Stay Connected This Summer: Sprint 4G LTE Expands into 22 New Cities

[digiblur]

I smell an article coming....

 

Look at your quote. Is this another example of Yabbadabbadotalk...er, I mean...Tapatalk necro quote?

 

 

 

 

AJ

Hahaha.. Yep. The browser is too cumbersome on the phone to fit my A.D.D. needs.

[S4GRU]

 

I don't know about the other maps, but the Lansing one isn't just generous on LTE. It's claiming LTE coverage in places where there is no PCS EVDO service at all (even according to Sprint's own maps).

 

 

If you flip between the two, the boundary lines for LTE claim to go out farther than Sprint's own map for voice service. It's showing LTE data coverage in places where they claim to only have voice roaming.

 

As strange as it sounds, I almost have to wonder if Sprint marketing's cartography department does not have the ability distinguish between CDMA2000 RSSI and LTE RSRP. Robert, what was the figure of merit that we saw Sprint determine for the edge of LTE coverage, -119 dBm RSRP? Could it actually be that the maps are being projected out to -119 dBm RSSI instead?

 

 

AJ

This was one of my early hypotheses when the initial coverage maps came out last summer. I believe I even built a signal map with CloudRF software that would support that as a possibility.

 

The LTE coverage map are notoriously bad and just give a really bad image to Sprint and Network Vision. If this is intentional, it's a bone headed move. I have to believe it is just an error along these lines.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[digiblur]

This was one of my early hypotheses when the initial coverage maps came out last summer. I believe I even built a signal map with CloudRF software that would support that as a possibility.

 

The LTE coverage map are notoriously bad and just give a really bad image to Sprint and Network Vision. If this is intentional, it's a bone headed move. I have to believe it is just an error along these lines.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

A very bad error indeed...I hope.  I really hope they don't base their CSR calls and even network planning for new/filler sites on this.  As there are many many areas on the map that show LTE coverage yet you'll struggle to hold 1X there.  So instead their network group says "nope, that area is covered! move along" when in reality the area needs a site very badly.  Look at the side by side comparison below.  That's a bunch of LTE coverage in a roaming 1X area! I know this site pretty well and I will say the voice coverage for this one is very close.

 

[S4GRU]

 

A very bad error indeed...I hope. I really hope they don't base their CSR calls and even network planning for new/filler sites on this. As there are many many areas on the map that show LTE coverage yet you'll struggle to hold 1X there. So instead their network group says "nope, that area is covered! move along" when in reality the area needs a site very badly. Look at the side by side comparison below. That's a bunch of LTE coverage in a roaming 1X area! I know this site pretty well and I will say the voice coverage for this one is very close.

 

 

That's just so bad. LTE 1900 shown with greater range than 1x on 1900? Crazy. I don't even think LTE 800 is going to provide but just a small improvement over 1x voice in distance (raw coverage).

 

I think LTE 800 biggest advantage will be signal strength and usability at the edge of current CDMA coverage. I don't expect huge coverage gains on LTE 800. But I do expect pretty good coverage gains on CDMA 800.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[Ascertion]

 

 

 

A very bad error indeed...I hope. I really hope they don't base their CSR calls and even network planning for new/filler sites on this. As there are many many areas on the map that show LTE coverage yet you'll struggle to hold 1X there. So instead their network group says "nope, that area is covered! move along" when in reality the area needs a site very badly. Look at the side by side comparison below. That's a bunch of LTE coverage in a roaming 1X area! I know this site pretty well and I will say the voice coverage for this one is very close.

 

 

 

 

That's just so bad. LTE 1900 shown with greater range than 1x on 1900? Crazy. I don't even think LTE 800 is going to provide but just a small improvement over 1x voice in distance (raw coverage).

 

 

 

I think LTE 800 biggest advantage will be signal strength and usability at the edge of current CDMA coverage. I don't expect huge coverage gains on LTE 800. But I do expect pretty good coverage gains on CDMA 800.

 

 

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

 

 

I thought LTE travelled further, but was more fragile (meaning it's more prone to suffer signal loss if there's any obstacles in the way.) You think if I have relatively no 1x signal on 1900 at work as of now, LTE 800 will not either? My signal on 1x is usually around -102dBm at work, I know CDMA 800 will help, but you're making it sound like lte 800 won't help much in my case. (Not that bad since I'll have a Clearwire site right outside my work providing LTE 2500.

[S4GRU]

I thought LTE travelled further, but was more fragile (meaning it's more prone to suffer signal loss if there's any obstacles in the way.) You think if I have relatively no 1x signal on 1900 at work as of now, LTE 800 will not either? My signal on 1x is usually around -102dBm at work, I know CDMA 800 will help, but you're making it sound like lte 800 won't help much in my case. (Not that bad since I'll have a Clearwire site right outside my work providing LTE 2500.

 

In the same exact deployment and all things being equal...1x and LTE on the same frequency will be practically the same signal strength in the same conditions.  The difference being that LTE will not be usable beyond approximately -93dBm and -95dBm RSSI, and 1x will be usable up to -103dBm to -107dBm.  And that is a huge difference when indoors or nearing the edge of service.  LTE does not travel further than 1x, no matter how you define it.  You may be confusing that LTE travels further than WiMax, being that WiMax maxed out around -83dBm to -85dBm and LTE maxes out around 10dBm weaker.

 

I don't believe that LTE 800 will travel much farther than CDMA 1900.  It will some, but not a lot.  There will be a significant difference between CDMA 800 and CDMA 1900, though.

 

Robert

[maximus1987/lou99]

This was one of my early hypotheses when the initial coverage maps came out last summer. I believe I even built a signal map with CloudRF software that would support that as a possibility.

 

The LTE coverage map are notoriously bad and just give a really bad image to Sprint and Network Vision. If this is intentional, it's a bone headed move. I have to believe it is just an error along these lines.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

If it's really an "error", wouldn't they have noticed it by now?

How many complaints before they seriously take a look at the coverage maps?