Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Chicago Market


thesickness069

Recommended Posts

Is this hyperbole, or are their lte connections literally slower than dial-up? Though it might not be blowing my hair back, my B25 lte connection is pretty snappy.

 

 

This is no joke, perhaps you have missed some previous conversations.  I can share speed tests with you if you would like, but take my word speeds are literally below dial-up on 1900LTE for large chunks of downtown and near downtown neighborhoods.  This is where I spend most of my time. Sometimes I pull below 10K DL.  Left picture my GS3 at CitiGroup Center (right now), right pic is my friends N5 at this home in West Loop from a few days ago. 

Joey.png

Ryan2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no joke, perhaps you have missed some previous conversations.  I can share speed tests with you if you would like, but take my word speeds are literally below dial-up on 1900LTE for large chunks of downtown and near downtown neighborhoods.  This is where I spend most of my time. Sometimes I pull below 10K DL.  Left picture my GS3 at CitiGroup Center (right now), right pic is my friends N5 at this home in West Loop from a few days ago. 

 

Doesn't help that you and your friend has 0-1 bar(s) of signal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't help that you and your friend has 0-1 bar(s) of signal.

Bars show voice signal strength only, right?  I can't speak for my friend and his N5, but my signal strength is indicated in the top left since I use Signal Check Pro.  -102dBm LTE for me, which according to the scale puts me in the "good" range.

 

  • Better than -96dBm is a great signal
  • Between -97dBm and -107dBm is good
  • Between -108dBm and -114dBm is fair
  • Worse than -115dBm is poor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Bars show voice signal strength only, right?  I can't speak for my friend and his N5, but my signal strength is indicated in the top left since I use Signal Check Pro.  -102dBm LTE for me, which according to the scale puts me in the "good" range.

 

  • Better than -96dBm is a great signal
  • Between -97dBm and -107dBm is good
  • Between -108dBm and -114dBm is fair
  • Worse than -115dBm is poor

 

 

Nexus 5 and GS3 after the latest update show LTE signal strength in the bars because they can't operate LTE and CDMA at the same time. Even if it was showing voice signal, your LTE would be almost non-existent because LTE signal drops way before CDMA under the same conditions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nexus 5 and GS3 after the latest update show LTE signal strength in the bars because they can't operate LTE and CDMA at the same time. Even if it was showing voice signal, you LTE would be almost non-existent because LTE signal drops way before CDMA under the same conditions.

Huh, didn't know that.  I thought Bars was voice only.  Still learn something new everyday on this board. :) I updated my Android a couple weeks ago so there ya go.  Obviously, I am not pleased with such a low LTE signal, especially knowing from NV sites complete there are 3 LTE towers 1500 feet or less from my location.  I am beginning to think Spark deployment and a Spark phone is the only thing that can save me, but its expensive.  I can do some speed testing with stronger signals when I get on the EL platform later or while walking home, but in my experience even with better LTE signal strengths I have still been seeing ISDN like throughput's, 50-200K IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nexus 5 and GS3 after the latest update show LTE signal strength in the bars because they can't operate LTE and CDMA at the same time. Even if it was showing voice signal, your LTE would be almost non-existent because LTE signal drops way before CDMA under the same conditions.

Even if GS3 shows LTE bars, its still connected to 1x at the same time. Nexus 5 supports circuit switched fallback. If GS3 couldn't operate LTE and 1x at the same time, you wouldn't receive any phone calls. If I am mistaken about the GS3, feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if GS3 shows LTE bars, its still connected to 1x at the same time. Nexus 5 supports circuit switched fallback. If GS3 couldn't operate LTE and 1x at the same time, you wouldn't receive any phone calls. If I am mistaken about the GS3, feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure. 

 

I know that. I made an edit to my previous post without changing that. Initially instead of GS3 it said G2. The GS3 is connected to 1x at the same time. My point was simply that the bars on devices that are on 4.2 or higher show LTE signal strength instead of 1x signal strength.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice! My Chicagoland G2 is still waiting for Spark. Are there particular settings or updates I need to make to my phone to prep it for the Spark update?

