Jump to content

How BEHIND is Sprint's deployment as of now ?


Recommended Posts

I remember reading somewhere that LTE would be partially available in/around Los Angeles and Riverside by Feb, March.

 

So far I haven't seen anything...the one time I did get a LTE signal, it only lasted for a brief moment and speedtests reviewed 2mbps which is slower than T-mobile which isnt LTE.

 

This isn't a post to complain or vent, as I'm merely wondering how behind they are.

 

It almost reminds me of when I waited for wimax which never came.

 

Is Sprint planning on rushing through anytime soon or are they merely working at a glacial pace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading somewhere that LTE would be partially available in/around Los Angeles and Riverside by Feb, March.

 

So far I haven't seen anything...the one time I did get a LTE signal, it only lasted for a brief moment and speedtests reviewed 2mbps which is slower than T-mobile which isnt LTE.

 

This isn't a post to complain or vent, as I'm merely wondering how behind they are.

 

It almost reminds me of when I waited for wimax which never came.

 

Is Sprint planning on rushing through anytime soon or are they merely working at a glacial pace?

 

They are running 3-4 months behind in most markets. Finding skilled labor is the latest challenge. There are only so many people out there with the skills to do the work, and all 4 major carriers and most regional carriers all doing upgrades at once, straining the labor market.

 

LA County has about 50% of its Sprint service area with at least some outdoor LTE coverage now. And more is being added daily. In the Riverside/San Bernardino market, about 1/4 of the sites have been worked on, but only two have had LTE completed and signed off. More will be coming in the next few weeks.

 

It is going to be slowish going, but steady. About a dozen sites a week will go live in LA on average through the rest of the year at the current pace. It may pick up, but not likely. It will just slowly get better and better.

 

This deployment is nothing like WiMax. The WiMax network was owned and installed by a 3rd party called Clearwire. Clearwire ran out of money and hadn't even finished planning the Inland Empire, let alone deploy anything meaningful. Sprint has completely planned and already has the money to complete the LTE deployment and they are doing this themselves. And work is already underway.

 

The reason for the slow speed is signal strength. LTE performance is very signal strength dependent. And this is true no matter which wireless carrier you use. The stronger the LTE signal, the better the speeds. For more info about that, you can visit this thread: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/2040-bars-lie-for-lte-signal-strength-how-to-determine-your-actual-lte-signal-strength/

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are running 3-4 months behind in most markets. Finding skilled labor is the latest challenge. There are only so many people out there with the skills to do the work, and all 4 major carriers and most regional carriers all doing upgrades at once, straining the labor market.

 

LA County has about 50% of its Sprint service area with at least some outdoor LTE coverage now. And more is being added daily. In the Riverside/San Bernardino market, about 1/4 of the sites have been worked on, but only two have had LTE completed and signed off. More will be coming in the next few weeks.

 

It is going to be slowish going, but steady. About a dozen sites a week will go live in LA on average through the rest of the year at the current pace. It may pick up, but not likely. It will just slowly get better and better.

 

This deployment is nothing like WiMax. The WiMax network was owned and installed by a 3rd party called Clearwire. Clearwire ran out of money and hadn't even finished planning the Inland Empire, let alone deploy anything meaningful. Sprint has completely planned and already has the money to complete the LTE deployment and they are doing this themselves. And work is already underway.

 

The reason for the slow speed is signal strength. LTE performance is very signal strength dependent. And this is true no matter which wireless carrier you use. The stronger the LTE signal, the better the speeds. For more info about that, you can visit this thread: http://s4gru.com/ind...ignal-strength/

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

Maybe a bit off-topic for this thread..but I've never understood why LTE at 1900 MHz will be any better at building penetration than Wimax was???? Pray tell as you mentioned signal strength; are LTE signals going to be that much stronger than Wimax at 1900 Mhz?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a bit off-topic for this thread..but I've never understood why LTE at 1900 MHz will be any better at building penetration than Wimax was???? Pray tell as you mentioned signal strength; are LTE signals going to be that much stronger than Wimax at 1900 Mhz?

