Network Vision/LTE - Chicago Market

[ydoucare]

Looks like most of the microwave backhaul documents I have are for Lake County IN, furthest southern location is Lowell, IN. Most of what I have is for 60+ miles outside of Chicago proper in all directions. Far North, West, and South suburbs. Its good, they're doing this to make sure backhaul is ready in rural areas ahead of setting all of Chicago market live. This way they don't have to waste time running fiber.

Good deal, thanks for that info!

[kencid99]

404 error on the picture

 

I tested from different computers + networks, looks ok for me.

[djmiro83]

I tested from different computers + networks, looks ok for me.

I'm gettin 404 as well

[kencid99]

I'm gettin 404 as well

 

Maybe this then:

http://imgur.com/4t3r0

[djmiro83]

 

Maybe this then:

http://imgur.com/4t3r0

 

I can see that one!! Thanks. Sweet speeds

 

Sent from my JB iPhone 4S using Forum Runner

[Josh]

Looks like most of the microwave backhaul documents I have are for Lake County IN, furthest southern location is Lowell, IN. Most of what I have is for 60+ miles outside of Chicago proper in all directions. Far North, West, and South suburbs. Its good, they're doing this to make sure backhaul is ready in rural areas ahead of setting all of Chicago market live. This way they don't have to waste time running fiber.

 

Its not the 'waste of time' problem, its the fact that many of the fiber backhaul is actually contracted or rented from the local communications companies. If those companies do not already have service extending toward that area, the COSTS are very large, and therefore not cost effective especially when you consider that those areas are less populated and not going to generate as much money. Therefore where microwave can be more cost effective, they will use it instead of fiber. Other than slightly higher pings, speeds will be comparable and it will still be a much better experience than the current.

[aerxx]

Its not the 'waste of time' problem, its the fact that many of the fiber backhaul is actually contracted or rented from the local communications companies. If those companies do not already have service extending toward that area, the COSTS are very large, and therefore not cost effective especially when you consider that those areas are less populated and not going to generate as much money. Therefore where microwave can be more cost effective, they will use it instead of fiber. Other than slightly higher pings, speeds will be comparable and it will still be a much better experience than the current.

 

Ok, then it would be a waste of time AND money.....

[iansltx]

 

Its not the 'waste of time' problem' date=' its the fact that many of the fiber backhaul is actually contracted or rented from the local communications companies. If those companies do not already have service extending toward that area, the COSTS are very large, and therefore not cost effective especially when you consider that those areas are less populated and not going to generate as much money. Therefore where microwave can be more cost effective, they will use it instead of fiber. Other than slightly higher pings, speeds will be comparable and it will still be a much better experience than the current.[/quote']

 

Microwave gear, if configured correctly, adds a negligible amount of latency to a network. Like, less than a millisecond per hop.

 

Sent from my Galaxy SIII-32GB using Forum Runner

[Zander]

most people will not know he difference between fiber and microwave as long as Sprint doesnt put 10-20 towers in a chain. From my understating it should not be more then 2-3 towers in a chain and 80% of all towers will have fiber, so we are golden.

[newspapercrane]

I tested from different computers + networks, looks ok for me.

Did all of those computers happen to be signed into your dropbox?

[S4GRU]

most people will not know he difference between fiber and microwave as long as Sprint doesnt put 10-20 towers in a chain. From my understating it should not be more then 2-3 towers in a chain and 80% of all towers will have fiber' date=' so we are golden.[/quote']

 

There are two types of microwave chains. There are redundant loops, which can have up to 7 or 8 sites. But these have MW links set up both directions and each end ends up back at the source site (In a loop). These are more reliable with redundancy. These are very common in DFW.

 

The second type is terminal end. Sometimes these are as few as one site that is connected another site, or it can be several. The only time you would relay more than 2-3 sites out on a terminal end is out to remote rural sites. And if you are 50 miles out in the plains on a low usage site, it doesn't much matter if the site is on a terminal end MW relay that has been beamed from 5 sites.

 

Also, I keep seeing this 80% fiber number, and I don't know where it came from. This is not accurate. I would estimate, based on what I've seen, Sprint has less than 20% of sites as direct fiber backhaul. Most backhaul is via AAV. However, often AAV is fiber backed in a very short distance from the service demark at the site. Sometimes only 20'-30'.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[iansltx]

If a site is backhauled via AAV, my guess is that the connection is handed off as copper Ethernet, but there's a fiber media converter very nearby. So the site is effectively fiber-fed.

