Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Boston Market (all of Massachusetts)


brendan4t

Recommended Posts

Which tower? I heard it was rejected cause no representatives from sprint or the tower company were present at the meeting.

 

Waltham city hall had granted one of the two permits the one on 39 sachem street was granted last night. here's the link

 

https://web-server.city.waltham.ma.us/GovernEComponents/WebUserInterface/(S(c5onrwjo3di4qm45vklekiv3))/Report/Web_Report_CrystalViewer.aspx?REPORTNAME=D%3a%5cwalthamweb%5cGovernEComponents%5cReports_TX_Site%5cWAL_WEB_PM.rpt&ReportParameter=YEAR_ID%3d2013%3bP_ID%3d10%2c081.00%3bPM_ID%3d76%2c882.00

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know that this permit is for sprint? I don't see anything mentioning sprint, alcatel, or Ericsson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was staying in the Boston Harbor Hotel over the weekend. I saw 4G (8-9 mbps) in my room' date=' but not in the lobby. Got 4G in the middle of Quincy Market (yes, I was a tourist).[/quote']

 

This makes sense. The nearest active LTE site is probably not close enough to the hotel to provide coverage. But once you go into your room above the ground clutter, you probably had line of sight to the active site and was able to get LTE that way.

 

I have the same issue with WiMax here in New Mexico. The East ABQ site works for about 1.5 miles on the ground. But staying at the Airport Sheraton, I can get the signal almost 5 miles away when I get above the 4th floor and above all the clutter.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also as of monday i went from DL speeds on 3G at .15 to DL speed of 1.35 or higher

Edited by mazza31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes sense. The nearest active LTE site is probably not close enough to the hotel to provide coverage. But once you go into your room above the ground clutter, you probably had line of sight to the active site and was able to get LTE that way.

 

I have the same issue with WiMax here in New Mexico. The East ABQ site works for about 1.5 miles on the ground. But staying at the Airport Sheraton, I can get the signal almost 5 miles away when I get above the 4th floor and above all the clutter.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

 

Yeah, the lte tower broadcasting in that area is up the street at downtown crossing (few streets up). There is a 3G tower that's literally right outside boston harbor hotel that hasn't been upgraded yet.

 

All outside of the boston harbor hotel and the entire greenway you'll get 4G. In the lobby, the signal just can't make it and reverts to the tower right outside.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing at Gillette stadium today. Could barely keep a 1X connection.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Yeah I've noticed at Gillette during the Pats game Sprint service is awful. I noticed that Verizon 3G isnt much better and only their LTE connection works.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Odd, I had 4G LTE at Gillette yesterday. Fairly weak signal up in the nose bleed, but it was there. 5-10mbit speeds.

 

I am wondering if they have just started working on the DAS there... maybe they haven't made it around the stadium yet. My 3G signal was super solid (overpowering 4G).

 

The 4G is strong on R1 in Wrentham, and is abruptly ends on the Foxboro line. You must have picked up for being high up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also a question - I have noticed that the signal strength of the tower near my apartment building ( I am right next to RT3) has gotten slowly stronger. It used to switch over to 3g by the time I got off the highway, then I could pick it up on the grounds, and the last few days I have noticed it in my apartment (before my phone switches to wifi). Am I imagining this?

 

Probably because the leaves are falling off the trees. Leaves can really do a number on your signal. I get a much better signal at my house during the late fall and winter than I do in the spring and summer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also as of monday i went from DL speeds on 3G at .15 to DL speed of 1.35 or higher

 

A city counselor in waltham said sachem st and turner st were rejected due to sprint not showing up at the meetings. I wonder if sprint is going ahead with the work regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

A city counselor in waltham said sachem st and turner st were rejected due to sprint not showing up at the meetings. I wonder if sprint is going ahead with the work regardless.

 

Well the one for sachem street the permit on city hall website say its been approved it also says to Pinnacle Towers Which is the company owns the towers so I guess I just have to wait and see

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need more peeps to scour the South Shore for more LTE goodness!

 

I used Sensorly to map the LTE coverage heading down 93S through the Braintree split the other night. Not too surprised to see coverage there since the sponsor maps show a new live LTE tower in that area in the last update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you finding the sponser Map in the Boston market? in the animated maps section?

 

I used Sensorly to map the LTE coverage heading down 93S through the Braintree split the other night. Not too surprised to see coverage there since the sponsor maps show a new live LTE tower in that area in the last update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got some 4g LTE love today driving from Braintree toward Brockton. 128 to rt 24

around Harrison Blvd. Sporadic though with only 6gb download speeds.

Got to Brockton but the signal disappeared.

Kinda bummed about that. Hopefully they'll get that area hooked up soon.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A new LTE tower mayhave got flipped on (or an existing one adjusted) in Leominster as signal is now strong enough to stay locked on LTE indoors. Seems to average about 5mbps down and 1 up indoors. I can get 10 or higher if i step outside. 3G speed was much improved for a while but seems borked again. I'll map some more with sensorly when I go out.

 

Now only if Burlington would get some LTE. There is ehrpd and improved 3G. Seems close since rt3 Billerica has spots up and running.

Edited by SteaminLoaf
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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
  • Recently Browsing

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