Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[gusherb]

Why is so hard to optimize.... what does it take to optimize.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

Pretty much anyones best guess, there are some very plausible educated guesses on here but none of them are fact because nobody has actually heard anything from the horses mouth about it really.

Unfortunately if optimized low band spectrum is a priority for ones self then moving to a carrier that has it is the best solution, like I wound up doing after being patient for a year.

[chamb]

Pretty much anyones best guess, there are some very plausible educated guesses on here but none of them are fact because nobody has actually heard anything from the horses mouth about it really.

Unfortunately if optimized low band spectrum is a priority for ones self then moving to a carrier that has it is the best solution, like I wound up doing after being patient for a year.

If you have half decent Band 25, it could be possible that your Band 26 might not be much better.   The band 26 might be optimized to fill in a dark hole that is more important than your particular home. Band 26 can also be optimized to reach out further than the band 25 will.

[tyroned3222]

Pretty much anyones best guess, there are some very plausible educated guesses on here but none of them are fact because nobody has actually heard anything from the horses mouth about it really.

Unfortunately if optimized low band spectrum is a priority for ones self then moving to a carrier that has it is the best solution, like I wound up doing after being patient for a year.

Who did you end up picking?

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

If you have half decent Band 25, it could be possible that your Band 26 might not be much better. The band 26 might be optimized to fill in a dark hole that is more important than your particular home. Band 26 can also be optimized to reach out further than the band 25 will.

The only thing positive that i take from this is. That El paso is about 97% converted to network vision sites. I thing i found only 3 towers that are legacy only.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Pretty much anyones best guess, there are some very plausible educated guesses on here but none of them are fact because nobody has actually heard anything from the horses mouth about it really.

Unfortunately if optimized low band spectrum is a priority for ones self then moving to a carrier that has it is the best solution, like I wound up doing after being patient for a year.

Does Ericsson play any role in optimizing Band 26 as part of its network management contract with Sprint? (Which is set to expire this year after 7 long years):

 

http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-gains-network-advantage-innovative-network-services-deal-with-ericsson-delivers-competitive-edge.htm

[lilotimz]

Does Ericsson play any role in optimizing Band 26 as part of its network management contract with Sprint? (Which is set to expire this year after 7 long years):

 

http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-gains-network-advantage-innovative-network-services-deal-with-ericsson-delivers-competitive-edge.htm

 

Ericsson maintains and operates the network after acceptance by the vendors.

 

Sprint does Band 26 "optimization" in house (aka their own engineers and Ericsson network management employees) though they did trial the vendors themselves "optimizing" 800 MHz in their regions. Results were quite unsatisfactory. 

[tyroned3222]

Does Ericsson play any role in optimizing Band 26 as part of its network management contract with Sprint? (Which is set to expire this year after 7 long years):

 

http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-gains-network-advantage-innovative-network-services-deal-with-ericsson-delivers-competitive-edge.htm

I believe so ! When i contacted the higher executive team.. they said everything as far as maintenance/optimization is handle by Ericsson still.. on band 25/26.... they contacted Ericsson for me via e mail and that's when i was told that my tower is running optimal. But the tower site has capacity issues and then i got a 250$ bill credit.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[cdk]

I believe so ! When i contacted the higher executive team.. they said everything as far as maintenance/optimization is handle by Ericsson still.. on band 25/26.... they contacted Ericsson for me via e mail and that's when i was told that my tower is running optimal. But the tower site has capacity issues and then i got a 250$ bill credit.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

That sounds like the Ericsson way. Those paste eaters have screwed up many sites around me that worked perfectly when they where first turned on...

[tyroned3222]

That sounds like the Ericsson way. Those paste eaters have screwed up many sites around me that worked perfectly when they where first turned on...

I wonder who will handle maintenance after the contract expires?

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

That sounds like the Ericsson way. Those paste eaters have screwed up many sites around me that worked perfectly when they where first turned on...

Will nokia get the big contract? I know they have the contact for band 41 rollout

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[cdk]

I wonder who will handle maintenance after the contract expires?

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

I haven't heard any thing. I would hope Sprint would have the courage to take it in house, but I am not expecting that.

[tyroned3222]

I haven't heard any thing. I would hope Sprint would have the courage to take it in house, but I am not expecting that.

I agree.... samsung and nokia seem to be the best.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[joshuam]

Ericsson maintains and operates the network after acceptance by the vendors.

