Jump to content

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


S4GRU

Recommended Posts

Another thing I wanted to point out in the thread. Sprint has expanded LTE into Ruidoso NM. It's looks to be live good stretch of highway 70 and inner mountain of gods now has full LTE .. haven't seen anyone report that

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I got that last week. Forgot to post it. It was not there the week before when I went up. I also got 1X800 SMR. That was a first also. I will be up there again in a week or two to run some speed test.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder why the site isn't doing 3xca yet. It's a full 8T8R site

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These screenshots do not verify whether its active at the site level or not...

 

Samsung devices disable 2nd and 3rd carriers when session is idle...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in Las Cruces this weekend and the network experience increased significantly from the last time I was there in early June, even though they only have one B25 carrier. Everywhere in the city that I went to the network was great. I didn't take any engineering screenshots though.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in Las Cruces this weekend and the network experience increased significantly from the last time I was there in early June, even though they only have one B25 carrier. Everywhere in the city that I went to the network was great. I didn't take any engineering screenshots though.

I think sprint can do 10 MHz on b 25 in las cruces

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think sprint can do 10 MHz on b 25 in las cruces

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You might be right. I'll check the logs and compare to previous EARFCNs for Las Cruces unless someone beats me to it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be right. I'll check the logs and compare to previous EARFCNs for Las Cruces unless someone beats me to it.

I thought Sprint only had 15 MHz (7.5 + 7.5) of original PCS (A-F) spectrum in Las Cruces? Or maybe that was in Deming/Lordsburg...I can't remember. One of those towns along I-10 was definitely spectrum starved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Sprint only had 15 MHz (7.5 + 7.5) of original PCS (A-F) spectrum in Las Cruces? Or maybe that was in Deming/Lordsburg...I can't remember. One of those towns along I-10 was definitely spectrum starved.

I don't have my NM spreadsheet but I'm positive it's LC. Only one B25 carrier is possible. Sprint does have 140 MHz of EBS/ERS there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Sprint only had 15 MHz (7.5 + 7.5) of original PCS (A-F) spectrum in Las Cruces? Or maybe that was in Deming/Lordsburg...I can't remember. One of those towns along I-10 was definitely spectrum starved.

Well, from a post in "The Wall" about VZW & TM spectrum swap I gathered that it has 20 MHz of C block allocated for Sprint and the usual 10 MHz G block for a total of 30 MHz in Las Cruces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, from a post in "The Wall" about VZW & TM spectrum swap I gathered that it has 20 MHz of C block allocated for Sprint and the usual 10 MHz G block for a total of 30 MHz in Las Cruces.

 

Si. (1900-1915 / 1980-1995)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11998e9bd2500c84a5cc6423ed7e8846.jpg

I know 2xca is live on b25 , but I never got speeds that fast on b25 during this time of the day . Any ideas

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering that upload with that download, most definitely 2xCA B25

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering that upload with that download, most definitely 2xCA B25

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup , but the download doubled from the speeds I used to see in this area . Coming from this site 108ae2f4b9c1f3f67c4fbfefe170c4f5.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in this area with the galaxy s8 on both occasions ... last time I couldn't get passed 30mbps, now I hit almost 60

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1) I’ve noticed sometimes certain servers in ABQ wont correctly show CA on ookla’s speedtest.

2) Certain sites in ABQ had 2nd carrier weeks before CA started working.

Some things that could be happening in your case

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in this area with the galaxy s8 on both occasions ... last time I couldn't get passed 30mbps, now I hit almost 60

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it possible that B41 is taking some of the load now, freeing up more room on B25? If a nearby site now has B41 active and is freeing up room on that site, it could definitely result in a speed boost like that.

 

Also, was CA active the last time you were there and couldn't get pass 30? If you were getting nearly 30 on a single carrier, doubling that with CA would get you near 60.

 

Sent from my LG G6

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Spotted this at the football stadium by utep ... any ideas if this is a sprint site .. all other carrier already have towers set up ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is this pointed towards the West or South??? Because it sure looks that way by the position of the lights. I wonder if they are hoping the hills block the signal from going right into Juarez.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this pointed towards the West or South??? Because it sure looks that way by the position of the lights. I wonder if they are hoping the hills block the signal from going right into Juarez.

c7f4b83c0484558e8b13dcdfba2b1007.jpg

3eb290ce348ff74b7104c19609a1fafe.jpg

This is where it is located .. I just thought this has to be a sprint site .. everyone else has tower in that area

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
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...