Jump to content

2 data speed upgrades on http://network.sprint.com are LTE sites?


Recommended Posts

On sponsors map, all of San Diego's LTE sites are compared and does show "2 data speed upgrades" on Sprint's map.  We found new 2 data speed upgrades but is not indicated on sponsors map as 4G. We were able to confirm last night it indeed is broadcasting LTE.

 

 

 

Is it safe to say all "2 data speed upgrades" are confirmed LTE sites by Sprint?  Been watching both sponsors map and Sprints map, all new "2 data speed upgrades" on Sprint's map end up being confirmed on sponsors map as 4G.  Can anyone confirm?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tower across the street from my house says 2 data speed upgrades, and has for over a month. Still not broadcasting LTE. It has the new panels, RRU's and the new base station just can't confirm back haul which is supposed to be fiber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a great indicator, but isn't always 100% true. It become useless when trying to look at certain cities too. For example, when I got to NYC, it's hard to see each tower individually because there are too many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On sponsors map, all of San Diego's LTE sites are compared and does show "2 data speed upgrades" on Sprint's map.  We found new 2 data speed upgrades but is not indicated on sponsors map as 4G. We were able to confirm last night it indeed is broadcasting LTE.

 

 

 

Is it safe to say all "2 data speed upgrades" are confirmed LTE sites by Sprint?  Been watching both sponsors map and Sprints map, all new "2 data speed upgrades" on Sprint's map end up being confirmed on sponsors map as 4G.  Can anyone confirm?

 

No, it is not safe to say.  Legacy site backhaul upgrades are also shown as two speed upgrades.  There are thousands of sites that show 2 Speed Upgrades that are 3G accepted and have had one legacy speed upgrade in the previous six months, and there are many more that have just have had two legacy speed upgrades in the past six months.  All legacy upgrades stay shown on those Sprint maps for six months, then fall off.

 

So all LTE sites in an AlcaLu market will say two speed upgrades if LTE is accepted, but not all two speed upgrade sites have LTE accepted.  Hopefully that makes sense.  And in Ericsson and Samsung markets, it's even harder to tell.

 

There still is no substitution for S4GRU acceptance reports.

 

Robert

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about 3 data speed upgardes, would u assume it is lte

 

No.  It could have received two upgrades on legacy.  Then to even confuse the matter I've seen a site go active with LTE one week then an adjacent site receive a legacy upgrade a week later. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have even seen a site in Farmington, New Mexico that had 4 data speed upgrades and all were legacy.  There was not one piece of NV equipment at that location at the time.  So sites may be worth checking out if they have two or more speed upgrades, but it is far from definitive to mean LTE.

 

Robert

  • Like 2
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

    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
  • Recently Browsing

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