Jump to content

Coverage Map updated 6/15/18

clbowens
 Share

Recommended Posts

Terrell352 Member Level: LTE Advanced

Terrell352

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, clbowens said:

The legend says their coverage map no longer distinguishes between LTE Plus and regular LTE.

Little disappointed to see this but it makes since. It doesnt look good to see so little LTE Plus on the map and other carriers only show you LTE so this was probably the right call. However it makes the map way less useful to spot new coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted

Not to mention the LTE Plus layer was broken for months now so it might be easier to just get rid of it on the coverage map and maybe add it again later. Although I wouldn't be surprised to see them get rid of it indefinitely.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brynn0823 Member Level: 3G EVDO

Brynn0823

Posted
Posted
Little disappointed to see this but it makes since. It doesnt look good to see so little LTE Plus on the map and other carriers only show you LTE so this was probably the right call. However it makes the map way less useful to spot new coverage.




Except I spotted several new areas of LTE that was grey no service/roaming before like Marquette MI in the upper peninsula of Michigan. It’s LTE now. New coverage area


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkoellerwx Member Level: LTE Advanced

Dkoellerwx

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Brynn0823 said:

Except I spotted several new areas of LTE that was grey no service/roaming before like Marquette MI in the upper peninsula of Michigan. It’s LTE now. New coverage area

 

 

 

Except not really. Those are B41 protection sites that originally did not show on the normal coverage map, only on a separate LTE Plus only layer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brynn0823 Member Level: 3G EVDO

Brynn0823

Posted
Posted
Except not really. Those are B41 protection sites that originally did not show on the normal coverage map, only on a separate LTE Plus only layer.





So you’re saying there’s no LTE in Marquette Mi ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Brynn0823 said:

So you’re saying there’s no LTE in Marquette Mi ?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

There is, it's just not a full buildout. It's likely only one site or a skeleton network that's there just to fulfill buildout requirements for Band 41.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brynn0823 Member Level: 3G EVDO

Brynn0823

Posted
Posted
There is, it's just not a full buildout. It's likely only one site or a skeleton network that's there just to fulfill buildout requirements for Band 41.




Based off the coverage map it looks like all of Marquette is covered with LTE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Brynn0823 said:

 

 

 


Based off the coverage map it looks like all of Marquette is covered with LTE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

From the coverage map you can tell it's only one site which is the protection site. That one site might cover the entire city but it's not intended as everyday coverage. If you go indoors, that coverage is likely lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brynn0823 Member Level: 3G EVDO

Brynn0823

Posted
Posted
From the coverage map you can tell it's only one site which is the protection site. That one site might cover the entire city but it's not intended as everyday coverage. If you go indoors, that coverage is likely lost.




Do you think they’ll do a full build there or no ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkoellerwx Member Level: LTE Advanced

Dkoellerwx

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Brynn0823 said:

Based off the coverage map it looks like all of Marquette is covered with LTE.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's one site. Quite possibly the old Clearwire protection site converted to B41. There is partner 3G and LTE roaming in the area, so the likelihood of a full build out in the near term is pretty low. 

 

I'm actually quite surprised they added it to the coverage map. I'm not sure they meant to since as far as we know, that site is only producing B41 coverage, no CDMA, EVDO or B25/26 LTE. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brynn0823 Member Level: 3G EVDO

Brynn0823

Posted
Posted
It's one site. Quite possibly the old Clearwire protection site converted to B41. There is partner 3G and LTE roaming in the area, so the likelihood of a full build out in the near term is pretty low. 
 
I'm actually quite surprised they added it to the coverage map. I'm not sure they meant to since as far as we know, that site is only producing B41 coverage, no CDMA, EVDO or B25/26 LTE. 




Very interesting. I thought it was by accident that they put coverage on the map becuase I knew they had a protection site.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
drhz Member Level: Digital

drhz

Posted
Posted

Do any of you think the removal of LTE Plus has anything to do with the new T-Mobile Roaming aggreement? I wonder if Sprint is planning on treating T-Mobile Roaming as native. If they did then getting rid of LTE Plus would make it easier to integrate T-Mobile coverage on their maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, drhz said:

Do any of you think the removal of LTE Plus has anything to do with the new T-Mobile Roaming aggreement? I wonder if Sprint is planning on treating T-Mobile Roaming as native. If they did then getting rid of LTE Plus would make it easier to integrate T-Mobile coverage on their maps.

