Picture of Sprint's LTE footprint once NV rolled out

[twospirits]

Looks like West Virginia is in the same boat, strange seeing that spot of non-green.

 

TS

[S4GRU]

yeah I question that map just b/c the whole West(left) side of Kansas is blank there...while Sprint's coverage map clearly shows that spot blanketed with Sprint(not iDEN) coverage...are they really decommissioning towers there making it roaming area' date=' or not putting Network Vision upgrades on that section?[/quote']

 

West Kansas coverage is from NexTec, which I believe is treated as native for Sprint customers. However, Nextec probably doesn't have spectrum to deploy its own LTE. Perhaps one day Sprint and Nextec will come to an agreement for them to deploy LTE on G Block there.

 

So the nextel merger was a huge financial drain to Sprint as we all know. So let's at least use the infrastructure that we overpaid for in the beginning to thicken coverage and provide a better service to our existing and potential future customers' date=' right? No, we'll just shut it all down. Makes sense.

 

Sorry for the negative post, but this decision really does bother me, especially when I read that Mr. Hesse got a 31% pay increase.

 

Ok, back to being positive.[/quote']

 

I agree. Its the item of Network Vision planning that I am most critical about...and a significant oversight.

 

I also saw something today that referenced 35,000 post NV sites. My database has 38,000. I sure hope they aren't planning another 3,000 site reduction.

 

Or' date=' when you live in Montana, are you really interested in 4G? Or just the next rodeo?

 

Apoligise in advance for any mad Montanians. I would be too busy hunting all the time to care about 4G if I lived in Montana.[/quote']

 

If want 4G in Montana! I must have it all! I must have it all!

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

[S4GRU]

Looks like West Virginia is in the same boat' date=' strange seeing that spot of non-green.

 

TS[/quote']

 

Yeah, most of WV is Shentel.

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

[ChadBroChillz]

So the nextel merger was a huge financial drain to Sprint as we all know. So let's at least use the infrastructure that we overpaid for in the beginning to thicken coverage and provide a better service to our existing and potential future customers, right? No, we'll just shut it all down. Makes sense.

 

Sorry for the negative post, but this decision really does bother me, especially when I read that Mr. Hesse got a 31% pay increase.

 

Ok, back to being positive.

Completely Agree, but maybe it is slated for after NV completion. I wonder if the lack of iDEN sites being included is because the investors are breathing down Hesse's back. I would think they gotta use some of the towers in the future for better capacity and coverage.

 

 

I know they are decommissioning sites, but do they still own the rights to put up towers after they are decommissioned or is it like they are giving up that tower completely. If it is the latter, then I am upset, because they have a great chance to at least close the gap on ATT for coverage.

 

also I assumed the map would have more coverage with the LTE 800 added. I was not expected a lot, but it seems exactly like sprint's cdma coverage. I thought the 800 would have a larger effect.

 

 

[bigzeto]

Completely Agree, but maybe it is slated for after NV completion. I wonder if the lack of iDEN sites being included is because the investors are breathing down Hesse's back. I would think they gotta use some of the towers in the future for better capacity and coverage.

 

 

I know they are decommissioning sites, but do they still own the rights to put up towers after they are decommissioned or is it like they are giving up that tower completely. If it is the latter, then I am upset, because they have a great chance to at least close the gap on ATT for coverage.

 

also I assumed the map would have more coverage with the LTE 800 added. I was not expected a lot, but it seems exactly like sprint's cdma coverage. I thought the 800 would have a larger effect.

 

Depends on the lease agreements.

[Madfelon]

All the Chicago coverage looks sexy! Make it happen Sprint.

[Rickie546]

in regards to 800LTE...the more I look at the maps on http://www.cellularm...re.shtml#Sprint versus the LTE map linked https://p.twimg.com/...E4USN.jpg:large the more it looks like a mesh of the two. Really when you look at the Nextel and Sprint maps there are few areas that they dont overlap so kinda tough to say if it does or doesn't include 800LTE, no?

 

I say that b/c based on the Nextel map the LTE map is missing a small section of coverage in North Dakota that stretches vertical on the map. At the same time there is a giant hole in the LTE map on the West part of Kansas that is clearly blanketed on the Sprint network map I linked...

 

In regards to roaming the guy doesn't say LTE roaming on twitter really, just that sprint phones will work in those areas...I look forward to the LTE roaming article btw Robert and AJ.

 

The western part of Kansas is Nex-tech wireless out of Hays that is a Roaming Alliance Partner. They have no public LTE plans as of now.

[ericdabbs]

So the nextel merger was a huge financial drain to Sprint as we all know. So let's at least use the infrastructure that we overpaid for in the beginning to thicken coverage and provide a better service to our existing and potential future customers, right? No, we'll just shut it all down. Makes sense.

