Jump to content

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


riddlebox

Recommended Posts

Ericsson doesn't need to have 3G and 4G upgrades on a site for eCSFB to work. It can be installed on the legacy equipment. Only a few isolated sites are having the issue. Missouri is not a problem market. Re-read Robert's article.

 

This is why it's mainly a Samsung problem.

Around here what doesn't work are the 3g 4g both live sites. You get kicked back to 3g like the others have said when near one of those. I assumed all that got 3g accepted on a site with 4g live site going forward would have it too. There seem to be a lot of 3g accepted sites lately so I thought it would be something that would become more of an issue until the issue was resolved. Either way it's going be fixed soon.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Around here what doesn't work are the 3g 4g both live sites. You get kicked back to 3g like the others have said when near one of those. I assumed all that got 3g accepted on a site with 4g live site going forward would have it too. There seem to be a lot of 3g accepted sites lately so I thought it would be something that would become more of an issue until the issue was resolved. Either way it's going be fixed soon.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

My G2 can connect to a 3G/4G site. My phone automatically connects to the 270 & Manchester site without any problem.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I havent had time to post much today but the Pontoon Site was working this morning. Anyone check Motherhead?

Actually this was still causing problems tonight. Don't know why....it was fine this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Around here what doesn't work are the 3g 4g both live sites. You get kicked back to 3g like the others have said when near one of those. I assumed all that got 3g accepted on a site with 4g live site going forward would have it too. There seem to be a lot of 3g accepted sites lately so I thought it would be something that would become more of an issue until the issue was resolved. Either way it's going be fixed soon.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

That was just a preliminary assessment. I have been able to connect to almost all sites. Including 3G/4G and 4G only. So it is just a problem with some sites. Also like the Pontoon site and what others are saying it will prevent you from connecting to other sites that may even be closer. Also most newly 4G accepted sites will not be eCSFB out of the gate and are usually eCSFB ready sometime shortly after acceptance. A few weeks ago we had like 4 or 5 reports of the previous weeks accepted sites getting eCSFB overnight on a Monday night. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they "launch" with this atrocious coverage.............

I'm fairly certain coverage is less than "atrocious." Perhaps you need to widen your view.

 

You used to actually contribute to these forums. Lately it's been all negativity. It will not be tolerated without some actual content to back it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they "launch" with this atrocious coverage.............

I can truly say in the time I've been on this forum Sprint's network gas came a long way. I remember my first time getting a lte signal after the tornado came through north county last year. I thought the tornado had just damage the tower and it was flipping out cause the signal was unusual at the time. Now I can go pretty much anywhere and pick up a good signal for what I need. I say be patient if you can. I know I use way to much data to go to a different carrier.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing like being spanked in front of the class for speaking the truth..... Sorry, but I have nothing but problems with slow data speeds. I wish I could hold hands and skip down the aisle singing Kumbaya.

 

The following is the normal in most cases. I thought it was the phone, but was given a loaner and had the same issues.

 

Like I mentioned before I get MUCH better data speed and MUCH better consistency with WiMax.

 

2e5qmw1.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing like being spanked in front of the class for speaking the truth..... Sorry, but I have nothing but problems with slow data speeds. I wish I could hold hands and skip down the aisle singing Kumbaya.

 

The following is the normal in most cases. I thought it was the phone, but was given a loaner and had the same issues.

 

Like I mentioned before I get MUCH better data speed and MUCH better consistency with WiMax.

 

Posted Image

For every low speed test others get high speed tests. I never got results like these on wimax

Posted Image

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll get one of those every once in awhile. Just today I was pulling 15 down. I walked 10 feet into a building to make a delivery and it was gone! I go back outside and it is back. This LTE does not penetrate buildings worth a hoot. It happens all the time for me, in all areas of the metro area. They has issues, but I guess I just need to stick my head in the sand and not say anything, because we know that fixes everything.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll get one of those every once in awhile. Just today I was pulling 15 down. I walked 10 feet into a building to make a delivery and it was gone! I go back outside and it is back. This LTE does not penetrate buildings worth a hoot. It happens all the time for me, in all areas of the metro area. They has issues, but I guess I just need to stick my head in the sand and not say anything, because we know that fixes everything.

Until we get 800 LTE I think it is going to be that way. Sucks for you being on the move all the time. I would probably be the same way.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only going off the limit knowledge that I have is Sprint didn't have that frequency until they purchased Nextel. From what I remembered being said in here is that 800 lte has surfaced in Chicago.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question then is simple. If 800 LTE is where it's at, then why wasn't it released to the wild instead of whatever it is we have now? That is just stupidity if you ask me.

 

800 is coming. And when it does, so are a lot of forum users, if you catch the drift.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question then is simple. If 800 LTE is where it's at, then why wasn't it released to the wild instead of whatever it is we have now? That is just stupidity if you ask me.

They couldn't start using 800 till they shut down the Nextel network. Wimax is on the same frequency and had the same building penetration issues. Wimax won't hand off to 3g so if you leave it on your battery drains crazy fast and I never had it in Wentzville much less Troy. I'm really impressed with the coverage we have so far given how many towers there still are to go. I do service work and travel all over the metro area and have LTE more times than not.

 

Sent from my HTC Butterfly s using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question then is simple. If 800 LTE is where it's at, then why wasn't it released to the wild instead of whatever it is we have now? That is just stupidity if you ask me.

Sprint was only approved to use 800 LTE this summer. They only got the designs for radios in smartphones completed this fall. That's why it wasn't released yet. They have been quietly upgrading equipment ever since. We are starting to see 800 LTE acceptance reports come in. None in Missouri yet, but many sites are scheduled for 800 LTE in the next few months.

 

Unfortunately, many of the older buildings in St. Louis don't let cell signals in. That goes for any carrier, unless they happen to be sitting on top of a cell site. It seems you just spend all your time in the dwindling areas that still don't have the majority of sties upgraded. I'm sure coverage downtown is not up to par yet, as there are many sites that still need upgraded. The Central West End is so dense that the cells sites are already overwhelmed. The are DAS systems in the hospitals there, that once upgraded, should help some with the congestion.

 

Elsewhere, last time I was in STL I had good coverage, and decent speeds 5+Mbps most of the places I went. Even downtown I had acceptable coverage, but I was getting coverage from across the rive and the Washington site. I'm sure at other times of day it's not as good.

 

Obviously you are not having a good experience. There is always someone. No matter what happens, cell coverage isn't going to work for everyone, on any carrier. That's just the nature of how mobile technologies work. However, the larger majority of people are seeing much improved service, so your experience is not representative. However, still valid, so long as you back up complaints with facts. Complaining for the sake of complaining is what we do not allow.

  • 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

    • 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.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
  • Recently Browsing

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