Network Vision and Spark EARFCN logging thread

[dkyeager]

I am literally so stupid sometimes

 

Happens to all of us at times

[lilotimz]

My math could be wrong, but here's what I get for the center frequencies for those channels:

 

40254 = 2556.4 MHz

 

41176 = 2648.6 MHz

 

And looking at the band plan in the link below it doesn't look like they're next to each other.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-360-whats-the-frequency-kenneth-interpreting-your-engineering-screen-part-three/

 

But hey, I'm more on the creative side, so maybe someone good with numbers can give us the real answer.

 

40254 is the original EARFCN of the Clearwire network that was based in the Sprint leased EBS 2500 MHz range. 

 

Sprint itself fired up EARFCN 40978+41176 in the Sprint licensed BRS 2600 MHz range. 

 

The "third" carrier will be adjacent to the existing ones on Sprint equipment so EARFCN 41374. 

 

In the future, 40254 will probably be sunsetted as the Clearwire equipment is converted to Sprint equipment with the 2500 MHz range not to be used until 2.5 High Capacity sites go live. 

[dkyeager]

40254 is the original EARFCN of the Clearwire network that was based in the Sprint leased EBS 2500 MHz range. 

 

Sprint itself fired up EARFCN 40978+41176 in the Sprint licensed BRS 2600 MHz range. 

 

The "third" carrier will be adjacent to the existing ones on Sprint equipment so EARFCN 41374. 

 

In the future, 40254 will probably be sunsetted as the Clearwire equipment is converted to Sprint equipment with the 2500 MHz range not to be used until 2.5 High Capacity sites go live. 

 

Very interesting.  I am used to unified EARFCN for Clear and Sprint, thus have been watching the Clear Earfcn because it is easiest.  They means they could split them in a market such as Columbus.  I will have to watch the Sprint EARFNs for B41 as well in the Columbus metro.

[bigmachine]

40254 is the original EARFCN of the Clearwire network that was based in the Sprint leased EBS 2500 MHz range. 

 

 

 

This particular Clear site had been 40978 since LTE was first turned on.  Would Sprint enable CA on this site with yet another "new" channel adjacent to 40254?

[lilotimz]

This particular Clear site had been 40978 since LTE was first turned on.  Would Sprint enable CA on this site with yet another "new" channel adjacent to 40254?

 

There are two vendors in LA for Clear with the north side being Huawei and records 40254. 

 

The rest of the market is Samsung Clear B41 which should be capable of 2xCA and thus should be on the same earfcn (40978+41176) as the Sprint 2.5 sites. 

[bigmachine]

There are two vendors for LA for Clear with the north side is Huawei and records 40254. 

 

The rest of the market is Samsung Clear B41 which should be capable of 2xCA and thus should be on the same earfcn (40978+41176) as the Sprint 2.5 sites. 

 

 

Now it's all starting to make sense.  When Sprint replaces the Huawei equipment I hope they'll turn the site into a full Sprint site. 

[MikeCortez]

I noticed this today while at home. Any indication if this is 5x5 or 10x10?

[RAvirani]

I noticed this today while at home. Any indication if this is 5x5 or 10x10?

Looks like a 5x5 at the bottom of the PCS A Block.

[Tengen31]

I noticed this today while at home. Any indication if this is 5x5 or 10x10?

Thats the thing that stinks about non Samsung Devices, they dont show you the bandwidth.

[Tengen31]

San Antonio started turning up the second PCS carrier back in November, you start in rural areas just in case something is jacked.

 

I had found the 2nd B25 Carrier in Minnesota about a Month ago. Now im not seeing it anymore. The Earfcn was 8109 for it.

 

[orangeblue]

Found my thrid carrier in the East Bay (Hayward, CA).

[jefbal99]

Found my thrid carrier in the East Bay (Hayward, CA).

Assuming you mean B41 3rd carrier?

[ingenium]

Assuming you mean B41 3rd carrier?

Yeah, there is one known site in Hayward running the third carrier. Another in Palo Alto. We haven't picked up anything else in the market yet though. They're running 20 MHz below our first carrier (40056), at 39858. Our second carrier is 40254.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P

[orangeblue]

Assuming you mean B41 3rd carrier?

 

Is there any other :-)

 

 

Yeah, there is one known site in Hayward running the third carrier. Another in Palo Alto. We haven't picked up anything else in the market yet though. They're running 20 MHz below our first carrier (40056), at 39858. Our second carrier is 40254.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P

 

I noticed that I bounce between 2CA and 3CA and I'm not sure why. At times there is just 1 carrier and it bounces to 2CA. I guess it's still a work in progress.

[ingenium]

Is there any other :-)

 

 

 

I noticed that I bounce between 2CA and 3CA and I'm not sure why. At times there is just 1 carrier and it bounces to 2CA. I guess it's still a work in progress.

By 2CA and 3CA I assume you mean the 2nd and 3rd carrier, not carrier aggregation. CA means carrier aggregation. Only the S7 supports 3 carriers aggregated. And currently, the third carrier does not support CA at all. It hasn't been enabled yet.

 

That's likely one reason they haven't rolled it out everywhere in the bay area, though it's live on many sites in San Jose and Sacramento.

