Re: [Telrad] WIMAX to LTE

[Ian Fraser]

Make sure you have good backup power.  You might brick the BTS if you lose 
power when they are doing the burn.  And a PC local to the BTS with Team Viewer 
is a good idea.

Ian


 Original message 
From: SmarterBroadband  
Date:09-21-2016  7:41 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
To: telrad@wispa.org 
Cc:  
Subject: [Telrad] WIMAX to LTE 

What is the official process to convert a Telrad Compact BTS from WiMAX to LTE?
 
I.e. A how do I do it.
 
We are ready to do our first unit and don’t know how….
 ___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] WIMAX to LTE

[David Peterson]

It's quite the process.   Hit me off list to discuss

Get Outlook for Android



On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:14 PM -0400, "Jorge Santiago" 
> wrote:

PCS Tech guys can help you with the transition to LTE. Great people to work 
with and very knowledgeable team.

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016, SmarterBroadband 
> wrote:

What is the official process to convert a Telrad Compact BTS from WiMAX to LTE?



I.e. A how do I do it.



We are ready to do our first unit and don’t know how….

___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] WIMAX to LTE

[Jorge Santiago]

PCS Tech guys can help you with the transition to LTE. Great people to work
with and very knowledgeable team.

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016, SmarterBroadband <
li...@smarterbroadband.com> wrote:

> What is the official process to convert a Telrad Compact BTS from WiMAX to
> LTE?
>
>
>
> I.e. A how do I do it.
>
>
>
> We are ready to do our first unit and don’t know how….
>
>
>
___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

[Telrad] Stock liquidation

[David Peterson]

Dual Slant Omni antennas - lightly used
LMR-400 spools
LMR connectors
Various surge arrestors
Purewave 2.5 GHz Basestation
2.5 GHz and 3.656 GHz dual slant antennas
Lots more, hit me offlist

[cid:image001.jpg@01D21425.7D3B00D0]

David Peterson  | ACC
Engineer

166 Milan Avenue, Norwalk, Ohio  44857
O. 419-668-4080  |  C. 419-706-7355



___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] [SPAM?] Re: Down tilt - UE drops

[Steve Cole]

On 9/21/2016 1:49 PM, Justin Davis wrote:
> We have 17 ENB's and almost 500 UE's online with 2 EPC's.  Its the 
> only way we are scaling our network.  We are not having any issues 
> except for a random reboot needed on a CPE here and there..  The only 
> support calls that come in are for UBNT gear.  The LTE side of our 
> network is quite as well.  We plan on turning up an additional 5 ENB's 
> sometime this winter. Out of 500 UE's I have one sitting on the bench 
> that needs to get RMA'd.  I'm extremely happy with the whole platform 
> from 18 mile line of site shots to 3 miles NLOS through nothing but 
> forest.
Sounds like you have your own discrete channel and a low user count overall.

We have over 100 eNBs and well over 1,000 clients on 3.65Ghz.


___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] [SPAM?] Re: Down tilt - UE drops

[Justin Davis]

We have 17 ENB's and almost 500 UE's online with 2 EPC's.  Its the only way
we are scaling our network.  We are not having any issues except for a
random reboot needed on a CPE here and there..  The only support calls that
come in are for UBNT gear.  The LTE side of our network is quite as well.
We plan on turning up an additional 5 ENB's sometime this winter.  Out of
500 UE's I have one sitting on the bench that needs to get RMA'd.  I'm
extremely happy with the whole platform from 18 mile line of site shots to
3 miles NLOS through nothing but forest.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Steve Cole  wrote:

