Jump to content

SignalCheck - Android app to monitor your Wi-Fi/2G/3G/4G LTE/5G-NR signal strengths


mikejeep

Recommended Posts

The update is awesome! But is this normal?

 

LT4QtEK.png?2

 

Are the site's different sectors identified under different PCIs? 'Cause that's 5 PCIs for one site, one of which is displayed twice. And the "352" PCI is at -97 yet its not part of the site I'm connected to.

This is not app related, but can you please investigate what site/band/carrier you're connected to!? I've never seen a Sprint GCI ending in 32.

 

Unless I've missed something? Edit. Yes I did.

 

Sent from my LG G3

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not app related, but can you please investigate what site/band/carrier you're connected to!? I've never seen a Sprint GCI ending in 32.

 

Unless I've missed something?

 

Sent from my LG G3

 

All of the screens I've seen of Sprint (8t8r) B41 has an odd market id - 009 in this case; and a sector id of 3X (X being 0-3? - and for that matter all of the B26 I've seen is 1X sector id).  It seems like a legit Sprint B41.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the screens I've seen of Sprint (8t8r) B41 has an odd market id - 009 in this case; and a sector id of 3X (X being 0-3? - and for that matter all of the B26 I've seen is 1X sector id).  It seems like a legit Sprint B41.

 

I wasn't disputing the validity, but it would appear I've been spending too much time in Samsung market threads. For those markets, 8T8R GCIs (so far) have been ending in 0x, not 3x. But now I see that in Nokia and ALU areas the GCI are ending in 3x. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe Samsung screws up something so simple on its phones.  I've got no PCI, no neighbors, and no B41 identification. :(

 

But I'm very glad to have the update if only for the "strongest signal" fields in the log--that's a huge deal!  I also see the "coming soon" option for a continuous log; also a huge deal.  I can't wait for the next one now!

 

Does anyone know if the Verizon 4.4.4 update fixed it for those customers?  Trying to figure out if I should be looking forward to 4.4.4 as a fix or not.  Otherwise, maybe 5.0 will help...

 

And one other thing, is it possible that the next version could clean out all the null entries from the database if that bug really is fixed now?

 

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe Samsung screws up something so simple on its phones. I've got no PCI, no neighbors, and no B41 identification. :(

 

But I'm very glad to have the update if only for the "strongest signal" fields in the log--that's a huge deal! I also see the "coming soon" option for a continuous log; also a huge deal. I can't wait for the next one now!

 

Does anyone know if the Verizon 4.4.4 update fixed it for those customers? Trying to figure out if I should be looking forward to 4.4.4 as a fix or not. Otherwise, maybe 5.0 will help...

 

- Trip

I'm on an S4T and I get band 41 identification, but no PCI/neighboring cells. I'm still on the current 4.4.2 release, maybe a new radio with the next release will fix it. Previous radios didn't have TAC.

 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe Samsung screws up something so simple on its phones.  I've got no PCI, no neighbors, and no B41 identification. :(

 

But I'm very glad to have the update if only for the "strongest signal" fields in the log--that's a huge deal!  I also see the "coming soon" option for a continuous log; also a huge deal.  I can't wait for the next one now!

 

Does anyone know if the Verizon 4.4.4 update fixed it for those customers?  Trying to figure out if I should be looking forward to 4.4.4 as a fix or not.  Otherwise, maybe 5.0 will help...

 

And one other thing, is it possible that the next version could clean out all the null entries from the database if that bug really is fixed now?

 

- Trip

I have B41 identification.  But no PCI or neighbors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is that all my local B41 installations are on Clearwire gear which have a different PLMN that is not reported correctly to the app, so you guys are probably on 8T8Rs or just getting lucky and one of the other ID methods just happens to flag it for you.

 

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Note 4 is showing the neighbor cells just fine.

Is the note 4 running 4.4.4 out of the box? Could be an update in 4.4.4 for the gs5 that could fix it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is that all my local B41 installations are on Clearwire gear which have a different PLMN that is not reported correctly to the app, so you guys are probably on 8T8Rs or just getting lucky and one of the other ID methods just happens to flag it for you.

 

- Trip

All mine is 8t8r

 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the note 4 running 4.4.4 out of the box? Could be an update in 4.4.4 for the gs5 that could fix it.

Any day now the 4.4.4 (NJ1) will drop for the S5, so let's hope! They've also fixed a ton of Bluetooth issues reportedly so maybe they worked up the radios and reporting good.

 

sent from an underwater dust storm with my Sprint S5

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any day now the 4.4.4 (NJ1) will drop for the S5, so let's hope! They've also fixed a ton of Bluetooth issues reportedly so maybe they worked up the radios and reporting good.

sent from an underwater dust storm with my Sprint S5

Yes but wonder if root will be impossible with 4.4.4?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my one max it not showing the neighboring nor the proper plmn ID. Not even a for close and restart fixes it.

Send me a diagnostic report and I will try to see what's going in. Make sure you have neighbor cells enabled in the Preferences also.

 

-Mike

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no neighboring cell sites on my G2. FYI.  Must have the Samsung bug.

Nor do I.  Have it on my G2. hardware version 1.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I am starting to question the accuracy of the neighbor cells on my Nexus 5.

Because it is showing several different towers I have no idea where they are unless they are 15 to 30 miles away.

 

If only Android would report the GCI.

I love the neighbor cells I could run the battery down watching it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I am starting to question the accuracy of the neighbor cells on my Nexus 5.

Because it is showing several different towers I have no idea where they are unless they are 15 to 30 miles away.

 

If only Android would report the GCI.

I love the neighbor cells I could run the battery down watching it.

If it shows it then the phone sees it.

 

It's not uncommon for signals to go way farther than expected. It just won't be usable.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it shows it then the phone sees it.

 

It's not uncommon for signals to go way farther than expected. It just won't be usable.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Is it the phone that sees it or is it the site that knows it.?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I am starting to question the accuracy of the neighbor cells on my Nexus 5.

Because it is showing several different towers I have no idea where they are unless they are 15 to 30 miles away.

 

If only Android would report the GCI.

I love the neighbor cells I could run the battery down watching it.

 

Like Tim said, the app reports what the phone is seeing. I have all of my nearby sites noted, and still see a "rogue" PCI on occasion. It could be that you haven't yet connected to that specific sector on that specific band, so you don't have that specific PCI recorded yet. Or your device can see it, but for whatever reason it is not accepting connections. Many possibilities. Again, as Tim said -- it's showing you what the phone sees. Just because you've never hit it doesn't mean it's not out there.

 

As far as GCI goes, it might not be an Android limitation, it might be by design; I have no idea if the LTE neighbor cell protocol includes any more information than Android is offering. It's a moot point though, I can only show what Android decides to collect. :)

 

-Mike

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

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • 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.
  • Recently Browsing

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