 

I'm also assuming you don't have a device that's capable of carrier aggregation, since its very difficult for those devices to connect to the third carrier. They almost immediately get kicked off to the first or second carrier when they try to initiate carrier aggregation. If you do have one that supports CA, then that is news that they fixed the issue.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P

[orangeblue]

By 2CA and 3CA I assume you mean the 2nd and 3rd carrier, not carrier aggregation. CA means carrier aggregation. Only the S7 supports 3 carriers aggregated. And currently, the third carrier does not support CA at all. It hasn't been enabled yet.

 

That's likely one reason they haven't rolled it out everywhere in the bay area, though it's live on many sites in San Jose and Sacramento.

 

I'm also assuming you don't have a device that's capable of carrier aggregation, since its very difficult for those devices to connect to the third carrier. They almost immediately get kicked off to the first or second carrier when they try to initiate carrier aggregation. If you do have one that supports CA, then that is news that they fixed the issue.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P

 

 

My phone (S7) is able to handle the carriers and as of today, it's a lot more stable while connecting.

[Dkoellerwx]

Is there any other :-)

 

 

 

I noticed that I bounce between 2CA and 3CA and I'm not sure why. At times there is just 1 carrier and it bounces to 2CA. I guess it's still a work in progress.

 

Make sure to differentiate between 2nd carrier, 3rd carrier and 2xCA, 3xCA. They are not equivalent. 

[ingenium]

My phone (S7) is able to handle the carriers and as of today, it's a lot more stable while connecting.

Oh really? Can you send a screenshot of the engineering screen showing 39858 as the PCC, SCC or TCC (is that what is shown for the third carrier?)? I think it would be the first evidence of CA being active on the third carrier anywhere.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P

[WiWavelength]

Make sure to differentiate between 2nd carrier, 3rd carrier and 2xCA, 3xCA. They are not equivalent. 

 

This is why I have been lobbying mikejeep to switch from, for example, "^²" to "#2" -- or something similar.

 

I fully respect precedent and continuity.  But we seem to run into this carrier aggregation misunderstanding or misrepresentation far too often.

 

AJ

[dkyeager]

If it follows what happened with B41 2nd carrier, in about a month CAx3 will begin with new sites, then it will take a while for the initial B41 3rd installations to get upgraded to B41x3. Who knows what will happen phonewise -- hopefully the S7 is not like the Nexus was with the original B41 (delayed 6 months before really functional). Of course added bandwidth is always welcome.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[cdk]

This is why I have been lobbying mikejeep to switch from, for example, "^²" to "#2" -- or something similar.

 

I fully respect precedent and continuity.  But we seem to run into this carrier aggregation misunderstanding or misrepresentation far too often.

 

AJ

I'd prefer to see the format BXX₂ myself, but BXX#2 would be just as helpful for people to make the distinction between a second carrier and carrier aggregation.

[Dkoellerwx]

If it follows what happened with B41 2nd carrier, in about a month CAx3 will begin with new sites, then it will take a while for the initial B41 3rd installations to get upgraded to B41x3. Who knows what will happen phonewise -- hopefully the S7 is not like the Nexus was with the original B41 (delayed 6 months before really functional). Of course added bandwidth is always welcome.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

Around here 2nd carrier and 2xCA went live around the same time. I think there was maybe a week or two between the initial sites that had the 2nd carrier, and when 2xCA was activated. All of the 2nd carrier sites had 2xCA activated at roughly the same time. From that time on, every site that got a 2nd carrier had 2xCA at the same time.

[mikejeep]

This is why I have been lobbying mikejeep to switch from, for example, "^²" to "#2" -- or something similar.

 

I fully respect precedent and continuity. But we seem to run into this carrier aggregation misunderstanding or misrepresentation far too often.

I put a lot of weight on your opinions and understand your reasoning. I know someone could see the current SignalCheck labeling as "squared" instead of "second". But I don't necessarily see it as a cause the misunderstandings that have popped up on here lately. It just seems that not everyone is aware that additional carriers aren't an automatic indicator of carrier aggregation.

 

With the hopes that some method to identify when CA is live is eventually discovered, I have been giving a lot of thought to how that information could best be displayed in the app. Perhaps that would in fact be best expressed as an exponent. It's one of several things I've been playing around with. I have always argued in favor of continuity, but not if it handicaps capability.

 

-Mike

[Trip]

I put a lot of weight on your opinions and understand your reasoning. I know someone could see the current SignalCheck labeling as "squared" instead of "second". But I don't necessarily see it as a cause the misunderstandings that have popped up on here lately. It just seems that not everyone is aware that additional carriers aren't an automatic indicator of carrier aggregation.

 

With the hopes that some method to identify when CA is live is eventually discovered, I have been giving a lot of thought to how that information could best be displayed in the app. Perhaps that would in fact be best expressed as an exponent. It's one of several things I've been playing around with. I have always argued in favor of continuity, but not if it handicaps capability.

 

-Mike

 

I actually like cdk's suggestion of using a subscript for second carrier, if feasible.  That gets rid of the "squared" implication while still looking elegant, I think.

 

- Trip

[bigmachine]

Is there enough room to do:

B41 + B41 + B41  (for 3 channel carrier aggregation)

 

B41 , B41  (for 2 carriers)

 

or in the future

 

B41 + B25 (or whatever the case may be.)