tommym65

Unfortunate choice of terms on my part. I didn't mean active hand off of calls, but rather changing frequencies while parked. The problem is that when a phone is idle, the Sprint network will tend to leave it parked on whichever frequency it is on (e.g., 1900) even when the alternate frequency is much stronger. And even when sending (or trying to receive) texts or initiating or receiving a call, Sprint loyally stays on the frequency. In "fringe" PCS coverage areas, this causes poor call quality, and failed and delayed texts. My point was that the method currently used by Sprint to change the parking frequency seems to hang on to 1900 even when signal quality falls below acceptable levels, when the phone should be "handed off" to 800. With current PRL 25018, for example, I can do nothing about this. With previous PRL 25017, I would force a PRL rescan, which would find 800 where available, and *poof* the connection problem was gone! I'm sure there is a better term than handoff, but can't remember it.

You're absolutely right, EXCEPT in 1x1900 coverage areas which are somewhat fringy and where there is good 1x800 coverage. Whatever algorithm(s) Sprint is using to determine when to handoff are holding onto 1x1900 way too long. I live in one of the few parts of Chicagoland with an incomplete Sprint site (no 1x800, no LTE). With the previous PRL, I could force my GS3 to seek 1x800; with the latest one, I am basically stuck on 1900. I find myself in areas where I used to be able to call reliably and could always get and receive texts, but in which I no longer can do so. It is frustrating. Hopefully, Sprint and/or the phone vendors will correct his.

I think that's a good theory, but the Zing stuck on that setting sometimes for a couple of minutes, and I was able to web browse and do speed tests. My B41 DL/UL channel is consistently 40978, while the B25 reading was 40056. My guess is tower tweaking.

Which somehow means my Zing is reporting a B41 frequency for a B25 site. Still doesn't seem to make sense. My guesses are 1. The Zing is wrong; 2. The site is somehow reporting wrong (this is also a new B26 site and Samsung may have gotten something wrong - does the Zing calculate the number, or is it broadcast by the sector?) 3. Something else is going on and needs more expert analysys. Or, 4. Huh?

Crystal Lake, but the sites (I found a second) are both south of me. And, yes I could disable B41, but I have been busy enough sorting out the numbers that i simply haven't disabled it. I think the B26 data is pretty solid, and in line with the Deployment Schedule, as you will see in the Premier post. Edit: Vt: Took your suggestion, disabled B41, now my eyes are getting easick as the hotspot yo-yo's between B25 & B26. The RSRP's are nearly identical, ~116. SNR also about the same, ~9.

Band 26 LTE has apparently popped up in the wild in the Far Northwest Burbs. My hotspot has been crazily jumping from B25 to B41 to B26 for the last several hours. (It is wonderful to live on the fringes!) For B26, it is reporting Channel UL of 26763 and Channel DL of 8763, both dead-center of the channels expected by AJ in his Wall article from last spring (i.e., UL 26761-26765 and DL 8761-8765). RSRP is mediocre (-105 to -115). I believe that the Sprint site is about 4.5 miles southeast of me. I think I got a speed test of 7.80 Mbps down and 4.20 Mbps up with a ping of 76 ms, but it is hard to be certain because the hotspot keeps jumping bands. (Right now, for instance it is camped on B41and giving me ~4.4 Mb down & ~0.8 up with a 168 Ms ping, from a site about 3 miles southwest of me. Of course, when I WANT to see B41, I can't connect to it at all.) I will post B26 screenshots and tower ID on the B26 Acceptances [edit:] 800 Deployment Schedule Premier thread. I am also getting an apparently anomalous B25 Channel UL reading from that same site, which keeps bouncing back & forth between B26 and B25: Per AJ, the normal B25 UL is 26665 (1912.5 MHz) and the DL is 8665 (1992.5 MHz), and I am getting those numbers most of the time. But intermittantly, from the same Sprint site, I am getting a UL of 40056 with a DL of 8665. Using AJ's formula, 40056 translates to 2.2516 MHz, which doesn't seem to be in any cellular band at all. I had thought that I finally found the elusive "USCC spectrum" in use as a second B25 LTE carrier, but actually my observation doesn't make any sense, first because the UL and DL aren't paired, second because the DL is already paired with 26665, and third because the UL isn't even in a cellular frequency. Any experts have any thoughts?

