Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Phoenix Market (including Flagstaff, Prescott)


MaxPower

Recommended Posts

Kind of off topic, but has to do with data speeds, and since I'm in PHX, here goes... I notice that when ever I run a speed test on my phone that the it is considerably slower then the speeds I get when I tether my phone to my laptop and run a speedtest. For example, when I run speed tests with my phone tethered to my PC (via speedtest.net) I get about 1000kbps DL, when I run the tests on my phone (via the speedtest.net App) I get about half that... 500kbps DL. Any ideas? Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of off topic, but has to do with data speeds, and since I'm in PHX, here goes... I notice that when ever I run a speed test on my phone that the it is considerably slower then the speeds I get when I tether my phone to my laptop and run a speedtest. For example, when I run speed tests with my phone tethered to my PC (via speedtest.net) I get about 1000kbps DL, when I run the tests on my phone (via the speedtest.net App) I get about half that... 500kbps DL. Any ideas? Thanks!

 

Using the same servers?

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the same servers?

 

Robert

 

That could be the issue... would that make it increase by 100% though? I'll definitely make sure the servers are the same next time. Thx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That could be the issue... would that make it increase by 100% though? I'll definitely make sure the servers are the same next time. Thx.

 

yes, it easily could.

 

When you use the PC version, it actually pings servers to see which one is likely to be fastest.

 

The mobile app does not.

 

Speedtest servers are all different - one may be overloaded, one may be poor routing to sprint, etc.

 

Test all the servers around you - it's amazing how different they all are.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, it easily could.

 

When you use the PC version, it actually pings servers to see which one is likely to be fastest.

 

The mobile app does not.

 

Speedtest servers are all different - one may be overloaded, one may be poor routing to sprint, etc.

 

Test all the servers around you - it's amazing how different they all are.

 

Good info! Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too have noticed this. I'll tether my phone on my laptop and get better speeds while tethering.

 

 

 

Kind of off topic, but has to do with data speeds, and since I'm in PHX, here goes... I notice that when ever I run a speed test on my phone that the it is considerably slower then the speeds I get when I tether my phone to my laptop and run a speedtest. For example, when I run speed tests with my phone tethered to my PC (via speedtest.net) I get about 1000kbps DL, when I run the tests on my phone (via the speedtest.net App) I get about half that... 500kbps DL. Any ideas? Thanks!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I was wondering if there were any update for Phoenix? I heard rumors that they were going to start on about 30 sites next month. Is that true? Thanks for any info!

 

Where did you hear this rumor? I don't think that is true. Last time I heard Phoenix is scheduled for late 2nd round and probably won't start breaking ground until early 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in Phoenix and have always been puzzled by Sprint leaving the SIXTH Largest City in America out when it comes to 4G.

I remember reading that Sprint and Clear were even testing WiMax / LTE here about a year ago.

Testing but no deployment.

I have been a Sprint customer for about 12 years and have had no problem with the service. I just thought it odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering if there were any update for Phoenix? I heard rumors that they were going to start on about 30 sites next month. Is that true? Thanks for any info!

 

This is not accurate. The design for Phoenix is just wrapping up now. And it takes months to work out the logistics of a market after design is complete before deployment starts. Also, I have schedules of the first 20,000 sites and Phoenix is not in it.

 

On another note, Sprint is not using Phoenix as a 'test market' for its LTE.

 

The last real source of info on LTE deployment in Phoenix is: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-148-silver-lining-for-phoenix-and-tucsonyuma-marketsthe-schedule-appears-to-be-moving-up-for-the-grand-canyon-state/

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I have been without data for the better part of 2 days. I was on the phone with Sprint Customer Support twice today. The second CSR informed me that there is a service bulletin for Flagstaff due to LTE upgrades taking place on at least 2 towers.

 

Verizon hasn't even thought about Flagstaff yet, so I'm a happy camper if this is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not aware of any Network Vision/LTE work in Arizona, yet. I think the earliest we will see any activity in the Phoenix market (which includes Flagstaff) is this Winter. Sprint has not even finished a detail schedule of the market, yet.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been without data for the better part of 2 days. I was on the phone with Sprint Customer Support twice today. The second CSR informed me that there is a service bulletin for Flagstaff due to LTE upgrades taking place on at least 2 towers.

 

Verizon hasn't even thought about Flagstaff yet, so I'm a happy camper if this is true.

 

Sprint CSRs are these days using that excuse for everything.

 

"Bad signal? Network vision upgrades, wait a few weeks!"

"No voicemail? Network vision upgrades, wait a few weeks!"

"Billing error? Network vision upgrades, wait a few weeks!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had a customer say CARE told him they were turning LTE on in this area on Sept 21st which thanks to this website I know is wrong.

 

Wow! Sprint needs to drive home with bulletins and training to make sure their employees know not to speculate ever about LTE availability. It's one of the biggest problems with customer dissatisfaction. It may get them off the phone happy now, but will be a bigger problem after that date comes and goes.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One odd thing. Just got back to Phx today. Not sure if this qualifies for anything but been getting mobile regestration errors. The same as when i'd be in a NV'd area. I thought its my phone but it happened to two deferent units on two different accounts. Figure that one out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One odd thing. Just got back to Phx today. Not sure if this qualifies for anything but been getting mobile regestration errors. The same as when i'd be in a NV'd area. I thought its my phone but it happened to two deferent units on two different accounts. Figure that one out?

 

I have been having the same issues here in New Mexico for the past 3 or 4 days on my GS3 and EVO LTE. Been driving me nuts. So it must be something more network related. NV definitely has not started here in NM.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

So, in chandler, work has been going on this tower for past 2 months - off and on. Replacing those top gizmo's.

 

Sorry for the image Q, phone camera while driving...

 

Beginnings of NV? Sprint tower near Riggs and McQueen.

 

cNQLg.jpg

Edited by claypidgeon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, drove by with a real camera this time. Does it look like NV was installed?

 

btw, they did spend at least a week on the "boxes" at the base.

 

mjg6A.jpg

 

Negative. Looks like AT&T on there top where they are working. I don't see any NV work in this pic. :(

 

Robert via Nexus 7 on Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...