Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Chicago Market


thesickness069

Recommended Posts

Interesting, I wonder if you caught the crews running the new equipment through the paces during an installation....

I ahve been checking the towers as there are two right near me along 294 and golf road. i havent seen any crews yet. not to say that i couldnt miss them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might just mean that the network software is being updated to eHRPD in preparation for LTE to start coming online.

 

Sent from my CM9 Toro

well that would be good news. I did notice all of the June LTE towers in the updated map.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid question.......but will you only see eHRPD as the network on Netmonitor if you have an LTE capable device? Or will it show on my 3G/WiMax phone.....?

 

Sent from my Epic 4G (WiSuck) using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid question.......but will you only see eHRPD as the network on Netmonitor if you have an LTE capable device? Or will it show on my 3G/WiMax phone.....?

 

Sent from my Epic 4G (WiSuck) using Forum Runner

 

eHRPD ssessions can only be connected in a LTE device. A WiMax device will only connect to an EVDO session.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eHRPD ssessions can only be connected in a LTE device. A WiMax device will only connect to an EVDO session.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

Is this because eHRPD handles the seamless 3G to LTE and LTE to 3G transitions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

eHRPD ssessions can only be connected in a LTE device. A WiMax device will only connect to an EVDO session.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

Thanks Robert.

 

Sent from my Epic 4G (WiSuck) using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this because eHRPD handles the seamless 3G to LTE and LTE to 3G transitions?

 

No. It's possible to create a 3G only device that could run on eHRPD. However, eHRPD was created to allow LTE devices to seamlessly transfer back and forth to EVDO. So, only a LTE device needs eHRPD.

 

eHRPD is EVDO-A, and doesn't have better speeds (all things being equal). In a completed NV site, eHRPD and EVDO-A share the same backhaul. However, EVDO data goes to the Sprint MSC Switch and eHRPD goes to the 4G DDC (Core). So on a complete NV site, EVDO and eHRPD should have nearly identical speeds. However, if there is a bottleneck at the Switch, it is possible that EVDO could be slower than eHRPD. Also, the reverse is true, but less likely.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It's possible to create a 3G only device that could run on eHRPD. However, eHRPD was created to allow LTE devices to seamlessly transfer back and forth to EVDO. So, only a LTE device needs eHRPD.

 

eHRPD is EVDO-A, and doesn't have better speeds (all things being equal). In a completed NV site, eHRPD and EVDO-A share the same backhaul. However, EVDO data goes to the Sprint MSC Switch and eHRPD goes to the 4G DDC (Core). So on a complete NV site, EVDO and eHRPD should have nearly identical speeds. However, if there is a bottleneck at the Switch, it is possible that EVDO could be slower than eHRPD. Also, the reverse is true, but less likely.

 

Robert

 

:o you're so smart........ lol ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Pleasant surprise at work this morning.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

Do you work in a lead lined building? That's a weak signal for being relatively close.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you work in a lead lined building? That's a weak signal for being relatively close.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

See comments in this prior thread in the Samsung forum here about testing aerxx's signal performance with a GS3 in his workplace. What we don't have are any controlled comparison tests of other devices at this location.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you work in a lead lined building? That's a weak signal for being relatively close.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

Home Depot.....

 

My OG EPIC was about the same.....maybe one bar better.

 

This is standing outside at the same location....

http://www.imgur.com/pr8Hm.jpg

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Home Depot.....

 

My OG EPIC was about the same.....maybe one bar better.

 

Okay, now you have confused me. We started this conversation with you reporting,:

 

I get half the bars indoors that my OG EPIC would get..

 

Then you did some more testing of your GS3, and said:

 

1bar -101dbm

2bar -97dbm

 

This is what I have been averaging all day inside work.

 

You did not correct my extrapolation of that:

 

And your old Epic 4G was typically 3 bars or better in the same location? (That would correspond to -91 dBm or better on my reference scale.)

 

And now you say the Epic 4G's performance "was about the same" after all? Sorry, but this seems like a wild goose chase. It goes to show that anecdotal reports of performance, especially those that rely on somebody's subjective memory, are not very reliable. There has to be some controlled testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One day of testing is what was reported and I wasnt connected to eHRPD. I dont know if thats the difference or not. Im going to assume it is.

 

I kook forward to reading anyone elses results.....

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One day of testing is what was reported and I wasnt connected to eHRPD. I dont know if thats the difference or not. Im going to assume it is.

There doesn't seem to be any significant difference with this eHPRD report and your earlier tests of the GS3 performance. My point is that your recollections of your old Epic 4G's performance at the same site have been all over the lot, which led to confusing comparisons.

.

EDIT: I don't mean this personally. None of us can really trust our subjective memories on stuff like this. That's why scientists do double-blind studies, etc. I know I have no reliable memory of what my phone's historical performance has been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the term "half" shouldnt have been used. I now get 1 bar where I used to get 2. I get 2 where it used to fluxuate 3 and 4. In my eyes, that would make this phones antenna perform half as well as my EPIC. Even as I was typing this....my signal went anywhere from no service to 3 bars.

 

What made me say that its "about the same" today, is because I still have the same slow speeds and inconsistant signal that I have always had inside my work.

 

Like I said...I cant wait to see what everyone else sees.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There doesn't seem to be any significant difference with this eHPRD report and your earlier tests of the GS3 peformance.

.

 

This was a bad assumtion on my part. I thought I read somewhere that eHRPD sessions had a higher signal strength.....

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was a bad assumtion on my part. I thought I read somewhere that eHRPD sessions had a higher signal strength.....

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

I don't know if I would say eHRPD has higher signal strength. But what can happen: if you are comparing an EVDO legacy signal to an eHRPD signal from a Network Vision site, there may be some improvement. However, I personally would never say that eHRPD has a stronger signal than EVDO, because that would not be true technically.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

workers at Tower CH13XC009 In Glenview @ Glenview Road and Greenwood. New radios r up and they are huge. Also they installed a fiber backhual through the gas station and down the street a good 100 yards or so to whatever it is they connect the fiber to.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...