Jump to content

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


S4GRU

Recommended Posts

Not if the macro is still using that spectrum for CDMA. It would interfere.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Ya, these are band 25 only 5x5 .. all macros are running 2xca band 25, but most of these a and the monopoles on the military base are doing 5x5 band 25 only

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not if the macro is still using that spectrum for CDMA. It would interfere.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

That stinks.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That stinks.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

They can use the second carrier that is on the macros. Eventually Sprint will refarm more PCS for LTE. In a lot of markets they're down to only 5x5 of CDMA, so no advantage to shut down more until they're ready to cram CDMA into the LTE internal guard bands (or add a 3x3 B25 carrier).

They should be able to fit a single CDMA carrier between each 2 contiguous B25 carriers. They're already doing this with the Airave 1x carrier (T-Mobile does it as well with GSM). I suspect we'll see that at the evdo shutdown, and it will probably remain on existing sites until the equipment is replaced.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, ingenium said:

They should be able to fit a single CDMA carrier between each 2 contiguous B25 carriers. They're already doing this with the Airave 1x carrier (T-Mobile does it as well with GSM). I suspect we'll see that at the evdo shutdown, and it will probably remain on existing sites until the equipment is replaced.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

Sprint should not and will not split contiguous spectrum into multiple carriers. Performance is much worse—dozens of studies have been done regarding this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint should not and will not split contiguous spectrum into multiple carriers. Performance is much worse—dozens of studies have been done regarding this. 
Oh I know they shouldn't. But they currently are (Pittsburgh is 5x5 + 10x10 contig instead of a 15x15). Or in a situation where Sprint has more than 20x20 contig (if that exists), since that's the maximum LTE carrier width.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ingenium said:

Oh I know they shouldn't. But they currently are (Pittsburgh is 5x5 + 10x10 contig instead of a 15x15). Or in a situation where Sprint has more than 20x20 contig (if that exists), since that's the maximum LTE carrier width.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

That’s because equipment isn’t yet certified for 15x15 operations. As soon a second it is, I’m sure Sprint will switch over to 15x15. 

I agree that what you’re saying would make sense in cases where Sprint has greater than 20 MHz FDD of contiguous spectrum. But I think those will be few and far between. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s because equipment isn’t yet certified for 15x15 operations. As soon a second it is, I’m sure Sprint will switch over to 15x15. 
I agree that what you’re saying would make sense in cases where Sprint has greater than 20 MHz FDD of contiguous spectrum. But I think those will be few and far between. 
Samsung equipment was recertified for 15x15 in January apparently. I'm pretty sure it's live in some Samsung markets. Pittsburgh got the second 5x5 carrier a couple months ago, so after the recertification.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ingenium said:

Samsung equipment was recertified for 15x15 in January apparently. I'm pretty sure it's live in some Samsung markets. Pittsburgh got the second 5x5 carrier a couple months ago, so after the recertification.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

15x15 contiguous is not th same as 10x10+5x5.

There is apparently a holdup with the Samsung equipment as well. They are  running into errors in testing which they still have not resolved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What post are you replying to?
I just saw this now. It was multiple. I thought I qouted them all but, it didn't work. [emoji54]

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tyroned3222 said:

Drastic change in Albuquerque.. Sprint more then doubled speeds in the 2nd half of 2018.. with more work on the way.. wow

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

This is due to band 41 available about 30 to 40% of the places I go now. I consistently get 100mb at Whole Foods.  Its crazy.

In some places, I think I have found higher QAM.  I have an iphone so I can't completely confirm. Just does not make sense on the speeds that i have seen. This has been seen in my MB as well. I am consistently getting 30 to 40mb from my MB now when I first got it I was getting 5 to 10.  This is now faster than my centurylink 40 package (highest I can get for my neighborhood, comcast just got 100).

Finally, all of the GMO's have been completed and are doing band 25, so my assumption the rating increased as loss of LTE has significantly gone done in my experiences.

 

The biggest change is my wife does not complain about service. She face times a lot and it is a constant connection now as well as her web-browing use is consistent every time. I would have probably rated Sprint higher than the figures show but those are my real world experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tyroned3222 said:

Drastic change in Albuquerque.. Sprint more then doubled speeds in the 2nd half of 2018.. with more work on the way.. wow

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

One wierd thing I saw was that Sprint took a hit in Call Performance. Interesting. I have not noticed this. Perhaps I missed a Calling Plus or VoLTE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jroepcke51 said:

One wierd thing I saw was that Sprint took a hit in Call Performance. Interesting. I have not noticed this. Perhaps I missed a Calling Plus or VoLTE.

It's due to refarming of CDMA carriers. Hopefully VoLTE will be solid(from my early testing it seems to be) once it's launched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

It's due to refarming of CDMA carriers. Hopefully VoLTE will be solid(from my early testing it seems to be) once it's launched.

I would normally agree with you but that happened over a year ago with the second band 25 carrier. 

 

Ill do do some tests today to see what is on 1x and 3g. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would normally agree with you but that happened over a year ago with the second band 25 carrier. 
 
Ill do do some tests today to see what is on 1x and 3g. 
Yes and root uses Samsung phones so they could of likley used the calling plus feature

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jroepcke51 said:

I would normally agree with you but that happened over a year ago with the second band 25 carrier. 

 

Ill do do some tests today to see what is on 1x and 3g. 

Refarming is still ongoing, some markets are seeing 10x10+5+5 and 15x15.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:
Another band 26/41 upgrade in progress 2 for the day

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

Are these sites that only had B25 before?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes all sites were only band 25 before

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

Nice that should improve coverage B26 and capacity B41

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Nice that should improve coverage B26 and capacity B41

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

They are preparing for B26. It can't be brought online yet, but they are working very quickly to have it on every site once the spectrum is cleared.

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

    • 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?
    • I wouldn’t be shocked if it’s Verizon, too. In my area they have multiple nodes on the same block as full macro sites with mmWave, in direct line of sight. 
  • Recently Browsing

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