You are right that CA doesn't eliminate non-CA devices, but my concern is that the CA-capable devices on B25 could potentially hog the aggregated bandwidth. My paranoia may result from the market that I live in, where Sprint is currently struggling with one single tiny choking B25 carrier, with no live B26 yet (for those devices which can even use it). B41, on the other hand is abundant and has great coverage as you get near the Big City, and this with only a small fraction of planned sites actually turned on. Add to that the enormous amount of B41 spectrum currently allocated to Wimax, which seems to use many carriers per site as opposed to only 1 per site with LTE, and the B41 potential seems almost unlimited (AJ will likely disagree here). And finally factor in the reduced diameter of B41 coverage, which will permit many, many more B41 sites with concomitant increases in market-wide bandwidth, and my poor mind is boggled.

Patience, Grasshopper, patience. (If Sprint dropped prices and suddenly added 4 or 5 million subs right now, especially in over-crowded markets like Chicago & NYC, the current network would simply melt down. He needs infrastructure now, aggressive pricing thereafter. Or so we can hope.)

What is the advantage of aggregating B25 Sprint carriers when B25 is primarily going to be used by phones? Moreover, wouldn't aggregation permit a small number of devices to essentially take over all the carriers for a given sector, should those devices run applications with high bandwidth needs? It seems that enabling multiple independent B25 carriers would make the most sense, especially in markets which are already slammed for B25 capacity (can you say "Chicago"?). Hesse has stated that the NV phase 1 goal is to provide ~6 Mbps sustainable bandwidth. Carrier aggregation could in theory provide much higher bandwidth than that, but could also significantly reduce the number of devices which could concurrently use any given sector, a very undesirable result at least for urban markets. It seems more logical to focus CA development on B41 spectrum, where Sprint controls an abundance of bandwidth. Once that pesky Wimax is curtailed (with its current highly inefficient spectrum utilization), B41 bandwidth can be unleashed for those devices which really need it.

Keep in mind that Hesse formerly reported to a board of directors that was known to thwart at least some of his attempts to add to, streamline, and modernize Sprint. He now reports directly to Son. My suspicion is that he and Son are making moves that Hesse has long known were necessary, but which he did not have the authority to make. I further suspect that he and Son have spent much of the last 7 months perfecting a syrategic plan, and that many more chsnges are coming. Does this mean the Hesse himself will survive? Maybe. Maybe not. Time - and results - will tell. But realistically, Son is responsible to no board, and has the power to do what he needs to do.

And, they need to become familiar with S4GRU. I am serious on this point, not joking. S4GRU has identified virtually every problem and shortcoming of Sprint Network Vision since its very inception, and the intelligent and insightful members, Sponsors, Premiers, and Staff have presented well-thought-out solutions to almost all of them, long before Sprint would even publicly admit their existence. So, I ask, how can we, as supporters of this forum, get the attention of the Executive level of Sprint/Softbank?

[N. B.: The following is not a rant. It is, after the style of a Greek tragedy, more in the style of a lamentation by the off-stage chorus, pointing out how the gods have begun tormenting the hero (that would be me), in preparation for squashing him into paste, as if he were an annoying insect. We who are about to be paste salute you. Note to Robert: You should put some sort of block on my account preventing me from posting at this time of the morning, so that others are not subjected to my lunatic attempts at humor.] This is an open thread, so I will phrase my response carefully: The sponsor maps show that certain areas (Chicago, Minneapolis, West Michigan, Indy, for example) are nearly 100% complete for 800 voice. In those areas, in my experience, when I am on 800 voice, my call quality is excellent and texts go through. Madison/Milwaukee (and most of the rest of the country) does not have anywhere near 100% completion, so at this time, you probably haven't seen the same amount of voice/text improvement, if any improvement at all. My personal problem -- well, I have many personal problems, but this isn't Dear Abby -- with the new PRL is that by dumb luck, I live in one of the very few locations in my market that DOESN'T have an 800-upgraded Sprint site, and it just happens that I am also adjacent to an area with very fringy 1900 voice, but not fringy enough to lose 1900 completely. So, even though I am totally surrounded by wonderful, strong, voice- and text-perfect 800 coverage, once I am camped on 1900, the new PRL will not let me connect to 800 no matter what I do. With PRL 25017, I used to be able to force a PRL update, which had the unintended consequence of pushing me onto 800. Not any more, with PRL 25018. So my texts have begun failing again, just like they did 8 or 9 months ago, and my voice calls are totally crappy and have begun dropping again. And because I live in a location not yet upgraded, I have and need an Airave, so every time I go home, I go back on 1900 voice. So, goodbye to all the benefits of NV for me! And, because my local tower is not upgraded, my LTE coverage also sucks. Thus, thanks to a tiny little change in the PRL, and my unfortunate geographic location, I feel like Sprint has decided that I personally should be punished. Severely. Oh, and it's only paranoia when they are NOT after you.