 

 

Is this hyperbole, or are their lte connections literally slower than dial-up? Though it might not be blowing my hair back, my B25 lte connection is pretty snappy.

 

 

Someone hasn't been to Cicero in a while, amigos.

 

 

Doesn't help that you and your friend has 0-1 bar(s) of signal.

 

So I stepped outside my building to get a better LTE signal and run some speed tests.  Not recommended as its 27 degrees with 40 MPH winds right now, but welcome to Chicago winter.  Anyway, so as I was alluding to earlier, when I go outdoors and my signal strength improves I get between 50-200K in and around downtown Chicago and surrounding neighborhoods.  I did two tests standing at the corner of Washington & Clinton around 3PM.  One with -74dBM LTE, received 50K DL, one with -62 dbM, received 200K DL.  Thats pretty typical for the performance of 1900LTE over the last 4-5 months around here.  Like I said before, I am sure our suburban folks have a different story to tell, but that's not my domain. 

 

If anyone else has other stories to tell from different parts of the city I would love to hear.

50K Test.png

200K Test.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really still, ya know Robert made an update to the LTE800 maps.  A huge upgrade at that.  Go take a look again, I believe there is one site in your hood that may be active.  And to everyone else, I recently donated enough to become a Premier Sponsor, with the information and maps on LTE2600 and LTE800 it is will worth the investment.  I highly recommend,  I think that investment alone has changed my 2014 attitude about Sprint after looking at some of the maps. :tu:

 

That accepted site is a TOY cell.  TOY cells are located inside MSC and DDC's.  They rarely have a usable signal outside.  Here is some more info on TOY's:  http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/2401-network-visionlte-hawaii-market-including-honolulu-oahu-and-all-hawaiian-islands/?p=265057

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I stepped outside my building to get a better LTE signal and run some speed tests.  Not recommended as its 27 degrees with 40 MPH winds right now, but welcome to Chicago winter.  Anyway, so as I was alluding to earlier, when I go outdoors and my signal strength improves I get between 50-200K in and around downtown Chicago and surrounding neighborhoods.  I did two tests standing at the corner of Washington & Clinton around 3PM.  One with -74dBM LTE, received 50K DL, one with -62 dbM, received 200K DL.  Thats pretty typical for the performance of 1900LTE over the last 4-5 months around here.  Like I said before, I am sure our suburban folks have a different story to tell, but that's not my domain. 

 

If anyone else has other stories to tell from different parts of the city I would love to hear.

 

I really don't want this thread to become a place of every Sprint member in Chicago who can find a bad spot on the network to go into excruciating details and post tons of speedtests.

 

I think the problems in Chicago are already well documented.  The issue is in Sprint's hands.  We will have to see if they get another PCS LTE carrier deployed on new USCC spectrum soon, or at least get Band 26 fired up.  We know that Band 41 provides wonderful relief in Chicago where it is available.  IIWU, I would be using only a Trband device in a place like Chicago.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...IIWU, I would be using only a Trband device in a place like Chicago.

 

Robert

It has made a world of difference for me. Now I get blazing speeds at work AND home. Excellent. I ditched my Apple loyalty for triband and it was kind of worth it.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't want this thread to become a place of every Sprint member in Chicago who can find a bad spot on the network to go into excruciating details and post tons of speedtests.

 

I think the problems in Chicago are already well documented.  The issue is in Sprint's hands.  We will have to see if they get another PCS LTE carrier deployed on new USCC spectrum soon, or at least get Band 26 fired up.  We know that Band 41 provides wonderful relief in Chicago where it is available.  IIWU, I would be using only a Trband device in a place like Chicago.

 

Robert

Alright I will cool it on the speed tests.  Though I am still curious if experiences are vastly different neighborhood to neighborhood, not just burbs to city.