> On 9/21/2016 12:42 PM, Paul Vaughn wrote:
> > We are also deploying 450i sectors - putting a new tower up today
> actually.  It rocks.  No dropped UEs, manages interference like a boss -
> 900 MHz even, and a fraction of the cost.  It is hard to justify paying
> more for more troubles and less satisfied customers.  We put a lot of hope
> in Telrad initially, and then the new firmware recently, and neither seem
> to be delivering.  I am going to try to roll back the UE firmware as
> recommended on here and see if that helps.
> Yep.  450i performs better in the real world.  RF and throughput.
>
> Had I known that Telrad would be the MORE difficult path, I'd have saved
> myself a lot of time, effort and aggravation and just gone Cambium.  Oh,
> how I wish that I had.
>
> All this talk of LTE 'standards' and 'evolution' is meaningless when the
> product's basic operation is a problem.   We're now 18 months past the
> time Telrad said the product would be ready and at this point we were
> supposed to be deploying a different "version" of LTE with much higher
> RF and TCP/IP performance.   But 'software-defined' seems to mean
> something different to Telrad as they're already talking about the UEs
> being obsolete for that purpose - which of course is far more expensive
> to deal with than tower-side gear and makes a lie of any claims about
> 'software evolution' of the product.
>
> They can't even agree on how to RMA all the UEs we had that stopped
> working when we switched over from WiMax mode to LTE.  We still have a
> pallette of them waiting for Telrad to pull out their thumb while they
> age and we have to buy UEs to continue deployment.
>
> As an added bonus, they changed the user interface for the 8000
> product.  Because life with Telrad was too easy already.
>
> I feel really guilty for having been an early adopter and early
> advocate.  The gear doesn't do what it did in our early tests, which
> were WiMax mode - we were told to expect better RF performance, and of
> course I think we all know that what we got was something else. Today I
> tell WISPs to avoid LTE and will continue to do so until proven wrong.
> ___
> Telrad mailing list
> Telrad@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
>



-- 
Sincerely,


Justin Davis
SkyWerx COO
970-731-9790
___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

[Ian Fraser]

Always.


On 21/09/2016 1:50 PM, Jeremy Austin wrote:


On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Terry Duchcherer > wrote:


This is an element of scale, we have 23 eNodeB's and over 500 UE's.


Terry, are you saying that at a larger scale the problems are magnified?

Jeremy


--
Jeremy Austin

(907) 895-2311
(907) 803-5422
jhaus...@gmail.com 

Heritage NetWorks
Whitestone Power & Communications
Vertical Broadband, LLC

Schedule a meeting: http://doodle.com/jermudgeon


___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad


___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

[Jeremy Austin]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Terry Duchcherer  wrote:

> This is an element of scale, we have 23 eNodeB's and over 500 UE's.
>

Terry, are you saying that at a larger scale the problems are magnified?

Jeremy


-- 
Jeremy Austin

(907) 895-2311
(907) 803-5422
jhaus...@gmail.com

Heritage NetWorks
Whitestone Power & Communications
Vertical Broadband, LLC

Schedule a meeting: http://doodle.com/jermudgeon
___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

[Terry Duchcherer]

This is an element of scale, we have 23 eNodeB's and over 500 UE's.

Terry


-Original Message-
From: telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of 
Matthew Carpenter
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:23 AM
To: telrad@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

We have 4 eNB’s deployed, 106 UE’s and its working good.
I had a UE that needed a reboot this morning (7000 on Beta firmware), but other 
then that our service calls for LTE service issues are far and few between.

The Telrad LTE product has had a few bumps in the road, but all have been taken 
care of and things are running very smooth.  No dropped UE’s, or other odd 
things I hear about.

It has saved us in a an area where 5ghz went from working great to crap 
overnight. 