 

Sent from my Galaxy SIII-32GB using Forum Runner

[aerxx]

Connected to 4G in St. Charles corner of Randall and RT. 38. I about shit my pants!!! Screenshots to come.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

[aerxx]

Horrible building penetration....lost 4G as soon as I walked into Lowe's....

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

[aerxx]

http://www.imgur.com/tdRZ1.png

 

http://www.imgur.com/nkZII.png

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

[aerxx]

aaaaand the tower is already turned off.....that was short lived...

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

[irev210]

There are two types of microwave chains. There are redundant loops, which can have up to 7 or 8 sites. But these have MW links set up both directions and each end ends up back at the source site (In a loop). These are more reliable with redundancy. These are very common in DFW.

 

The second type is terminal end. Sometimes these are as few as one site that is connected another site, or it can be several. The only time you would relay more than 2-3 sites out on a terminal end is out to remote rural sites. And if you are 50 miles out in the plains on a low usage site, it doesn't much matter if the site is on a terminal end MW relay that has been beamed from 5 sites.

 

Also, I keep seeing this 80% fiber number, and I don't know where it came from. This is not accurate. I would estimate, based on what I've seen, Sprint has less than 20% of sites as direct fiber backhaul. Most backhaul is via AAV. However, often AAV is fiber backed in a very short distance from the service demark at the site. Sometimes only 20'-30'.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

I was trying to think of a senario where you would have an AAV that was not based off fiber. I couldn't think of any connection that would provide 250mbit+ of throughput without ethernet to fiber.

 

So, what % of total sites are AAV/Fiber vs. Microwave? Are the sites that are straight fiber in the highest demand locations or is it just random?

 

Also, I've always wondered - does Sprint have any of their own fiber run to any sites?

[boomerbubba]

Connected to 4G in St. Charles corner of Randall and RT. 38. I about shit my pants!!! Screenshots to come.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

Horrible building penetration....lost 4G as soon as I walked into Lowe's....

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

Interesting.

 

This is consistent with Robert's hypothesis that handsets may be downshifting too soon when the LTE signal is not very strong. I notice that yours is a Galaxy S3.

 

http://www.imgur.com/tdRZ1.png

 

http://www.imgur.com/nkZII.png

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

First, a caveat: That Netmonitor screenshot plots the CDMA tower, which may or may not be the tower you were connected to for LTE. (We know of no Android app that maps actual LTE connections.)

 

But it is plausible that this is also the LTE tower, which I believe would be the closest to your actual location. As far as I can tell from Google Earth, you were about .66 miles aways from that tower with an unobstructed line of sight.

 

The LTE signal strength was not captured. (That can only be done from the Android Settings -> About ... menus.) But just from the SpeedTest screen showing 12.14Mbps down, I guess that is plausible performance in such an environment. What do the RF experts think?

 

aaaaand the tower is already turned off.....that was short lived...

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Forum Runner

 

I wonder if the LTE tower station was really turned off, or if this was an artifact of the threshold issue on the phone. There may be two threshold settings -- once controlling downshifts from LTE and one controlling upshifts.

 

Anecdotally, it seems fairly common in launched areas that some users lose their LTE connection, then don't reacquire it. I wonder if the phone would get the LTE back if it was reset by toggling the LTE in the Settings menu, or maybe a reboot.

 

(Of course, LTE on the tower may have been turned off, since the Chicago market isn't launched yet. It may even have been turned off coincidentally as you entered the building. That could explain this whole scenario, but we can't know for sure.)

[aerxx]

 

Anecdotally, it seems fairly common in launched areas that some users lose their LTE connection, then don't reacquire it. I wonder if the phone would get the LTE back if it was reset by toggling the LTE in the Settings menu, or maybe a reboot.

 

(Of course, LTE on the tower may have been turned off, since the Chicago market isn't launched yet. It may even have been turned off coincidentally as you entered the building. That could explain this whole scenario, but we can't know for sure.)

 

Once the signal went away, I tried restarting and cycling as you described above and as everyone tries to do when in an LTE covered area, nothing came back on after 5:10ish pm. (quitting time?)

 

When I initially showed 4G connection, I did a speed test right away, nothing fantastic and the test actually timed out. (4.00down and the upload timed out)

 

after restarting the phone, I was able to get a solid connection and the screenshot above showing the 4G speeds.

 

I tried to capture a screenshot with Open Signal Maps, but for some reason my phone doesn't like that program and wouldn't let me. On the map screen it showed connected to LTE service.

[boomerbubba]

Once the signal went away, I tried restarting and cycling as you described above and as everyone tries to do when in an LTE covered area, nothing came back on after 5:10ish pm. (quitting time?)