 

Sprint does Band 26 "optimization" in house (aka their own engineers and Ericsson network management employees) though they did trial the vendors themselves "optimizing" 800 MHz in their regions. Results were quite unsatisfactory.

Executive support got me in touch with a local Sprint employer network engineer. I talked 10-15 mins with him last summer about band 26...because along the busiest interstate in Maryland (I-95), there are still holes in LTE. He said they were aware, but we're not in a position to fix it then because it would end up being slower than their 3G network in those areas because of capacity issues. So the only solution is another tower. Who knows what the issue is now, I still have one line with Sprint, but it's not my everyday device.

[lilotimz]

Executive support got me in touch with a local Sprint employer network engineer. I talked 10-15 mins with him last summer about band 26...because along the busiest interstate in Maryland (I-95), there are still holes in LTE. He said they were aware, but we're not in a position to fix it then because it would end up being slower than their 3G network in those areas because of capacity issues. So the only solution is another tower. Who knows what the issue is now, I still have one line with Sprint, but it's not my everyday device.

Yep. Same reason I got from my local engineer here.

 

I am bound to believe it for as its already hovering at 2-6 Mbps on a good day since it's load balancing with band 25. If it covers the 3G dead zones between sites (quite a lot) then it probably would collapse.

 

Funny thing is there's several instances of 2.5 sectors having more range than both band 25 and 26.

 

Sprint has superbly accurate coverage heat maps outlining all three bands coverage so no doubt the engineers know whats up. It just appears they are powerless to do much with the lack of funding today compounding the lack of investment in increasing site density over the years.

[gusherb]

Yep. Same reason I got from my local engineer here.

 

I am bound to believe it for as its already hovering at 2-6 Mbps on a good day since it's load balancing with band 25. If it covers the 3G dead zones between sites (quite a lot) then it probably would collapse.

 

Funny thing is there's several instances of 2.5 sectors having more range than both band 25 and 26.

 

Sprint has superbly accurate coverage heat maps outlining all three bands coverage so no doubt the engineers know whats up. It just appears they are powerless to do much with the lack of funding today compounding the lack of investment in increasing site density over the years.

 

It's a shame that B25 is fairly range limited due to the RRU's multimodal setup. I feel that if they could increase the range of B25 they could increase the range of B26, I suspect the reports of B41 having even slightly better range than B25 could be due to the reason that the RRU's for that are dedicated to the band and can therefore put out more power. 

 

If Sprint didn't have this limitation they could easily get B25 to cover quite well up to 3-4 miles from the site in a suburban setting, and probably quite further in a rural setting. I have no problem locking onto B2 LTE from sites 3 miles away on AT&T and my phone even sees B2 from sites up to 5-6 miles away. 

 

And I have to wonder what Sprint's solution may be to this matter short of adding dedicated LTE RRU's to each sector, turning off CDMA? 

I suppose densifying would be a solution, but seems like that would be more costly than adding RRU's. I know there's the small cell build out that's been lurking around the corner for awhile now, but what about suburbia? 

 

Outside of that I suppose it will be awhile before anything changes. 

 

I for one can't stand the sight of 3G in a generation where LTE is maturing, I can only assume at some point that the less savvy masses will catch on and start to feel the same. 

[utiz4321]

Does anyone think sprint still plans on adding "thousands" of new macro sites? Recent chatter around network densification seem both to be sparse and focused on small cells. I know one of the specific reason given by Marcelo for the addition of new macro sites was to expand the capacity of b26, it would be a shame if this doesn't happen.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nexgencpu]

I've always thought the same thing for B26, you can expand its coverage abilities but at the cost of usable speeds.

 

Here in NYC, density is pretty good, hence B25 and B26 perform well enough, (B41 is taking almost all the load)

 

I'm surprised when people complain about B26 not covering more ground, when it's obvious that it would slow it to a crawl

It's become painfully clear that 5x5 just isn't enough for most use cases, that is one reason why I had such low hopes for 600mhz.

 

Here in NYC, Tmobile's 700Mhz is already saturated.

[lilotimz]

It's a shame that B25 is fairly range limited due to the RRU's multimodal setup. I feel that if they could increase the range of B25 they could increase the range of B26, I suspect the reports of B41 having even slightly better range than B25 could be due to the reason that the RRU's for that are dedicated to the band and can therefore put out more power.

