Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - East Iowa Market (Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, Dubuque, Waterloo/Cedar Falls)


S4GRU

Recommended Posts

Yeah. I don't understand why this market is so terrible with multiple carriers even with a population of 500,000 people.

1. iWireless sucks.

2. Someone else owns the B41 spectrum.

 

*sad trombone*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big 2 are fine in the Quad Cities. US Cellular is also fine in the Quad Cities, but I personally don't see why anyone would pick them when they're basically the same price as the other 2 carriers but with a much smaller network that got even smaller when they sold off their Chicago market to Sprint. With US Cellular drive an hour east of the Quad Cities and you're roaming (often at 1X data).

 

As has been mentioned in this thread, if Sprint would add some more towers it would probably help tremendously. There are many towers in the Quad Cities that the other carriers use that Sprint could co-locate on if they chose to, so it wouldn't even involve the trouble and expense of actually building a new tower. And unless I'm mis-reading Sprint's own coverage map, there are spots (albeit little) right in the main urban areas in the Quad Cities that are roaming coverage *boggle*

 

On the subject of 2500mhz, it does appear that Speedconnect is using their spectrum in the Quad Cities. Here is an article in the local newspaper about it.

 

http://qctimes.com/news/local/quad-city-providers-unveil-new-residential-broadband-services/article_4b3c61aa-50ee-5926-ae5a-35e98c57f453.html

Edited by billyjoejimbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mr. Nuke>   Yeah, I'm with you on that reaction.  That just shows how much people hate the incumbent cable company who can give them decent speeds, and how little alternative they are given by the incumbent Telco who often cannot.

Exactly.  We have 2 choices, ATT DSL with a max speed of 3-6 Mbps with a cap at 150Gb or Mediacom who is despised in this area and caps their plan at 250 Gbs (unless you want to pay more for a larger cap)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. We have 2 choices, ATT DSL with a max speed of 3-6 Mbps with a cap at 150Gb or Mediacom who is despised in this area and caps their plan at 250 Gbs (unless you want to pay more for a larger cap)

But even Mediacom is cheaper than that. They're 75$ for 100mbps and that's with a 1TB cap and no discounts (so that's the highest price you pay). I think the reaction is more that SpeedConnect owns almost all the 2.5 ghz spectrum, so Sprint can't reasonably deploy Spark. That ad is one of the big reasons Sprint service sticks in the Quad Cities.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I agree that Mediacom is a lot cheaper than SpeedConnect's extreme service. I was agreeing with the post above where people will pay more for the same service if they don't like the business and I know people hate Mediacom. There are also many posts in this forum as a whole about people who wouldn't do business with ATT (even if their service is better than sprint) because they don't like the business practices.

 

I am also upset that this company bought up all the spectrum so Sprint can't have proper service in this area. We do need competition here in the wireless, TV, and broadband services though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Does anyone know if something is going on in the area? The CEO (support)Twitter account told me twice the B41 is in our area and I had to correct them, but I hope it means something is going on here.

Nothing has changed in the Quad Cities. Sprint could deploy a single 15 Mhz band 41 channel only after the Wimax shutdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is the top speed of that and will it do much good?

Just ball-parking it without running any calculations the usable speed is probably around 40 down* so roughly the same as the theoretical max for 25/26.  And yes that would help quite a bit if they choose to build the QC out. Just like the 20 Mhz channels everywhere else from a network management perspective you'd put everyone you could on the 15 Mhz channel which 1) provides them with a better experience than the current B25/B26 only setup and 2) improves the quality of service for people that cannot connect to Band 41 as the other bands are less burdened. Again though, we have no indication this will happen.

 

*Edit: Thanks to Tim, theoretical max is 60.3 Mbps in configuration 1 and 82.3 Mbps in configuration 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so they need to wait until after Nov 6 if they are going to implement it here.  Could they already be doing work and waiting for Wimax to be turned off before flipping the switch to turn b41 on?  Or could they not do any work until wimax is offline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could they already be doing work and waiting for Wimax to be turned off before flipping the switch to turn b41 on?  Or could they not do any work until wimax is offline?