 

When I initially showed 4G connection, I did a speed test right away, nothing fantastic and the test actually timed out. (4.00down and the upload timed out)

 

after restarting the phone, I was able to get a solid connection and the screenshot above showing the 4G speeds.

 

I tried to capture a screenshot with Open Signal Maps, but for some reason my phone doesn't like that program and wouldn't let me. On the map screen it showed connected to LTE service.

 

Thanks for that addtional info. I guess we can chalk this case up to you capturing a test tower in the wild temporarily.

 

As for as the app screenshots go, neither Open Signal Maps nor Netmonitor actually maps LTE sites, although they might give that erroneous impression. (Heck, Open Signal Maps can't even map CDMA sites at all. It just guesses from crowdsourced submissions.) Netmonitor is mapping your CDMA connection, and plotting the coordinates squawked by the CDMA radio on the tower. In this case, that much is dead-on accurate. That site is a Sprint tower site. But it may or may not be the same tower where your LTE connection was coming from. (Although in your case I suspect that it was, after studying the Sponsor-accessible maps.)

 

But there is no known app capable of mapping an actual LTE connection. You can see LTE signal strength under the Android's general Setttings -> About ... menus. But that is all the device knows. Neither the Android API nor the apps calling it have access to any LTE site indentifiers or locations.

[wtsguy]

Does anyone randomly go into roaming mode in the Chicago area? Are these just Sprint dead spots? I was getting my car fixed today in Carol Stream and I had 1 bar of 3g that constantly switched to 1xRTT roaming. I couldn't maintain a Sprint connection so I roamed for the 3 hours I was getting my car repaired (at dial up speeds, too). I don't understand how you could roam anywhere in the Chicago market? According to Net Monitor, the Sprint tower was between .5-.75 miles away, there's no reason why I should be roaming.

 

I also get extremely poor connections all the way down Winfield Road north of I-88, drop calls constantly, no 3G or dial-up speed 3G, and switches back and forth from roaming. Dead zones, or just a side effect of NV upgrades?

[djmiro83]

 

I also get extremely poor connections all the way down Winfield Road north of I-88' date=' drop calls constantly, no 3G or dial-up speed 3G, and switches back and forth from roaming. Dead zones, or just a side effect of NV upgrades?[/quote']

 

I feel your pain here. My office building is off Ferry, butting up to 88, right by Winfield. Even with cell repeaters in the office building, I'll drop calls like crazy.

 

As for the tower by my house, data speeds have been all over the place. It seems as if I hit 2 Mbps less frequently and more frequently hit speeds less than 1 Mbps. Is Samsung still working out kinks with the NV equipment or are more people using 3G now that they noticed better speeds?

 

Sent from my JB iPhone 4S using Forum Runner

[tongboy]

Does anyone randomly go into roaming mode in the Chicago area? Are these just Sprint dead spots? I was getting my car fixed today in Carol Stream and I had 1 bar of 3g that constantly switched to 1xRTT roaming. I couldn't maintain a Sprint connection so I roamed for the 3 hours I was getting my car repaired (at dial up speeds, too). I don't understand how you could roam anywhere in the Chicago market? According to Net Monitor, the Sprint tower was between .5-.75 miles away, there's no reason why I should be roaming.

 

I also get extremely poor connections all the way down Winfield Road north of I-88, drop calls constantly, no 3G or dial-up speed 3G, and switches back and forth from roaming. Dead zones, or just a side effect of NV upgrades?

 

Yes. From what I understand from sprint is that Samsung/Ericson applied a patch to NV and legacy towers that prevents 1x handoffs from legacy to nv or nv to legacy towers unless absolutly necessary. It seems like it hangs on to a signal when going across the "boundery" until it is gone. My phone would sometimes roam when that would happen. It didn't seem to effect 3g service at all. Once the legacy towers were upgraded that stopped.

 

Sent from my EVO LTE

[dannible]

I feel your pain here. My office building is off Ferry, butting up to 88, right by Winfield. Even with cell repeaters in the office building, I'll drop calls like crazy.

 

As for the tower by my house, data speeds have been all over the place. It seems as if I hit 2 Mbps less frequently and more frequently hit speeds less than 1 Mbps. Is Samsung still working out kinks with the NV equipment or are more people using 3G now that they noticed better speeds?

 

Sent from my JB iPhone 4S using Forum Runner

ill take those 3g speeds any day. the tower near my house that had its NV radios installed a few weeks ago gives me a whopping .07/mbps down regularly

[gr8nuguy]

sounds like back haul isnt installed yet then