 

If Sprint didn't have this limitation they could easily get B25 to cover quite well up to 3-4 miles from the site in a suburban setting, and probably quite further in a rural setting. I have no problem locking onto B2 LTE from sites 3 miles away on AT&T and my phone even sees B2 from sites up to 5-6 miles away.

 

And I have to wonder what Sprint's solution may be to this matter short of adding dedicated LTE RRU's to each sector, turning off CDMA?

I suppose densifying would be a solution, but seems like that would be more costly than adding RRU's. I know there's the small cell build out that's been lurking around the corner for awhile now, but what about suburbia?

 

Outside of that I suppose it will be awhile before anything changes.

 

I for one can't stand the sight of 3G in a generation where LTE is maturing, I can only assume at some point that the less savvy masses will catch on and start to feel the same.

Dual mode is not the reason for lack of coverage. It's just lack of cell site density and how the local environment affects the Rf signals. Go to the roof of a two story or three story building and you'd get a pretty damn good signal whereas on ground level it'd be pretty non existent.

 

Sprint just need higher site density.

 

Also it's a null point in the coming months as sprints vendors (aka other than Ericsson) start ramping up the 2 antenna/radio set pet sector 4x MIMO deployment on PCS 1900 with one antenna/radio setup running cdma and the other running lte only.

[gusherb]

Dual mode is not the reason for lack of coverage. It's just lack of cell site density and how the local environment affects the Rf signals. Go to the roof of a two story or three story building and you'd get a pretty damn good signal whereas on ground level it'd be pretty non existent.

 

Sprint just need higher site density.

 

Also it's a null point in the coming months as sprints vendors (aka other than Ericsson) start ramping up the 2 antenna/radio set pet sector 4x MIMO deployment on PCS 1900 with one antenna/radio setup running cdma and the other running lte only.

So in other words they are actually going to fix the issue. 

 

I feel like you kind of ignored half of what I said though, how is it that not being able to get B25 past 1-2 miles is a density issue when it's pretty much proven to be the multimodal radio setup because other carriers with single use radios can far exceed that 1-2 mile limit? You said this yourself before even. and my concern is in suburban areas, I would be surprised if Sprint actually densified where I am because it's already somewhat dense and I just don't see them adding any more sites except maybe on some existing towers. They still gotta get that signal to reach further, they can't build out a tower every mile, even T-Mobile hasn't done that here. 

[lilotimz]

So in other words they are actually going to fix the issue.

 

I feel like you kind of ignored half of what I said though, how is it that not being able to get B25 past 1-2 miles is a density issue when it's pretty much proven to be the multimodal radio setup because other carriers with single use radios can far exceed that 1-2 mile limit? You said this yourself before even. and my concern is in suburban areas, I would be surprised if Sprint actually densified where I am because it's already somewhat dense and I just don't see them adding any more sites except maybe on some existing towers. They still gotta get that signal to reach further, they can't build out a tower every mile, even T-Mobile hasn't done that here.

Sprint b25 equipment can go all the way 8-9 miles at full power on a boomer if they wanted to except in urban land you don't get 200-400 feet boomers.

 

Most cell structures are generally several story tall monopoles or rooftop mounts. Att VZW and tmobile have far superior site density than sprint. They're able to overcome the issue with mid bands cell signals severely degrading to nothing in urban land by spacing sites closer and utilizing their low band spectrums.

 

The biggest difference occurs between dual mode and single mode when carriers crank the TX up to the maximum per port (40-60+w) which does not happen much in urban land.

 

For sprint pcs radios, each Txrx port is capable of up to 40-45w in total. Generally the more ports you have, the less maximum power can be outputted per port.

 

Ie 8t8r is limited to 160w total from 8 ports or 20w per port while 2t2r equipment like Ericsson rrus12 can be up to 60w per port when boosted.

 

So no its not proven to be dual mode vs single mode. In the end it just comes down to network design.

 

Hell my entire suburban neighborhood have good b25/26 (4-6 miles on one sector) coverage from a single tower with antenna 100' up. While other sites in my suburban area barely cover a mile or two.

