Network Vision/LTE - Central Illinois Market (Peoria, Springfield, Quincy, Bloomington/Normal, Terre Haute)

[WhiteZero]

Every market will have bands 25 and 26 (PCS and SMR) on nearly every site, that was always the plan. SoftBank has announced plans to put Clear LTE (band 41) TD-LTE on most Sprint sites as well. So pretty much every market will see all three bands in some capacity. 

Is band 41 superior in any way or are all 3 bands equal? Will phones that support multiple bands be able to use them simultaniously? I'm trying to grasp the benifit of one market having up to 3 bands.

[Dkoellerwx]

Is band 41 superior in any way or are all 3 bands equal? Will phones that support multiple bands be able to use them simultaniously? I'm trying to grasp the benifit of one market having up to 3 bands.

 

They are not equal, nor is any one superior. You will only be able to use one band at a time.

 

800 SMR - Greater range, better in-building coverage. Similar to Verizon's LTE band. Limited to 37.5Mbps max speed

 

1900 PCS - The LTE that is being deployed right now. Decent range, in-building coverage. Nearly matches current EVDO coverage. Limted to 37.5Mbps. May see carrier aggregation when LTE-A is released. That is several years away.

 

25/2600 TD-LTE (Clearwire) - Much higher capacity, possible speeds to 100Mbps, or more in good conditions. Shorter range, does not do well deep inside buildings.

 

TD-LTE is being deployed for capacity, PCS LTE is being deployed for the everyday user, SMR LTE is being deployed to better cover fringe areas and in-building. So why is 3 bands a good thing? It gives Sprint superior coverage.

[gnoj]

Every market will have bands 25 and 26 (PCS and SMR) on nearly every site, that was always the plan. SoftBank has announced plans to put Clear LTE (band 41) TD-LTE on most Sprint sites as well. So pretty much every market will see all three bands in some capacity. 

 

Since Sprint will only be using one 20 MHz TDD carrier on 2600 for the time being, the max on that band is about 90 Mbps. 1900/2600 are supposedly going to be deployed on every site, but 800 LTE isn't permitted in the IBEZ. So ironically, the sites that have 800 LTE will end up being a subset of those with TDD 2600.

[Dkoellerwx]

Since Sprint will only be using one 20 MHz TDD carrier on 2600 for the time being, the max on that band is about 90 Mbps. 1900/2600 are supposedly going to be deployed on every site, but 800 LTE isn't permitted in the IBEZ. So ironically, the sites that have 800 LTE will end up being a subset of those with TDD 2600.

 

True, but seeing as this market isn't affected, I didn't feel it necessary to discuss that and make it more confusing.

 

Also, Clear was advertising speeds of up to 100Mbps, eventually. Obviously that's not the case right off the bat, but as WiMax gets decommissioned, it's a possibility. 

[wesman]

I just want lte here and decent coverage without losing calls or slow Internet

[9690austin]

In Mackinaw this morning i was getting full bar and then all of a sudden it went back to normal service which is 1-2 bars. i was just wondering could this be 800 being tested. is there any Nextel towers or us cellular towers going to updated with sprint on it? would really love full bar and also if i don't have off roaming i constantly roam. i don't have roaming turned on because i don't like using roaming when i connect to sprint without it on. any ideas on the first three sentences.

[Dkoellerwx]

In Mackinaw this morning i was getting full bar and then all of a sudden it went back to normal service which is 1-2 bars. i was just wondering could this be 800 being tested. is there any Nextel towers or us cellular towers going to updated with sprint on it? would really love full bar and also if i don't have off roaming i constantly roam. i don't have roaming turned on because i don't like using roaming when i connect to sprint without it on. any ideas on the first three sentences.

 

It may have been 800 1x being tested. It's hard to say without out any engineering screen shots or Signal Check screen shots. 

 

Sprint will not be using any US Cellular towers. Sprint may convert a few Nextel towers, but we do not know which ones until we see the acceptance report come through the system.

[9690austin]

How do access engineering screen and whats signal check. while i had that signal i did a speed test and i got 0.37Mbs and .40Mbs. network Ehrpd.

[Dkoellerwx]

How do access engineering screen and whats signal check. while i had that signal i did a speed test and i got 0.37Mbs and .40Mbs. network Ehrpd.

