Jump to content

WiMax Protection Site Operation Confirmation

S4GRU

By S4GRU
in WiMax

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

S4GRU
S4GRU

This Note is a listing of every single Protection Site in America (work in progress) and a confirmation whether it is working or not. This note will be updated daily as information changes and/or is

WiWavelength
WiWavelength

I have long thought that the FCC needs a Spectrum Czar -- namely, me.   AJ

WiWavelength
WiWavelength

A license protection site is the condom of the wireless world. It does not offer much wireless pleasure, but it gets the job done.   AJ

Posted Images

Djkraemer Member Level: Smoke Signals

Djkraemer

Posted
Posted

No WiMAX connection in Roanoke, VA. I'm located roughly a mile from the local airport. Clear indicates that coverage is acailable at my address, however services are not yet being sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WealthyHabitz Member Level: 3G EVDO

WealthyHabitz

Posted
Posted

Is it possible these protection sites (Central Florida at least) are running on the Uppermost receivable frequencies? Because official site seem to penetrate better for download than protection sites.

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

S4GRU

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Is it possible these protection sites (Central Florida at least) are running on the Uppermost receivable frequencies? Because official site seem to penetrate better for download than protection sites.

 

Official sites do penetrate better. Good observation! But it's not because of the frequency set used. Protection sites are deployed with little to no downtilt. The panels are pointed out 90 degrees straight out from the tower to maximize coverage area. This is good for creating a large coverage circle on a map that you showcase to the FCC to "protect" your license, but not good in actually being usable to the people on the ground, or especially inside buildings.

 

The whole point of the protection site isn't to give people service, but rather to protect their license from being revoked by the FCC for failing to meet minimum coverage standards. If you can actually use the signal, then they just consider that bonus.

 

Also, Protection Sites will give you better coverage from higher buildings and hills and mountains than you will from being on the ground. That's because if you are up in the air, those panels are pointed right at you. That's the reason why there is a difference between Protection Sites and Standard WiMax Deployments. Most people don't even notice the difference. Good job.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjr Member Level: Smoke Signals

pjr

Posted
Posted

...

Also, Protection Sites will give you better coverage from higher buildings and hills and mountains than you will from being on the ground. That's because if you are up in the air, those panels are pointed right at you. That's the reason why there is a difference between Protection Sites and Standard WiMax Deployments. Most people don't even notice the difference. Good job.

...

Robert

 

I can vouch for this, my parents house in Shamokin is on the hill across from the protection tower, almost line of site, I just have to get his neighbors to cut the roof off their houses.

 

I had a nice strong signal there, 4 out of 5 lights on my clear modem.

 

I was able to get 7+ mbps down with the clear modem in Shamokin, much better my dad's DSL line.

 

Do they normally use that nice of a backhaul with a protection site?

 

Patrick

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I can vouch for this, my parents house in Shamokin is on the hill across from the protection tower, almost line of site, I just have to get his neighbors to cut the roof off their houses.

 

I had a nice strong signal there, 4 out of 5 lights on my clear modem.

 

I was able to get 7+ mbps down with the clear modem in Shamokin, much better my dad's DSL line.

 

Do they normally use that nice of a backhaul with a protection site?

 

Patrick

 

When it comes to Protection Sites, the backhaul is highly variable. It pretty much is potpourri. Whatever is convenient, that's what they use. Some Protection Sites only have T1's, if that's all they could get.

 

In Las Vegas, New Mexico they have a WiMax Protection Site that is 1.5Mbps upload and download 24 hours a day. Because it's on a T1 for backhaul. However, the next Protection Site to the west in Santa Fe has fiber backhaul. There was a vendor already there that leased to Clearwire for dirt cheap. It has 9 - 15Mbps Download speeds.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt. Slaughter Member Level: 4G WiMax

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted

 

When it comes to Protection Sites, the backhaul is highly variable. It pretty much is potpourri. Whatever is convenient, that's what they use. Some Protection Sites only have T1's, if that's all they could get.

