Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Chicago Market


thesickness069

Recommended Posts

By far the biggest multiquote I have seen!! ;) There are 3 stepper motors located at the bottom of each panel to adjust the downtilt.

 

Inside the antenna, I presume? The pictures I took don't seem to indicate there is anything like that external to the antenna.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

AT&T's LTE is likely running on 700 MHz, while Sprint's currently is on 1900. When they deploy 800 MHz LTE, that advantage will largely be gone. It'll still play a role when at the edge of their license area.

 

 

Really digging for quotes are we? Haha. Just FYI, this information has been posted before, possibly in this thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Inside the antenna, I presume? The pictures I took don't seem to indicate there is anything like that external to the antenna.

 

Nope. They bolt on to the bottom. Dig around this site and you will see close up pictures of the three ACUs on the bottom.

Even other carriers use these on their newer panels but they only have 2 ACUs on the bottom.

 

I haven't seen Sprint using them but I also heard that there are azimuth control units as well for panels.

 

Sent from a little old Note 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. They bolt on to the bottom. Dig around this site and you will see close up pictures of the three ACUs on the bottom.

Even other carriers use these on their newer panels but they only have 2 ACUs on the bottom.

 

I haven't seen Sprint using them but I also heard that there are azimuth control units as well for panels.

 

Sent from a little old Note 2

 

 

The pictures I took of a NV site I was at have nothing in them indicating the ability to remotely control the azimuth or elevation (downtilt) of the entire antenna. If Sprint is using something like this, it must be internal. Next time I'm on a NV site, I'll take more detailed pictures of the Sprint equipment.

 

https://plus.google.com/photos/113290727794626880879/albums/5815120670046143473

 

 

Really digging for quotes are we? Haha. Just FYI, this information has been posted before, possibly in this thread?

 

New to the site, so I haven't viewed all threads. That information was portrayed in this thread, but I put it another way and added some more information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pictures I took of a NV site I was at have nothing in them indicating the ability to remotely control the azimuth or elevation (downtilt) of the entire antenna. If Sprint is using something like this, it must be internal. Next time I'm on a NV site, I'll take more detailed pictures of the Sprint equipment.

 

https://plus.google....120670046143473

 

 

 

 

New to the site, so I haven't viewed all threads. That information was portrayed in this thread, but I put it another way and added some more information.

 

Wow detailed pic's... What do you do for a living if you don't mind me asking??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow detailed pic's... What do you do for a living if you don't mind me asking??

 

I operate a Fixed Wireless Broadband company (WISP). At the time I was inspecting the site to verify it was a suitable location for a turn-key private microwave backhaul for a customer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I operate a Fixed Wireless Broadband company (WISP). At the time I was inspecting the site to verify it was a suitable location for a turn-key private microwave backhaul for a customer.

 

Well, excellent pictures. Most detailed views of an NV site I believe I've ever seen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, excellent pictures. Most detailed views of an NV site I believe I've ever seen.

 

 

Thanks.

 

 

*nods* If I was interested in the Sprint gear at the time, I would have grabbed more detailed pictures. I was just after an overview of the site including what types of antennas were pointing what directions, what poles were available, did those poles have LOS to the intended sites, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pictures I took of a NV site I was at have nothing in them indicating the ability to remotely control the azimuth or elevation (downtilt) of the entire antenna. If Sprint is using something like this, it must be internal. Next time I'm on a NV site, I'll take more detailed pictures of the Sprint equipment.

 

https://plus.google....120670046143473

 

 

 

 

New to the site, so I haven't viewed all threads. That information was portrayed in this thread, but I put it another way and added some more information.

 

Wow...that site is a mess! Loved the upside down ubiquiti radio. The hell with the drip loop, just mount it upside down and put enough weather seal on it right?

 

I didn't see any in your pictures but didn't really see the bottom of the new panels either. Looks like it wasn't a full 1900/800/1900 site though.

 

Here's a picture of what they are installing in the Ericsson areas. This is the exact equipment down to the panel pictured towards the bottom that Sprint is using.

 

http://www.rfsworld.com/websearch/DataSheets/media/?q=images%2FSite_Optimization_Products%2FACU_Installation_V6_Mar12.pdf

 

Sprint doesn't use any remote azimuth adjustment equipment that I am aware of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, one of the WISPs is leaving the site and I think is less than inspired to maintain organization.

