dditional cases. The goal of the preceding section and this section is simply to practically visualize some of the procedures covered in the first part of the chapter. Thus, this section aims to collect results on carrier spacing evaluations to illustrate de- ployment coordination, and multi-layer deployment considerations. 5.5.7.1 ACIR for 21 dBm Terminals Figure 5.9 illustrates the UL speech ACIR for Intermediate and Worst case scenarios for the Macro to Macro cellular environment, while Figure 5.10 shows the DL case. The UTRA Transmission System 105,00% RunlInterm 100.00% Run2Interm 95.00% AvgInterm 90.00% Runl Worst Run2 Worst 85.00% AvgW orst 80.00% ACIR (dB) Figure 5.9 ACIR intermediate and worst case for macro to macro UL speech 8 kbps. The examples include UL and DL 8 kbps speech service with the following characteris- tics: Intermediate case scenario where the 2nd system is located at a half-cell radius shift. Worst case scenario where the second system base stations are located at the cell border of the first system. Average results for intermediate and worst case. We can see clearly in Figure 5.9 that as the ACIR increases the capacity also increases. The impact applies to the intermediate as well as to the worst case situations. Likewise for the DL case, as the ACIR value increase the capacity keeps high. The worst case run still has impact at 32.5 dB but remains at minimum at 35 dB. 105.00% RunlInterm 100.00% Run2Interm 95.00% Avg Interm 90.00% Runl Worst 85.00% Run2Worst 80.00% AvgWorst 75.00% ACIR (dB) Figure 5.10 ACIR intermediate and worst cases for macro to macro DL speech 8 kbps. 5.5.7.2 ACIR for 24 dBm terminals Other simulation results also following [5] include outputs for UL ACIR with 24 dBm terminals, for both speech (8 kbps) and data (144 kbps). We compare the results with those obtained with 21 dBm terminals. Figure 5.11 illustrates the UL ACIR in 24 dBm terminals. The UMTS Network and Radio Access Technology Capacity Loss (%) Ref. Worst case Ref. Intermediate case 24 dBm worst 24 dBm in