siemens has the following Micro BTS offering:

BS-11 AirXpress 1 (2) transceivers Indoor/outdoor

Siemens has launched a two transceiver indoor micro base station at CeBIT 97. The size

is about 28 litres and the output power is 2 W. The GA is expected for the one

transceiver model Q1 1998. They are doing test deliveries today.

Strength

1 Low weight and size.

2 Less power consumption. They claim around 80 W only.

3 Supports Transmission cascading.

4 Will get ISDN transmission integrated in the future.

Weakness

1 Is having severe cooling problem at the moment.

2 Low output power.

3 The two transceiver version will not be delivered until new technology has been

introduced.

Guide 17 (23)


7 Small base station vendors

7.1 ADC

ADC is a U.S. based company. They showed at CeBIT 98 three equal sized data

processor with the signs BTS, BSC and MSC above. I estimate the volume to 100 litres.

They demonstrated a live phone call between two mobile terminals. The BTS was a three

transceiver unit, with as they said, enough receiver sensitivity and output power. The

BSC had capacity for around 100 transceivers. They had a solutions only for GSM (not

for CDMA or AMPS)

They claimed to have had real installations, but didn’t want to give any references.

7.2 Air Net

Air Net have a generic technology concept for GSM, NMT-, TACS- and AMPS- base

stations. This new technology is under investigation at Ericsson.

BTS

Air Net delivers a radio test technology and not a complete radio base station. There is

no connection to BSC. They do not say any thing about if they co-operate with other

companies. Air Net has two generic models:

AirNet has the following Macro BTS offering:

Base Transceiver Systems, 12 TRX

PCS 1900, 12 TRX

The BTS uses wideband (10 MHz) digital processing techniques. They claim to deliver

more channel capacity in a smaller base station than any other competitor. The volume

of theirs both models are 590 litre. It has diversity and MCPA.

To the base station is connected to a “Remote radio”. This remote radio has diversity and

probably more than one Watts output power. The distance between the BTS and remote

unit could be up to 24 miles (35 km) The remote radio is a type of repeater that could

change frequencies, like Avitec or Mikom.

7.3 Interwave

Micro BTS

See Nortel above. They have a GSM micro BTS product, single TRX, approximately

same size as our micro BTS. Telstra evaluated it in late 1997 and said it was O.K, but did

not suit their needs as it was only one transceiver BTS. More effort has apparently gone

into GSM 1800 and 1900, a 900 MHz commercial version wont be available until late

1998.

Guide 18 (23)


8 Acronyms and Abbreviations

AC Alternating Current

ALNA Antenna-mounted Low Noise Amplifier

BSC Base Station Controller

BSS Base Station System

BTS Base Transceiver Station

CME 20 Cellular Mobile Telephone System 20 (prefix for a product name)

CMS 40 Cellular Mobile Telephone System 40 (prefix for a product name)

dB Decibel

dBm Decibel to 1 Milliwatt

DC Direct Current

GSM Global System for Mobile Communication

LAPD Link Access Protocol on D-channel

MBTF Mean Time Between Failure

MCPA Multi Carrier Power Amplifier

PA Power Amplifier

RBS Radio Base Station

RF Radio Frequency

TRU Transceiver Unit (for RBS 2000)

TRX Transceiver Unit (for RBS 200)

bts competition gudie - cosconor.fr competition.pdf · bts competition guide ... 2.1 moveout of...

Documents