 

I'll be installing my dishes with care. ;-)

 

*nods* I'll take better pictures when I'm back. I wasn't worried about the Sprint stuff when I was there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, latency is part of the overall results of the speed test, so while my IP can place me in Kansas, I have the feeling that if I test through Chicago, I will get a better ping because I can't beat physics. However, I have no doubt that the download/upload speed shouldn't suffer (much) due to the increased distance assuming that the server's capacity and bandwidth are sufficient.

 

Due to how TCP functions, latency plays a big role. Latency, jitter (worse on mobile networks), packet loss, etc. all affect what you can get.

 

Just because you are physically located in say Bozeman, Montana doesn't mean the Bozeman server would offer the best performance. Your provider may haul you all the way back to Westin in Seattle before interconnecting with other carriers and thus to the speedtest site. To bring a bit more localness to it, if he is in Arlington Heights, his signal will travel to the MSC (or LTE core) responsible for that site (LTE cores do make it more interesting because they're dynamic). From there it travels over Sprint's network (this part I'm fuzzy on) to wherever Sprint interfaces with the rest of the world. In Chicago, these locations are likely 600 S. Federal and 350 E. Cermak. If a speedtest server sitting on a network that BGP currently prefers is in Joliet, that is where you're likely to get the best performance. It is a lot further away than an Arlington Heights server, but how the Internet is connected is a much bigger factor than physical location. My credentials for this are that I have my own ISP with microwave backhaul and I have equipment in the major Internet exchange points in Chicago.

 

 

First of all, my post sounded more than a little arrogant, so I apologize for that. I had no doubt that you knew what you were talking about; despite your low post count (at the time of the post), it was pretty obvious that you knew a thing or two about network technology. You may have resurrected a lot of old posts, but at least you made use of the “MultiQuote” feature here and obviously have a genuine desire to contribute and not artificially increase your post count.

 

As for your explanation, thanks! I think I have an idea what you’re saying, but I’m still a little hazy on how the whole thing works. I was under the impression that a latency test was very distance-dependent (hence my “can’t beat physics” comment). As an example, here’s how I thought a latency test worked (and this is probably totally wrong):

 

Imagine a very long-distance, rudimentary network is set up between New York City and Los Angeles (straight-shot distance: ~2500 miles). If the network hardware itself somehow didn’t impact the test, the latency would still be a minimum of 27 ms (2500 mi / 186000 mi/s)*2. That number would go up because of the time it takes to change the signal from one form to another (wired -> microwave, for example).

 

As I wrote that, I began to realize that if you don’t take distance into account, you don’t get a true measure of how fast the network can get a response, which is what I think your explanation covers, right? If I’m in Arlington Heights and run a latency test to a server in Joliet, would the packet travel like this? Phone->Tower->MSC->BGP->Server->BGP->MSC->Tower->Phone. If so, is the latency a measurement of the time it takes to go from the BGP to the server and back to the BGP (bolded section)? Just to be clear, is the BGP the Sprint/Internet interface that you referenced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have an idea of when (or if) the hole around Wheaton is going to get some improved coverage? I get good 4G to the north, south, east and west of Wheaton, but for some reason, the bandwidth in Wheaton itself is really awful. It's actually kind of funny: the moment you cross the town line on Roosevelt, coverage drops to near zero. Wheaton has a history of throwing up red tape when it comes to infrastructure upgrades (see: Xfinity, power grid etc), I hope this isn't another example of NIMBYism.

Edited by Hiro11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have an idea of when (or if) the hole around Wheaton is going to get some improved coverage? I get good 4G to the north, south, east and west of Wheaton, but for some reason, the bandwidth in Wheaton itself is really awful. It's actually kind of funny: the moment you cross the town line on Roosevelt, coverage drops to near zero. Wheaton has a history of throwing up red tape when it comes to infrastructure upgrades (see: Xfinity, power grid etc), I hope this isn't another example of NIMBYism.

 

If - yes, there are several towers yet to be upgraded. The when part, that's trickier. It's hard to know where they are in the process. However, we do know that all the towers will be upgraded, that much you can count on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*blush* Thanks. ;-)

 

BGP is a protocol. More appropriate words in your depiction would be <Internet>. I'll spin this off to a new thread as to not clutter the Chicago thread with how the Internet works. ;-)

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...net-works-haha/

 

Haha, sorry… didn’t mean to come off so kiss-assy, I do appreciate the explanation, though! I look forward to reading that post!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If - yes, there are several towers yet to be upgraded. The when part, that's trickier. It's hard to know where they are in the process. However, we do know that all the towers will be upgraded, that much you can count on.

 

Similar situation.