 

800 1x isn't a data network, so a speed test is irrelevant. (for the most part)

 

To see your engineering screen, from the dialer, dial ##DEBUG# (##33824#) then enter SPRINT (777468) then 1x engineering.

 

Or, install SignalCheck Pro. It will tell you your network type without having to go into the engineering screens.

[9690austin]

How do you access the acceptance towers page. thanks

[lilotimz]

How do you access the acceptance towers page. thanks

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/1195-information-about-s4gru-sponsorship-levels-and-how-to-become-a-sponsor/

[tommym65]

FWIW, driving down I-39/I-55 from Rockford to St. Louis today, Signal Check Pro reported continuous 1x800 (SMR) coverage all the way down 39 to the Hudson, IL, tower, whose coverage carried to within a cat's whisker of Normal.  Then coverage dropped back to 1xRTT (1900 PCS) around Normal and Bloomington, after which I did a forced PRL update near McLean and got 1x800 back. So B-N remains a black hole for all NV upgrades, but it is oh-so-close.

 

I stopped looking for 800 south of Lincoln, because I would have needed to fiddle with the phone, and there was this annoying distraction called traffic. I just wish those inconsiderate, non-Sprint-obsessed drivers would stay out of my way!!!

 

I realize that several sites along this route have been shown as 1x800 accepted on the sponsor maps, but the sites in Wenona, Minonk, El Paso (IL), and Hudson have not, nor has the site in McLean (800 SMR acceptance reports -- or lack of them -- are a topic in another thread), and I thought it was interesting that many, many sites in Central Illinois (like in Northern Illinois) have 1x800.  The real numbers, nationwide, for 1x800 are far, far higher than the acceptance reports indicate.

[9690austin]

About the sprint putting equipment on U.S. Cellular tower they have intentions of doing so in the markets it bought from them to improve coverage and capacity. Quote "Sprint stated its intentions to replace U.S. Cellular’s aging CDMA gear with its new Network Vision architecture" (Gigaom). Link to the article 

http://gigaom.com/2013/08/29/sprint-will-sunset-u-s-cellulars-network-in-st-louis-oct-31-chicago-on-jan-31/

This is great news for central Illinois market because it will significantly increase there coverage here. U.S. Cellular has great coverage in the Midwest. I think Sprint Should buy the rest of U.S. Cellular. 

[userkv8031]

About the sprint putting equipment on U.S. Cellular tower they have intentions of doing so in the markets it bought from them to improve coverage and capacity. Quote "Sprint stated its intentions to replace U.S. Cellular’s aging CDMA gear with its new Network Vision architecture" (Gigaom). Link to the article 

http://gigaom.com/2013/08/29/sprint-will-sunset-u-s-cellulars-network-in-st-louis-oct-31-chicago-on-jan-31/

This is great news for central Illinois market because it will significantly increase there coverage here. U.S. Cellular has great coverage in the Midwest. I think Sprint Should buy the rest of U.S. Cellular. 

 

I think most of that is due to the USCC network being shut down which means those users will automatically be moved to the Sprint network which is seeing NV work. USCC did not sell the network assets in those areas...yet. As of last quarter they were looking into selling those assets. I think USCC is looking to sell a few more markets. I hope Sprint picks them up instead of Verizon. Verizon would be most likely as USCC has some cellular licenses where Verizon holds none. The Quincy area is one place where Verizon offers no service. That extends east along US 24 almost to Rushville, IL.

 

Statements from Sprint/Softbank does make it sound like they are exploring purchases of smaller carriers. I would have to guess USCC is on the list.

 

On note of 1x800...I have not been able to connect to it lately. Instead I am stuck on roaming. They could be working on getting LTE up and running I guess as I usually have a fairly solid signal on 800.

[Dkoellerwx]

About the sprint putting equipment on U.S. Cellular tower they have intentions of doing so in the markets it bought from them to improve coverage and capacity. Quote "Sprint stated its intentions to replace U.S. Cellular’s aging CDMA gear with its new Network Vision architecture" (Gigaom). Link to the article 

http://gigaom.com/2013/08/29/sprint-will-sunset-u-s-cellulars-network-in-st-louis-oct-31-chicago-on-jan-31/

This is great news for central Illinois market because it will significantly increase there coverage here. U.S. Cellular has great coverage in the Midwest. I think Sprint Should buy the rest of U.S. Cellular. 

