Network Vision/LTE - Chicago Market

[Dkoellerwx]

Strange, Sensorly maps show solid 4G LTE coverage (darker purple for stronger signal) in and around soldier field, implying that Network Vision has come and gone through this area. True there are probably about 65K more people in and around soldier field on gamedays, but thats probably what 13,000 Sprint Customers, assuming a 20% market share. That doesnt seem to me to be an overloading type capacity. Ballgames at Wrigley probably add around 10,000 additional Sprint Customers about 81 times a year, I have never seen or heard of issues here. Had no issues around Medinah for Ryder Cup, that was about 60,000 people per day, about 12,000 Sprint Customers. Had no issues at US Open in 2003 at Olympia Fields, same about 12,000 Sprint Customers. The only time I really see this system overloaded with capacity issues are when crowds are in the hundreds of thousands or millions. 270,000 people attended Lolla in Grant Park, thats 54,000 Sprint customers, system overloaded. 250,000 people in Grant Park for Obama Rally in 2008, 50,000 Sprint Customers, system overloaded. Same with the old July 3rd Fireworks/Taste of Chicago which always drew 250,000 people to the lakefront.

 

My point is the addition of 65,000 fan football crowd, of which about 20% or 13,000 people want access to nearby Sprint Towers, in a densly towered area like the loop, doesn't seem to fall into the "not enough capacity for that type of crowd" bucket. Sure once a year events like Lollapolooaza do, but not typical, repeatable stadium sporting events.

 

I can't post here, but if I could direct your attention to this thread in the sponsors forum: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/586-network-vision-site-map-chicago-indianapolis-ft-waynesouth-bend-and-central-illinois/page__view__findpost__p__75207

I put up a comparison between the currently 4G only accepted sites around the Soldier Field, and the sites that haven't had upgrades yet.

 

Another possibility you have to consider here, when you are comparing to the other places, they could have in building repeaters or other systems to create a network inside, separate of the network provided by the cell towers. Ideally, every sporting event center and otherwise large gathering place would have these systems, but they don't, and 12,000 people can easily overload the cell network if they are all in one spot. The number of sites currently upgraded can easily provide the coverage you see on Sensorly on a regular day, but throw in that huge mass of people in one spot, and there just isn't enough coverage yet.

[Joeynach]

I can't post here, but if I could direct your attention to this thread in the sponsors forum: http://s4gru.com/ind...dpost__p__75207

I put up a comparison between the currently 4G only accepted sites around the Soldier Field, and the sites that haven't had upgrades yet.

 

Another possibility you have to consider here, when you are comparing to the other places, they could have in building repeaters or other systems to create a network inside, separate of the network provided by the cell towers. Ideally, every sporting event center and otherwise large gathering place would have these systems, but they don't, and 12,000 people can easily overload the cell network if they are all in one spot. The number of sites currently upgraded can easily provide the coverage you see on Sensorly on a regular day, but throw in that huge mass of people in one spot, and there just isn't enough coverage yet.

 

This helps a lot and explains a lot. One of the nearest towers to soldier field, on 14th and Wabash, has not received Network Vision Upgrades, though the one near 18th/LSD/Train Tracks has. Though again, I was not aware that these sites can get LTE as part of the network vision, be turned on, and not receive their 3G capacity upgrades yet. That must again imply that they are being turned on without backhaul. Kinda of a tease ya know.

 

I still don't believe under normal circumstances that sporting event crowds, which are scheduled and repeated, can cause these no service/constant time out problems. I can see this happening in huge crowds like Lollapolooza which can strain the system, but if ballgames strained the system to the point they didn't work we all would have noticed, complained, and the market would react. In fact im sure this was the case as carriers built their networks over the past 20 years. Do you know how many professional and college stadiums I have been to in the last ten years, probably about 40. This is probably the second time I have ever noticed a stadium crowd causing the "not enough capacity" issue where phones don't work. Usually these are places carriers make sure to provide adequate capacity. They are the easy places to identify where towers are needed. The idea that a football game crowd can cripple a network in Chicago in 2012 just seems so.........retro.

