Does Sprint expand its network? As in, add more towers?

[Moropo]

So I know about the NV upgrade, putting LTE into almost every current 3G tower etc.

 

But I wonder, if besides this, does Sprint also expand coverage, as in add new towers? I mean both adding towers in towns/cities where there arent any and hence lighting up new areas, and also adding towers in places where there is coverage but it may be weak and hence putting a new tower will improve the signal etc.

 

I ask this because I got some family in Hialeah (Miami area) that I pretty much visit every weekend and the signal is very bad in that area. Inside the house I get the triangle, and outside its above -100 dBm etc. This got me thinking into whether Sprint actually realizes they have this pockets of weak signal and they add towers to fix it, or if its pretty much a case of: get an Airave or leave Sprint. Hence my question.

 

Thanks.

[S4GRU]

There is not a lot of coverage growth occurring now via additional sites. They are adding a total of approximately 300 new sites in Network Vision and adding an additional approximately 100 Nextel iDEN only sites being converted to Sprint Network Vision CDMA/LTE. This is a total nationwide.

 

To average per market, that would be about 4 sites on average. So a little extra is coming. Perhaps after the close of SoftBank investment in Mid 2013 they will identify more additional sites. However, I think they are more interested to see how well 800 fills in a lot of these areas.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

[lynyrd65]

I definitely can think of a few places that I would like them to expand to. One area in particular could be a profitable venture for them as well. It could only be served well by Sprint or T-Mobile due to cellular license boundaries. I've considered writing a detailed proposal to Sprint about the area.

 

The area I'm speaking of is Lake Tenkiller in Oklahoma. US Cellular serves the west side of a cell boundary a little to the west while former alltel towers (now Verizon), serve the east side boundary covering the Lake. Sprint's nearest cell site is north in Tahlequah. Verizon has sites positioned so as not to project too strong of a signal across the license boundary it has with has US Cellular to the west. As Lake Tenkiller straddles Cherokee county (VZW) and Sequoyah (AT&T) counties to the south along another boundary Verizon must also be careful to keep signal strength below the legal threshold to the south as well. The area has absolutely terrible CDMA cell service, signal from all three providers is poor on the lake with AT&T being the best. This is because AT&T wised up and installed a couple PCS cell sites along the lake to make up for the 850 licensing issues but even this was under deployed. Usually, CDMA users have no signal.

 

The lake is home to many wealthy individuals whose permanent residences are in Muskogee, Tahlequah and Tulsa. They travel there for the weekends or during vacation time (my Aunt and Uncle). This area I believe presents a unique opportunity for Sprint to swoop in and steal these high ARPU customers from VZW and USCC as Sprint's PCS B license does not have a border anywhere near the lake and (as far as I know) neither does SMR. So all Sprint would need to do to cover the lake is install 5 or 6 cell sites along the highway as shown.

 

[WiWavelength]

The area I'm speaking of is Lake Tenkiller in Oklahoma.

 

I am a geographer, but I will admit that I can barely keep track of all of the major man-made lakes and reservoirs in Kansas and Missouri, let alone Oklahoma. The Army Corps of Engineers really went overboard about 50 years ago.

 

AJ

[Jrome.brooks]

Sprint needs to put towers everywhere where AT&T and Verizon put there's

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lynyrd65]

 

I am a geographer, but I will admit that I can barely keep track of all of the major man-made lakes and reservoirs in Kansas and Missouri, let alone Oklahoma. The Army Corps of Engineers really went overboard about 50 years ago.

 

AJ

 

Someone told me that due to our man made lakes, Oklahoma has the most coastline of any state.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Serious]

Someone told me that due to our man made lakes, Oklahoma has the most coastline of any state.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Probably a reaction to the dust bowl.

[pyroscott]

Someone told me that due to our man made lakes' date=' Oklahoma has the most coastline of any state.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[/quote']

 

I believe coastline refers to where land meets a sea or ocean, and some also include great lake coastline.

 

Lake and riverfront property is generally referred to as shoreline and bankline. Of which, Oklahoma claims to have around 20,000 miles of shoreline. Minnesota (land of 10,000 lakes) claims to have around 90,000 miles of shoreline.

