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

[WiWavelength]

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.

 

I will let Robert make the more definitive statement if he chooses to join this discussion.  But 100 Mbps symmetrical fiber is low from what I recall hearing and reading here at S4GRU.  My recollection is that roughly 200 Mbps is the baseline for backhaul capacity.

 

Now, that said, you are correct that 100 Mbps should be sufficient in actual practice for three sectors deployed with one 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier along with at least one CDMA1X carrier and at least one EV-DO carrier.  The three LTE sectors, for example, are never going to run full tilt simultaneously, since unity frequency reuse causes them to interfere with one another to some degree.

 

But that would be just scraping by with the bare minimum.  We have to take into account the 5 MHz FDD LTE 800 carrier, maybe even a second 5 MHz FDD LTE 1900 carrier, and the CDMA1X 800 carrier.  While it does not make sense to overpay to over provision backhaul, if Sprint is once again under provisioning backhaul, then we are in for more of the same old trouble.

 

AJ

[RCM]

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.

I noticed that last weekend and almost took a photo but decided it wasn't really relevant for this site. I don't know the carrier but it is not Sprint. Sprint is on the flagpole at Center and 131.

[azoclark]

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.

I noticed that last weekend and almost took a photo but decided it wasn't really relevant for this site. I don't know the carrier but it is not Sprint. Sprint is on the flagpole at Center and 131.

 

Couple of of us at $DAYJOB joke that it (new tower) is the Redwood of Portage in that it seems to be double the height of the surrounding trees. So much for it fitting it.  It seems to stick out more than the flag pole tower when you are heading south and sitting at the Oakland/Center light.

 

See previous posts about the flag pole tower behind Portage Cleaners and the new tower across Oakland:

• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=106984
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=107083
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=107085
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-15&do=findComment&comment=107840

[RCM]

Couple of of us at $DAYJOB joke that it (new tower) is the Redwood of Portage in that it seems to be double the height of the surrounding trees. So much for it fitting it.  It seems to stick out more than the flag pole tower when you are heading south and sitting at the Oakland/Center light.

 

See previous posts about the flag pole tower behind Portage Cleaners and the new tower across Oakland:

• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=106984
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=107083
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-14&do=findComment&comment=107085
• http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3227-network-visionlte-west-michigan-market-grand-rapidslansingkalamazoo/page-15&do=findComment&comment=107840

 

I pointed out the tree/tower to my wife. She asked "what is the deal with Portage"? I could only say they always have been trying to be the Beverly Hills of Kalamazoo County.

[Overboost]

Yes, the tree is obnoxious compared to everything else around it. I'm still patiently waiting for the flagpole at Centre/131 to be updated to 4G, as I believe that site supplies my house with signal.

[geocachenut]

So...if I just let sensorly run while I'm driving, it will map out towers and signl strength?

[SWMich4G]

So...if I just let sensorly run while I'm driving, it will map out towers and signl strength?

It will map signal strength if you turn on active mapping and then click start under "map trip" for the drive.  Tower locations are easy to determine after a little mapping is done around them.  Zoom in pretty far and look for the dark purple (4 bars).  There's a tower somewhere in pretty much every blob of dark purple - usually near the center. 

[geocachenut]

 

 

So...if I just let sensorly run while I'm driving, it will map out towers and signl strength?

 

 

It will map signal strength if you turn on active mapping and then click start under "map trip" for the drive. Tower locations are easy to determine after a little mapping is done around them. Zoom in pretty far and look for the dark purple (4 bars). There's a tower somewhere in pretty much every blob of dark purple - usually near the center.

Maybe it isn't an option for the iPhone? I don't see an option for that....

[bbrad8]

Maybe it isn't an option for the iPhone? I don't see an option for that....

Sorry, those of us who use iPhones are not able to procide any assistance in mapping on Sensorly.

[jefbal99]

Maybe it isn't an option for the iPhone? I don't see an option for that....

Apple does not allow access to the APIs needed

[MattVeltkamp]

Site live at Charles dump in Jenison. Well do some mapping today hopefully

 

Sent frome Note 2 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

[geocachenut]

 

Maybe it isn't an option for the iPhone? I don't see an option for that....

 

Apple does not allow access to the APIs needed[/quote

 

Bummer! Wanted to map Muskegon/Whitehall area...

[geocachenut]

Yeah! At the McDonalds area in Whitehall my phone picked up 4G LTE....so of course I checked it out...what a turbo boost to the iPhone! Then, I drove about 1/2 mile away and I went back to 3G. Is this a hint at what is to come?

[jefbal99]

Yeah! At the McDonalds area in Whitehall my phone picked up 4G LTE....so of course I checked it out...what a turbo boost to the iPhone! Then, I drove about 1/2 mile away and I went back to 3G. Is this a hint at what is to come?

You were probably on the fringe of a tower if you lost it within a 1/2 mile or there might be some buildings/physical interference.  If you donate to the site, you can see maps with what towers are accepted and upgraded.

[S4GRU]

 

 

 

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.

 

 

I will let Robert make the more definitive statement if he chooses to join this discussion. But 100 Mbps symmetrical fiber is low from what I recall hearing and reading here at S4GRU. My recollection is that roughly 200 Mbps is the baseline for backhaul capacity.

 

Now, that said, you are correct that 100 Mbps should be sufficient in actual practice for three sectors deployed with one 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier along with at least one CDMA1X carrier and at least one EV-DO carrier. The three LTE sectors, for example, are never going to run full tilt simultaneously, since unity frequency reuse causes them to interfere with one another to some degree.

