Jump to content

Coverage map updated 3/9/2018


Recommended Posts

At least for the Cleveland area, it seems like there's more "holes" showing up on the coverage map, which I think is more accurate.  And hopefully this is a step to them fixing the holes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not all; I note some of the newer Shentel coverage--which was found in a previous version of the map--is now missing.  Not sure how that happened.

There are also individual LTE Plus towers missing in the DC area--some are Clear sites that have been there a very long time.

That said, since the last time I looked at coverage in this area, the map has gotten more accurate.  It now shows holes that I know exist because I travel through them on a regular basis. 

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

LTE Plus coverage is broken in NYC again. A lot of the city is lacking it on the map when most of the city is covered in it.

If you’re aware of specific locations in NYC that are wrong on the coverage map, you should post them in the Sprint Subreddit Coverage Map thread and tag /u/Craig-S who interfaces with the Map Team. He does a great job following up on this stuff.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

Where in the territory?

Central Pennsylvania -  Harrisburg, York, Carlisle, Chambersburg, Waynesboro.

Maryland -  Hagerstown

West Virginia -  Martinsburg   

Probably more than I mentioned.  Does not look like any Shentel data has been upgraded for a long time. That is a shame

since the service is great. The mapping should reflect that, but it does not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They really broke the Missouri market. Looks like they turned off Band 26 again. And it looks like they tried to make B41 coverage more realistic, but in the process, shrank it *too* much. Previously it covered way too much ground. Now they're not showing coverage where I know there is a pretty decent B41 (3xCA) signal. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think it is over conservative for a lot of the Cleveland Market, actually.  Basically any site that has received B41 since the beginning of 2017 is not showing on the map.

Another couple map updates, and we'll be right back to the Cleveland area having hardly any B41. GRR! :mad:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, red_dog007 said:

https://rf.jwmaloney.name/sprint-coverage.html

 

If I select 3G & More and LTE Plus (No 3G) I see lot more B41 coverage.  The two B41 towers that are new near me are shown.  Manhattan is shown correctly. Shentel B41 is shown. The B41 I saw in Huntsville is shown.

Great Find concerning the Shentel LTE Plus Coverage. The jwMaloney maps even show the difference between inside and outside LTE Plus coverage.  You now have one vote for making the jwmaloney maps the official Sprint Maps.

The B-41 coverage shown on the Maloney maps appears to be fairly accurate too. 

How can the Sprint managers see these jwmaloney maps and then look at the official Sprint maps and feel good about their products they place out for public consumption?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, red_dog007 said:

https://rf.jwmaloney.name/sprint-coverage.html

 

If I select 3G & More and LTE Plus (No 3G) I see lot more B41 coverage.  The two B41 towers that are new near me are shown.  Manhattan is shown correctly. Shentel B41 is shown. The B41 I saw in Huntsville is shown.

 

It's not accurate everywhere.  It's says now that nearly every site in Nebraska has B41 live on it.  Even in rural GMO and microwave sites.  And it's not true.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, S4GRU said:

It's not accurate everywhere.  It's says now that nearly every site in Nebraska has B41 live on it.  Even in rural GMO and microwave sites.  And it's not true.  

Not to mention, many NEW Nebraska sites, many in BFE towns...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

That's their attempt to show in building coverage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

I was looking at LA and San Diego on the new map and was somewhat shocked. The amount of 3G only/roaming spots in some of the densest parts of LA seems hard to believe. Are there any folks down in LA that can confirm that this is accurate?

 

Thanks!

coverage.png

 

11 minutes ago, Dkoellerwx said:

That's their attempt to show in building coverage. 

They have done this in downtown Seattle too and I think it’s stupid. It makes coverage look completely awful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, chamb said:

Great Find concerning the Shentel LTE Plus Coverage. The jwMaloney maps even show the difference between inside and outside LTE Plus coverage.  You now have one vote for making the jwmaloney maps the official Sprint Maps.

The B-41 coverage shown on the Maloney maps appears to be fairly accurate too. 

How can the Sprint managers see these jwmaloney maps and then look at the official Sprint maps and feel good about their products they place out for public consumption?

At least they're finally using Google Maps officially now. No excuse for not making that change years ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, RAvirani said:

 

They have done this in downtown Seattle too and I think it’s stupid. It makes coverage look completely awful. 

So this isn't a map-wide change? Are they just doing this is downtown areas? It makes it hard to figure out exactly what they're trying to show with all the changes and when they don't tell you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thomas L. said:

So this isn't a map-wide change? Are they just doing this is downtown areas? It makes it hard to figure out exactly what they're trying to show with all the changes and when they don't tell you!

They've been doing it on a market by market basis in urban areas. Like, I noticed it in the Kansas market late last year. They just added it to the Colorado market in last months update. They only seem to do it for the biggest cities, largest buildings and surrounding areas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They've done it all over NYC, not just the densest areas. For what it's worth, the areas where it says there is no coverage or just 3G are mostly correct. However, they are missing a ton of Band 41 coverage that exists in these giant bright yellow patches. I'm hoping all of the complaints will make Sprint fix it soon.

gaGXto2.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thinking but I would imagine having a super accurate map like this, while potentially being bad because it looks like you have poor coverage, could be good for when VoLTE comes around. You'll have a better idea of which areas VoLTE won't work or will struggle in.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

They've done it all over NYC, not just the densest areas. For what it's worth, the areas where it says there is no coverage or just 3G are mostly correct. However, they are missing a ton of Band 41 coverage that exists in these giant bright yellow patches. I'm hoping all of the complaints will make Sprint fix it soon.

gaGXto2.png

I would consider all of NYC to be dense... more dense that most of the other areas I was talking about in previous posts. So I stand by the point that they are doing this to dense urban areas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2018 at 2:11 AM, JWMaloney said:

At least they're finally using Google Maps officially now. No excuse for not making that change years ago.

Agreed. Glad they made this transition to Google Maps for the Coverage Map.

When you Report a Network Issue in the My Sprint Mobile App for iOS, Sprint actually uses Apple Maps.

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.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Author kinda doesn't know what they're talking about, as they assumed their speeds were n71-only (it's like they half-read the PCMag article they cite). The speeds they're mentioning are 100% from n71 + n66 SDL, which also explains speeds dropping off a cliff when they walk indoors. In fact, Dish has some paired AWS-3 in Spokane, albeit just 5x5, so I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't bothered deploying that and are just doing 71 + n66 SDL (the former at 5x5). May head down to San Marcos and New Braunfels tonight to do some testing. I expect either n71-only or n71 + SDL, not sure which. n71 is 5x5 here as Dish has leased half of their 10x10 to T-Mobile. When that lease expires they'll be at 10x10, and they could get another 10 MHz FD (albeit not contiguous) from speculators if T-Mobile didn't outbid them. Will be interesting to see who buys what when.
    • The Verge wrote an article on Dish’s network.    https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/1/23188077/dish-wireless-project-genesis-first-week-testing-speeds-coverage
    • I guess that makes sense. I know that ZiplyFiber (my ISP) has had issues with sourcing fiber as well.  Also, that recently upgraded site is interesting. NOt only does it have a strange eNB value, 236960, which  is different from the ones usually around here but also, all of the LTE bands (including B41) are on the same eNB. This is the first time I have seen  T-Mobile do that in this area.  Also found another upgraded site, eNB 84770, by FireStation 26 has been upgraded with B71/n71 (no n41). 
    • Almost the exact same thing happened on my Verizon Galaxy Flip a couple days ago. 
  • Recently Browsing

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