 

Edit: I just found another source saying Oklahoma has about 55,000 miles of shoreline http://www.owrb.ok.gov/util/waterfact.php I have to admit that I am surprised at the amount of water that there is in Oklahoma...

[Moropo]

There is not a lot of coverage growth occurring now via additional sites. They are adding a total of approximately 300 new sites in Network Vision and adding an additional approximately 100 Nextel iDEN only sites being converted to Sprint Network Vision CDMA/LTE. This is a total nationwide.

 

To average per market, that would be about 4 sites on average. So a little extra is coming. Perhaps after the close of SoftBank investment in Mid 2013 they will identify more additional sites. However, I think they are more interested to see how well 800 fills in a lot of these areas.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

Speaking of which I just found this:

 

 

So they are displaying a planned new tower.

 

edit: zooming in I see it is in the airport.

[WiWavelength]

Probably a reaction to the dust bowl.

 

Not really. Much of the Army Corps of Engineers lake and reservoir construction 50 years ago was a reaction to urban flooding in the 1950s. The lakes and reservoirs were designed to hold back floodwaters that would otherwise enter the greater Missouri-Mississippi River system.

 

AJ

[jamesinclair]

Sprint needs to put towers everywhere where AT&T and Verizon put there's

 

 

Wherever AT&T has a tower, sprint should go for two.

[WiWavelength]

Sprint needs to put towers everywhere where AT&T and Verizon put there's

 

Get a clue, and get real. VZW and AT&T bought most of those preexisting networks. They did not build them. Sprint would commit financial suicide trying to build out its network to compete with the geography that VZW and AT&T have bought.

 

AJ

[Jrome.brooks]

How !!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

How !!!

 

Who???!!!

What???!!!

When???!!!

Where???!!!

 

AJ

[Zachthelizard]

How !!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Sprint has limited resources, and the cost / customer reaches absurb levels in certain regions of the country. Plot a new tower down in downtown Manhattan and you've reached a ton of new customers. In the middle of Nowheresville County, Deserted Western State, there are only a handful of new customers, even if the effort is in the same order of magnitude. Think in terms of ROI for Sprint, a company currently losing money every quarter.

[xcharles718]

No, Sprint wouldn't do that.

At most, Sprint would expand just outside of areas they already serve or expand via acquisitions.

[xcharles718]

Who???!!!

What???!!!

When???!!!

Where???!!!

 

AJ

Why?

[pyroscott]

 

Who???!!!

What???!!!

When???!!!

Where???!!!

 

AJ

 

Whence

[nahum365]

Why?

 

I came here to say this, only to see you had beat me by 7 minutes.

[xcharles718]

I came here to say this, only to see you had beat me by 7 minutes.

Not even off topic.

[Brandonlmbrt]

So In areas that are becoming more populated but have few towers, the coverage won't change?

[xcharles718]

So In areas that are becoming more populated but have few towers, the coverage won't change?

Probably not. 800MHz might add just a tad bit(from it's better propagation characteristics).

Plus more towers would probably be added due to the capacity of the increase customers in the areas already being served.

At most, you're get some service on the outskirts of the current coverage area, but nothing more.

[pyroscott]

So In areas that are becoming more populated but have few towers' date=' the coverage won't change?[/quote']

 

Sprint monitors the areas with a lot of roaming and builds a new site there, but they will not likely actively expand their footprint until NV is complete, if ever...

[DaQue]

Sprint monitors the areas with a lot of roaming and builds a new site there, but they will not likely actively expand their footprint until NV is complete, if ever...

 

One day NV will be complete. Just keep repeating that till you believe it.

[lordsutch]

I agree it's unlikely Sprint will expand its footprint substantially, although I expect the USCC acquisition will lead to some new sites to replicate the existing USCC coverage (I doubt the feds will permit the acquisition without that commitment) - and I also expect other, similar strategic acquisitions - and if Sprint does obtain more spectrum from the feds (the semi-mythical PCS H block, potential rebanding of Cellular 850, etc.) the minimum coverage requirement will probably require a substantial buildout in which Sprint would probably expand SMR and PCS A-G coverage too.