 

WiMAX is deployed in BRS/EBS 2600 MHz spectrum, not PCS 1900 MHz spectrum. And WiMAX uses OFDMA on the uplink. It is not an apples to apples comparison to LTE in PCS 1900 MHz spectrum.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to spring board off AJ's points, WiMax signal air link was even more fragile and maxed out between -82 and -85dBm RSSI. Any weaker than that and your device couldn't get a signal back to the sites. Whereas LTE signal peters out around -93 to -95dBm RSSI.

 

So even if WiMax and LTE are deployed on the same band, LTE would go farther. About 10dBm farther. But since there is also a gain in the better band of PCS over EBS/BRS, Sprint LTE 1900 is considerably better in signal strength and coverage than WiMax in most deployment scenarios.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTE would go farther. About 10dBm farther.
Which is "inside your average building" vs "only on the street", if I'm remembering my numbers correctly.

 

Which... if "dBm" is a logarithmic scale, a reduction of 10 dBm is equivalent to the signal being reduced by a factor of 10, or 90% loss. If that's true, houses are brutal, and I'm surprised we ever get in-building coverage at all with anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is "inside your average building" vs "only on the street", if I'm remembering my numbers correctly.

 

Which... if "dBm" is a logarithmic scale, a reduction of 10 dBm is equivalent to the signal being reduced by a factor of 10, or 90% loss. If that's true, houses are brutal, and I'm surprised we ever get in-building coverage at all with anything.

 

Considering the power outputs that cell sites broadcast at, I am not surprised.

 

I was at a site and felt the onset of a headache about an hour into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the power outputs that cell sites broadcast at, I am not surprised.

 

I was at a site and felt the onset of a headache about an hour into it.

Actually, it seems (waiting for AJ, Rob, et. al. to join in) cell sites broadcast an exceptionally small amount of power. The strongest signal I've ever seen is -60 dBm, which according to wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBm

is 1.0 nW, or 10^(-9) watts. Compare this to some of the handheld low-power ham radio equipment, which blasts out 5 Watts without thinking about it. Quick edit: funny, the same table actually includes handheld ham radio equipment at +37 dBm, or 5 Watts. Legal limit, ho!

 

Edit2: So, -60 dBm has the note of "The Earth receives one nanowatt per square metre from a magnitude +3.5 star." The Andromeda Galaxy, which is barely visible on a moonless night in an area with barely any light pollution, is magnitude 3.44. So being within a few hundred feet of a cell site hits you with the same amount of radiated power as a single star you can barely see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the [redacted] that [redacted] at, I am not surprised.

 

I was at a [redacted] and [redacted] about [redacted] into it.

 

What are you trying to do, Deval, give the NIMBY, tinfoil hat crowd evidence?

 

;)

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never felt any effect from being around panels and radios, nor living next to a site. Why does it differ from the power of your device which is immediately adjacent to your body? I would say it is coincidence.

 

On another note, when I go out in the field I tend not to drink as much water and end up getting dehydration headaches.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems (waiting for AJ, Rob, et. al. to join in) cell sites broadcast an exceptionally small amount of power. The strongest signal I've ever seen is -60 dBm, which according to wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBm

is 1.0 nW, or 10^(-9) watts. Compare this to some of the handheld low-power ham radio equipment, which blasts out 5 Watts without thinking about it. Quick edit: funny, the same table actually includes handheld ham radio equipment at +37 dBm, or 5 Watts. Legal limit, ho!

 

Edit2: So, -60 dBm has the note of "The Earth receives one nanowatt per square metre from a magnitude +3.5 star." The Andromeda Galaxy, which is barely visible on a moonless night in an area with barely any light pollution, is magnitude 3.44. So being within a few hundred feet of a cell site hits you with the same amount of radiated power as a single star you can barely see.

