Jump to content

LTE Coverage Map - Lawrenceville, Georgia 8/16/2012


S4GRU

Recommended Posts

Sprint LTE-1900 Coverage Map of Lawrenceville, GA area as of 8/16/2012

 

gallery_1_1_78612.jpg

 

And for comparison, here is Sprint's overly optimistic LTE coverage for the area. I used actual Sprint data for tower heights and figured range (downtilt) for sectors based on using 2/3 of the distance to the next adjacent tower.

 

Robert

 

gallery_1_1_134731.jpg

 

There is an interactive version of our Coverage Map in our Sponsor section. You can read this thread for more information about how to become a S4GRU Sponsor. Sponsorship gets you access to even more content.

 

S4GRU coverage maps created using CloudRF.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint LTE-1900 Coverage Map of Lawrenceville, GA area as of 8/16/2012

 

gallery_1_1_78612.jpg

 

And for comparison, here is Sprint's overly optimistic LTE coverage for the area. I used actual Sprint data for tower heights and figured range (downtilt) for sectors based on using 2/3 of the distance to the next adjacent tower.

 

Robert

 

gallery_1_1_134731.jpg

 

There is an interactive version of our Coverage Map in our Sponsor section. You can read this thread for more information about how to become a S4GRU Sponsor. Sponsorship gets you access to even more content.

 

S4GRU coverage maps created using CloudRF.com

Robert..I am very concerned about this. Does this mean that Sprint's maps will always be erroneous like this and that LTE will remain just as spotty as wimax currently is (at least until 800 mhz LTE is turned on next year)?? Or do you anticipiate these holes filling in over time, even at 1900 mhz, to eventually more closely mirror Sprint's fantastically conjured up coverage maps? I just am wondering if it's going to get better in the short term or is this the way it's gonna be - extremely spotty LTE a la wimax - until the next gen 800 mhz LTE devices being shipping. Thanks in advance for your input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert..I am very concerned about this. Does this mean that Sprint's maps will always be erroneous like this and that LTE will remain just as spotty as wimax currently is (at least until 800 mhz LTE is turned on next year)?? Or do you anticipiate these holes filling in over time, even at 1900 mhz, to eventually more closely mirror Sprint's fantastically conjured up coverage maps? I just am wondering if it's going to get better in the short term or is this the way it's gonna be - extremely spotty LTE a la wimax - until the next gen 800 mhz LTE devices being shipping. Thanks in advance for your input.

 

Once all towers are upgraded and NV is complete, Sprint's maps will be accurate, however, right now Sprint is playing loose and fast with their coverage maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert..I am very concerned about this. Does this mean that Sprint's maps will always be erroneous like this and that LTE will remain just as spotty as wimax currently is (at least until 800 mhz LTE is turned on next year)?? Or do you anticipiate these holes filling in over time, even at 1900 mhz, to eventually more closely mirror Sprint's fantastically conjured up coverage maps? I just am wondering if it's going to get better in the short term or is this the way it's gonna be - extremely spotty LTE a la wimax - until the next gen 800 mhz LTE devices being shipping. Thanks in advance for your input.

 

You are conflating two different issues: The accuracy of Sprint's maps and the completeness of the coverage to date. The sprint maps are over-optimistic, as Robert has stated and demonstrated matter-of-factly,

 

But future coverage is not the same as current coverage. I will repeat my comment from the parallel sponsor thread on this very topic:

 

And let me add a too-obvious observation for the benefit of those just tuning in: Remember that the map reflects the coverage as of yesterday (8/16/2012) and the rollout is still a work in progress. If you eyeball the sites on the total project map next to this one, you can see that the big coverage holes typically include towers that are not complete yet. As I understand the limitations of the CloudRF tool, it might not be possible to display coverage in this area as complete because there would be too many towers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert..I am very concerned about this. Does this mean that Sprint's maps will always be erroneous like this and that LTE will remain just as spotty as wimax currently is (at least until 800 mhz LTE is turned on next year)?? Or do you anticipiate these holes filling in over time' date=' even at 1900 mhz, to eventually more closely mirror Sprint's fantastically conjured up coverage maps? I just am wondering if it's going to get better in the short term or is this the way it's gonna be - extremely spotty LTE a la wimax - until the next gen 800 mhz LTE devices being shipping. Thanks in advance for your input.[/quote']