 

Now if there is a lack of capacity in the system b/c the NV upgrades are ongoing, fine, then I am to assume coverage and service at soldier field will only get better with time. Same thing with 3G upgrades/backhaul, that will only improve the system. But I have to assume that after all upgrades and NV completion, Sprint shouldn't have an unusable network around Solder Field on gamedays b/c of the crowd.

[Dkoellerwx]

I don't personally know what the capacity of a single site is, or what it takes to overload it. But I'm fairly certain that a single site can't handle 12,000 people. If someone who has a little bit more knowledge on that could jump in, I'd appreciate it!

 

However, I would imagine that once NV is complete in the Chicago area sometime early next year, that you probably won't have issues like that again.

 

The sites that have 4G live are connected to the new backhaul, but for some reason 3G is not. Most markets that are being upgraded by Ericsson have been 4G only for some time now, and are not seeing the 3G improvements yet for some reason. However, Chicago is being upgraded by Samsung, which is moving quickly, and seems to be doing a pretty good job of getting 4G up and then switching the 3G on fairly quickly after.

[S4GRU]

A single LTE sector serving more than 250 customers actively will fail to perform. You can forget about 13,000 in a single sector. If only one site in the area is live, it will likely only have one sector facing the stadium. To properly handle 13,000 customers in one cell sector, you would have to have fully functioning DAS or beaucoup small cells. Period. Even a full build out of Network Vision cannot handle 13,000 customers in one area. But this is true on any network. Not even Verizon can handle that.

 

If you have other carriers having successful data use in a highly loaded cell sector (like a stadium), then they are providing more than just macro cell coverage from adjacent conventional sites. Sprint has a lot of plans to equip airports, shopping malls, stadiums, convention centers, etc. with small cells/DAS systems. But their focus so far on Network Vision has been the macro network. That will work will largely not get under way until later in 2013.

 

Robert

[Joeynach]

A single LTE sector serving more than 250 customers actively will fail to perform. You can forget about 13,000 in a single sector. If only one site in the area is live, it will likely only have one sector facing the stadium. To properly handle 13,000 customers in one cell sector, you would have to have fully functioning DAS or beaucoup small cells. Period. Even a full build out of Network Vision cannot handle 13,000 customers in one area. But this is true on any network. Not even Verizon can handle that.

 

If you have other carriers having successful data use in a highly loaded cell sector (like a stadium), then they are providing more than just macro cell coverage from adjacent conventional sites. Sprint has a lot of plans to equip airports, shopping malls, stadiums, convention centers, etc. with small cells/DAS systems. But their focus so far on Network Vision has been the macro network. That will work will largely not get under way until later in 2013.

 

Robert

 

This all makes sense, but using a flat 13,000 numbers to say well that's obviously more than the 250 that the cell site can handle and therefore the system can handle it is misleading. There may be an extra 13,000 Sprint customers at Soldier Field Sundays, but not all of them are trying to use the service at the same time. Im sure there is plenty of times that the cell sites get overloaded, like halftimes, pre/post game, timeouts, etc and plenty of times the sites are not overloaded, like during Bears offensive drives. Its completely on demand.

[S4GRU]

This all makes sense, but using a flat 13,000 numbers to say well that's obviously more than the 250 that the cell site can handle and therefore the system can handle it is misleading. There may be an extra 13,000 Sprint customers at Soldier Field Sundays, but not all of them are trying to use the service at the same time. Im sure there is plenty of times that the cell sites get overloaded, like halftimes, pre/post game, timeouts, etc and plenty of times the sites are not overloaded, like during Bears offensive drives. Its completely on demand.

 

Who knows what exactly the peak demand is there? But it doesn't much matter if it is 3,000 or 6,000 or 12,000, the results will be the same. The macro network cannot handle those kind of numbers. In my opinion, about the most the macro network could probably handle (and if properly designed for it) is probably between 500-1000 simultaneous users in a small area. And the expense it would take to make the macro network handle that is not worth it (and the spectrum may not be available to pull off additional carriers, either). It's better to install some small cells or DAS. Which is what Sprint will do in the longer term there.

 

Robert

[aerxx]

Sprint has a lot of plans to equip airports' date=' shopping malls, stadiums, convention centers, etc. with small cells/DAS systems. But their focus so far on Network Vision has been the macro network. That will work will largely not get under way until later in 2013.

