Jump to content
clbowens

Coverage map updated 3/9/2018

Recommended Posts

At least for the Cleveland area, it seems like there's more "holes" showing up on the coverage map, which I think is more accurate.  And hopefully this is a step to them fixing the holes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LTE Plus coverage is broken in NYC again. A lot of the city is lacking it on the map when most of the city is covered in it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LTE Plus coverage not showing in Shentel territory

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not all; I note some of the newer Shentel coverage--which was found in a previous version of the map--is now missing.  Not sure how that happened.

There are also individual LTE Plus towers missing in the DC area--some are Clear sites that have been there a very long time.

That said, since the last time I looked at coverage in this area, the map has gotten more accurate.  It now shows holes that I know exist because I travel through them on a regular basis. 

- Trip

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

LTE Plus coverage is broken in NYC again. A lot of the city is lacking it on the map when most of the city is covered in it.

If you’re aware of specific locations in NYC that are wrong on the coverage map, you should post them in the Sprint Subreddit Coverage Map thread and tag /u/Craig-S who interfaces with the Map Team. He does a great job following up on this stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chamb said:

LTE Plus coverage not showing in Shentel territory

Where in the territory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

Where in the territory?

Central Pennsylvania -  Harrisburg, York, Carlisle, Chambersburg, Waynesboro.

Maryland -  Hagerstown

West Virginia -  Martinsburg   

Probably more than I mentioned.  Does not look like any Shentel data has been upgraded for a long time. That is a shame

since the service is great. The mapping should reflect that, but it does not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They really broke the Missouri market. Looks like they turned off Band 26 again. And it looks like they tried to make B41 coverage more realistic, but in the process, shrank it *too* much. Previously it covered way too much ground. Now they're not showing coverage where I know there is a pretty decent B41 (3xCA) signal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the information is a lot more accurate now in the South SF Bay and Central Valley. Or at least a lot more specific than it was previously.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it is over conservative for a lot of the Cleveland Market, actually.  Basically any site that has received B41 since the beginning of 2017 is not showing on the map.

Another couple map updates, and we'll be right back to the Cleveland area having hardly any B41. GRR! :mad:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://rf.jwmaloney.name/sprint-coverage.html

 

If I select 3G & More and LTE Plus (No 3G) I see lot more B41 coverage.  The two B41 towers that are new near me are shown.  Manhattan is shown correctly. Shentel B41 is shown. The B41 I saw in Huntsville is shown.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, red_dog007 said:

https://rf.jwmaloney.name/sprint-coverage.html

 

If I select 3G & More and LTE Plus (No 3G) I see lot more B41 coverage.  The two B41 towers that are new near me are shown.  Manhattan is shown correctly. Shentel B41 is shown. The B41 I saw in Huntsville is shown.

Great Find concerning the Shentel LTE Plus Coverage. The jwMaloney maps even show the difference between inside and outside LTE Plus coverage.  You now have one vote for making the jwmaloney maps the official Sprint Maps.

The B-41 coverage shown on the Maloney maps appears to be fairly accurate too. 

How can the Sprint managers see these jwmaloney maps and then look at the official Sprint maps and feel good about their products they place out for public consumption?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, red_dog007 said:

https://rf.jwmaloney.name/sprint-coverage.html

 

If I select 3G & More and LTE Plus (No 3G) I see lot more B41 coverage.  The two B41 towers that are new near me are shown.  Manhattan is shown correctly. Shentel B41 is shown. The B41 I saw in Huntsville is shown.

 

It's not accurate everywhere.  It's says now that nearly every site in Nebraska has B41 live on it.  Even in rural GMO and microwave sites.  And it's not true.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, S4GRU said:

It's not accurate everywhere.  It's says now that nearly every site in Nebraska has B41 live on it.  Even in rural GMO and microwave sites.  And it's not true.  

Not to mention, many NEW Nebraska sites, many in BFE towns...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

That's their attempt to show in building coverage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

 

11 minutes ago, Dkoellerwx said:

That's their attempt to show in building coverage. 