 

Sorry for the negative post, but this decision really does bother me, especially when I read that Mr. Hesse got a 31% pay increase.

 

Ok, back to being positive.

 

I agree with you in that Sprint should keep some iDEN sites that are located much better than CDMA sites to provide better coverage throughout the area and convert those to Network Vision. However I don't agree with keeping all 68,000 towers and converting those to Network Vision because there is too much redundancy and keeps the operating costs too high. Sprint needs to cut down dramatically on operating costs that are causing a huge cash drain. Most of the areas where there is a CDMA tower there is an iDEN tower nearby so there is no need for that and probably would cause too much interference. I wish Sprint would keep at least 40,000-42,000 towers instead of just a little over 38,000 towers.

[bigzeto]

I agree with you in that Sprint should keep some iDEN sites that are located much better than CDMA sites to provide better coverage throughout the area and convert those to Network Vision. However I don't agree with keeping all 68,000 towers and converting those to Network Vision because there is too much redundancy and keeps the operating costs too high. Sprint needs to cut down dramatically on operating costs that are causing a huge cash drain. Most of the areas where there is a CDMA tower there is an iDEN tower nearby so there is no need for that and probably would cause too much interference. I wish Sprint would keep at least 40,000-42,000 towers instead of just a little over 38,000 towers.

 

Agree completely. I was never insinuating they need to keep all the iDEN sites. That would make no sense. You live in Los Angeles where Sprint has lots and lots of CDMA sites and many of them were created from co-locations. Here in Louisiana and a lot of other areas, there are not enough sites. With all the money Sprint spent on the planning of NV, it would have made sense to use the best location possible, whether that is a CDMA site or an iDEN site. This would have been a great opportunity for Sprint to correct the mistakes Gulf Coast Wireless made in this area.

[ericdabbs]

Agree completely. I was never insinuating they need to keep all the iDEN sites. That would make no sense. You live in Los Angeles where Sprint has lots and lots of CDMA sites and many of them were created from co-locations. Here in Louisiana and a lot of other areas, there are not enough sites. With all the money Sprint spent on the planning of NV, it would have made sense to use the best location possible, whether that is a CDMA site or an iDEN site. This would have been a great opportunity for Sprint to correct the mistakes Gulf Coast Wireless made in this area.

 

I wish I had a map to see where all the CDMA and iDEN towers are in Louisiana because I would like to see what you are talking about. It does suck that in Louisiana that the towers are not located in optimal locations. I am not sure if complaining to Sprint will do anything but I guess it doesn't hurt.

[S4GRU]

I once did a quick estimation that Sprint would only have to keep approx. 1,000 Nextel sites to maximize its coverage area into areas where they have no CDMA coverage currently, but do have iDEN. So, no need to keep all 25k Nextel sites.

 

Robert

[pyroscott]

Agree completely. I was never insinuating they need to keep all the iDEN sites. That would make no sense. You live in Los Angeles where Sprint has lots and lots of CDMA sites and many of them were created from co-locations. Here in Louisiana and a lot of other areas, there are not enough sites. With all the money Sprint spent on the planning of NV, it would have made sense to use the best location possible, whether that is a CDMA site or an iDEN site. This would have been a great opportunity for Sprint to correct the mistakes Gulf Coast Wireless made in this area.

 

They could have put some network engineers on it and really optimized the network. I'm sure there are a lot of places that the iDEN tower has better location or a lower monthly cost or better position for cheaper backhaul. I wonder why they didn't figure all that out? Not to mention the sites that are currently outside their coverage area.

[bigzeto]

They could have put some network engineers on it and really optimized the network. I'm sure there are a lot of places that the iDEN tower has better location or a lower monthly cost or better position for cheaper backhaul. I wonder why they didn't figure all that out? Not to mention the sites that are currently outside their coverage area.

 

Right, if you're going to modernize your entire network, use what you have in front of you to make the best possible decision. When Verizon bought Alltel, they integrated this entire market. They decommissioned some Alltel sites where a Verizon site was nearby, but they utilized both sites to attain maximum coverage.

[pyroscott]

Right, if you're going to modernize your entire network, use what you have in front of you to make the best possible decision. When Verizon bought Alltel, they integrated this entire market. They decommissioned some Alltel sites where a Verizon site was nearby, but they utilized both sites to attain maximum coverage.

 

Not to mention that they are already planning to swap out all the equipment on the tower anyway, so it isn't an equipment issue.

[ChadBroChillz]

I once did a quick estimation that Sprint would only have to keep approx. 1,000 Nextel sites to maximize its coverage area into areas where they have no CDMA coverage currently, but do have iDEN. So, no need to keep all 25k Nextel sites.

