Jump to content

Network Visions - non-metro areas

bobbi

By bobbi
in Markets

 Share

Recommended Posts

bobbi Member Level: 1x Advanced

bobbi

Posted
Posted

I've a bunch of Network Vision articles here and elsewhere, but I still don't understand the full scope of Network Vision. I understand the metro roll outs. It makes sense to cover high density population areas over those less dense. But I don't understand their plans for the the outskirts of the metro areas and the rural areas.

 

Is it Sprint's intention as part of Network Vision to upgrade all its towers that it doesn't decommission? Will there still be some towers without upgrades when Network Vision is officially wrapped up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
Posted

I've a bunch of Network Vision articles here and elsewhere, but I still don't understand the full scope of Network Vision. I understand the metro roll outs. It makes sense to cover high density population areas over those less dense. But I don't understand their plans for the the outskirts of the metro areas and the rural areas.

 

Is it Sprint's intention as part of Network Vision to upgrade all its towers that it doesn't decommission? Will there still be some towers without upgrades when Network Vision is officially wrapped up?

 

Sprint will be upgrading all of their remaining 38,000 sites to Network Vision, including rural sites. For the most part, Sprint is not decommissioning any CDMA sites in Network Vision. Only a small handful. Like around 100 out of 38,000. They are actually adding more CDMA than they are removing. Almost all of the sites being removed are iDEN sites (Nextel).

 

The Chicago article covers a lot of information of how they are deploying in rural areas within a macro market. In the S4GRU.com Chicago case study, the Network Vision OEM Samsung is starting with rural clusters of NV sites and working their way into the denser Central part of the market. If Sprint can stay on schedule, they will have started work in all markets by December 2013.

 

- Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bobbi Member Level: 1x Advanced

bobbi

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the reply.

 

Follow up question... In the Chicago case study it states "What was referred to as the Kankakee FIT was really a 3G-only Network Vision FIT. Many news outlets reported these as including 4G LTE because it was assumed all Network Vision towers had LTE."

 

So not all towers are going to be upgraded to include LTE with the Network Vision upgrades?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt. Slaughter Member Level: 4G WiMax

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted
Thanks for the reply.

 

Follow up question... In the Chicago case study it states "What was referred to as the Kankakee FIT was really a 3G-only Network Vision FIT. Many news outlets reported these as including 4G LTE because it was assumed all Network Vision towers had LTE."

 

So not all towers are going to be upgraded to include LTE with the Network Vision upgrades?

 

I think he commented somewhere saying he didn't know why they didn't have LTE on them and assumed it was for testing purposes but also assumed that LTE would be added to the towers later after testing.....

 

I could be wrong there and if so I'm sorry Robert.

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
Posted

Thanks for the reply.

 

Follow up question... In the Chicago case study it states "What was referred to as the Kankakee FIT was really a 3G-only Network Vision FIT. Many news outlets reported these as including 4G LTE because it was assumed all Network Vision towers had LTE."

 

So not all towers are going to be upgraded to include LTE with the Network Vision upgrades?

I think he commented somewhere saying he didn't know why they didn't have LTE on them and assumed it was for testing purposes but also assumed that LTE would be added to the towers later after testing.....

 

I could be wrong there and if so I'm sorry Robert.

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

 

Sarge...thanks for responding. That is basically what I'm saying.

 

All Network Vision upgrades include LTE installations. However, in the case of the Kankakee FIT, it was only installed to conduct 3G field testing of a cluster of Network Vision sites, working together. To check RF designs for accuracy, make sure everything on the 3G EVDO network was performing as expected, including handoffs between towers.

 

The Hammond 4G FIT cluster did the same thing, but only the LTE portion though. Why they didn't do both in the same cluster? Because they both needed to use PCS G-block for testing. Sprint has mandated that all Network Vision testing be done in PCS G-Block spectrum so as to not interfere with existing customers.