They have done this in downtown Seattle too and I think it’s stupid. It makes coverage look completely awful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, chamb said:

Great Find concerning the Shentel LTE Plus Coverage. The jwMaloney maps even show the difference between inside and outside LTE Plus coverage.  You now have one vote for making the jwmaloney maps the official Sprint Maps.

The B-41 coverage shown on the Maloney maps appears to be fairly accurate too. 

How can the Sprint managers see these jwmaloney maps and then look at the official Sprint maps and feel good about their products they place out for public consumption?

At least they're finally using Google Maps officially now. No excuse for not making that change years ago.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, RAvirani said:

 

They have done this in downtown Seattle too and I think it’s stupid. It makes coverage look completely awful. 

So this isn't a map-wide change? Are they just doing this is downtown areas? It makes it hard to figure out exactly what they're trying to show with all the changes and when they don't tell you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

So this isn't a map-wide change? Are they just doing this is downtown areas? It makes it hard to figure out exactly what they're trying to show with all the changes and when they don't tell you!

They've been doing it on a market by market basis in urban areas. Like, I noticed it in the Kansas market late last year. They just added it to the Colorado market in last months update. They only seem to do it for the biggest cities, largest buildings and surrounding areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've done it all over NYC, not just the densest areas. For what it's worth, the areas where it says there is no coverage or just 3G are mostly correct. However, they are missing a ton of Band 41 coverage that exists in these giant bright yellow patches. I'm hoping all of the complaints will make Sprint fix it soon.

gaGXto2.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking but I would imagine having a super accurate map like this, while potentially being bad because it looks like you have poor coverage, could be good for when VoLTE comes around. You'll have a better idea of which areas VoLTE won't work or will struggle in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

They've done it all over NYC, not just the densest areas. For what it's worth, the areas where it says there is no coverage or just 3G are mostly correct. However, they are missing a ton of Band 41 coverage that exists in these giant bright yellow patches. I'm hoping all of the complaints will make Sprint fix it soon.

gaGXto2.png

I would consider all of NYC to be dense... more dense that most of the other areas I was talking about in previous posts. So I stand by the point that they are doing this to dense urban areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2018 at 2:11 AM, JWMaloney said:

At least they're finally using Google Maps officially now. No excuse for not making that change years ago.

Agreed. Glad they made this transition to Google Maps for the Coverage Map.

When you Report a Network Issue in the My Sprint Mobile App for iOS, Sprint actually uses Apple Maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Son not gonna give up that treasure trove of 2.5 spectrum for cheap, $12 per share minimum.  Gonna love my May 2018 calls!  Cha-ching! 
    • PRLs do not affect LTE connectivity — they are only for CDMA. What you are observing must be a coincidence. As Sprint and Open Mobile are still integrating their networks, Band 13 will probably come and go quite a few more times before you’ll be able to properly connect to it.  It’s hard to say. Although I may be wrong, I think that if the merger does goes through (which it may or may not), it will go through everywhere. 
    • Update: Did a PRL update (55069) and sightings of B13 using Signal Check Pro are less frequent know in my area. Before this latest PRL, I was able to see between 2-3 B13 signals everyday for the entire time that I had the app open but not anymore. There is a B13 in my area at -98 dBm that's constantly disappearing from Signal Check Pro. As for roaming charges when I was using Open Mobile, there are none and the roaming data allotment stills at zero. Two question for thought... If Sprint and T-Mobile merge, what could be the implications for PRWireless in Puerto Rico (Joint company between Sprint and Open Mobile)? Would the DOJ step in to prevent a 3 carrier merge in PR? Or would it go thru making a super telecom company in PR? Or maybe the DOJ allows the merge in the USA but not in PR... Lastly, could the rollout of Sprint VoLTE be affected in PR do to Open Mobile's equipment?
    • Why not link the the actual report instead of a 2nd hand telling of said report? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sprint-corp-m-a-t-mobile-us-exclusive/exclusive-t-mobile-sprint-make-progress-aim-for-deal-next-week-sources-idUSKBN1HX3G6
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×