Network Vision/LTE - West Michigan Market (Grand Rapids/Lansing/Kalamazoo)

[SteveK]

Don't know about Horrocks but I was at the Gander Mountain across the street (almost) and had a strong LTE signal.

[geocachenut]

Any news on the Muskegon area?

[jefbal99]

Any news on the Muskegon area?

Check sensorly to see if any mapping has been done, start looking at towers for NV equipment, become a sponsor to get access to the tower locations

[hfase]

Any news on the Muskegon area?

 

I noticed a couple new spots on sensorly this morning in the north-musk area.

So yeah, might be doing some (more) work in Muskegon.

[geocachenut]

Hart has full 4G LTE. My wife says she turns off wifi in the office because its faster than the buildings service. Cannot wait!

[jefbal99]

Hart has full 4G LTE. My wife says she turns off wifi in the office because its faster than the buildings service. Cannot wait!

She should still use wifi if available to not overly load the network.  Off loading is a good thing and keeps unlimited around

[geocachenut]

True.....it's sad right here in Muskegon. I'm on Latimer Drive near Laketon and even just to read this forum using the app....is a chore.

[RCM]

I'm kinda bummed. I was in the area and was going to map a little more of the site north of Schoolcraft but LTE wasn't online. It'll probably come back online right after I leave.

 

 

[SWMich4G]

I was initially excited that Berrien county was getting LTE and based on the tower spacing I saw in the sponsor's forum thought the coverage would be fine.  Now that I've gotten an LTE phone and  mapped everything on sensorly it's very disappointing to me.  Towers broadcasting about 1.5 miles before you lose signal completely, or clearly seeing a tower and not being able to get LTE off of it, etc.  The worst part is the site locations are so poorly thought out.  There's a half mile dead zone in St. Joseph: t's the entire business district where everyone who works in St Joe or Benton Harbor eats lunch every day.  Literally the worst spot to have a dead zone if you want anyone local to use your service.  Half of downtown BH is dead or unstable as well.  Verizon has a tower right there, plus a tower right in the St. Joe business district for great coverage of both, PLUS has panels at or near every Sprint site.  Looking at sensorly, it's obvious they have almost twice as many sites in the area as Sprint despite being 700Mhz vs Sprint's 1900Mhz. 

 

Is this just an area where Sprint thought, "we don't have enough subscribers and can't compete with the big two so we won't even try?"  Or will 800Mhz LTE eliminate the dead zones?  End rant.

[userkv8031]

I was initially excited that Berrien county was getting LTE and based on the tower spacing I saw in the sponsor's forum thought the coverage would be fine.  Now that I've gotten an LTE phone and  mapped everything on sensorly it's very disappointing to me.  Towers broadcasting about 1.5 miles before you lose signal completely, or clearly seeing a tower and not being able to get LTE off of it, etc.  The worst part is the site locations are so poorly thought out.  There's a half mile dead zone in St. Joseph: t's the entire business district where everyone who works in St Joe or Benton Harbor eats lunch every day.  Literally the worst spot to have a dead zone if you want anyone local to use your service.  Half of downtown BH is dead or unstable as well.  Verizon has a tower right there, plus a tower right in the St. Joe business district for great coverage of both, PLUS has panels at or near every Sprint site.  Looking at sensorly, it's obvious they have almost twice as many sites in the area as Sprint despite being 700Mhz vs Sprint's 1900Mhz. 

 

Is this just an area where Sprint thought, "we don't have enough subscribers and can't compete with the big two so we won't even try?"  Or will 800Mhz LTE eliminate the dead zones?  End rant.

Much of that area was run by an affiliate of Sprint known as iPCS. There was a bit of corporate Sprint in the extreme sw corner of MI, that didn't extend up very far along the lakeshore. iPCS had horrible spacing in some areas of MI and is likely what you are seeing. I think I had the same experience when I was there 5+ years ago. Hopefully with 800 coming online there will be some better coverage coming along soon. I know in areas here in IL iPCS did some rather horrid siting like placing towers in valleys then expect that signal to travel 10+ miles. Towers are spaced 15-20 miles apart in this area which is a bit of a stretch.

