Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - East Michigan Market (Detroit/Flint/Ann Arbor/Tri-Cities)


ReyBanz

Recommended Posts

Thank you, now I know what to look for.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

You have to know what is common for your area. I pretty much see 40978 and now 41176 in my areas but I have found 4137x in Madison Heights and Troy. I cant remember the different earfcn I found in Kalamazoo. Point is that 40978//41176 are not necessarily constants. Know your area.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK Michigan peeps... Weirdest issue! We have a bunch of phones that can't connect to LTE. I have a ticket out there on my site with Sprint but its been sitting with Field engineering for a while with no resolution. The problem is only on eCSFB devices they can't connect to LTE on hundreds of sites. They can connect to sites around metro Detroit. Older iPhones and stuff can connect to LTE fine. 

 

Problem is in cities like Whitmore Lake, Hartland, and a bunch other to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any word on a second PCS LTE carrier, or 10x10? Sorry if that's a n00b question.

A second pcs carrier will be another 5x5. Refarming for the second carrier in most markets have begun a whole back. It shan't be too long before they can fire it up.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A second pcs carrier will be another 5x5. Refarming for the second carrier in most markets have begun a whole back. It shan't be too long before they can fire it up.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

Thanks for the info! Is it due to the carriers being noncontiguous that they're not going for a single 10x10?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info! Is it due to the carriers being noncontiguous that they're not going for a single 10x10?

 

Early devices were only certified for 5x5 and Sprints spectrum is not always contigious with the PCS G block as most 30 mhz PCS A-F markets are of the A or B block. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I was scouting around the LTE Engineering screen of my wife's LG G4 looking for any signs of CA in Flint and Saginaw. I didn't see any CA going on but a new EARFCN caught my attention while in the heart of Flint on I-475. I verified on my LG G2 that the 2nd Band 25 LTE carrier was legit and not something I caught midscan. 

 

Screenshot_2015-07-05-13-27-04.png

Screenshot_2015-07-05-13-27-27.png

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Spark is indeed alive in Metro Detroit

On my lg g3 on cherry hill and Wayne

It was one of the first times I connected and and got 44 down 12 up

Edited by maxter5080
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As others mentioned, sectors 03/04/05 in your area are likely second carriers. SignalCheck will show a small "2" next to your provider name if you are on sector 04 or 05. Still working on getting 03 added; it conflicts with the way other areas of the country are configured. I hope to have that resolved soon.

 

-Mike

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I was finally able to screenshot the 2nd Band 25 LTE carrier that keeps popping up in the Novi, Wixom and New Hudson areas. It is a slightly different EARFCN than the 2nd carrier I found in Flint several weeks ago. (Screenshot is in the Network Vision/Spark EARFCN logging thread)

 

There is a 2nd Band 25 LTE carrier near DTW however I haven't been able to determine that EARFCN. The network at least in the Detroit area is heavily pushing my phone onto B41 even when B25 has much better signal. Same issue with another 2nd B25 LTE carrier out by the GM Milford Proving Grounds.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another site in Farmington Hills just had 2nd B25 LTE carrier go online. Pulling 5-7 Mbps down on both carriers on a site without B41. Some much needed relief.

 

Also noticed spotty LTE coverage this morning through Highland, Milford, New Hudson with some sites entirely offline. I noticed something similar in Flint before I found the 2nd B25 carrier there so that leads me to wonder if some refarming is in progress.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another site in Farmington Hills just had 2nd B25 LTE carrier go online. Pulling 5-7 Mbps down on both carriers on a site without B41. Some much needed relief.

 

Also noticed spotty LTE coverage this morning through Highland, Milford, New Hudson with some sites entirely offline. I noticed something similar in Flint before I found the 2nd B25 carrier there so that leads me to wonder if some refarming is in progress.

Might explain my exact issues in the Columbus, OH market in the Granville/Newark/Heath areas.... Lots of lte drops and finding b41 2nd carriers and 10mhz b25 within the last few weeks!

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Is Speedtest laggy?

 

Let's just say the speedtests on my G2 are faster than her G4 when she's pulling from 2 DL channels. Speedtest peaks very high and very briefly at the beginning then just craps out.

 

 

For some reason, yes. I've run into this problem on my G4. I've had to turn to Sensorly to get more accurate results, especially when CA is involved.

 

Sent from my LG G4

 

I'll have to try Sensorly. I haven't been a fan of the speed test aspect but I'll give it a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just say the speedtests on my G2 are faster than her G4 when she's pulling from 2 DL channels. Speedtest peaks very high and very briefly at the beginning then just craps out.

 

 

 

I'll have to try Sensorly. I haven't been a fan of the speed test aspect but I'll give it a shot.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of Sensorly's speed test function either. But when Ookla shows a test of 10 or 20Mbps, and Sensorly shows 100.... you know something is up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not the biggest fan of Sensorly's speed test function either. But when Ookla shows a test of 10 or 20Mbps, and Sensorly shows 100.... you know something is up.

I got a fluke of 236.78 Mbps down with 13.95 up yesterday with Ookla.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

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

    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • 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.
  • Recently Browsing

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