ectively [SaGo01]. The measurement results were isations, uniformly distributed directions of travels, and compared between these two bands and between 5 MHz random phases of scattered components, he arrives at subbands within the 60 MHz bands. The authors note a PDP of the shape of exp(-t/o-) for cubic rooms, in that frequency dependent differences between subbands which or bands are determined by the amount of dispersion on the channel. For the delay spread results, larger variations OT = (2d)-1 (4.7.23) between subbands were seen in NLoS than in LoS situ- ations and larger differences between uplink and down- In turn, d = -In(dE), with de the mean reflection link were found in environments with dense scattering attenuation, and Et represents the room dimensions in than with sparse scattering. It was noted that locally, terms of number of wall interactions per unit of time. As frequency differences between subbands or bands are for exponential decay in general, O equals the delay larger than apparent from CDFs over pooled data. These spread. Hansen claims that delay spread is a robust pa- differences were largest at largest range or smallest link rameter with respect to modelling inaccuracies and that budget, presumably because dispersion is strongest in therefore the derived model will be a good approxima- these cases [SaGo01]. tion to many propagation scenarios. He compared his The latter conclusion was reached by Foo et al. too model with measurements, at 5.25 GHz with 100MHz [FBKE02]. In this case, two 20 MHz bands centred at bandwidth, in rooms and a corridor in an office envi- 1920 and 2120 MHz respectively, were measured ronment. The measured RMS delay spread values were simultaneously from a moving vehicle. Time of arrival, small, ranging from 7 to 13 ns. The analytically derived AoA, and power of multipath components were esti- values could well serve as upper bound as these values mated using a 2D unitary ESPRIT algorithm. Different generally exceeded the measured ones with one standard responses were