Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Albuquerque market (including El Paso, Las Cruces, Santa Fe, Los Alamos, Roswell)


S4GRU

Recommended Posts

This is in otero county NM ... it right at the state line of nm and Texas on a military base ..the closest LTE tower is in chaparral nm 6.7 miles away, but I really get a low DBm signal on 3G.. so I figured that's would be the tower

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's not saying new towers aren't needed. B26 could also help.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not saying new towers aren't needed. B26 could also help.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

This was in reference to the tower I posted that dead smack on the base .. it show a low signal on the DBM's . So, I thought that tower I posted a pic of was a sprint tower

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is in otero county NM ... it right at the state line of nm and Texas on a military base ..the closest LTE tower is in chaparral nm 6.7 miles away, but I really get a low DBm signal on 3G.. so I figured that's would be the tower

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We do have maps of all Sprint sites in the Sponsors section, have you considered a donation to help the site continue to exist and also get access to those maps?

 

I did find a site that I did not notice before. It appears there is no NV information for this site so it may be fully legacy. It appears to be located next to a water tower and other cell sites. I do not believe it was the site that you pictured.

 

2017-08-02_15-38-16.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have maps of all Sprint sites in the Sponsors section, have you considered a donation to help the site continue to exist and also get access to those maps?

 

I did find a site that I did not notice before. It appears there is no NV information for this site so it may be fully legacy. It appears to be located next to a water tower and other cell sites. I do not believe it was the site that you pictured.

 

2017-08-02_15-38-16.png

I sure would like to if I can get info on that ...

and that's the area. The one that's squared in red are top Verizon bottom at&t .. the one of the right is the pics I sent in

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sure would like to if I can get info on that ...

and that's the area. The one that's squared in red are top Verizon bottom at&t .. the one of the right is the pics I sent in

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The information we have specifically indicates the one in the red box. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have maps of all Sprint sites in the Sponsors section, have you considered a donation to help the site continue to exist and also get access to those maps?

 

I did find a site that I did not notice before. It appears there is no NV information for this site so it may be fully legacy. It appears to be located next to a water tower and other cell sites. I do not believe it was the site that you pictured.

 

2017-08-02_15-38-16.png

7270cd1352b8fd0fbfae8bf640548923.jpg

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well, the one on the left in that image appears to have equipment similar to Sprint NV on it, but as you said it may be AT&T. It is possible that the reason I can't pin-point the Sprint site is because it is still using legacy antennas that I don't recognize, so it may be possible it was the site you originally posted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Second source also shows that the site in the red box is the one to look at.

 

Additionally, the taller, now empty looking sites appears to have been a Nextel site at one time.

Could be .. I know that at&t are running 3xca here on base and Verizon is running 2xca T-Mobile no service and sprint 3G only ... would sprint upgrade a site like this to LTE

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be .. I know that at&t are running 3xca here on base and Verizon is running 2xca T-Mobile no service and sprint 3G only ... would sprint upgrade a site like this to LTE

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the tower provides a signal they should add LTE.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be .. I know that at&t are running 3xca here on base and Verizon is running 2xca T-Mobile no service and sprint 3G only ... would sprint upgrade a site like this to LTE

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It should be upgraded at some point, though it is odd the coverage map doesn't seem to reflect the existence of this site. I wonder if there haven't been problems getting it upgraded due to it being on military land. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be upgraded at some point, though it is odd the coverage map doesn't seem to reflect the existence of this site. I wonder if there haven't been problems getting it upgraded due to it being on military land.

Verizon and at&t had no issues.... their upgrade happened back to back 1 week Verizon the next at&t

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verizon and at&t had no issues.... their upgrade happened back to back 1 week Verizon the next at&t

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It's only a theory. Sprint wasn't doing upgrades in sync with VZ and AT&T. it's possible they collaborated to get crews on the grounds. Sprint has had timing and money issues when it comes to upgrades, which could have made it more difficult to schedule a time to allow crews to come and upgrade the tower.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only Sprint sites not NV upgraded in my area are on military installations.  It's not likely the military has prohibited their upgrade, but for some reason Sprint have not made these a priority.  It could be related to difficulty.  The difficulty may have been worth it to the others.  But these may be low usage for Sprint.  Interesting though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only Sprint sites not NV upgraded in my area are on military installations. It's not likely the military has prohibited their upgrade, but for some reason Sprint have not made these a priority. It could be related to difficulty. The difficulty may have been worth it to the others. But these may be low usage for Sprint. Interesting though.

Thanks for the replies .. I am getting a call from sprint network team tomorrow .. no one on the customer service level is acknowledging the area as being sprint native coverage all say it's roaming ... so, I will see what they are able to tell me

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies .. I am getting a call from sprint network team tomorrow .. no one on the customer service level is acknowledging the area as being sprint native coverage all say it's roaming ... so, I will see what they are able to tell me

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hopefully B25 comes to that site as well as B26 when that can happen. Sprint needs to get all their remaining 3G only sites to LTE. People shouldn't have to leave LTE behind when they go places.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully B25 comes to that site as well as B26 when that can happen. Sprint needs to get all their remaining 3G only sites to LTE. People shouldn't have to leave LTE behind when they go places.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I will let you guys know .. I will try to keep this thread going .. I know sprint has done too much in the last few years ..so, I will report with more updates in El Paso

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies .. I am getting a call from sprint network team tomorrow .. no one on the customer service level is acknowledging the area as being sprint native coverage all say it's roaming ... so, I will see what they are able to tell me

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I've noticed that a lot of military sites don't show up on official coverage maps.  None of the WSMR show up on coverage.  Many are shown internally as Corporate Network Solutions (CNS).  So it does not surprise me they think there is no coverage there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that a lot of military sites don't show up on official coverage maps.  None of the WSMR show up on coverage.  Many are shown internally as Corporate Network Solutions (CNS).  So it does not surprise me they think there is no coverage there.

 

Wish is good , cause T-mobile has a lot of mad customers here , cause they have no service at all

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that a lot of military sites don't show up on official coverage maps. None of the WSMR show up on coverage. Many are shown internally as Corporate Network Solutions (CNS). So it does not surprise me they think there is no coverage there.

Any idea where I could check about the SMR b26 spectrum in Ibez for El Paso ... to see how what's going on with that .. I got guenthers attention so I will see what he tells me , but I would still like a backup source if possible

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the mini Marco b41 is a more cost affective way of adding b41. Which I'm sure in El Paso we are going to get a lot of these ... so, these sites can only add carriers to b41 , but it can't to carrier aggregation? If the mimi macros are able to do carrier aggregation can they do 3xca ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by tyroned3222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the mini Marco b41 is a more cost affective way of adding b41. Which I'm sure in El Paso we are going to get a lot of these ... so, these sites can only carriers to b41 , but it can't to carrier aggregation? If the mimi macros are able to do b41 can they do 3xca ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes it can do 3xca. Thos sites can only do 3carriers. Where the full build sites that cost more can do up to 6 carriers

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it can do 3xca. Thos sites can only do 3carriers. Where the full build sites that cost more can do up to 6 carriers

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Ok, got it thanks ... one thing I noticed when I had the s6 edge plus lots of drops to 3G .. now with the galaxy s8 I'm able to hold on to b25 a lot longer which in these areas I'm not dropping to 3G anymore .. is this just the s8 RF performance

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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

    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
  • Recently Browsing

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