Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Shentel Market (Shenandoah Valley/Hagerstown/Harrisburg)


Boosted20V

Recommended Posts

I thought CA was on in Shentel I can't remember seeing it though. I know 2nd carrier is widespread where B41 is located.

In my county (Shenandoah Co), I've found three towers so far with B41. All have two carriers active, but CA is not active.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im noticing alot of degraded signal quality in the area... im assuming the towers are getting upgraded now or the backhaul in Shenandoah is being upgraded

 

 

I used to get LTE inside my job in New Oxford and as of about a month ago, i barely get signal. If I leave my phone sitting alone on my desk, it will occasionally pick up LTE, but as soon as I pick up my phone, it'll drop to 3G and sometimes 1x and is completely unusable. A coworker and I already reported network issues via Sprint Zone app a few times and are hoping they resolve whatever got messed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to get LTE inside my job in New Oxford and as of about a month ago, i barely get signal. If I leave my phone sitting alone on my desk, it will occasionally pick up LTE, but as soon as I pick up my phone, it'll drop to 3G and sometimes 1x and is completely unusable. A coworker and I already reported network issues via Sprint Zone app a few times and are hoping they resolve whatever got messed up.

It's nationwide now. Just flew from Baltimore to Miami, both are having the same issue and care told me they have many calls on it

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nationwide now. Just flew from Baltimore to Miami, both are having the same issue and care told me they have many calls on it

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

If there is a nationwide problem right now, I'm sure it's not related to this isolated incident that he's experiencing for the past month at his workplace.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0ab120a2c184310bf159194e0abe7691.jpg

 

Near Gettysburg and York springs on us 15

 

If there is a nationwide problem right now, I'm sure it's not related to this isolated incident that he's experiencing for the past month at his workplace.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

I'm not disregarding his issue and I experience it to in PA, I'm just saying I am having this in Baltimore and Miami.

 

 

If there is a nationwide problem right now, I'm sure it's not related to this isolated incident that he's experiencing for the past month at his workplace.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

I'm not disregarding his issue and I experience it to in PA, I'm just saying I am having this in Baltimore and Miami.

 

 

 

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Just found a new 10X10 band 25 carrier in Shentel territory.  It Waynesboro, Pa city

UL channel 26140     DL Channel 8140.

This is a change.  We did have the standard G block 5X5 and another 5X5 probably in Block "A"

SCP identifies this as B25 with no second carrier identification.

I am not sure if they obtained something other than block "A" somehow or what.

I have not seen a B-25 second carrier identification in SCPsince this 10X10 suddenly appeared, but there may still be a second b-25 carrier here.

An nTelos site was removed here as it was no longer needed.  nTelos used band 25 but not sure what block was used here. It was not block "A:"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found a new 10X10 band 25 carrier in Shentel territory. It Waynesboro, Pa city

UL channel 26140 DL Channel 8140.

This is a change. We did have the standard G block 5X5 and another 5X5 probably in Block "A"

SCP identifies this as B25 with no second carrier identification.

I am not sure if they obtained something other than block "A" somehow or what.

I have not seen a B-25 second carrier identification in SCPsince this 10X10 suddenly appeared, but there may still be a second b-25 carrier here.

An nTelos site was removed here as it was no longer needed. nTelos used band 25 but not sure what block was used here. It was not block "A:"

Could this be from trading another carrier to make one 10x10 channel instead of two 5x5 channels?

 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could this be from trading another carrier to make one 10x10 channel instead of two 5x5 channels?

 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

No, 8140 is the product of an expansion of the 5x5 A Block LTE carrier to a 10x10 A Block carrier. The 5x5 G Block carrier (at 8665) should not have changed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, 8140 is the product of an expansion of the 5x5 A Block LTE carrier to a 10x10 A Block carrier. The 5x5 G Block carrier (at 8665) should not have changed...

It was late last night when I discovered this new 10X10 Carrier and I did not really have time to investigate it.  You could be right on the use of the "A" Block.  It could be that Shentel could be forcing more 1x voice traffic onto 800 so that they could clear the "A" block for this 10X10. Another possibility is that 1X voice could have been shifted onto 1900 spectrum they obtained when they killed the nTelos cell sites in this area of Pennsylvania. Needs more investigation.  My Galaxy s7 totally loves this new 10X10 and I am not able to get it to land on the old "G" block at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anybody know of any improvement going on or about to happen in the Roanoke valley area?

 

I used to get 60+ at my house from the beginning with B41, now I’m at 5-20 Mbps.. The pings are higher, however B41 actually works now in the Valley View area.. (it wouldn’t even assign an IP at the beginning)..

 

I’m wondering if CA is scheduled to come to town any time soon.. pretty big market for Sprint here..

Edited by dhrumil2504
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like I found my first B25 CA. This is outside of Edinburg, VA. It's two 5x5 carriers. I would be curious to know why they haven't enabled a 10x10 carrier, since they have spectrum to do that in this area, but hey, I'll take it. 0c6e478dd12a5bd35709f6cf784db5a5.jpgbfd2f975ba6a0a560f0c76bd69c7dee1.jpg

 

Sent from my Galaxy S8+ using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

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

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • 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. 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...