 

Robert

 

Sounds like a no brainer, but maybe it has to deal with cost. The lack of Nextel sites added might be the cost of losing LS as a partner. I just hope after NV that they reconsider expanding or getting more rural partners( SouthernLinc or Nextech etc) to join soon.

[lordsutch]

Yeah, most of WV is Shentel.

 

Shentel says they're going to deploy LTE too, roughly on the same timetable as Sprint NV; it's curious that Sprint isn't including it on their maps (although it could be something as simple as Sprint not knowing Shentel's tower locations - you'll note the LTE map matches up pretty precisely with the market maps here on S4GRU already).

[S4GRU]

Completely Agree, but maybe it is slated for after NV completion. I wonder if the lack of iDEN sites being included is because the investors are breathing down Hesse's back. I would think they gotta use some of the towers in the future for better capacity and coverage.

 

 

I know they are decommissioning sites, but do they still own the rights to put up towers after they are decommissioned or is it like they are giving up that tower completely. If it is the latter, then I am upset, because they have a great chance to at least close the gap on ATT for coverage.

 

also I assumed the map would have more coverage with the LTE 800 added. I was not expected a lot, but it seems exactly like sprint's cdma coverage. I thought the 800 would have a larger effect.

 

800 LTE is only going on existing Sprint 1900 CDMA sites. So it will not create any new coverages, just a 45% distance increase for the same sites. So, on a national level, it would just appear as the existing coverage would just swell a little. However, on a local map level, especially one showing signal intensity, the difference is huge.

 

you'll note the LTE map matches up pretty precisely with the market maps here on S4GRU already).

 

That's because the data points in our Sprint market maps come from Sprint databases.

The data comes from October 1, 2011. Changes since then (which isn't much) are not reflected.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

West Kansas coverage is from NexTec, which I believe is treated as native for Sprint customers. However, Nextec probably doesn't have spectrum to deploy its own LTE. Perhaps one day Sprint and Nextec will come to an agreement for them to deploy LTE on G Block there.

The western part of Kansas is Nex-tech wireless out of Hays that is a Roaming Alliance Partner. They have no public LTE plans as of now.

 

Nex-Tech (based in Hays) covers primarily the northern half of western Kansas, while United Wireless (based in Dodge City) covers the southern half of western Kansas. As I recall, both share each other's footprints as pseudo native coverage, as does Sprint.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

@saschasegan posted a picture of what sprint's LTE network footprint will look like once NV is fully rolled out in 2014. Doesn't say where he got it from. Looks like some kind of presentation. Anyway thought it was interesting.

 

https://twitter.com/...0/photo/1/large

 

Robert, at first glance, the map appears to include accurate Sprint market boundaries. Based on your GIS work with digiblur, is that correct?

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

For easy comparison, here is a Sprint native/pseudo native (because it also includes Sprint Rural Alliance partners) coverage map that comes directly from the Sprint coverage tool:

 

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

Robert, at first glance, the map appears to include accurate Sprint market boundaries. Based on your GIS work with digiblur, is that correct?

 

AJ

 

Yeah, I saw that. I was half considering a revision to the Sprint Markets maps based on that.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

As I archived all of the supposed before and after merger LTE coverage maps from AT&T's "astroturfing" web site, mobilizeeverything.com, before AT&T unceremoniously pulled the plug, perhaps someone would like to put together a mashup of all the maps so that we could compare AT&T's so called limited LTE coverage absent the merger to Sprint's projected LTE coverage.

 

AJ

[JeffDTD]

Assuming you believed ATT's conservative projections of how they will look when they're "complete" with LTE buildout? I didn't.

[nova46]

Yes. But what's your point? My point is 800 LTE is not going on iDEN sites. And if you want to add a caveat that it is going on a small handful of sites that iDEN and CDMA are co-located then I can accept that.

 

However, when it comes to iDEN only sites in non Sprint coverage areas, and there are thousands of them, they will not be getting LTE 800 from Sprint. And that is the point of what started this sidetrack, no?

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

Ahh, I didn't know that Sprint was not using the Nextel towers at all. I thought that the iDEN sites that were being decommissioned were going to be converted to LTE and added into network vision. So what happens to people that are on nextel now but live in an area with little to no sprint service?

[S4GRU]

Ahh, I didn't know that Sprint was not using the Nextel towers at all. I thought that the iDEN sites that were being decommissioned were going to be converted to LTE and added into network vision. So what happens to people that are on nextel now but live in an area with little to no sprint service?

 

All iDEN customers will be forced migrated. They can move to Sprint CDMA or they can go to another carrier. That's about it for options.

 

Robert