 

I'm 2,125 feet away from a NV tower that has not had any work done yet and am still at 3G at home. Insult to injury, I'm surrounded by about 20 LTE towers within a 5 mile radius.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similar situation.

 

I'm 2,125 feet away from a NV tower that has not had any work done yet and am still at 3G at home. Insult to injury, I'm surrounded by about 20 LTE towers within a 5 mile radius.

 

How can you be " 2,125 feet away from a NV tower that has not had any work done yet?" If it hasn't had any work done yet, it's not an NV tower....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tower is on Robert's Network Vision Site Map, and missing from his NV Complete Sites map for the Chicago area...

 

Ah, well the first map is just a map of all Sprint sites. Every Sprint site is getting upgrades, so in that sense, every site in the US will be a NV site.

 

However, since it's not on the complete sites, then I wouldn't consider it to be a NV site yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today in Daley Plaza at the Kristkindlmarket there was hundreds of people if not some thousands. There was no LTE but 3G was getting .4 mbps down and about 100 kbps up. took a few minutes each to send an MMS (as opposed to taking forever to not even being able to send one). Not bad for so many people and being downtown! One block over on State street outside Macy's ( Fields) I had LTE and got good speeds (didn't test them)

 

Inside Fields was another story, they apparently have no DAS in their basement!? I could only get service in the cafeteria and near the main escalators, kinda annoying as just a few months prior I got full service all over that building on AT&T...speaking of that a family member i was with had 4 bars of AT&T LTE down there...

I was able to get somewhat usable internet speeds where I did have service in their basement though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. There was not a single whiff of 4G, even though on Sensorly and Sprint's map there should be coverage, I get 4G in most places around the Chicago Loop now. There wasn't even any 3G service. The whole time the phone was in 3G everything timed out and then it would reset the 3G signal every seconds. Couldn't send a text, make a call, look up a score, use an app.....nothing. In fact the only time I could, is when the phone went into 3G roaming. At that point I could at least send a text or use twitter. Im appalled that my phone went to and needed to go into 3G roaming in Chicago's lakefront, now months after Network Vision. When this first happened two months ago I said, OK fine, its Network Vision, it will take a little pain to get better. Now two months later, with 4G basically everywhere I go in the city now, the service is still non existent at Soldier Field for 60K+ people on gameday. Inexcusable.

 

As a follow up I remembered I have never had a problem with my service at other Chicago events; White Sox, Bulls, Cubs games, street festivals, taste of Chicago, etc etc. In fact service has been quite reliable in and around Chicago for years, the Soldier Field issue is now repeatable and expected, thats bad. Also remember, I was there with other people on different networks, Verizon and AT&T, there phones were working just fine, no timeouts, no roaming, no constant 3G/4G switching or looking for signal. CH25XC046 is on 19th St and Lake Shore Dr, about two blocks south of Solider Field, CH50XC945 is on 14th and Wabash, about 4 blocks west of the Stadium. So there should be adequate coverage, perhaps there is an issue with those towers, if not I am suggesting that there is, or that those towers do not provide enough capacity for the Museum Campus area, at least not on gamedays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. There was not a single whiff of 4G, even though on Sensorly and Sprint's map there should be coverage, I get 4G in most places around the Chicago Loop now. There wasn't even any 3G service. The whole time the phone was in 3G everything timed out and then it would reset the 3G signal every seconds. Couldn't send a text, make a call, look up a score, use an app.....nothing. In fact the only time I could, is when the phone went into 3G roaming. At that point I could at least send a text or use twitter. Im appalled that my phone went to and needed to go into 3G roaming in Chicago's lakefront, now months after Network Vision. When this first happened two months ago I said, OK fine, its Network Vision, it will take a little pain to get better. Now two months later, with 4G basically everywhere I go in the city now, the service is still non existent at Soldier Field for 60K+ people on gameday. Inexcusable.

 

As a follow up I remembered I have never had a problem with my service at other Chicago events; White Sox, Bulls, Cubs games, street festivals, taste of Chicago, etc etc. In fact service has been quite reliable in and around Chicago for years, the Soldier Field issue is now repeatable and expected, thats bad. Also remember, I was there with other people on different networks, Verizon and AT&T, there phones were working just fine, no timeouts, no roaming, no constant 3G/4G switching or looking for signal. CH25XC046 is on 19th St and Lake Shore Dr, about two blocks south of Solider Field, CH50XC945 is on 14th and Wabash, about 4 blocks west of the Stadium. So there should be adequate coverage, perhaps there is an issue with those towers, if not I am suggesting that there is, or that those towers do not provide enough capacity for the Museum Campus area, at least not on gamedays.

