Sprint LTE coverage maps online @ sprint.com

[flyer8493]

I drove all through the orange on my way to work and at work in San Antonio and I haven't picked up anything yet.

[Rickie546]

I drove all through the orange on my way to work and at work in San Antonio and I haven't picked up anything yet.

 

Is your data mode set to LTE/CDMA? if so trying toggling that option, and or rebooting to see if that picks it up.

[Rickie546]

A bit disappointing, my part of town still has yet to be completed( I drove around). But even then, Although I have four towers within 2 miles of my house, coverage in the street is around -100dBm. LTE can't help that.

 

I had to get an Airave to make calls inside the house, but it's a piece of junk and has been replaced several times. It freezes up time to time as well and sends 10+ of the same text message to people. I guess it's a waiting game to see when they upgrade my area.

 

If I can just get better speeds away from home where I don't have wifi, I'll be happy. But right now, areas with full signal are still creeping at 56k speeds. I feel like i'm stuck in the 90s.

 

I'll be going into Houston tonight, will test the speeds/coverage there :-)

 

If you get 100 db right now, you might have something really workable when the NV comes, and even more when 800 mhz comes along, if you love the phone, hang out a bit longer and bet you will like it.

 

Rickie

[flyer8493]

 

Is your data mode set to LTE/CDMA? if so trying toggling that option, and or rebooting to see if that picks it up.

 

Yes, I have also updated my profile and toggled airplane mode. I rebooted by my house earlier today and it did not work. I won't make a huge fuss about it yet as it has not officially launched until tomorrow. I'm downtown right now and its up. Ill be patient it might take through tonight or longer for them to turn on the lte all over the city.

[Rickie546]

Yes, I have also updated my profile and toggled airplane mode. I rebooted by my house earlier today and it did not work. I won't make a huge fuss about it yet as it has not officially launched until tomorrow. I'm downtown right now and its up. Ill be patient it might take through tonight or longer for them to turn on the lte all over the city.

installed the htc software update??

[flyer8493]

installed the htc software update??

 

Yes

[Rickie546]

Yes

Ok i'm out of ideas..maybe tomorrow

[flyer8493]

Ok i'm out of ideas..maybe tomorrow

 

Lol, thx for the help anyways. I restarted and its in 4g now so all is good.

[S4GRU]

 

Yes' date=' I have also updated my profile and toggled airplane mode. I rebooted by my house earlier today and it did not work. I won't make a huge fuss about it yet as it has not officially launched until tomorrow. I'm downtown right now and its up. Ill be patient it might take through tonight or longer for them to turn on the lte all over the city.[/quote']

 

Yeah, it will not be ubiquitous and comprehensive coverage over the whole city. I'm glad Sprint turned it on now and not waiting for more coverage. More and more sites will be added every week. Adding more coverage and more capacity.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy S-III 32GB using Forum Runner

[Rickie546]

Lol, thx for the help anyways. I restarted and its in 4g now so all is good.

 

or maybe sprint did something

[ericdabbs]

Sprint updated their coverage maps to display LTE coverage. I wonder how often Sprint is going to update these coverage maps for each market since more and more tower sites will be added over time?

[drreif]

When will we start to see LTE-Advanced? I read somewhere that it should start showing up around 2013.

[ericdabbs]

When will we start to see LTE-Advanced? I read somewhere that it should start showing up around 2013.

 

I don't think we will see LTE-Advanced on Sprint until 2014 when Network Vision is complete.

[WiWavelength]

When will we start to see LTE-Advanced? I read somewhere that it should start showing up around 2013.

 

No kidding. LTE has been live for three days already. Yesterday's news. Blasé. Time to move on to the next big thing.

 

 

AJ

[jagerwick]

If you want a more specific look at LTE Coverage get your GPS location with something like GPS Logger for Android and input it at http://srv.so/sprint (Web app I made.).

 

Pretty nice little app, but how up to date is it?

I had 3G turned on in my town about 2 months ago and your app isn't reflecting that, just wanted to let ya know.

 

Looks good and works pretty quick though, good job.

[NiteSnow]

Pretty nice little app, but how up to date is it?

I had 3G turned on in my town about 2 months ago and your app isn't reflecting that, just wanted to let ya know.

 

Looks good and works pretty quick though, good job.

 

it pulls info directly from sprints website, it gets your location from a GeoIP database. If the location is wrong it's due to the GeoIP database being wrong or you ip having a different city registered to the ip/ip block. If it's displaying the wrong city you can get your gps coords from the speedtest.net app or gps logger.

 

EDIT: I did some searching through apache's logs and I found your ip, checked it against a GeoIP database and it shows you're covered with 3G. In the legend it says EVDO which is colored purple for your entire area. In short EVDO is 3G.

[Dees_Troy]

The coverage maps for LTE are very extensive.*

 

* Note, coverage maps not typical.

