These look like a festival COWs. This can be used in several scenarios.
more use-cases if you get creative 
The most common application for horizontally mounted antennas are in sports stadiums.
In those venues, capacity is the main objective (of course coverage is nice to have too). The seating is divided into many narrow sectors around the bowl with coverage from the top row to the bottom row.
The antenna must have a very narrow horizontal beamwidth to prevent overlapping sectors and a decent vertical beamwidth to achieve this result.
Since most cellular antennas have a narrow vertical beamwidth compared to their horizontal beamwidth, turning it on its side reverses the beamwidths.
Some antenna manufacturers have models that are specifically for stadiums that do just this.
Why not just take the vertical antennas and turn them on their side? As some have pointed out, it is the location of the weep holes to allow moisture to drop away from the antenna instead of moisture entering the antenna.
Also the placement of the RF connectors can be placed in the back rather than the bottom to avoid the ugliness seen in this post’s image.
Yeah, it’s making rounds around LinkedIn…
Although many made fun of and pointed out the obvious issues with managing the sidelobes.
But I am really curious to know what was the actual performance…
I am also curious to know HOW can we monitor the performance under this setting.
As a start, how do you differentiate the UE received data based on different vertical antenna layers?
Cool!
Pointing to a building my guess.
I thought Ill never see that, but I guess somebody was convinced by that idea.
You don’t need to “differentiate the UE received data based on different vertical antenna layers” since these traditional passive antennas don’t have that capability anyway. And for MaMIMO there is no real need to flip antenna like that due to beamforming and also vendors provide different Broadcast/Traffic beam patterns for different clutter use cases.
Maybe it works with less numbers of antennas to avoid the Interference.
Well, you know the guy that already did it already spent in many things just to try so this person will find the arguments to defend this no matter what.
Yes, sure he succeeded after many times failed.
I hope for the best.
I agree it intends to be a multibeam arrange for high traffic events.
I agree it will be a very noisy environment. In my opinion this interference (overlapping) happens because of the horizontal beamwidth (that is vertically positioned here).
I agree also that you should not use.
But if you want to try, bringing the antennas 1 or 2m behind the rooftop edge to make a physical shade on the 65º beamwidth might help.
I suppose.
Those antennas mounted horizontally rather than the typical vertical installation, are designed to optimize coverage for high-rise buildings, like skyscrapers. This setup can enhance signal propagation vertically, potentially improving coverage for users at different elevations in tall structures.
Operators are using this to take advantage of the smaller vertical beamwidth in order to increase the amount of sectors in a 90/120 degrees angle, without the huge interference from a normal 60/65 degrees horizontal beamwidth. By doing this they can have 6/8 sectors in 90/120 degrees angle and hugely increase the capacity of such location.
But still, keep in mind that configuration can lead to significant interference issues as we may have overlapping beams and increased cross-sector interference, which might degrade network performance. Proper network planning and interference mitigation techniques would be crucial to ensure this setup is effective without compromising signal quality.
Unorthodox solution for FDD only to cover narrow areas with tall buildings or special events when there is no budget or very limited tight schedule.
And the user experience is not a priority as there will be multiple complaints.
There are many other solutions which will give a better performance such as DAS-IBS, micro cells, COWs or propriety High capacity antennas with/without beam forming.
Maintenance in this tower will be difficult, changing jumpers for exemple
Hi experts,
Are the antennas highlighted in the image deployed horizontally?
If so, what is the reason for implementing them this way?
These seem to be bars used to secure the panel antenna against wind forces.
An omni-directional antenna would typically be “thick and tubular” in shape.
These are likely bars, possibly added for structural support or to allow space for additional antennas in future deployments.
Horizontal installation is typically used for outdoor coverage in areas like hospitals and hostels, where coverage needs to be spread more widely across a horizontal area.