 

There are still several sites around Soldier Field that have not received LTE upgrades, and none of the sites in the area have had 3G upgrades yet. I would image that once the remaining sites have been upgraded to LTE, and the 3G enhancements finally are made, you experience will get better. That said, without and in-stadium system, the number of people attending a game can easily overwhelm the nearby towers. I'm not sure how well the towers will operate under that stress if there is in fact no stadium system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still several sites around Soldier Field that have not received LTE upgrades, and none of the sites in the area have had 3G upgrades yet. I would image that once the remaining sites have been upgraded to LTE, and the 3G enhancements finally are made, you experience will get better. That said, without and in-stadium system, the number of people attending a game can easily overwhelm the nearby towers. I'm not sure how well the towers will operate under that stress if there is in fact no stadium system.

 

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.

 

Sensorly.jpg

Sensorly.jpg

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

    • Throwed Roll Lambert's Cafe 
    • I've now seen how things work in Kobe, Hiroshima, and Osaka, as well as some areas south of Osaka (e.g. Wakayama, Kinokawa), and tried three more SIMs. The two physical SIMs (different branding for each) both use IIJ, which provides a Japanese IP address/routing on NTT, aleit LTE-only, so latency is ~45ms to Tokyo. The catch with NTT is that it uses two frequency bands (B42/3500 MHz LTE, n79/4900 MHz NR) that you're not going to get on an Android sold in the US, and I'm guessing that B42 would be helpful speed-wise on that network, as it doesn't have B41. I also found one place that doesn't have cell service: a vending machine in the back of the Osaka Castle tower. Or, rather, the B8/18/19 signal is weak enough there to be unusable. Going back to 5G for a moment, I saw a fair amount of Softbank n257 in Hiroshima, as well as in some train stations between Osaka and Kobe. 4x100 MHz bandwidth, anchored by B1/3/8, with speeds sometimes exceeding 400 Mbps on the US Mobile roaming eSIM. Not quite the speeds I've seen on mmW in the States, but I've probably been on mmW for more time over the past few days than I have in the US over the past year, so I'll take it. My fastest speed test was actually on SoftBank n77 though, with 100 MHz of that plus 10x10 B8 hitting ~700 Mbps down and ~80 Mbps up with ~100ms latency...on the roaming eSIM...on the 4th floor of the hotel near Shin-Kobe station. Guessing B8 was a DAS or small cell based on signal levels, and the n77 might have been (or was just a less-used sector of the site serving the train station). I'm now 99% sure that all three providers are running DSS on band 28, and I've seen 10x10 on similar frequencies from both NTT and SoftBank IIRC, on both LTE and 5G. I also picked up one more eSIM: my1010, which is different from 1010/csl used by US Mobile's eSIM unfortunately, as it's LTE-only. On the bright side, it's cheap (10GB/7 days is like $11, and 20GB for the same period would be around $15), and can use both KDDI and SoftBank LTE. It also egresses from Taiwan (Chunghwa Telecom), though latency isn't really any better than the Singapore based eSIMs. Tomorrow will include the most rural part of our journey, so we'll see how networks hold up there, and from tomorrow night on we'll be in Tokyo, so any further reports after that will be Tokyo-centric.
    • I think the push for them is adding US Mobile as a MVNO with a priority data plan.  Ultimately, making people more aware of priority would allow them (and other carriers) to differentiate themselves from MVNOs like Consumer Cellular that advertise the same coverage. n77 has dramatically reduced the need for priority service at Verizon where the mere functioning of your phone was in jeopardy a couple of years ago if you had a low priority plan like Red Pocket. Only have heard of problems with T-Mobile in parts of Los Angeles. AT&T fell in between. All had issues at large concerts and festivals, or sporting events if your carrier has no on-site rights. Edit: Dishes native 5g network has different issues: not enough sites, limited bandwidth. Higher priority would help a few. Truth is they can push phones to AT&T or T-Mobile.
    • Tracfone AT&T sims went from QCI 8 to 9 as well a couple years ago. I'm pretty neutral towards AT&T's turbo feature here, the only bad taste left was for those who had unadvertised QCI 7 a couple months ago moved down to 8. In my eyes it would have been a lot better for AT&T to include turbo in those Premium/Elite plans for free to keep them at QCI 7, while also introducing this turbo add on option for any other plans or devices. As it stands now only a handful of plans can add it, and only if you're using a device on a random list of devices AT&T considers to be 5G smartphones.
  • Recently Browsing

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