Matt Carpenter
Amarillo Wireless



> On Sep 21, 2016, at 11:42 AM, Paul Vaughn  wrote:
> 
> I was looking at this issue yesterday and found a major drop in utilization 
> (from 70% to 20%) and 6 dropped UEs on the BV graphs at the same time.  I 
> would normally think that a customer turned their unit off, or when 5 or 6 
> cut off at the same time, I would think there was a power outage.  But, it 
> appears that the customers were actively using the service and then 
> disconnected.  Customers have been complaining, but it has not been something 
> we were able to see easily.  We are the only licensed provider in this 
> region.  I know the owner of the other license in the next market and it is 
> not deployed.  So the interference is very un-likely to be the cause here.  
> 
> We are also deploying 450i sectors - putting a new tower up today actually.  
> It rocks.  No dropped UEs, manages interference like a boss - 900 MHz even, 
> and a fraction of the cost.  It is hard to justify paying more for more 
> troubles and less satisfied customers.  We put a lot of hope in Telrad 
> initially, and then the new firmware recently, and neither seem to be 
> delivering.  I am going to try to roll back the UE firmware as recommended on 
> here and see if that helps.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> Paul R. Vaughn
> Tennessee Wireless
> (931) 996-2050
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of telrad-requ...@wispa.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:00 AM
> To: telrad@wispa.org
> Subject: Telrad Digest, Vol 23, Issue 25
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:48:29 -0400
> From: Neil Smellie 
> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
> To: telrad@wispa.org
> Message-ID:
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> We are experiencing similar issues with the Compact 3000 in 2.3Ghz.
> Customer complaints are sometimes fast, sometimes slow, long periods of no 
> service, UE just drops and requires the customer to repower the radio to 
> reconnect. I know Silo is using the same gear and seeing ducting from the 
> states in 2355MHz, but we are seeing issues in both 2355 and 2310. I am 
> having a hard time accepting the interference argument unless we are creating 
> some self interference.
> 
> The LTE service was to be a flagship service for us. We now have 
> customers that we have moved fro Canopy FSK to LTE asking to be moved 
> back because they are not willing to trade speed to stability. We are 
> looking at moving some planned LTE deployments to the 450i 900Mhz 
> platform
> 
> Neil Smellie
> Core Broadband Inc
> Interactive North
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Terry Duchcherer  wrote:
> 
>> Yes, we have not had success with 105, UE continually disconnect and 
>> do not come back for long periods of time. We have also experienced 
>> many customer complaints about speed issues.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Rolling back to .89 solves the speed issues, and greatly improves the 
>> disconnects. Telrad blames interference, which may be some of the 
>> cause, but not all of it.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Terry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] 
>> *On Behalf Of *Ian Fraser
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 9:36 AM
>> 
>> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks Terry
>> 
>> I am running F1F2.  So leave the eNB at 6.6 and move the UE's to .89 ?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>> 
>> On 20/09/2016 11:30 AM, Adam Brodel wrote:
>> 
>> Why back to .89?  Are there problems with .105?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org 
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Terry Duchcherer
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:40 AM
>> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ian, if you are running version 105 on the UE?s, try downgrading to .89.
>> Also, with the sectors not back to back using F1F2 would be better.
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

[Matthew Carpenter]

We have 4 eNB’s deployed, 106 UE’s and its working good.
I had a UE that needed a reboot this morning (7000 on Beta firmware), but other 
then that our service calls for LTE service issues are far and few between.

The Telrad LTE product has had a few bumps in the road, but all have been taken 
care of and things are running very smooth.  No dropped UE’s, or other odd 
things I hear about.

It has saved us in a an area where 5ghz went from working great to crap 
overnight. 