 

I am on the same thought process as you on Tri-Band.  Unfortunately, budgetary constrains don't allow me to make an out of pocket upgrade to Tri-Band device and I got 10 long months to go until I can upgrade.  I keep telling myself, oh you had to take that two week vacation across Europe and now you are stuck with the dang GS3 from 2012. Oh well, trip was worth it.  I have already told my Tri-Band friends with N5's to hang in there for the relief on B41, they are waiting for the MSL push for live B41.  And I have also encouraged them to get their a$$es to this site and become a (premier) sponsor so they can reap some knowledge and stop bothering me for explanations (which sometimes are wrong).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has made a world of difference for me. Now I get blazing speeds at work AND home. Excellent. I ditched my Apple loyalty for triband and it was kind of worth it.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

What is your in building coverage/speed like while connected to B41.  Not just your home, but shopping centers, grocery stores, office buildings, high rises.....I am really curious Vince.  And don't make me take you to a Bulls game to find out how it works inside a stadium like the UC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is your in building coverage/speed like while connected to B41. Not just your home, but shopping centers, grocery stores, office buildings, high rises.....I am really curious Vince. And don't make me take you to a Bulls game to find out how it works inside a stadium like the UC!

Unfortunately, I don't go indoors much in Chicago. I'm a truck driver, so I'm constantly moving throughout the south side. I spend my off days near my home in the western burbs where there is really zero band 41, but 25 is excellent mostly everywhere I go (except oakbrook). I have to use my phone to look up locations and get directions every night while at my terminal near 47th and Pulaski. Typical speeds there are a pathetic 100kbps, and it takes forever to do this every night. Last night was my first night with triband, and I was cruising along at 17mbps with -111dBm (wow). The way 41 performs with weak signal at cellular edge is very impressive, and even more impressive with good signal. If you're near a 41 tower, it should work ok inside a building. And btw, I'm not made of money either, but this g2 was 0 down, 21/month which is fine because I saved 60/month by having a framily of 10.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I don't go indoors much in Chicago. I'm a truck driver, so I'm constantly moving throughout the south side. I spend my off days near my home in the western burbs where there is really zero band 41, but 25 is excellent mostly everywhere I go (except oakbrook). I have to use my phone to look up locations and get directions every night while at my terminal near 47th and Pulaski. Typical speeds there are a pathetic 100kbps, and it takes forever to do this every night. Last night was my first night with triband, and I was cruising along at 17mbps with -111dBm (wow). The way 41 performs with weak signal at cellular edge is very impressive, and even more impressive with good signal. If you're near a 41 tower, it should work ok inside a building. And btw, I'm not made of money either, but this g2 was 0 down, 21/month which is fine because I saved 60/month by having a framily of 10.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

Very interesting thanks for the info.  Interesting about Oak Brook and your 47th/Pulaski locations, I don't see any holes in LTE coverage near either location.  Everything is lite up.  Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting thanks for the info.  Interesting about Oak Brook and your 47th/Pulaski locations, I don't see any holes in LTE coverage near either location.  Everything is lite up.  Any thoughts?

 

Please never count on Sprint LTE coverage maps for anything but for comedic diversions.  :td:

 

Robert

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned in AJ's article about the USCC spectrum deal, it is always advantageous to have your spectrum holdings be as contiguous as possible, as spectrum dedicated to guard bands can instead be used by the network to carry voice or data traffic. Seeing that very soon the number of PCS operators in Chicagoland will decline from 6 5 to 4 (not including the new H block licensee), it seems timely to evaluate how the remaining cellular providers can work together to improve all of their positions in this market. I'm sure similar deals could be struck in other areas as well.

 

Here is the current (post-USCC) allocation of PCS in Chicago, as of February 1, 2014:

 

A: 1850–1865 MHz x 1930–1945 MHz- AT&T*

D: 1865–1870 MHz x 1945–1950 MHz- Sprint

B (lower 20 MHz): 1870–1880 MHz x 1950–1960 MHz- Sprint (from USCC)

B (upper 10 MHz): 1880-1885 MHz x 1960-1965 MHz- VZW

E: 1885–1890 MHz x 1965–1970 MHz- Sprint

F: 1890–1895 MHz x 1970–1975 MHz- AT&T

C: 1895–1910 MHz x 1975–1990 MHz- TMUS

G: 1910–1915 MHz x 1990–1995 MHz- Sprint

    

If my calculations are correct, this would give Sprint room for 6 CDMA carriers (which is what they have now) and *two* more 5 MHz FDD LTE carriers, including guard bands. With that much LTE capacity, the current number of CDMA Ev-DO carriers would likely be adequate. If only one additional LTE carrier is needed, then the remaining spectrum could be used for a handful of extra 1xA or Ev-DO carriers.