[Johnner1999]

Does anyone think sprint still plans on adding "thousands" of new macro sites? Recent chatter around network densification seem both to be sparse and focused on small cells. I know one of the specific reason given by Marcelo for the addition of new macro sites was to expand the capacity of b26, it would be a shame if this doesn't happen.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally I suspect it's not going to happen. At least not till Sprint can prove to wall street that they are a viable contender.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gusherb]

Sprint b25 equipment can go all the way 8-9 miles at full power on a boomer if they wanted to except in urban land you don't get 200-400 feet boomers.

 

Most cell structures are generally several story tall monopoles or rooftop mounts. Att VZW and tmobile have far superior site density than sprint. They're able to overcome the issue with mid bands cell signals severely degrading to nothing in urban land by spacing sites closer and utilizing their low band spectrums.

 

The biggest difference occurs between dual mode and single mode when carriers crank the TX up to the maximum per port (40-60+w) which does not happen much in urban land.

 

For sprint pcs radios, each Txrx port is capable of up to 40-45w in total. Generally the more ports you have, the less maximum power can be outputted per port.

 

Ie 8t8r is limited to 160w total from 8 ports or 20w per port while 2t2r equipment like Ericsson rrus12 can be up to 60w per port when boosted.

 

So no its not proven to be dual mode vs single mode. In the end it just comes down to network design.

 

Hell my entire suburban neighborhood have good b25/26 (4-6 miles on one sector) coverage from a single tower with antenna 100' up. While other sites in my suburban area barely cover a mile or two.

Ok so you by basically ruling out the multimodal equipment as the issue (thanks for the info btw), points to it just simply being poor optimization even with B25 then in the case of the signal not traveling very far while competitors have no problem doing it from similar site locations on similar frequencies. In Lake County, IN, Verizon and AT&T do NOT have better site density than Sprint, considerably worse in fact but the big two do a very good job making it's mid band travel well. 

 

So I guess that leads me back to my original statement of these issues being anyones best guess and points at incompetence. *cough* Ericsson *cough*

[lilotimz]

Ok so you by basically ruling out the multimodal equipment as the issue (thanks for the info btw), points to it just simply being poor optimization even with B25 then in the case of the signal not traveling very far while competitors have no problem doing it from similar site locations on similar frequencies. In Lake County, IN, Verizon and AT&T do NOT have better site density than Sprint, considerably worse in fact but the big two do a very good job making it's mid band travel well.

 

So I guess that leads me back to my original statement of these issues being anyones best guess and points at incompetence. *cough* Ericsson *cough*

It also helps Att and VZW can depend on their midband coverage to not collapse upon itself since it's usually 10/15/20 MHz wide compared to 5mhz for sprint.

 

I do believe the engineer remarks on b26 being possibly overloaded if coverage is increased also applies to band 25.

 

Iotw, b41 plz save us.

[gusherb]

It also helps Att and VZW can depend on their midband coverage to not collapse upon itself since it's usually 10/15/20 MHz wide compared to 5mhz for sprint.

 

I do believe the engineer remarks on b26 being possibly overloaded if coverage is increased also applies to band 25.

 

Iotw, b41 plz save us.

Seems like the logical thing to do at least in areas like mine where the Sprint network is somewhere in between the big two and T-Mobiles in terms of density is crank B25 up to get as much range out of it as possible, strong blanket coverage should be easily achievable at spacing of 2-3 miles apart (as it is now most of it is blanket but gets real flaky in between cells or if you blink wrong), and turn up B26 to also blanket everything, ignoring the risk of it crashing and implement an aggressive algorithm to keep all devices on B25 until reaching -118 dbm or so, leaving B26 as the last resort everyone assumed it would be in the first place. and B41 (2 x B41 in the more crowded areas) should do just fine at keeping the two 5 Mhz FDD B25 carriers we have from crashing (one of them being upsized to 10 Mhz FDD). Makes sense doesn't it? The way It is now doesn't... 

[RAvirani]

Dual mode is not the reason for lack of coverage. It's just lack of cell site density and how the local environment affects the Rf signals. Go to the roof of a two story or three story building and you'd get a pretty damn good signal whereas on ground level it'd be pretty non existent.

 

Sprint just need higher site density.

 

Also it's a null point in the coming months as sprints vendors (aka other than Ericsson) start ramping up the 2 antenna/radio set pet sector 4x MIMO deployment on PCS 1900 with one antenna/radio setup running cdma and the other running lte only.

Do you know if Samsung plans to do this extensively in their markets?