 

US Cellular did not sell it's tower sites to Sprint, only the spectrum. At this time, it is not an option for Sprint to convert any of the old USCC sites to Sprint NV. If/When USCC sells off the sites in the area, then it might be an option. But until then, it's not going to happen.

[mhammett]

US Cellular did not sell it's tower sites to Sprint, only the spectrum. At this time, it is not an option for Sprint to convert any of the old USCC sites to Sprint NV. If/When USCC sells off the sites in the area, then it might be an option. But until then, it's not going to happen.

That relevance is if USCC owns or leases that site. If Sprint needs additional sites in an area, they should build the appropriate ones, not necessarily the ones USCC had.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Dkoellerwx]

That relevance is if USCC owns or leases that site. If Sprint needs additional sites in an area, they should build the appropriate ones, not necessarily the ones USCC had.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

True, but that's different from converting USCC sites. Any new sites - if there are any - were likely planned before the USCC sale was even a thought. And it won't be any sort of big change in coverage either. Just a site here, a site there, if any.

[mhammett]

True, but that's different from converting USCC sites. Any new sites - if there are any - were likely planned before the USCC sale was even a thought. And it won't be any sort of big change in coverage either. Just a site here, a site there, if any.

 

Has anyone applied any GIS magic to the areas the USCC licenses cover that the existing Sprint licenses did not? Assuming there is a difference, anything comparing theoretical coverage based on Robert's site map with the USCC licenses? What about existing Sprint sites with existing Sprint licenses?

[Dkoellerwx]

Has anyone applied any GIS magic to the areas the USCC licenses cover that the existing Sprint licenses did not? Assuming there is a difference, anything comparing theoretical coverage based on Robert's site map with the USCC licenses? What about existing Sprint sites with existing Sprint licenses?

 

I don't follow? Sprint had licences covering all the same areas, just not enough... that's what the sale was for. Increased capacity, specifically in Chicago. 

[mhammett]

I don't follow? Sprint had licences covering all the same areas, just not enough... that's what the sale was for. Increased capacity, specifically in Chicago. 

 

It shouldn't have been that hard to follow. I tried to just have all branches of the question in one post. I'll simplify this out a bit. Are the USCC licensed that Sprint obtained wholly located within existing Sprint licenses?

[Dkoellerwx]

It shouldn't have been that hard to follow. I tried to just have all branches of the question in one post. I'll simplify this out a bit. Are the USCC licensed that Sprint obtained wholly located within existing Sprint licenses?

 

Yes.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-334-updated-sprint-uscc-spectrum-deal-sprint-gets-20-mhz-broader-in-the-city-of-broad-shoulders/

 

I guess the part that threw me was this:

What about existing Sprint sites with existing Sprint licenses?

[mhammett]

Yes.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-334-updated-sprint-uscc-spectrum-deal-sprint-gets-20-mhz-broader-in-the-city-of-broad-shoulders/

 

I saw that before and I knew the intention was spectrum depth in capacity constrained markets. I just didn't know if any of the licenses came with any ancillary geography not already under a Sprint license.

 

 

 

What about existing Sprint sites with existing Sprint licenses?

That would depict where Sprint current has licenses, but not coverage.

[Dkoellerwx]

I saw that before and I knew the intention was spectrum depth in capacity constrained markets. I just didn't know if any of the licenses came with any ancillary geography not already under a Sprint license.

 

 

 

That would depict where Sprint current has licenses, but not coverage.

 

I'm having trouble finding the link, but I believe Sprint has at least one nationwide licence, so it would follow that yes, they do have licences where they do not have coverage. An additional licence in one of these areas likely won't change the approach, but I really have no idea what Sprint's plans are for expansion beyond NV.

[Dkoellerwx]

I saw that before and I knew the intention was spectrum depth in capacity constrained markets. I just didn't know if any of the licenses came with any ancillary geography not already under a Sprint license.

 

 

 

That would depict where Sprint current has licenses, but not coverage.

 

Sprint's PCS B licence covers the entire affected area, as does the G licence, but we know that one's going to LTE.

[9690austin]

Sprint has LTE on Framington Rd in Peoria but it was shut off shortly after it was turned on.