 

Not true. The 10^-9 watts is the radiated power received by the total area of the cell phone antenna, not the transmitting power of the cell phone tower. You can stand next to a 100w transmitter and receive a signal several orders of magnitude lower than what is being transmitted, simply because that power is being radiated in many directions.

Edited by jsncrso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems (waiting for AJ, Rob, et. al. to join in) cell sites broadcast an exceptionally small amount of power. The strongest signal I've ever seen is -60 dBm...

 

Well, cell sites can transmit a fair amount of power -- from several watts to several hundred watts. And if you are only 1 m from the antenna, then you are going to bear the brunt of that output. But path loss is logarithmic. Even using the free space model, at 50 m from the antenna, path loss is already 34 dB greater than it was at 1 m from the antenna. So, say that power at 1 m is 500 W (highly unlikely, but for the sake of argument). Then, power at 50 m is already down to 0.19 W.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true. The 10^-9 watts is the radiated power received by the total area of the cell phone antenna, not the transmitting power of the cell phone tower.

Oh, yes, so I gathered. I used -60 dBm as an example, but I can see that being immediately next to a site could be... a lot?

 

My idea is "signal passing through a human", which what I've learned (thanks to wiki, AJ, and you) is that in almost all cases the power you could be exposed to by an average cell tower is exceedingly small, even compared to what mobile devices themselves put out... and we put those by our heads.

Well, cell sites can transmit a fair amount of power -- from several watts to several hundred watts. And if you are only 1 m from the antenna, then you are going to bear the brunt of that output. But path loss is logarithmic. Even using the free space model, at 50 m from the antenna, path loss is already 34 dB greater than it was at 1 m from the antenna. So, say that power at 1 m is 500 W (highly unlikely, but for the sake of argument). Then, power at 50 m is already down to 0.19 W.

 

AJ

Free space is worse than buildings!!!!</badmath>

 

Now, the answer is probably "yes but unfeasible", but... couldn't someone then reverse that equation to figure out how much power a cell site is radiating? I imagine it would require something like the area of the phone's antenna or something like that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free space is worse than buildings!!!!</badmath>

 

Free space path loss is predicated on the decrease in field strength density over distance as the signal spreads omnidirectionally like a growing sphere. Or, to put it in simpler terms, power is quartered with every doubling of distance. So, 1 m to 50 m is a doubling of distance about 5.5 times. That is a 34 dB path loss. But 1 km to 50 km is also a doubling of distance about 5.5 times and the same 34 dB path loss. Thus, the degree of path loss seems to diminish with distance. The greatest degree is close in to the transmitter.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are running 3-4 months behind in most markets. Finding skilled labor is the latest challenge. There are only so many people out there with the skills to do the work, and all 4 major carriers and most regional carriers all doing upgrades at once, straining the labor market.

 

I'm too much of a wimp to climb a tower, but I can configure routers and swap out chassis cards. Where do I put in my application to help with NV? :-P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free space path loss is predicated on the decrease in field strength density over distance as the signal spreads omnidirectionally like a growing sphere. Or, to put it in simpler terms, power is quartered with every doubling of distance. So, 1 m to 50 m is a doubling of distance about 5.5 times. That is a 34 dB path loss. But 1 km to 50 km is also a doubling of distance about 5.5 times and the same 34 dB path loss. Thus, the degree of path loss seems to diminish with distance. The greatest degree is close in to the transmitter.

 

AJ

The density of a sphere is actually a great visual metaphor. I got it! It's similar to a video game portrayal of a shotgun, actually.

 

So can we, like, sit down some day, sip some whiskey, and just talk about nerdy things? I'd like to pick your brain for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So can we, like, sit down some day, sip some whiskey, and just talk about nerdy things? I'd like to pick your brain for a while.

 

Sure, I would enjoy that. Are you coming to the S4GRU National Convention at McCormick Place in Chicago this summer? We have to decide if we wish to nominate Robert for a second term.

