Fiber to the antenna - Corning Incorporated

Corning Cable Systems
fiber to the antenna (FTTA)
how does the value stack up? |
Relative to both coaxial cable-based solutions and optical
homerun solutions, Corning Cable Systems’ terminalbased
approach can save both money and time:
| Money – Compared to coax cable deployments, with 6 to 12
coaxial cables, a fiber-fed remote radio solution can save as
much as 50-60% on total material and installation costs. The
sheer number and length of coaxial cables that must be placed
is a key driving factor. The higher the tower becomes, the need
for larger coaxial cable, at higher per foot cost, widens the gap.
Compared with the homerun solution, Corning Cable Systems
OptiSheath® MF2 or MF4 MultiPort Terminal can further
reduce costs, saving up to 15% on material and installation.
Additional benefits include spare ports, replaceable remote
radio cable assemblies and a single optical sheath down the
tower (compared to three and 12 in the homerun scenario).
Reducing the number of cables saves time and money during
installation and may reduce monthly lease costs as well.
| Time – A fiber-fed solution installs quickly, getting the site
up and running much faster than with a coax solution. Comparing
a site with three antennas and six coax lines to a site
with three remote radios/antennas, a four-technician crew would complete
the coax tower work in about three days. For a fiber homerun solution,
that drops to three technicians and two days. With Corning Cable Systems
OptiSheath MF2 or MF4 MultiPort Terminal, the three-technician crew can
knock out the job in as little as one day. This translates into better productivity
from existing crews and more sites done for the same hours spent.
| Weight – Consolidating into a single optical cable reduces weight and can
help avoid costly tower upgrades. For the same three antenna solutions as
above, the fiber solution (with power cable included) can reduce weight load
on the tower by as much as 62%.
| Sparing – A tower-top terminal can include spare ports for future remote
radio connection at minimal material and virtually no installation cost.
This avoids the need for additional cables that would be required with the
homerun approach.
| Repair, Maintenance and Testing – With a terminal, the radio cable assembly
can be quickly replaced, whereas the homerun approach requires a completely
new cable assembly all the way down the tower.
| Power Costs – Remote radio technology makes more efficient use of utility
power by avoiding the typical three dB RF power loss in coax lines and by
lowering the HVAC load in the shelter.
EVO-1040-EN | Page 7