How is Network Vision progressing?

[krishnac]

What is your guy's opinions on how NV is progressing? Is anyone seeing any material benefits yet? I know the most exciting part is the LTE deployment, but how about improved 3G speeds, lower dropped calls, getting signal where you weren't before, etc? Does anyone have any hard data on this matter -- pre/post NV deployment network performance? How would you guys rate the non-LTE benefits of NV?

 

I noticed from your maps that Los Angeles is undergoing a lot of NV deployments, but I have yet to see any material benefits -- mostly seeing pretty poor 3G speeds on the Epic Touch. In fact, I think I would argue that the speeds are lower than they were around this time last year, probably due to the increased # of users on the network. I'm just curious if they haven't flipped the switch yet, or if this is all there is.

[Abyss19707]

I have experienced many problems in my house and certain parts of my town. Most these problems have been fixed with the temporary upgrades but can't wait till NV come through my town this Fall

[pyroscott]

I'm not sure about this, but I know that many problems with towers that have already been upgraded is the lack of back haul. With the amount of microwave back haul being implemented, when the fiber optic back haul is late, it can affect up to 6-8 towers. Forcing Sprint to continue to use the legacy back haul and only 3G. It is difficult to accept when you expect to see vast improvement, but it won't be long until there is a premium network fully implemented.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[tongboy]

I know based on how the rollout has gone here in Chicago that 3g upgrades can happen without the backhaul upgrade being complete yet. The couple towers that I have encountered here that have had both the 3g and backhaul upgrades done I was seeing download speeds of 1+mbps and 500k upload speeds at 2:00 in the afternoon. The upgrades, when they finally happen, are worth it!

[pyroscott]

I know based on how the rollout has gone here in Chicago that 3g upgrades can happen without the backhaul upgrade being complete yet. The couple towers that I have encountered here that have had both the 3g and backhaul upgrades done I was seeing download speeds of 1+mbps and 500k upload speeds at 2:00 in the afternoon. The upgrades, when they finally happen, are worth it!

 

It depends on what was slowing down the network though. If it was in need of additional capacity, NV will make big improvements without back haul upgrades. If back haul was the problem, nothing will change until enhanced back haul is installed.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[nikmash232]

I'm still stuck at a whopping .2-.4 Mbps not much improvement here in jersey, but if I go east a bit from here it's pretty nice where the 3G towers have been upgraded. I get around 1 mbps man do I miss T-Mobile surprisingly enough.

[S4GRU]

What is your guy's opinions on how NV is progressing? Is anyone seeing any material benefits yet? I know the most exciting part is the LTE deployment, but how about improved 3G speeds, lower dropped calls, getting signal where you weren't before, etc? Does anyone have any hard data on this matter -- pre/post NV deployment network performance? How would you guys rate the non-LTE benefits of NV?

 

I noticed from your maps that Los Angeles is undergoing a lot of NV deployments, but I have yet to see any material benefits -- mostly seeing pretty poor 3G speeds on the Epic Touch. In fact, I think I would argue that the speeds are lower than they were around this time last year, probably due to the increased # of users on the network. I'm just curious if they haven't flipped the switch yet, or if this is all there is.

 

They have only completed 36 sites out of 1,063 total LA Metro sites. That is only 3%. 97% more to go. Also, with such a high site density, that means most of these cells are very small. I would doubt you would notice much right now, unless you were standing right next to one of the completed NV sites. And we have a S4GRU member who is going around and checking some LA sites that are complete and has reported his findings, including upgraded speeds.

 

Network Vision is not a simple upgrade at each site. It is a major tear down and replace of every single piece of equipment, coax, internet backhaul, sweeps, cabinets, radios, panels...it replaces everything at every single site except for the tower/structure itself. It is going to take 10 months to complete a market the size of LA. And perhaps even longer.

 

Robert

[Sandman]

Robert or someone else capable of answering this question, I have read awhile back ( can't remember where though) that with NV upgrade they were putting something closer to the receiver antenna that was normally on the ground with the main equipment. The logic was that it would minimize signal loss and actually improve signal strength quite a bit being up on the tower itself. Is this so and what was it exactly just to refresh my memory?

 

If this is the case then I can't wait for my towers in Charlotte, NC receive the NV upgrades. I am more concerned with Voice coverage more than anything at the house.

[MacinJosh]

Robert or someone else capable of answering this question, I have read awhile back ( can't remember where though) that with NV upgrade they were putting something closer to the receiver antenna that was normally on the ground with the main equipment. The logic was that it would minimize signal loss and actually improve signal strength quite a bit being up on the tower itself. Is this so and what was it exactly just to refresh my memory?

 

If this is the case then I can't wait for my towers in Charlotte, NC receive the NV upgrades. I am more concerned with Voice coverage more than anything at the house.

 

Remote Radio Units, or RRU's, is what was talked about many times here on this site.

[S4GRU]

Robert or someone else capable of answering this question, I have read awhile back ( can't remember where though) that with NV upgrade they were putting something closer to the receiver antenna that was normally on the ground with the main equipment. The logic was that it would minimize signal loss and actually improve signal strength quite a bit being up on the tower itself. Is this so and what was it exactly just to refresh my memory?

 

If this is the case then I can't wait for my towers in Charlotte, NC receive the NV upgrades. I am more concerned with Voice coverage more than anything at the house.

 

Yes, as Josh explains above, Sprint is moving to RRU's in Network Vision. Placing the radio directly behind the antenna. In field testing, the signal gain for doing this is approximately 20%. However, the gain is highly variable depending on the coax that was used at the legacy site and the length of the run. A newer site with a short coax, the gain could be as low as 3% to 5%. At an old boomer (with a 500' run), the gain could be 30% to 40%, possibly even more.

 

Robert

[Sandman]

Yea I didn't know what they were called or even if they were talked about. Thanks for the info...

[Deval]

I'm still stuck at a whopping .2-.4 Mbps not much improvement here in jersey, but if I go east a bit from here it's pretty nice where the 3G towers have been upgraded. I get around 1 mbps man do I miss T-Mobile surprisingly enough.

 

They actually have completed a block of towers in Central Jersey with both NV and LTE, I believe...I'm going to do some drive testing this weekend if I get a chance. I just got my hands on an LG Viper to test with.

[S4GRU]

Report back should you find any sites live with LTE. Would love to update our maps accordingly. Thanks!

 

Robert

[Deval]

Report back should you find any sites live with LTE. Would love to update our maps accordingly. Thanks!

 

Robert

 

Will do, if they are live...lol.

 

Otherwise I'll get kickass 3G speeds