Verizon for 1x and sprint for 3g?

[blackwaterstout]

Was using signal check today and noticed my 1x was through a Verizon tower while the 3g was through a sprint tower. I didn't realize this could happen.

 

Also, what is eHrpd?

 

Sent from my EVO 4G LTE using Tapatalk 2

 

[tybo31316]

This happens often with the LTE devices that I know of. Sometimes you will roam on 1x while connected to sprint LTE.

[xdfgf]

Since 4g was turned on here this past weekend, this has been the norm for service locally

[vtimmy13]

thats just weird.... why would it do that! correct me if im wrong but doesnt 1x reach farther than lte??

[JDD]

I have had this happen in my area. What was explained to me was that, I am picking up data from a Sprint tower but the voice side was down during the upgrade. So the phone would look for the next closest tower for voice coverage and in this case is a Verizon tower.

[tybo31316]

thats just weird.... why would it do that! correct me if im wrong but doesnt 1x reach farther than lte??

There's a variety of different reasons why but just because you are connected to sprint 1x on a certain tower. You could be connected to evdo on another vice versa.

[leerage]

Was using signal check today and noticed my 1x was through a Verizon tower while the 3g was through a sprint tower. I didn't realize this could happen.

 

Also, what is eHrpd?

 

Sent from my EVO 4G LTE using Tapatalk 2

 

Like the other have said, you were connected to Verizon 1x and Sprint eHRPD.

 

eHRPD stands for Enhanced High Rate Packet Data. What it basically does is allow for seamless data transmissions from EV-DO to LTE and vice versa.

[PhillMezzetta]

thats just weird.... why would it do that! correct me if im wrong but doesnt 1x reach farther than lte??

 

My understanding is that no technology, nor frequency will travel further than another. The only difference is that lower frequencies are capable of delivering higher power at a further distance. Also, 1X as a technology requires less power to function than LTE.

 

Do I have that correct? 

[mozamcrew]

My understanding is that no technology, nor frequency will travel further than another. The only difference is that lower frequencies are capable of delivering higher power at a further distance. Also, 1X as a technology requires less power to function than LTE.

 

Do I have that correct? 

Ok, this is my understanding, Feel free to correct me here AJ.

The reason that lower frequencies are percieved as having longer range is because they are attenuated less by obstructions than higher frequencies as a general rule. Thus they are able to achieve greater coverage (distance and building penetration) from a single site compared to higher frequencies. The downside to lower frequency spectrum is that in dense urban areas, since it has such low attenuation, it creates more interferance issues with neighboring cell sites than higher frequency spectrum.

 

As far as technologies and coverage go, my understanding is that the LTE signal is more "complex" than CDMA/EV-DO. This allows LTE to pack more data into a given slice of spectrum than EV-DO. It also allows LTE to handle cell edge interferance issues better than CDMA. The downside is that the signal is more "fragile" than CMDA/EV-DO, and thus requires greater signal strength to achive a working connection. Thus there will be places where you have a working CDMA connection where you won't be able to get a working LTE signal from the same cell site on the same frequency.

[WiWavelength]

Ok, this is my understanding, Feel free to correct me here AJ.

The reason that lower frequencies are percieved as having longer range is because they are attenuated less by obstructions than higher frequencies as a general rule. Thus they are able to achieve greater coverage (distance and building penetration) from a single site compared to higher frequencies. The downside to lower frequency spectrum is that in dense urban areas, since it has such low attenuation, it creates more interferance issues with neighboring cell sites than higher frequency spectrum.

 

The general perception is that lower frequencies/longer wavelengths travel farther than higher frequencies/shorter wavelengths.  That is not really true, but it does work as a common simulacrum for a more complicated relationship.

 

In free space or clear air, all frequencies effectively travel equal distances.  The issue then is antenna aperture.  Higher frequencies have smaller antenna apertures, so less emitted power is received at the same respective distances.  That is what is known as "path loss" and leads to the popular idea that lower frequencies travel farther.

 

Additionally, the real world RF environment is typically far from free space.  Instead, RF must pass through, reflect off of, diffract around numerous objects.  Different materials have different frequency dependent attenuation factors.  Not all materials function as low pass filters.  Sometimes, higher frequencies actually have the advantage.  But in most cases, lower frequencies are less attenuated.  This, too, supports the misconception that lower frequencies travel farther.

 

AJ