 

In Las Vegas, New Mexico they have a WiMax Protection Site that is 1.5Mbps upload and download 24 hours a day. Because it's on a T1 for backhaul. However, the next Protection Site to the west in Santa Fe has fiber backhaul. There was a vendor already there that leased to Clearwire for dirt cheap. It has 9 - 15Mbps Download speeds.

 

Robert

 

That is the most ridiculous stunt ever. But at the same time genius bc they are sticking it to the system in a sense. LOL

 

Would never thought Clearwire would stump to such levels and provide T1 backhaul in some places...

 

Taking notes from sprint...hehe

 

Surprised the FCC doesn't step in and monitor speed levels in some cases...guess that's a lil out of their realm though?...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

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

S4GRU

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That is the most ridiculous stunt ever. But at the same time genius bc they are sticking it to the system in a sense. LOL

 

Would never thought Clearwire would stump to such levels and provide T1 backhaul in some places...

 

Taking notes from sprint...hehe

 

Surprised the FCC doesn't step in and monitor speed levels in some cases...guess that's a lil out of their realm though?...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

 

I always wondered if the FCC would care about T1's being used in protection sites. After all, the build out requirements called for mobile broadband. And it was my understanding that EVDO did not meet the definition of the FCC mobile broadband definition for EBS/BRS spectrum and exactly why they used WiMax. So how can T1 backhaul that would essentially render WiMax to EVDO speeds be acceptable? It's a great point.

 

Robert

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

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted

 

I always wondered if the FCC would care about T1's being used in protection sites. After all, the build out requirements called for mobile broadband. And it was my understanding that EVDO did not meet the definition of the FCC mobile broadband definition for EBS/BRS spectrum and exactly why they used WiMax. So how can T1 backhaul that would essentially render WiMax to EVDO speeds be acceptable? It's a great point.

 

Robert

 

Wonder if clear as a network could get in trouble for false advertising in a sense? I'm sure they advertise speeds the same nationally and those sites would be well below them...less protection sites like that are solely run by sub providers in a sense...

 

One would hope that when LTE comes through they would change the backhaul then at least though...lol

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

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

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

I always wondered if the FCC would care about T1's being used in protection sites. After all, the build out requirements called for mobile broadband. And it was my understanding that EVDO did not meet the definition of the FCC mobile broadband definition for EBS/BRS spectrum and exactly why they used WiMax. So how can T1 backhaul that would essentially render WiMax to EVDO speeds be acceptable? It's a great point.

 

Robert

 

That is a good point. Maybe the FCC didn't care as long as the protection sites were just operational, let alone fast enough to support high speed data. Just hopefully when they upgrade to LTE they upgrade the backhaul on those sites.

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

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted

 

That is a good point. Maybe the FCC didn't care as long as the protection sites were just operational, let alone fast enough to support high speed data. Just hopefully when they upgrade to LTE they upgrade the backhaul on those sites.

 

Or they just have bigger fish to fry....ie lightsquared. Lol

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

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

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

Or they just have bigger fish to fry....ie lightsquared. Lol

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

 

And Verizon, since they finished frying at&t over the T-Mobile merger, lol.

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

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted

 

And Verizon, since they finished frying at&t over the T-Mobile merger, lol.

 

Yes! One can dream.....oh what's that? VZ must forfit half its spectrum holdings....LOL

Dream big. Hehe

 

 

Then maybe they can go after Apple? Jkjkjkjk

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

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

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

I always wondered if the FCC would care about T1's being used in protection sites.

That is a good point. Maybe the FCC didn't care as long as the protection sites were just operational, let alone fast enough to support high speed data. Just hopefully when they upgrade to LTE they upgrade the backhaul on those sites.

Or they just have bigger fish to fry....ie lightsquared. Lol

 

I have long thought that the FCC needs a Spectrum Czar -- namely, me. ;)

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacinJosh Member Level: LTE Advanced

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

Yes! One can dream.....oh what's that? VZ must forfit half its spectrum holdings....LOL

Dream big. Hehe

 

 

Then maybe they can go after Apple? Jkjkjkjk

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

 

You wish that Verizon would have to forfeit half their spectrum, lol. I don't ever see that happening.