 

Robert[/quote']

 

This is great news. Wrigley Field area is awful. Nice to see that much forward thinking.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

[bkrodgers]

Im not big on complaining about service during the Network Vision, I would say I have been quite patient and excited for the better service to come, but I must say something about Sprint's service in and around Solider Field during game days. I have been to two games this season, one yesterday, and one about two months ago. Both times Sprint service has been awful at best.

 

Kind of like the Bears game yesterday...

[mellimel2212]

Yeah the bears was bogas lol. MR Wilson killed our defense lol

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus Rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Joeynach]

This is great news. Wrigley Field area is awful. Nice to see that much forward thinking.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

Man Im still trying to wrap my head around the idea that these cell sites can accommodate so few active connections that how can anyone possibly get decent service at places like ballparks, stadiums, concerts etc. I was certainty having problems at Soldier Field, but I probably went to 10 Cubs and 10 Sox games this season and never had the same no connectivity, timeouts, service not available, phone goes to roaming issues there. I went to the Bulls game the other night and didnt have an issue, had 4G the whole time there with 22K people in the house and it worked fine.

[WiWavelength]

I was certainty having problems at Soldier Field, but I probably went to 10 Cubs and 10 Sox games this season and never had the same no connectivity, timeouts, service not available, phone goes to roaming issues there. I went to the Bulls game the other night and didnt have an issue, had 4G the whole time there with 22K people in the house and it worked fine.

 

My experience has been that baseball or basketball games with ~20,000 attendees do not cause the same network issues that football games with ~60,000 attendees do. In other words, the network reaches its breaking point at some number in between 20,000 and 60,000.

 

AJ

[Joeynach]

More of an NV related question here for Robert. So if I look at the NV Site Map for Chicago there are probably about 20 towers in the Chicago Loop, the yellow Pins. If you look at the Samsung Complete NV Sites Map from Nov 26th you see about two completed NV Sites (in Purple), one in the South Loop (CH03XC034), and one in River North (CH13XC053). Am I to interpret this that there are really about 20 towers in the Loop area yet to receive their NV upgrades. Or was the Nov 26th Completed Site Map just showing the towers that were turned on since the last map update? Do you see what I am saying?

[Joeynach]

My experience has been that baseball or basketball games with ~20,000 attendees do not cause the same network issues that football games with ~60,000 attendees do. In other words, the network reaches its breaking point at some number in between 20,000 and 60,000.

 

AJ

 

Not bad. You would assume then places like football stadiums, college and pro, would have extra capacity in and around them, either with additional Macro Cell towers, or those micro sites Robert was referencing. Just imagine in some of these places like Tuscaloosa, Columbia SC, Clemson, Auburn, Lincoln NB, etc, where these are small towns with small cellular needs then all of a sudden on gamedays there are 100K extra people there all demanding cellular signal and data/phone service at the same time.

[WiWavelength]

Not bad. You would assume then places like football stadiums, college and pro, would have extra capacity in and around them, either with additional Macro Cell towers, or those micro sites Robert was referencing. Just imagine in some of these places like Tuscaloosa, Columbia SC, Clemson, Auburn, Lincoln NB, etc, where these are small towns with small cellular needs then all of a sudden on gamedays there are 100K extra people there all demanding cellular signal and data/phone service at the same time.

 

Well, you have to consider that those users -- whether 20,000 or 100,000 -- are not all on the same network. For example, in Kansas City, home of Sprint, I have much trouble with Sprint CDMA1X/EV-DO at Arrowhead Stadium, while both VZW and Cricket CDMA1X tend to be usable. Not all users at Chiefs games are on Sprint, but a higher proportion are than on potentially any other carrier.

 

As for SEC football games, I have heard multiple reports from multiple campuses that home games often crash the networks for most/all carriers in the areas surrounding the stadiums.

 

AJ

[Dkoellerwx]

More of an NV related question here for Robert. So if I look at the NV Site Map for Chicago there are probably about 20 towers in the Chicago Loop, the yellow Pins. If you look at the Samsung Complete NV Sites Map from Nov 26th you see about two completed NV Sites (in Purple), one in the South Loop (CH03XC034), and one in River North (CH13XC053). Am I to interpret this that there are really about 20 towers in the Loop area yet to receive their NV upgrades. Or was the Nov 26th Completed Site Map just showing the towers that were turned on since the last map update? Do you see what I am saying?