 

But that would be just scraping by with the bare minimum. We have to take into account the 5 MHz FDD LTE 800 carrier, maybe even a second 5 MHz FDD LTE 1900 carrier, and the CDMA1X 800 carrier. While it does not make sense to overpay to over provision backhaul, if Sprint is once again under provisioning backhaul, then we are in for more of the same old trouble.

 

AJ

 

To add some clarity as AJ requested:

 

The baseline demand is indeed 90. But not 90 per site, 90 per LTE carrier. For NV sites with LTE service that are supposed to get LTE 800 & 1900 they are looking for 200. And this makes sense when you figure three sectors.

 

They have allowed lower amounts for sites with backhaul service problems that are lower capacity. On one sheet I have them show some that say 60, 55 and some as low as 45. And these are the sites where people say, "I have a full and perfect signal and never get above 10-15Mbps." That's because that is all the site backhaul can currently support.

 

Also, these sites have scalable backhaul requirements in their contract. Upon request, the backhaul provider can increase backhaul requirements within 30 days to support additional LTE carriers when added. And all of these backhaul requirements were figured just on 1900/800 CDMA and LTE loads. They will grow significantly to add Clearwire TD-LTE if the intent is to push those carriers anywhere near their 60-90Mbps max speeds.

 

Sites that have lower amounts allowed, like 60, 55, 45 are just temporary measures. They will need more backhaul brought in to support additional carriers, especially TD-LTE.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[jefbal99]

To add some clarity as AJ requested:

 

The baseline demand is indeed 90. But not 90 per site, 90 per LTE carrier. For NV sites with LTE service that are supposed to get LTE 800 & 1900 they are looking for 200. And this makes sense when you figure three sectors.

 

They have allowed lower amounts for sites with backhaul service problems that are lower capacity. On one sheet I have them show some that say 60, 55 and some as low as 45. And these are the sites where people say, "I have a full and perfect signal and never get above 10-15Mbps." That's because that is all the site backhaul can currently support.

 

Also, these sites have scalable backhaul requirements in their contract. Upon request, the backhaul provider can increase backhaul requirements within 30 days to support additional LTE carriers when added. And all of these backhaul requirements were figured just on 1900/800 CDMA and LTE loads. They will grow significantly to add Clearwire TD-LTE if the intent is to push those carriers anywhere near their 60-90Mbps max speeds.

 

Sites that have lower amounts allowed, like 60, 55, 45 are just temporary measures. They will need more backhaul brought in to support additional carriers, especially TD-LTE.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

This should be added to the FAQ

[koiulpoi]

The baseline demand is indeed 90. But not 90 per site, 90 per LTE carrier. For NV sites with LTE service that are supposed to get LTE 800 & 1900 they are looking for 200. And this makes sense when you figure three sectors.

So - 90 per sector, so 270 Mbps down for a standard three-sector site?

 

The 200 number is also per sector then, just doubled because of two different frequencies, right? So for a 800+1900 site with three sectors of each, they need backhaul of 600 Mbps? 

 

And then if we add three ~90 Mbps TD-LTE carriers, that jumps up to 900 per site?

 

Goodness.

[S4GRU]

So - 90 per sector, so 270 Mbps down for a standard three-sector site?

 

The 200 number is also per sector then, just doubled because of two different frequencies, right? So for a 800+1900 site with three sectors of each, they need backhaul of 600 Mbps? 

 

And then if we add three ~90 Mbps TD-LTE carriers, that jumps up to 900 per site?

 

Goodness.

 

Nope.  90 for each carrier that has three sectors.  Not 90 per sector.  90 per carrier.  A two sector site can have less than 90.

 

Robert

[koiulpoi]

Nope.  90 for each carrier that has three sectors.  Not 90 per sector.  90 per carrier.  A two sector site can have less than 90.

 

Robert

Wow, I feel dumb making that mistake. Need more coffee.

Oh, of course! It's ~37 Mbps per sector peak, times three.

 

Edit: So 200 for 800+1900... how much more then do we need for TD-LTE? If it's peak of 90 Mbps,we actually do need the extra 300 to get 3 sectors of that, right? Or no?

[S4GRU]

 

Edit: So 200 for 800+1900... how much more then do we need for TD-LTE? If it's peak of 90 Mbps,we actually do need the extra 300 to get 3 sectors of that, right? Or no?

 

I'm not certain what the requirements are going to be to add TD-LTE to a Network Vision site.  Do they try to support the full 90Mbps max speeds?  Do they do something lower just to provide more capacity?  Do they provide the max where possible and something less when not?  I have no idea.  I have very little data about the Clearwire integration into Sprint.  

 

A week ago we weren't even sure if Sprint was going to end up with Clearwire.  Hopefully some of these plans will start leaking out now that there appears to be more certainty.

 

Robert

[geocachenut]

You were probably on the fringe of a tower if you lost it within a 1/2 mile or there might be some buildings/physical interference.  If you donate to the site, you can see maps with what towers are accepted and upgraded.

I cannot figure out where the link is to donate to the site!!  Help?

[lilotimz]

I cannot figure out where the link is to donate to the site!!  Help?

Go to forum list and the top right is where the paypal link is located. 

[Overboost]

On Friday afternoon, I noticed a truck at the tower on 131, just south of B&G Discount in Schoolcraft, there was a truck and some equipment. I will keep an eye out for other equipment showing up.

[azoclark]

On Friday afternoon, I noticed a truck at the tower on 131, just south of B&G Discount in Schoolcraft, there was a truck and some equipment. I will keep an eye out for other equipment showing up.

 

I think I saw the same truck Sunday AM (07:00ish).

[mrgoalie]

Looks like the tower in Portage on the corner of Westnedge and Kilgore (behind Lowes) is broadcasting LTE now.