[SWMich4G]

Much of that area was run by an affiliate of Sprint known as iPCS. There was a bit of corporate Sprint in the extreme sw corner of MI, that didn't extend up very far along the lakeshore. iPCS had horrible spacing in some areas of MI and is likely what you are seeing. I think I had the same experience when I was there 5+ years ago. Hopefully with 800 coming online there will be some better coverage coming along soon. I know in areas here in IL iPCS did some rather horrid siting like placing towers in valleys then expect that signal to travel 10+ miles. Towers are spaced 15-20 miles apart in this area which is a bit of a stretch.

I see.  I don't understand why Sprint didn't add a tower to the business district of St Joseph long ago though after they took control.  I didn't work in the area until recently, but I do remember pretty much every time I'd stop at the bank in that area I would have to try several times just to send a text outside.  When people can't use their phones when they're on their lunch break or out shopping, they're unlikely to stay with that carrier. 

 

Also, I've mapped Cleveland road multiple times on Sensorly, so it apparently doesn't even get 3G to this day. 

[maxsilver]

I see.  I don't understand why Sprint didn't add a tower to the business district of St Joseph long ago though after they took control.  I didn't work in the area until recently, but I do remember pretty much every time I'd stop at the bank in that area I would have to try several times just to send a text outside.  When people can't use their phones when they're on their lunch break or out shopping, they're unlikely to stay with that carrier. 

 

Also, I've mapped Cleveland road multiple times on Sensorly, so it apparently doesn't even get 3G to this day. 

 

The iPCS work here has always been bad, and has never been fixed. They spaced their sites to the maximum limit available for 800mhz, so there are gaping coverage gaps in 1900mhz coverage, by design.

 

There are entire neighborhoods of Grand Rapids (close to 25% the total area of the city) that have never had working 1900 voice/data/sms from Sprint, ever, due to iPCS bad site spacing. I happen to live in one. 

 

There's plenty of towers here to rent space on, and they are cheap (MetroPCS and Clearwire can afford to be on them). But Sprint's not on them. Sprint even had one Nextel site (rooftop) in the middle of one of these PCS deadzones. They decomissioned the whole thing. They are literally paying a lease on a rooftop in a deadzone, but wouldn't put PCS up on the site (and that building already had 60x60 Metro Ethernet backhaul available, so that's not the issue) 

 

It's even sillier out on the suburbs. Some areas have miles of weak / poor coverage. (Jenison, Hudsonville). Other areas have perfect spacing with towers less than 2km apart of each other (Alpine, 28th st in Cascade, 28th street in Grandville).

 

In areas where Sprint's sites are less than 2km apart, their service is good. More or less competitive with everyone else.

 

In areas where Sprint's sites are more than 2km apart, service is almost useless. (In Grand Rapids, they have sites at 4km apart! In neighboorhoods with 3 times the density as the suburbs.). It's no suprise that data there is useless, phones stay on weak -105dbm of 1X all day long. (Not enough signal to be usable, but just enough to prevent you from getting roaming)

 

West Michigan is very hit - or - miss for Sprint.

 

It will be nice, that as part of Network Vision, all the towers get backhaul + data service. But we really need someone to come up here and finish deploying towers in West Michigan.

[jefbal99]

800Mhz will definitely help with those spacing issues.  I was in the Lowell/Alto/Freeport area over the weekend.  The tower in Lowell is still screaming out SMR and the towers on 60th St near Alto and Alden Nash/M50 were testing SMR on Saturday.  My phone was going nuts connecting and giving notifications from SignalCheck.

[maxsilver]

Yeah, the 800mhz will help, but I don't think it will fix the problem. It's more like a band-aid.

 

Really, they just need to fill in the holes, and get on the Towers + DAS already up and running here.

 

It would only take about 5 towers + 4 DAS leases for Sprint to fix Grand Rapids, and another 10 towers or so to do most of the suburbs + Holland + Grand Haven.

[jefbal99]

I think you are underestimating the effect of SMR and over estimating the cost/benefit of adding that many towers.