 

That part. Yes, there are still that many towers yet to be upgraded. We haven't had an update for a couple of weeks, so it's possible things have changed, but as of Nov. 26 that was the sites that have been upgraded.

[Joeynach]

That part. Yes, there are still that many towers yet to be upgraded. We haven't had an update for a couple of weeks, so it's possible things have changed, but as of Nov. 26 that was the sites that have been upgraded.

 

Ok cool I just wanted to make sure I was interpreting the maps correctly that they reflected upgrades to the totality of Site upgrades for NV, not just a monthly or weekly changes only.

[mellimel2212]

Look at lte between us and att haha

 

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus Rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[tommym65]

Look at lte between us and att haha

 

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus Rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2

 

Based on line colors, these maps probably show the effects of Sprint users' "Sensorly Addiction". Note that the map of The Dark Side shows coverage almost exclusively along expressways and tollways, where the Sprint map shows much neighborhood coverage, This suggests that Sprint Sensorly-addicited nutcakes (like me) spend w-a-a-y too much time using our smart phones as signal monitors and mappers, where Dark Side users spend their time performing more practical activities (like driving). (You can see my contributions to the insanity on the Sensorly mapping of the far Northwest Suburbs.)

[mellimel2212]

In a way that's true but in a way false our maps is dark along the expressways also this is real coverage though because if all att users are drivers ( which we both know false) then it wouldn't be just in the eways if there coverage was like ours lol look at vzw

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus Rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[drock2750]

Based on line colors, these maps probably show the effects of Sprint users' "Sensorly Addiction". Note that the map of The Dark Side shows coverage almost exclusively along expressways and tollways, where the Sprint map shows much neighborhood coverage, This suggests that Sprint Sensorly-addicited nutcakes (like me) spend w-a-a-y too much time using our smart phones as signal monitors and mappers, where Dark Side users spend their time performing more practical activities (like driving). (You can see my contributions to the insanity on the Sensorly mapping of the far Northwest Suburbs.)

 

It also seems to show the much more sensible (in my opinion) strategy of deploying from the loop outward. Covering the area with the densest subscriber base first means a maximum number of happy users. Those users also happen to be closest to any kind of backhaul infrastructure anybody could need. It is frustrating that LTE coverage improvements seem to have ground to a halt in the city as evidenced by sensorly and my own experience. Rather than racing to cover the maximum number of square miles, you'd think they'd want to cover the maximum number of paying subscribers...

 

I posted over a month ago that I noticed a slowdown in active LTE coming online, and weeks and weeks later, no noticeable progress has been made and the NV complete % is essentially frozen. Does anybody have any knowledge of why the pace of the buildout has changed so much? While the nerd in me likes to know which sites have been NVed, the distinction between sites with NV but no active LTE doesn't really matter in any kind of useful way. There is no way that their contractor doesn't have a project schedule...if it's gonna be done in, say, 6 months, just tell us! We'd be ok with it!

[tommym65]

It is frustrating that LTE coverage improvements seem to have ground to a halt in the city as evidenced by sensorly and my own experience. Rather than racing to cover the maximum number of square miles, you'd think they'd want to cover the maximum number of paying subscribers...

 

I posted over a month ago that I noticed a slowdown in active LTE coming online, and weeks and weeks later, no noticeable progress has been made and the NV complete % is essentially frozen. Does anybody have any knowledge of why the pace of the buildout has changed so much? While the nerd in me likes to know which sites have been NVed, the distinction between sites with NV but no active LTE doesn't really matter in any kind of useful way. There is no way that their contractor doesn't have a project schedule...if it's gonna be done in, say, 6 months, just tell us! We'd be ok with it!

 

If it's any consolation, LTE deployment in the far 'Burbs has recently been even slower than it has been Downtown. There has been little improvement in coverage in the far northwest in weeks, based both on Robert's maps and on Sensorly. I'm sure there is some valid reason for this, but being too impoverished to pay up to the Premier Sponsor level, I am rather puzzled. It is especially frustrating because LTE is SO CLOSE. (I can sometimes get coverage by holding my GS3 at just the right angle in my south-facing, 2nd floor guest bedroom, but it doesn't stay connected very long. Or, I can drive to a park 2 miles south of my house and get blazing speeds. I guess I should just live in my car.) I'm fairly sure that ISN'T any consolation, but it feels so good to get it off my chest!!!!