 

By doing two different clusters for 3G and 4G LTE, it allowed them to perform FIT testing for both at the same time. What I don't know is if the Hammond 4G FIT and the Kankakee 3G FIT also received full 3G and 4G gear when their FIT's were outfitted in December 2011. I'd guess yes, however, it probably is not all active until after testing completes. They will be using the same antenna panels and RRU's for CDMA and LTE, as well as 800MHz and 1900MHz. They also are in the same base cabinets. Since they share 75% of their hardware/systems at each site, it makes sense to install each of the FIT clusters with all the equipment, 1xA, EVDO and LTE.

 

However, the 4G will not likely go live in the Kankakee cluster while FIT testing is still going on in the PCS G-Block spectrum. And vice versa with the Hammond cluster. And I have no idea when they will complete the testing in these clusters. They may even be done already, for all I know. All I know is what I'm told by my sources. I don't work for Sprint or their subcontractors myself.

 

Robert

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
runagun Member Level: 3G EVDO

runagun

Posted
Posted

Robert, Makes sense cause the Marengo tower didnt have LTE installed. It was only Cdma 800. The Subcontractor didn't know when it was suppose to be installed. But he did say there where a bad batch of RRU installed and its taking time to find and replace them.

 

Another interesting tidbit That he said related to Tmobile and their plans on moving up the RRU. He told me that Tmobile has already started moving up the RRU's in the STL market since last year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
Posted

Robert, Makes sense cause the Marengo tower didnt have LTE installed. It was only Cdma 800. The Subcontractor didn't know when it was suppose to be installed. But he did say there where a bad batch of RRU installed and its taking time to find and replace them.

 

Another interesting tidbit That he said related to Tmobile and their plans on moving up the RRU. He told me that Tmobile has already started moving up the RRU's in the STL market since last year.

 

Thanks for the info. Additionally, AT&T is deploying remote RRU's too up top. Verizon is the only one without any publicized plans to do so at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CuriousTim Member Level: Analog

CuriousTim

Posted
Posted

I'm in a small town that is likely not going see Sprint 4g LtE until 2014. I'm hoping that when the town ~15miles east of here is upgraded and their towers provide expanded coverage that people who are on the fence about which tower to make a connection actually goes to the upgraded towers taking at least a few users off the congested tower in my small town -- wish it'd be the data heavy users. I also predict Verizon will have 4g here way before Sprint and that will remove some of the congestion.

 

Any info on network vision being done in Minnesota?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
Posted
I'm in a small town that is likely not going see Sprint 4g LtE until 2014. I'm hoping that when the town ~15miles east of here is upgraded and their towers provide expanded coverage that people who are on the fence about which tower to make a connection actually goes to the upgraded towers taking at least a few users off the congested tower in my small town -- wish it'd be the data heavy users. I also predict Verizon will have 4g here way before Sprint and that will remove some of the congestion.

 

Any info on network vision being done in Minnesota?

 

Tim, Network Vision deployments are being done market wide. When Samsung starts work in Sprint's Minnesota market, they will not leave until the entire market is complete. You shouldn't have an issue where the part you live has legacy service for a long time, living on the edge of Network Vision service.

 

As for when MN deployment will begin. We are not ready to announce MN yet. Stay tuned!

 

- Robert

 

Posted via Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

Another interesting tidbit That he said related to Tmobile and their plans on moving up the RRU. He told me that Tmobile has already started moving up the RRU's in the STL market since last year.

 

St. Louis is one of the markets in which T-Mobile has started PCS 1900 MHz spectrum refarming and deploying W-CDMA 1900. So, it makes sense that T-Mobile would be installing RRUs at the same time.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacinJosh Member Level: LTE Advanced

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

St. Louis is one of the markets in which T-Mobile has started PCS 1900 MHz spectrum refarming and deploying W-CDMA 1900. So, it makes sense that T-Mobile would be installing RRUs at the same time.

 

AJ

 

OK. What does RRU stand for?

  • Like 1
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Trip
      T-Mobile to acquire UScellular

      By Trip · Posted

      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
    • wispiANt
      Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

      By wispiANt · Posted

      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.
    • radem
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By radem · Posted

      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.
    • swintec
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By swintec · Posted

      will this work for service in a plane?
    • Paynefanbro
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By Paynefanbro · Posted

      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...