They could be installing the equipment in advance of the Wimax shutoff date. It is on you guys that live there to figure out if it is happening. That said, again there is no guarantee that Sprint will deploy widespread Band 41 equipment in  the Quad Cities now or in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Look what I ran across late last night/early this morning in Rock Island, IL!!! Some good ol band 41! Of course, it's not live but it's definitely some tinkering going on in the wee hours of the morning!!!attachicon.gifScreenshot_2016-01-25-01-27-20.pngattachicon.gifScreenshot_2016-01-25-03-08-39.png

 

Have you checked the LTE engineering screen other times when you are connected to 3G? I think that might be just some of the idle values, and not indicative of an actual connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was actual the second night in a row that I seen this. The night before it happened so quick I thought my eyes were playing tricks on me so I didn't have time to screen shot. It usually happy as my phone switched from 3g to 4g. It would go from band 26 for a slot second then hit band 41. On this occasion, it sat parked for several minutes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the DL channel values they are on par with what has already been reported for band 41. I got two different ones. While the UL channels are the same as I usually get while on band 25. Could be nothing, but it's definitely giving me a glimmer of hope for February when they flip the switch off WiMax!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it's never done that before. It's would usually say idle as the value or "blank"

You may also be seeing your device scanning LTE channels. When I was in a roaming area this past weekend, I saw Band 2, 4, 5, 12, 25, 26 and 41 showing in the engineering screen as it scanned for different possible channels.

 

Or, there is a B41 signal somewhere near you. Until you see a valid download channel, assume it's a glitch.

 

Sent from my LG G4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may also be seeing your device scanning LTE channels. When I was in a roaming area this past weekend, I saw Band 2, 4, 5, 12, 25, 26 and 41 showing in the engineering screen as it scanned for different possible channels.

 

Or, there is a B41 signal somewhere near you. Until you see a valid download channel, assume it's a glitch.

 

Sent from my LG G4

 

Band 41 doesnt neccesarily populate both download and upload channels on engineering screens. It depends on device model and if at that moment the device is using TDD time frames for uplink or downlink. 

 

Typically if its null values then both EARFCNs will be something invalid. If at least one is a valid EARFCN then there's something live. 

 

 

Look what I ran across late last night/early this morning in Rock Island, IL!!! Some good ol band 41! Of course, it's not live but it's definitely some tinkering going on in the wee hours of the morning!!!attachicon.gif Screenshot_2016-01-25-01-27-20.pngattachicon.gif Screenshot_2016-01-25-03-08-39.png

 

 

Unluckily for you that is not Sprint.

 

Those center frequencies land smack dab in Speedconnect EBS holdings where they are doing home wireless broadband internet using LTE Band 41. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Band 41 doesnt neccesarily populate both download and upload channels on engineering screens. It depends on device model and if at that moment the device is using TDD time frames for uplink or downlink.

 

Typically if its null values then both EARFCNs will be something invalid. If at least one is a valid EARFCN then there's something live.

 

 

 

Unluckily for you that is not Sprint.

 

Those center frequencies land smack dab in Speedconnect EBS holdings where they are doing home wireless broadband internet using LTE Band 41.

I am aware of Speedconnect in the QC area, but if I remember correctly Clear had a large chunk of Davenport, IA and at least parts of downtown Rock Island, IL on there coverage map offering service before they were bought out by Sprint. I live not to far from downtown Rock Island, so I was thinking maybe I was picking up a tower from downtown Davenport. (I have no idea of any former Clear tower placement)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am aware of Speedconnect in the QC area, but if I remember correctly Clear had a large chunk of Davenport, IA and at least parts of downtown Rock Island, IL on there coverage map offering service before they were bought out by Sprint. I live not to far from downtown Rock Island, so I was thinking maybe I was picking up a tower from downtown Davenport. (I have no idea of any former Clear tower placement)

 

No. EARFCNs don't lie. 

 

The 2 Clear sites were protection sites deployed to meet FCC buildout requirements. They were deployed to "protect" the 6 MHz (2618-2624 MHz) of total  spectrum clearwire is licensed there from being taken back by the FCC.

 

Speedconnect is licensed all the rest and uses it. No agreement whatsoever with Sprint have been discovered. 

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

    • 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...