[pyroscott]

It also seems to show the much more sensible (in my opinion) strategy of deploying from the loop outward. Covering the area with the densest subscriber base first means a maximum number of happy users. Those users also happen to be closest to any kind of backhaul infrastructure anybody could need. It is frustrating that LTE coverage improvements seem to have ground to a halt in the city as evidenced by sensorly and my own experience. Rather than racing to cover the maximum number of square miles, you'd think they'd want to cover the maximum number of paying subscribers...

 

I posted over a month ago that I noticed a slowdown in active LTE coming online, and weeks and weeks later, no noticeable progress has been made and the NV complete % is essentially frozen. Does anybody have any knowledge of why the pace of the buildout has changed so much? While the nerd in me likes to know which sites have been NVed, the distinction between sites with NV but no active LTE doesn't really matter in any kind of useful way. There is no way that their contractor doesn't have a project schedule...if it's gonna be done in, say, 6 months, just tell us! We'd be ok with it!

If it's any consolation, LTE deployment in the far 'Burbs has recently been even slower than it has been Downtown. There has been little improvement in coverage in the far northwest in weeks, based both on Robert's maps and on Sensorly. I'm sure there is some valid reason for this, but being too impoverished to pay up to the Premier Sponsor level, I am rather puzzled. It is especially frustrating because LTE is SO CLOSE. (I can sometimes get coverage by holding my GS3 at just the right angle in my south-facing, 2nd floor guest bedroom, but it doesn't stay connected very long. Or, I can drive to a park 2 miles south of my house and get blazing speeds. I guess I should just live in my car.) I'm fairly sure that ISN'T any consolation, but it feels so good to get it off my chest!!!!

 

There is nothing slow about the pace the Chicago market has been deployed. Chicago currently stands with 72% of the cell sites in the market complete and accepted by Sprint. The next highest is Baltimore at 51%. Chicago will likely be the first market complete.

 

If there is a problem with the strategy Sprint employed with the rollout, I suggest you try an official channel for complaints.

[drock2750]

There is nothing slow about the pace the Chicago market has been deployed. Chicago currently stands with 72% of the cell sites in the market complete and accepted by Sprint. The next highest is Baltimore at 51%. Chicago will likely be the first market complete.

 

If there is a problem with the strategy Sprint employed with the rollout, I suggest you try an official channel for complaints.

 

I would agree that the buildout pace is not slow overall...what I wanted insight on was why there was a flurry of activity a couple months ago, rapidly getting to 70%, followed by this past month with very little happening. I know that there is a reason for everything in a project of this size but does anybody have any additional information? If a container ship full of equipment sinks, or there's a software problem, or if Sprint ran out of cash to keep moving at the same pace since the Softbank deal isn't done yet, or any of a million other potential hiccups in a complex process like deploying LTE occured, it could serve to slow things down. I'm not simply stating that it has slowed down (aka complaining), I'm asking if anybody knows why.

[tommym65]

 

There is nothing slow about the pace the Chicago market has been deployed. Chicago currently stands with 72% of the cell sites in the market complete and accepted by Sprint. The next highest is Baltimore at 51%. Chicago will likely be the first market complete.

 

If there is a problem with the strategy Sprint employed with the rollout, I suggest you try an official channel for complaints.

 

Your tone is offensive, and your understanding of my post is inaccurate. As drock2750 correctly points out, after a flurry of mid-fall upgrades, installation of LTE in much of Chicagoland has slowed appreciably. The current RATE of upgrades has little to do with the prior PERCENTAGE of completions, and is a source of frustration. Nothing in my post was a complaint about Sprint's strategy, only a lamentation (shared by the approximately 88% of Sprint customers who are still looking forward to LTE). I have been a loyal Sprint customer for over 14 years, have suffered through the bad years, and have enjoyed the remarkable improvement in service and customer care under Dan Hesse's guidance, and certainly don't need a lecture about my attitude.

[WiWavelength]

Your tone is offensive...

 

Hold up, I am sorry that you took offense, but Scott's tone was not offensive.

 

AJ