 

Do not be concerned. Our map shows live coverage now, not expected coverage at completion. Sprint's LTE maps may be inaccurate, but that doesn't effect their network. In the Lawrenceville area depicted above, only approximately half of the sites are complete. There will be much more LTE coverage coming. The LTE network will be nothing like WiMax.

 

Sprint's LTE will be on more sites than the WiMax network. It will travel farther than WiMax. It will penetrate better than WiMax. Sprint LTE will be broadcast from almost every single site that 3G comes from now.

 

I also believe that Sprint will correct their coverage maps in the future. Poor coverage maps do not have any bearing on the fact that Atlanta is still an active deployment area. They are not even halfway done. More and more sites every week will be added to fill in the holes.

 

I'm just glad they are allowing us to use areas that are done now. But if Sprint could just learn the definition of the term launch.

 

I may create a complete build out coverage map of this area for your comparison, the next time I get a chance.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are conflating two different issues: The accuracy of Sprint's maps and the completeness of the coverage to date. The sprint maps are over-optimistic, as Robert has stated and demonstrated matter-of-factly,

 

But future coverage is not the same as current coverage. I will repeat my comment from the parallel sponsor thread on this very topic:

I am cleary very well aware that the future coverage isn't the same as current coverage. I think that speaks for itself. I am also clearly very well aware that it's been stated before that Sprint's maps are not exactly accurate. That was not the meat of my question so no need to repeat it. My question was will the holes fill in at the currently used 1900 mhz or will it require the use of the 800 mhz spectrum to match what Sprint shows. I think that was clear if you read the entire post I made (which really wasn't that long).

 

The forums are here for discussion so it seems a wild waste of time to take offense to said discussion. Thanks for you information anyway but my question still stands.

 

Edit: There was a delay in receiving your response, Robert, due to my faulty Comcast here at my house. My response here above wasn't directed at you, FYI. Thanks for your explanation by the way.

Edited by JonnygATL
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

  • Posts

    • https://www.androidauthority.com/t-mobile-sales-tactics-employee-interview-3460125/   From the "Uncarrier" to Carrier....
    • Another SCP beta is rolling out now, with some bugfixes as usual but also some fun new options to test: Non-standalone 5G-NR cells can now display Site Notes. This feature works in the same manner as how neighbor cell notes are displayed, requiring a PCI and your device's location. This option is enabled by default. As is the case with neighbor cell notes, you cannot edit NSA site notes directly unless there is an NCI being reported (which I have never seen); it uses the previously recorded standalone log entries. Like neighbor notes, if a cell has been previously logged but there is no note, you will see the distance information only.   Logging cells that are not reporting a valid PLMN is now possible. This option is disabled by default, but if you enable it along with two other options (log sites with missing GCI/NCI and to log sites with missing TAC), you should begin logging most NSA 5G-NR cells. A PCI is needed at a minimum, which is not always reported depending on your device and network factors. ("Sites" will be renamed to "cells" on the Preferences menu in the next update.)   Users can enable an option to display LTE cells above 5G-NR cells in the app if they choose to do so. This option is disabled by default. Should help improve the readability of your screen if you have NSA 5G-NR cells constantly appearing/disappearing. Please give these options a try and let me know if you notice any issues.. thanks!
    • Not yet. We probably won't see one submitted until construction on the new building is substantially complete. 
    • Yes, that is where the site used to be. All the antennas were removed. I hope they add a new site soon. Have any permits been submitted for a new site?
    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
  • Recently Browsing

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