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

pyroscott

Posted
Posted

 

Yes! One can dream.....oh what's that? VZ must forfit half its spectrum holdings....LOL

Dream big. Hehe

 

 

Then maybe they can go after Apple? Jkjkjkjk

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

DOJ is going after apple. For ebook contracts and pricing

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

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

Sgt. Slaughter

Posted
Posted

DOJ is going after apple. For ebook contracts and pricing

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

Saw that. almost posted it in General but didn't have time yesterday...thought it was funny how some of the others have already settled in the suit...

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

pyroscott

Posted
Posted

 

Saw that. almost posted it in General but didn't have time yesterday...thought it was funny how some of the others have already settled in the suit...

 

I think it's sad when you can buy a physical book for less than an e book. Then you have to buy a reader to boot. E books should be priced to pay the author and publisher. The delivery outlet gets a cut, and the customer saves a little. Just another example of apple gouging customers just because they can. E books would catch on big time if they were priced in the $5-8 range that they could be priced.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Paynefanbro
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By Paynefanbro · Posted

      Kind of amazing that T-Mobile is still holding onto that speed title despite Verizon all but killing off lowband 5G on their network. While Verizon is mostly being evaluated on mmWave and C-band performance, T-Mobile and AT&T's average 5G speeds include their massive lowband 5G networks that are significantly slower.
    • schmidtj
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By schmidtj · Posted

      5G in the U.S. – Additional Mid-band Spectrum Driving Performance Gains T-Mobile holds on to it's lead in 5G Speed
    • RedSpark
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By RedSpark · Posted

      Yup. Very true. We were originally on an Everything Data 1500 Plan, which got Unlimited Minutes thanks to Marcelo's "Loyalty Benefits" offer. We then switched to Unlimited Freedom (with the Free HD add-on that Sprint originally wanted $20/month per line for.... remember that?) because the pricing was better with "iPhone for Life", vs. the "Loyalty Credit" for staying on a Legacy Plan. After that, I ran the numbers and switched us over to Sprint MAX, especially for the international travel benefits. There's absolutely no reason for us to switch to Go5G Plus or Go5G Next if we're going to do BYOD by purchasing from Apple/Samsung/Google directly as we've been doing. These new plans aren't priced for current customers to switch to. They're priced for new customers, where they throw in a free line, etc. It's gone from "Uncarrier" to "Carrier". What a shame.
    • dkyeager
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By dkyeager · Posted

      Strange business model that they keep around all these pricing plans. 1000s of plans per carrier is reportedly not uncommon.  Training customer support must be a nightmare. Even MVNOs have legacy plans. A downside of their contract mentality I guess. Best to change contracts during a recession. But then all carriers try to squeeze out legacy plan benefits as they grow old.  
    • RedSpark
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By RedSpark · Posted

      Everything "Uncarrier" is becoming "Carrier" again. Because of the Credit Limit that T-Mobile put on our account for no reason at all (and wouldn't change/update the last time I checked all the way up to the CEO), I don't plan on buying/upgrading our iPhones through T-Mobile. I'm going through Apple directly. Looks like I'll be going through Google and Samsung directly for our other lines for upgrades. Also, we're staying on Sprint Max given the ridiculous pricing for Go5G Plus. On Sprint Max, we currently pay for our Plan: $260 for 7 Voice Lines $25 for two Wearable Lines. (One is $10/Month. The other is $15/Month because the AutoPay discount only applies up to 8 lines.) Total: $285/Month vs. Go5G Plus (Per the Broadband Facts "nutrition label" on the T-Mobile Website): https://www.t-mobile.com/commerce/cell-phone-plans $360 - ($5 AutoPay Discount x 7 Voice Lines) = $325 The Watch Plans show as either $12/Month or $15/Month: https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans/affordable-data-plans/smartwatches So this is about the same for the wearables as what we're paying now. Overall, it's quite more than we're paying now to switch plans. Ridiculous....

  • Recently Browsing

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