Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - Missouri Market (includes St. Louis)


riddlebox

Recommended Posts

If they can just get Downtown, the amphitheater/south of 94, and forest park area filled out, then it looks like they would have a nearly decent coverage for most of the stl metro area before winter sets in.

 

I fully expect Sprint to "launch" the St. Louis metro before winter. They've pretty much got the coverage to satisfy the 40% Pops coverage that seems to be the threshold, even though coverage is no where near complete yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully expect Sprint to "launch" the St. Louis metro before winter. They've pretty much got the coverage to satisfy the 40% Pops coverage that seems to be the threshold, even though coverage is no where near complete yet. 

 

So what happens in that situation? Will the crews up and leave to go to another (warm-weather) market, and then have another wave of crews come through in the thaw of Spring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what happens in that situation? Will the crews up and leave to go to another (warm-weather) market, and then have another wave of crews come through in the thaw of Spring?

 

No, work continues. The "launch" isn't anything more than a press release. In every other market, after an area is "launched" work continues as if nothing has happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, work continues. The "launch" isn't anything more than a press release. In every other market, after an area is "launched" work continues as if nothing has happened.

The markets I follow locally saw a huge change after launch. I've seen the same thing in the small metro areas in the market as well. Once they launched one city it seemed the work stopped then another city was hit hard with tons of work till it launched. My city has had one RRU install since June and that was today. Still several legacy sites waiting. I have even watched VZW and Tmobile upgrade their stuff on a few of them. No permits required here for tower upgrades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a lot of you guys are tech savy, so I have a question totally unrelated to the topic at hand.

 

I am looking for a solid router to replace an older one. I have several types of gear connected including laptops, DVRs and Smart TV's.

 

Price IS a concern. I need to stay less than $100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a lot of you guys are tech savy, so I have a question totally unrelated to the topic at hand.

 

I am looking for a solid router to replace an older one. I have several types of gear connected including laptops, DVRs and Smart TV's.

 

Price IS a concern. I need to stay less than $100.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320038

 

Awesome router especially with one of the Tomato variant firmwares on it to kick in Multi SSID, VLANs, your own VPN for secure browsing while on public wifi, media storage, built in adblocking, you name it.  I had it for years until I upgraded to the RT-N66U.  I would recommend it as it has a faster processor, more memory, gigabit ports, onboard micro-sd slot for storage, 5ghz, etc.  I usually keep routers for years so spending another $70 on a router is a no-brainer as you get what you pay for.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320091

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll ask my own version of the question here, does ASUS make a good dual band 802.11 n router that operates on the DD-WRT firmware, or am I going to have to go higher on spending to get that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll ask my own version of the question here, does ASUS make a good dual band 802.11 n router that operates on the DD-WRT firmware, or am I going to have to go higher on spending to get that? 

 

I read a ton of reviews about routers and the Asus N66U is the badass on the block.

Unfortunately, it is still over $150.  I'm waiting for a deal to pop back into the 120's and I'll pull the trigger I think.

 

http://www.amazon.com/RT-N66U-Dual-Band-Wireless-N900-Gigabit-Router/dp/B006QB1RPY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The markets I follow locally saw a huge change after launch. I've seen the same thing in the small metro areas in the market as well. Once they launched one city it seemed the work stopped then another city was hit hard with tons of work till it launched. My city has had one RRU install since June and that was today. Still several legacy sites waiting. I have even watched VZW and Tmobile upgrade their stuff on a few of them. No permits required here for tower upgrades.

 

Forgive me. MOST markets saw no change after launch. I forget that your market is the worst of all Sprint markets ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unyme3e3.jpg

 

From the Sprint Store in Fairview Heights today. Not bad, about time I walked into a store and saw what Sprint 4G LTE was like.

That's the store i go to...its about 5 minutes from my house. How long did you have to wait for help? And is that a GNex?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the store i go to...its about 5 minutes from my house. How long did you have to wait for help? And is that a GNex?

That's a Moto X. It got almost full signal bars ( I know bars lie ) compared to the HTC One that could barely connect to LTE. The Moto X is a great RF performer.

 

For reference I tested speeds at T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon. Here they are in order.

 

Posted Image

T-Mo

 

Posted Image

AT&T

 

Posted Image

Verizon

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That appears to be coming from a site off Big Bend, just W. of 141.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I saw that on the sheet which makes sense with the signal this site shows in progress on the sheet so maybe a nice surprise. I went back to the 141/Carmen site crossing Bowles and back to 3G outside Maritz.

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me. MOST markets saw no change after launch. I forget that your market is the worst of all Sprint markets ever.

 

You are forgiven and I never mentioned my market either but here you go and thanks for reminding me...

 

chart_5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it from EPC.? That is like a block from me and I have never been in it.

 

< nothing to see here, move along >

Dude, I work at EPC, you should go check it out sometime, tons of really nice equipment!  If you can't make it into the store, check out the website, deals.epcusa.com.  Also here is a 10% off coupon code if you find something you like, EPC400153.  Use it as many times as you like...anyone for that matter.

  • Like 1
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...