 

Sprint will need to maintain the existing 5MHz LTE G block carrier for quite some time, thanks to the large number of Samsung devices in use that were never certified for larger channel widths. As such, the no-merger proposal does not bother to ask T-Mobile to move from the adjoining C block. If the time comes when Sprint is interested in merging the C and G blocks for a wider LTE carrier, they may be able to persuade T-Mobile to swap their 30 MHz C block for the 30 MHz B block, assuming the companies have not merged by then.

 

Sprint currently can run 6 1xA/EVDO channels (3 each in the D and E blocks they currently have). Once the USCC network is shut down, Sprint can put up to 7 CDMA carriers (1xA or EVDO) into the B block spectrum formerly occupied by USCC. They gain an extra carrier by being able to straddle adjoining 5Mhz spectrum slices.

 

I like an even swap of the D block for the F block, it's a win-win for both parties so their is no reason it should cost either party any money. Once that is done Sprint will have a 10x10 availble in the E & F blocks available for LTE.  I'm not keen on paying Verizon to move out of the B block though, because it doesn't gain Sprint much of anything. If they merge with TMUS, then you just divest the B block eventually anyhow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please never count on Sprint LTE coverage maps for anything but for comedic diversions.   :td:

 

Robert

When I said I didn't see any LTE holes in coverage I meant by the NV Sites complete map, but I didn't want to be that specific b/c I am still confused on what I can reference from sections that are for paying customers.  Was just hoping Vince inferred that cuz he knows I am PREMIER NOW!!!! :D

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said I didn't see any LTE holes in coverage I meant by the NV Sites complete map, but I didn't want to be that specific b/c I am still confused on what I can reference from sections that are for paying customers. Was just hoping Vince inferred that cuz he knows I am PREMIER NOW!!!! :D

Premier shows coverage areas per tower? That's fantastic

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like an even swap of the D block for the F block, it's a win-win for both parties so their is no reason it should cost either party any money. Once that is done Sprint will have a 10x10 availble in the E & F blocks available for LTE.  I'm not keen on paying Verizon to move out of the B block though, because it doesn't gain Sprint much of anything. If they merge with TMUS, then you just divest the B block eventually anyhow.

A little off topic for this forum but I am dying to know why Sprint errr Softbank I guess, wants to buy TMobile.  When ATT wanted TMobile they wanted their spectrum, and they had compatible networks to absorb their subscribers.  Sprint has already made a series of acquisitions designed to gain spectrum assets (Nextel & Clearwire & USCC midwest) and fulfill their LTE goto market strategy of Network Vision and Tri Band LTE.

 

I don't understand what Sprint wants from TMobile, does Sprint really want Tmobile's AWS that bad?  Because I doubt they want the HSPA and HSPA+ network that bad, it isn't compatible with anything Sprint has.  Am I missing something here?  Is this just a move to remove a competitor?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Premier shows coverage areas per tower? That's fantastic

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOOOO, man u guys are making me look like a dummy, well not that its that hard to do.  I was just saying those locations Vince was talking about are NOT some of those remaining 3G only holes on the NV Sites complete map for Chicago.  Those locations are all surrounded by LTE sites so I wasn't sure why his service was bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said I didn't see any LTE holes in coverage I meant by the NV Sites complete map, but I didn't want to be that specific b/c I am still confused on what I can reference from sections that are for paying customers.  Was just hoping Vince inferred that cuz he knows I am PREMIER NOW!!!! :D

