 a 120° sector from the BS up to about 1.5 km distance. are comparable in value. The influence of the differences The authors used a Bartlett beamformer for determining in the antennas' operational angular ranges was not the dominant angles of arrival and compared these with discussed. the geometrical AoA, the direction of the straight line In grossly the same environments, Kainulainen et al. between TX and RX. For the macrocellular antenna made a large polarimetric survey at 5.3 GHz, de- placement, the dominant and geometrical AoA matched termining Cross-polarisation Power Ratios (XPRs) and quite well, Figure 4.7-40. However, for the microcellular cross-correlation coefficients between co-polar and set-up, large differences were found. The authors assume this to be caused by the difference between over-rooftop propagation and propagation through street canyons. The down-tilting of the receiving antenna could be an addi- Table 4.7-11 Mean XPRs and standard deviations in diverse tional factor in excluding over-rooftop components at the environments at 5.3 GHz (after [KaVV05]). lower BS position, due to the narrow elevational pattern. X XPRV X PPRH Frequency-band dependent dispersion Environment For present system bandwidths, statistical channel Indoor picocell 1 properties are generally assumed not to vary over the system bandwidth. For operation over different bands, Indoor picocell 2 for instance UMTS FDD operation or Multi-Band Outdoor-indoor OFDM (MB-OFDM), and for UWB applications, such Microcell (LoS) invariability is not obvious. Jämsä et al. measured delay spreads in a total bandwidth of 10 GHz, centred around Microcell (NLoS) 6 GHz, and compared some 500 MHz wide subband Macrocell (NLoS) results in order to study the frequency dependence of indoor propagation [JäHH04]. Also, a comparison was Propagation modelling and channel characterisation CHAPTER 4.7 Table 4.7-12 Mean cross-polarisation cross-correlation coefficients in diverse environments at 5.3 GHz (after [KaVV05]). Transmit correlation Receive corr