Not at all. Sprint has added Extended LTE (roaming treated as native LTE) to their maps without an issue in the past. I think it just has to do with the Band 41 coverage map being wrong and ultimately misleading customers about LTE coverage for months now. Until they fix it, they probably shouldn't even bring back that layer of the maps. It's perfectly fine to have a single LTE layer since that is what every other carrier does.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
red_dog007 Member Level: eHRPD

red_dog007

Posted
Posted

I think removing it and keeping it that way is cool.   Even TMobile didn't go as far as Sprint with 600/700MHz.  If Sprint ever had a B41 only device, then they should only show B41 coverage, but keep it the same color. 

However, they could leave the API there to be used on a site like our local user here (forgot name/site name) for the more geeky users and to track B41 a little.  However, it needs a lot of work and a lot of updating.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkoellerwx Member Level: LTE Advanced

Dkoellerwx

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

Not at all. Sprint has added Extended LTE (roaming treated as native LTE) to their maps without an issue in the past. I think it just has to do with the Band 41 coverage map being wrong and ultimately misleading customers about LTE coverage for months now. Until they fix it, they probably shouldn't even bring back that layer of the maps. It's perfectly fine to have a single LTE layer since that is what every other carrier does.

There is a small problem now with B41 protection sites now showing as normal LTE coverage though. This could also be misleading, making it look like there is full coverage where there is not (see Marquette discussion above).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
netrammgc Member Level: Smoke Signals

netrammgc

Posted
Posted (edited)

large.Capture_Cellular.PNG.1432af6b6d95bc02f9102cb0291eba71.PNG

Im a little late to the conversation here.  But its not just one site.  If you look at the coverage map now, there is LTE Data (but no Voice) in Marquette, MI, Iron Mountain, MI,  Houghton, MI.,  Ironwood, MI,  and a *huge* swath of land that includes Ishpeming, Negaunee and Sawyer Airport (Gwinn).  All with native data but no voice.  You can see the coverage clearly on the maps on prepaid.sprint.com and virginmobileusa.com.  So these are all old protectionism Clearwire sites? What would happen if you tried a VoLTE and/or Calling Plus call up there?  Would it go through?

Edited by netrammgc
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
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Paynefanbro
      Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

      By Paynefanbro · Posted

      Good catch! I meant 115932/119932. Edited my original post I've noticed the same thing lately and have just assumed that they're skipping it now because they're finally able to deploy mmWave small cells.
    • Dkoellerwx
      T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion V2

      By Dkoellerwx · Posted

      At some point over the weekend, T-Mobile bumped the Omaha metro from 100+40 to 100+90 of n41! That's a pretty large increase from what we had just a few weeks ago when we were sitting at 80+40Mhz. Out of curiosity, tested a site on my way to work and pulled 1.4Gpbs. That's the fastest I've ever gotten on T-Mobile! For those that know Omaha, this was on Dodge street in Midtown so not exactly a quiet area!
    • AirlineFlyer
      Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

      By AirlineFlyer · Posted

      Did you mean a different site? eNB ID 112039 has been around for years. Streetview even has it with C-band back in 2022 - https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7303042,-73.9610924,3a,24.1y,18.03h,109.66t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s2ossx06yU56AYOzREdcK-g!2e0!5s20220201T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D2ossx06yU56AYOzREdcK-g%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D18.027734930682684%26pitch%3D-19.664180274382204%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu Meanwhile, Verizon's eNB 84484 in Fort Greene has been updated to include C-band and CBRS, but not mmWave. I've seen this a few times now on updated Verizon sites where it's just the CBRS antenna on its own, not in a shroud and without mmWave. Odd.
    • topdownat4
      Keep a Word, Drop a Word #7

      By topdownat4 · Posted

      Nissan Skyline
    • dkyeager
      Dish Network/Boost Mobile cell/5G buildout thread

      By dkyeager · Posted

      Drove out into the country today.  Dish stuck to my phone like glue. At least -120 rsrp. Likely only good for phone calls (should have tested.) It then switched to T-Mobile. Getting back on Dish was another issue. I am used to dragging out coverage so I expected a few miles, but had to drive at least 10 miles towards a Dish site. Airplane mode, which worked for Sprint, did nothing. Rebooting did nothing. Finally got it to change over about 2 miles from the site by manually setting the carrier to Dish then it had great reception. Sprint used to have a 15 minute timeout but I did not have the patience today.  Previously I did a speed test on Dish out in the country at the edge of Dish coverage. My speeds were 2g variety. Dish has really overclocked some of these sites. Seen rssp readings in the 50s. Would have called them boomer sites with Sprint but much  more common with Dish.  

  • Recently Browsing

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