Premier shows coverage areas per tower? That's fantastic , Can you post the link?  ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oakbrook, more specifically has basically one tower to serve a massive stretch of business and dozens of high rise office buildings along butterfield between Meyers and Midwest roads. It's a matter of capacity not coverage.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And no. Sponsor maps don't show specific coverage of areas. Just towers. Like Robert said, disregard Sprint maps. Sensorly is still your best coverage tool especially since so many s4gru users have mapped massive amounts of cities.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little off topic for this forum but I am dying to know why Sprint errr Softbank I guess, wants to buy TMobile.  When ATT wanted TMobile they wanted their spectrum, and they had compatible networks to absorb their subscribers.  Sprint has already made a series of acquisitions designed to gain spectrum assets (Nextel & Clearwire & USCC midwest) and fulfill their LTE goto market strategy of Network Vision and Tri Band LTE.

 

I don't understand what Sprint wants from TMobile, does Sprint really want Tmobile's AWS that bad?  Because I doubt they want the HSPA and HSPA+ network that bad, it isn't compatible with anything Sprint has.  Am I missing something here?  Is this just a move to remove a competitor?

 

The only reason I can see to buy them is for the customers. They must know that a combined company will be required to make spectrum concessions, and as you said, I don't think Sprint wants to maintain two separate networks. Thus the only possible reason I see for acquiring TMUS is for the customers. IMHO it might be less expensive, although much slower, to grow organically, but I think that is the main motivation.

 

I think Softbank would like a Sprint that is closer in size to the big two. If nothing else, it would mean better leverage when negotiating site leases, backhaul, and equipment. I'm sure there are also efficiencies to be gained by eliminating redundant site locations.

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

    • Bribery. No discussion yet on whether the two laws will be revoked (which should happen). https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/05/att-paid-bribes-to-get-two-major-pieces-of-legislation-passed-us-govt-says/
    • https://www.fierce-network.com/wireless/t-mobiles-appetite-more-25-ghz-alive-and-well?__cf_chl_tk=E8B8E2cXIEfkSd2I6oKIMlE1.2OR2YbUh7Dl9Kkt_Os-1715722620-0.0.1.1-1770 Discusses pending deal for more 2.5Ghz for T-Mobile that may ultimately benefit AT&T.
    • If they're splitting it up, there's nothing stopping T-Mobile from doing a deal first and then the rest of the company being bought by Verizon or AT&T at a later date.  I can't see why you'd have to have both lined up at once. I'm reminded of when nTelos shut down.  They sold off the PCS spectrum they had in the "eastern market" (Richmond/Norfolk) to T-Mobile where they didn't have the Sprint deal first, and then later did the sale to Sprint and Shentel. - Trip
    • Reportedly Verizon has backed out, but that could be a negotiating tactic. T-Mobile needs another purchaser. They are doing a mmWave spectrum swap with AT&T, so maybe them. Could always go with a spectrum speculator.  The duo may not want the debt on their books until 2026.  I think the towers and customers may be dumped (handled separately).
    • I'm wondering which geographic areas T-Mobile might be interested in obtaining, or if it's strictly a spectrum sale of some kind.  In Virginia, US Cellular got three of the B41 licenses, including two in areas I frequent.  These two are in an area where US Cellular is severely spectrum constrained--just one block of CLR (B5) and one 5x5 in AWS-3 (B66), all running LTE.  (So 10x10 and 5x5.  Select towers also have B48 LTE on them, which is clearly at least 20 dB weaker than B5/66.)  I could definitely see interest from T-Mobile in the B41 licenses, but would have a hard time picturing US Cellular trying to continue serving these areas if it can't use spectrum to beef up its already-overwhelmed cell sites with more capacity.  (They keep adding towers to this very rural area to make up for it.)  Would T-Mobile buy out the area entirely to get a hold of the B41 licenses (and the B66 couldn't hurt either)?  Given US Cellular's strangehold over the area, would it even sell in that eventuality?  And then what would happen to the B5 spectrum?  Lots of questions.  Got my fingers crossed for T-Mobile obtaining the area and keeping most or all of the sites, as it could quickly and easily make reliable rural broadband a thing in the area, especially given how the Shentel merger went.  But I really have no sense of how likely it actually is. - Trip
  • Recently Browsing

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