Matt Carpenter
Amarillo Wireless



> On Sep 21, 2016, at 11:42 AM, Paul Vaughn  wrote:
> 
> I was looking at this issue yesterday and found a major drop in utilization 
> (from 70% to 20%) and 6 dropped UEs on the BV graphs at the same time.  I 
> would normally think that a customer turned their unit off, or when 5 or 6 
> cut off at the same time, I would think there was a power outage.  But, it 
> appears that the customers were actively using the service and then 
> disconnected.  Customers have been complaining, but it has not been something 
> we were able to see easily.  We are the only licensed provider in this 
> region.  I know the owner of the other license in the next market and it is 
> not deployed.  So the interference is very un-likely to be the cause here.  
> 
> We are also deploying 450i sectors - putting a new tower up today actually.  
> It rocks.  No dropped UEs, manages interference like a boss - 900 MHz even, 
> and a fraction of the cost.  It is hard to justify paying more for more 
> troubles and less satisfied customers.  We put a lot of hope in Telrad 
> initially, and then the new firmware recently, and neither seem to be 
> delivering.  I am going to try to roll back the UE firmware as recommended on 
> here and see if that helps.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> Paul R. Vaughn
> Tennessee Wireless
> (931) 996-2050
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of 
> telrad-requ...@wispa.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:00 AM
> To: telrad@wispa.org
> Subject: Telrad Digest, Vol 23, Issue 25
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:48:29 -0400
> From: Neil Smellie 
> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
> To: telrad@wispa.org
> Message-ID:
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> We are experiencing similar issues with the Compact 3000 in 2.3Ghz.
> Customer complaints are sometimes fast, sometimes slow, long periods of no 
> service, UE just drops and requires the customer to repower the radio to 
> reconnect. I know Silo is using the same gear and seeing ducting from the 
> states in 2355MHz, but we are seeing issues in both 2355 and 2310. I am 
> having a hard time accepting the interference argument unless we are creating 
> some self interference.
> 
> The LTE service was to be a flagship service for us. We now have customers 
> that we have moved fro Canopy FSK to LTE asking to be moved back because they 
> are not willing to trade speed to stability. We are looking at moving some 
> planned LTE deployments to the 450i 900Mhz platform
> 
> Neil Smellie
> Core Broadband Inc
> Interactive North
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Terry Duchcherer  wrote:
> 
>> Yes, we have not had success with 105, UE continually disconnect and 
>> do not come back for long periods of time. We have also experienced 
>> many customer complaints about speed issues.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Rolling back to .89 solves the speed issues, and greatly improves the 
>> disconnects. Telrad blames interference, which may be some of the 
>> cause, but not all of it.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Terry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] *On 
>> Behalf Of *Ian Fraser
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 9:36 AM
>> 
>> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks Terry
>> 
>> I am running F1F2.  So leave the eNB at 6.6 and move the UE's to .89 ?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>> 
>> On 20/09/2016 11:30 AM, Adam Brodel wrote:
>> 
>> Why back to .89?  Are there problems with .105?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org 
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Terry Duchcherer
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:40 AM
>> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ian, if you are running version 105 on the UE?s, try downgrading to .89.
>> Also, with the sectors not back to back using F1F2 would be better.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Terry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org 
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Ian Fraser
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2016 8:00 PM
>> *To:* Jeremy Austin ; telrad@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [Telrad] [SPAM?] Re: Down tilt - UE drops

[Steve Cole]

On 9/21/2016 12:42 PM, Paul Vaughn wrote:
> We are also deploying 450i sectors - putting a new tower up today actually.  
> It rocks.  No dropped UEs, manages interference like a boss - 900 MHz even, 
> and a fraction of the cost.  It is hard to justify paying more for more 
> troubles and less satisfied customers.  We put a lot of hope in Telrad 
> initially, and then the new firmware recently, and neither seem to be 
> delivering.  I am going to try to roll back the UE firmware as recommended on 
> here and see if that helps.
Yep.  450i performs better in the real world.  RF and throughput.

Had I known that Telrad would be the MORE difficult path, I'd have saved 
myself a lot of time, effort and aggravation and just gone Cambium.  Oh, 
how I wish that I had.

All this talk of LTE 'standards' and 'evolution' is meaningless when the 
product's basic operation is a problem.   We're now 18 months past the 
time Telrad said the product would be ready and at this point we were 
supposed to be deploying a different "version" of LTE with much higher 
RF and TCP/IP performance.   But 'software-defined' seems to mean 
something different to Telrad as they're already talking about the UEs 
being obsolete for that purpose - which of course is far more expensive 
to deal with than tower-side gear and makes a lie of any claims about 
'software evolution' of the product.

They can't even agree on how to RMA all the UEs we had that stopped 
working when we switched over from WiMax mode to LTE.  We still have a 
pallette of them waiting for Telrad to pull out their thumb while they 
age and we have to buy UEs to continue deployment.

As an added bonus, they changed the user interface for the 8000 
product.  Because life with Telrad was too easy already.