 

When I was camping over the weekend and SMR was being tested, I was skipping the tower 2 miles away and connecting to a tower almost 6 miles away at -92dBm through multiple forests and inside a camper. SMR is going to change the game for voice coverage in West Michigan. I need to see the SMR LTE performance before commenting on that because the airlink is so fragile, but it will make data coverage much better for new devices.

 

I believe it was stated around here that it is $100k at a bare minimum to stand up a new tower. Where is Sprint going to recoup that cost?

[lilotimz]

I think you are underestimating the effect of SMR and over estimating the cost/benefit of adding that many towers.

 

When I was camping over the weekend and SMR was being tested, I was skipping the tower 2 miles away and connecting to a tower almost 6 miles away at -92dBm through multiple forests and inside a camper. SMR is going to change the game for voice coverage in West Michigan. I need to see the SMR LTE performance before commenting on that because the airlink is so fragile, but it will make data coverage much better for new devices.

 

I believe it was stated around here that it is $100k at a bare minimum to stand up a new tower. Where is Sprint going to recoup that cost?

 

Generally $100,000 to $150,000 to physically erect a new tower after zoning,  permits, and other stuff. Additional $50,000-$100.000 for fiber backhaul in addition to months of red tape and waiting. Then you gotta get the lease for the area which is probably $20-25,000. Also gotta calculate other potential monetary requirements (cough cough) which brings an entire new tower up to $200,000 - $250,000.

 

Co-locating with other carriers cost less but is still significant as you have to get your own backhaul and lease. Still at least $100,000 after everything.

[maxsilver]

 

I think you are underestimating the effect of SMR

 

 

That's a completely fair argument.

 

I'm using the existing Nextel service as my metric for SMR.

 

But I've heard that the newer Network Vision equipment should add approx 6db to that, and I've never seen any Network Vision refarmed 800 first hand, so it could work a lot better than I'm expecting.

 

You mentioned "6 miles". Yes, they *could* turn up SMR to go crazy distances. But I would expect that shouldn't ever happen inside dense urban areas, if only because too many people would connect to a single tower.

 

 

Co-locating with other carriers cost less but is still significant as you have to get your own backhaul and lease. Still at least $100,000 after everything.

 

This is way, *way*  too high a guess. I have some actual numbers for West Michigan I can throw in here.

 

I called on an American Tower within the city limits, right on the freeway (AT&T and MetroPCS are on it). It's about $5,000 in fees to get started ("site surveys", "environmental impact", other fake fees they throw on). It's $1,000/month to be on the tower itself, and backhaul is about $2,000 - $3,000 a month (depending on how much you want, the $3,000 figure gets you 50x50 Fiber line from AT&T). 

 

This doesn't include electricity (which is small, but meaningful cost) and the cost for equipment + climbers to install it, but assuming its up and running, to maintain a 4G LTE tower is only about $4,000 - $5,000 per month.

 

If you assume an average revenue per subscriber of $40, you only need about 250 of those subscribers on a tower to give you enough revenue to maintain the tower with 50% margins.

 

Towers are expensive, no doubt. But they aren't *that* expensive.

[koiulpoi]

That's a completely fair argument.

 

I'm using the existing 1X 800 service as my metric for SMR.

 

But I've heard that the newer Network Vision equipment should add approx 6db to that, and I've never seen any Network Vision refarmed 800 first hand, so it could work a lot better than I'm expecting.

 

You mentioned "6 miles". Yes, they *could* turn up SMR to go crazy distances. But I would expect that shouldn't ever happen inside dense urban areas, if only because too many people would connect to a single tower.

What existing 1X 800? You mean Nextel service? There is no 800 MHz ESMR CDMA 1X that isn't Network Vision on Sprint. Maybe you're referring to VZW/AT&T 850 MHz Cellular?

 

My current record for a site blasting out 800 MHz ESMR is 12 miles. If you know Grand Rapids, I was able to connect to one of the sites in Byron Center while standing outside at Standale Plaza on Lake Michigan Drive, and again to the same site at Robinson Rd and Cascade Rd. Sure, my signal was -104 dBm, but I was able to make a call on it.