 

 

 

 

I know that the roll-out isn't complete, but the maps aren't even close to accurate in the Kansas City area. They show LTE coverage where there absolutely isn't any at all. I doubt if the coverage is even half what they're saying. There's some, but not a lot of coverage in Blue Springs and Independence. I traveled in and around Lee's Summit and found no LTE at all anywhere that I went. I didn't get any LTE west of Independence while travelling down I-70 until I got to downtown. Downtown appears to have one LTE tower that's probably up north close to the river, as best I can tell by the spotty connection that I managed to get to it.

 

Results based on a Galaxy Nexus, by the way.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Dees_Troy

[avb]

The coverage maps for LTE are very extensive.*

 

* Note, coverage maps not typical.

 

 

 

 

I know that the roll-out isn't complete, but the maps aren't even close to accurate in the Kansas City area. They show LTE coverage where there absolutely isn't any at all. I doubt if the coverage is even half what they're saying. There's some, but not a lot of coverage in Blue Springs and Independence. I traveled in and around Lee's Summit and found no LTE at all anywhere that I went. I didn't get any LTE west of Independence while travelling down I-70 until I got to downtown. Downtown appears to have one LTE tower that's probably up north close to the river, as best I can tell by the spotty connection that I managed to get to it.

 

Results based on a Galaxy Nexus, by the way.

 

It's the same here in Houston - it looks live Sprint's coverage maps just blanket an entire market where they have launched LTE instead of showing the actual coverage area.

[ChemicalArts]

 

It's the same here in Houston - it looks live Sprint's coverage maps just blanket an entire market where they have launched LTE instead of showing the actual coverage area.

 

If you want to see what sites are actually completed, just donate a few bucks to become a sponsor on S4GRU. You can see the NV site completion maps in that forum.

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

[avb]

If you want to see what sites are actually completed, just donate a few bucks to become a sponsor on S4GRU. You can see the NV site completion maps in that forum.

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

 

Look at my tag - I'm a sponsor. This thread is about Sprint's coverage map on Sprint's website, and that is what I commented on.

[ChemicalArts]

 

Look at my tag - I'm a sponsor. This thread is about Sprint's coverage map on Sprint's website, and that is what I commented on.

 

Sorry, I can't see the tag on tapatalk. I guess what I should've said is that the Sprint coverage map is not an accurate representation. The S4GRU information gives a better reflection of what's actually available.

 

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

[avb]

Sorry, I can't see the tag on tapatalk. I guess what I should've said is that the Sprint coverage map is not an accurate representation. The S4GRU information gives a better reflection of what's actually available.

 

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

 

No problem, I actually posted that reply pretty quickly, then after reading my post it sounded very snarky. It wasn't intended to come out that way.

 

But I do agree with you, anyone that wants more detailed information about completed towers should become a sponsor.

[boomerbubba]

Sorry, I can't see the tag on tapatalk. I guess what I should've said is that the Sprint coverage map is not an accurate representation. The S4GRU information gives a better reflection of what's actually available.

 

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

 

But we should understand that the S4GRU tower maps do not purport to be coverage maps, like Sprint's own maps do.

 

To compute geographical signal coverage for the towers, it would be necessary to use software that includes lots of other inputs, such as azimuths and downtilt angles for each sector on a tower, along with physical and man-made topography. I think there once was an ambitious goal in these parts to built such theoretical coverage maps using the resources at CloudRF.com, but that apparently was not feasible.

 

So we just have to tower points which are way better than nothing. And since Sprints coverage maps seem to be, uh, optimistic, having the actual tower sites is a good reality check.

[ChemicalArts]

 

No problem, I actually posted that reply pretty quickly, then after reading my post it sounded very snarky. It wasn't intended to come out that way.

 

But I do agree with you, anyone that wants more detailed information about completed towers should become a sponsor.

 

No problem. I wish Sprint was as good at communicating useful information as this site does. There's no reason they couldn't give information about which towers are upgraded and activated. They probably could prevent thousands of customer service phone calls simply by communicating clearly. That said, they're still better at customer communication than AT&T...but who isn't?

 

Sent from my GS3 on Tapatalk 2

[pyroscott]

But we should understand that the S4GRU tower maps do not purport to be coverage maps, like Sprint's own maps do.

 

To compute geographical signal coverage for the towers, it would be necessary to use software that includes lots of other inputs, such as azimuths and downtilt angles for each sector on a tower, along with physical and man-made topography. I think there once was an ambitious goal in these parts to built such theoretical coverage maps using the resources at CloudRF.com, but that apparently was not feasible.

 

So we just have to tower points which are way better than nothing. And since Sprints coverage maps seem to be, uh, optimistic, having the actual tower sites is a good reality check.

 

Yeah, it was taking a lot of time and money to create those maps. I think it was scrapped.