I feel really guilty for having been an early adopter and early 
advocate.  The gear doesn't do what it did in our early tests, which 
were WiMax mode - we were told to expect better RF performance, and of 
course I think we all know that what we got was something else. Today I 
tell WISPs to avoid LTE and will continue to do so until proven wrong.
___
Telrad mailing list
Telrad@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Re: [Telrad] Down tilt - UE drops

[Paul Vaughn]

I was looking at this issue yesterday and found a major drop in utilization 
(from 70% to 20%) and 6 dropped UEs on the BV graphs at the same time.  I would 
normally think that a customer turned their unit off, or when 5 or 6 cut off at 
the same time, I would think there was a power outage.  But, it appears that 
the customers were actively using the service and then disconnected.  Customers 
have been complaining, but it has not been something we were able to see 
easily.  We are the only licensed provider in this region.  I know the owner of 
the other license in the next market and it is not deployed.  So the 
interference is very un-likely to be the cause here.  

We are also deploying 450i sectors - putting a new tower up today actually.  It 
rocks.  No dropped UEs, manages interference like a boss - 900 MHz even, and a 
fraction of the cost.  It is hard to justify paying more for more troubles and 
less satisfied customers.  We put a lot of hope in Telrad initially, and then 
the new firmware recently, and neither seem to be delivering.  I am going to 
try to roll back the UE firmware as recommended on here and see if that helps.

Paul


Paul R. Vaughn
Tennessee Wireless
(931) 996-2050

-Original Message-
From: telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of 
telrad-requ...@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:00 AM
To: telrad@wispa.org
Subject: Telrad Digest, Vol 23, Issue 25
--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:48:29 -0400
From: Neil Smellie 
Subject: Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
To: telrad@wispa.org
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

We are experiencing similar issues with the Compact 3000 in 2.3Ghz.
Customer complaints are sometimes fast, sometimes slow, long periods of no 
service, UE just drops and requires the customer to repower the radio to 
reconnect. I know Silo is using the same gear and seeing ducting from the 
states in 2355MHz, but we are seeing issues in both 2355 and 2310. I am having 
a hard time accepting the interference argument unless we are creating some 
self interference.

The LTE service was to be a flagship service for us. We now have customers that 
we have moved fro Canopy FSK to LTE asking to be moved back because they are 
not willing to trade speed to stability. We are looking at moving some planned 
LTE deployments to the 450i 900Mhz platform

Neil Smellie
Core Broadband Inc
Interactive North

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Terry Duchcherer  wrote:

> Yes, we have not had success with 105, UE continually disconnect and 
> do not come back for long periods of time. We have also experienced 
> many customer complaints about speed issues.
>
>
>
> Rolling back to .89 solves the speed issues, and greatly improves the 
> disconnects. Telrad blames interference, which may be some of the 
> cause, but not all of it.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org] *On 
> Behalf Of *Ian Fraser
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 9:36 AM
>
> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>
>
>
> Thanks Terry
>
> I am running F1F2.  So leave the eNB at 6.6 and move the UE's to .89 ?
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
> On 20/09/2016 11:30 AM, Adam Brodel wrote:
>
> Why back to .89?  Are there problems with .105?
>
>
>
> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org 
> ] *On Behalf Of *Terry Duchcherer
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:40 AM
> *To:* telrad@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>
>
>
> Ian, if you are running version 105 on the UE?s, try downgrading to .89.
> Also, with the sectors not back to back using F1F2 would be better.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* telrad-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:telrad-boun...@wispa.org 
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ian Fraser
> *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2016 8:00 PM
> *To:* Jeremy Austin ; telrad@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>
>
>
> There are only 12 UE on that eNB. Average plan is 1x5. CINRS are all 
> pretty good.  I can lock them to the sector freq based on geographical 
> location but thats a pain if I need to change channels.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Ian
>
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Jeremy Austin 
> Date:09-19-2016 7:59 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: telrad@wispa.org
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Down tilt
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Ian Fraser  wrote:
>
>
> Now I see in BV that UpLink utilization is higher than it has ever been
> at 91% (peak was ~75% previously)  vs. DL at 58%.   I expect UL to drop
> or at least stay the same since we mitigated the noise slightly.
>
> I stopped frequency locking the UE's - could the UL utilization be 
> caused by UE's that are on