 

AJ

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, I would enjoy that. Are you coming to the S4GRU National Convention at McCormick Place in Chicago this summer? We have to decide if we wish to nominate Robert for a second term.

 

AJ

 

Honestly, would anyone else in their right mind even take the position?

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, would anyone else in their right mind even take the position?

 

:)

 

Rumor has it that Tommydaniel has selected PLANETEARTH as his running mate to challenge Robert for the nomination.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Sure, I would enjoy that. Are you coming to the S4GRU National Convention at McCormick Place in Chicago this summer? We have to decide if we wish to nominate Robert for a second term.

 

AJ

give me the time and the place, and I'll get it off of work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just one of those things. Could be the 30 degree snowy weather I was standing in as well.

 

Was roughly 6 feet away from the RRH/Panel.

 

So u were up high climbing the tower?... That's only way ud be that close to the panel really, no?

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So u were up high climbing the tower?... That's only way ud be that close to the panel really, no?

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Nope, was at a roof site.

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

    • Since this is kind of the general chat thread, I have to share this humorous story (at least it is to me): Since around February/March of this year, my S22U has been an absolute pain to charge. USB-C cables would immediately fall out and it progressively got worse and worse until it often took me a number of minutes to get the angle of the cable juuuussst right to get charging to occur at all (not exaggerating). The connection was so weak that even walking heavily could cause the cable to disconnect. I tried cleaning out the port with a stable, a paperclip, etc. Some dust/lint/dirt came out but the connection didn't improve one bit. Needless to say, this was a MONSTER headache and had me hating this phone. I just didn't have the finances right now for a replacement.  Which brings us to the night before last. I am angry as hell because I had spent five minutes trying to get this phone to charge and failed. I am looking in the port and I notice it doesn't look right. The walls look rough and, using a staple, the back and walls feel REALLY rough and very hard. I get some lint/dust out with the staple and it improves charging in the sense I can get it to charge but it doesn't remove any of the hard stuff. It's late and it's charging, so that's enough for now. I decide it's time to see if that hard stuff is part of the connector or not. More aggressive methods are needed! I work in a biochem lab and we have a lot of different sizes of disposable needles available. So, yesterday morning, while in the lab I grab a few different sizes of needles between 26AWG and 31 AWG. When I got home, I got to work and start probing the connector with the 26 AWG and 31 AWG needle. The stuff feels extremely hard, almost like it was part of the connector, but a bit does break off. Under examination of the bit, it's almost sandy with dust/lint embedded in it. It's not part of the connector but instead some sort of rock-hard crap! That's when I remember that I had done some rock hounding at the end of last year and in January. This involved lots of digging in very sandy/dusty soils; soils which bare more than a passing resemblance to the crap in the connector. We have our answer, this debris is basically compacted/cemented rock dust. Over time, moisture in the area combined with the compression from inserting the USB-C connector had turned it into cement. I start going nuts chiseling away at it with the 26 AWG needle. After about 5-10 minutes of constant chiseling and scraping with the 26AWG and 31AWG needles, I see the first signs of metal at the back of the connector. So it is metal around the outsides! Another 5 minutes of work and I have scraped away pretty much all of the crap in the connector. A few finishing passes with the 31AWG needle, a blast of compressed air, and it is time to see if this helped any. I plug my regular USB-C cable and holy crap it clicks into place; it hasn't done that since February! I pick up the phone and the cable has actually latched! The connector works pretty much like it did over a year ago, it's almost like having a brand new phone!
    • That's odd, they are usually almost lock step with TMO. I forgot to mention this also includes the September Security Update.
    • 417.55 MB September security update just downloaded here for S24+ unlocked   Edit:  after Sept security update install, checked and found a 13MB GP System update as well.  Still showing August 1st there however. 
    • T-Mobile is selling the rest of the 3.45GHz spectrum to Columbia Capital.  
    • Still nothing for my AT&T and Visible phones.
  • Recently Browsing

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