Coverage Map updated 6/15/18

[clbowens]

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

[Terrell352]

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.

[Paynefanbro]

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.

[Joski1624]

Good riddance!  Ditching "LTE Plus" coverage should  have been done a long time ago

[red_dog007]

Yeah, with almost 60% of the towers having B41 on them now, it's probably a good call.  Beings 2.5GHz, there will never be a one to one coverage w/ B26. Just adds confusion. 

[Brynn0823]

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

[Dkoellerwx]

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.

[Brynn0823]

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

[Paynefanbro]

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.

[Brynn0823]

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

[Paynefanbro]

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.

[Brynn0823]

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

[Dkoellerwx]

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. 

[Brynn0823]

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

[drhz]

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.

[Paynefanbro]

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.

[red_dog007]

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.  

[Dkoellerwx]

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).

[netrammgc]

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 July 21, 2019 by netrammgc