 

As 800 MHz ESMR 1X-Advanced is planned to go on almost every site outside the IBEZ, and seeing that 1X-A can have some pretty crazy capacity (IIRC it's triple of that of regular 1X), that is the least of my worries. Devices can, and will, still use PCS when it's available.

[maxsilver]

What existing 1X 800? You mean Nextel service?

 

Oops, sorry. Yes, Nextel is what I meant. Fixed.

[koiulpoi]

Oops, sorry. Yes, Nextel is what I meant. Fixed.

Well, never used Nextel myself, but I hear it from my customers. "With Nextel, I could make a call in my basement! It was amazing! It worked everywhere! This newfangled Sprint service doesn't work anywhere!"

 

Personally, I've been impressed with 800 MHz ESMR. You're a sponsor, there's some info about more 800 MHz towers coming up in the West Michigan thread.

[geocachenut]

Just received a Sprint text that says they are building a new sprint network with expanded 3G and new 4G LTE capabilities. Expect service interruptions while they do the work. Of course it didn't say what the timeframe was to turn it on!

[zbomb33]

I recieved that text as well.  For the Grandville Area.

[WiWavelength]

It's $1,000/month to be on the tower itself, and backhaul is about $2,000 - $3,000 a month (depending on how much you want, the $3,000 figure gets you 50x50 Fiber line from AT&T).

 

No, that is questionable.  For the amount of revenue that wireless operators rake in, $1000 per month for a site lease is definitely on the low end.  And your backhaul estimate is completely inadequate.  A symmetrical 50 Mbps fiber link would be barely enough to service one 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier on one sector of a site.  Multiply that by two or three for additional LTE carriers, as well as the CDMA1X and EV-DO carriers, then multiply again by three sectors, and now you have your actual backhaul requirements.

 

AJ

[maxsilver]

WiWavelength, on 20 Jun 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

No, that is questionable. For the amount of revenue that wireless operators rake in, $1000 per month for a site lease is definitely on the low end.

I'm not saying there aren't more expensive sites (I'm sure there are ones that cost more somewhere) But that's what I was quoted for various sites in urban West Michigan. (I've called everyone here at least once, except Crown Castle, who I presume has the most expensive sites)

 

WiWavelength, on 20 Jun 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

And your backhaul estimate is completely inadequate. A symmetrical 50 Mbps fiber link would be barely enough to service one 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier on one sector of a site. Multiply that by two or three for additional LTE carriers, as well as the CDMA1X and EV-DO carriers, then multiply again by three sectors, and now you have your actual backhaul requirements.

A 50x50 line can handle a single 5x5 LTE carrier, since 5x5 LTE maxes out at 37.5mb/s.

 

But, in theory, you would be correct. If Sprint wanted to run enough backhaul to fully handle all their air interfaces, at maximum load, all the time, they'd need roughly 160x160 to 200x200. (That's assuming a typical tower, with four LTE sectors, and EVDO + 1X service)

 

However, the vast majority of Sprint sites have never had enough backhaul to max out the air interface, and this isn't changing with Network Vision. Their old "3G" sites had just 1.5 to 4.5mbps of backhaul, even though they could push much more through EVDO rev A if they had more backhaul on the sites.

 

Most new Network Vision sites typically have just 100x100. This isn't coming from me, this is coming from Marty Nevshemal, Sprint's Vice President of Strategic Programs.

 

According to Sprint, they run 100x100 to most sites, and pay roughly $1,500 to $3,000 for backhaul at their sites. (Marty says "20 times more than the 4.5 used previously" - 20 * 4.5 = 90)

 

Source : http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/sprint-ethernet-backhaul-gives-us-20-times-more-bandwidth/2012-08-15

 

Now, there's nothing stopping them from buying more / using more backhaul, and it wouldnt suprise me if they had a few sites in NYC or somewhere that were set up for "high capacity". (Fiber can scale up pretty easily.) But I don't think it's a stretch to assume that the sites here don't have anything more than 100x100 behind them right now.

[Overboost]

Anyone notice the big fake tree tower that was recently installed in Portage near Centre and Oakland? I believe the flag pole is a tower for Verizon and/or ATT, but I noticed the crane putting the tree up the other day. Not sure if it might be a Sprint tower or not.