For those if us who are not PRL wizards, is there a practical way to go back to 25017? In my location, my phone has become almost unusable.

I will be very interested when someone decodes 55018 (and other new ones which may exhibit similar behavior). The link you posted into the Nebraska-Iowa thread suggests that 55018 may improve Airave behavior. It may also have something to do with the tri-band "single radio" problem (I can't remember the acronym). Unfortunately, I live in a place which is surrounded by excellent 1x800 coverage, but which has 1 non-upgraded Sprint site (precisely where I live, of course) and which badly needs a new site in the center of town (where my wife works, of course). And I don't have a tri-band phone. For the past 2 days, I have had many, many failing texts and my voice-call quality has been absolutely awful, because I simply cannot get a 1x800 connection. I have had near-perfect text and voice service everywhere I have gone in Chicagoland for the past 7 or 8 months, ever since Nextel was shut down and 800 SMR was widely deployed here, and now, suddenly and without explanation, my voice/text service has essentially reverted back to (unacceptable) pre-NV levels. Oh, and I also have an Airave, and it has been working fine for almost a year, and didn't need a PRL-induced fix. So I will be quite interested to hear more.

Oh, Where is digiblur when we need him? He is sorely, sorely missed!!!

If you do the arithmetic: The original NV 1.0 plan was to upgrade ~39,000 sites for ~$8 Billion. That works out to just over $205,000 per site. Since the original announcement, there have been additions for more sites and for B41 LTE & B26 LTE, and also more dollars allocated, so that today I would guess the total estimated cost per site is in excess of $400,000, but that is just a guess, and really doesn't account for the newer plan to have something like 50,000 B41 sites.

My GS3 has been updated to PRL 25018, and seemingly will no longer connect to 1x800, no matter what I do (PRL update, go into poor coverage areas, whatever). Anyone else have this problem? Anyone know what 25018 changes are?

I am factoring in the $20, and regardless of the cause, it is a cost increase -- in my case, $1,200 per year -- if I in fact end up paying it. And I realize that [self-censored] and [also self-censored] do not provide unlimited data, and are significantly more expensive than Sprint, compared both to my present plan and to Framily. But [self-censored yet again] is not more expensive, and could offer an alternative to my largely urban/suburban data use, although I choke with loathing at the thought of paying [un-nameable self-proclaimed rock star] actual money. As a recently-departed [and rather contentious] member from the west pointed out in one of his more rational posts, Sprint is investing huge amounts of capital to create a network with enormous bandwidth and capacity, with the intention of attracting more subscribers. Over time, this should result both in lower costs per subscriber and in larger profits. Rather than seeing my already substantial monthly cellular bill go higher, I would like to see my costs actually go down. Of course, I also expect world peace and unlimited free fried chicken (or in Robert's new situation, unlimited carrot slices).

I hope Sprint does offer better plans for those coming off subsidized, multi-subscriber plans. If the end of subsidized plans is coming on March 14th, time is running out, and panic will ensue. As you rightly point out, the alternative is likely to be further erosion in the subscriber base. And we are far, far off topic. SHAME on you, you naughty moderator!!!

I realize that this may be the wrong place to post this, but the Framily thread is rather crazy . . . Since it was brought up here: The "gotcha" is the supposed "reduced monthly payment": I have 5 lines of "Everything Data", and don't plan to go out and solicit distant family or vague acquaintances to join my plan and increase my count. As far as I can figure out, the equivalent unsubsidized 5-member Framily plan would cost me about $25 more per month than what I now pay including subsidies. Or, to restate more clearly, I would pay $5.00 more per line per month, and I would lose the ~$20 per month subsidy. Therefore, I would actually end up paying as much as $125 more per month should I choose to continue to purchase modern phones [which is virtually necessary in the fast-changing Sprint world of today]. Is my understanding of Framily wrong? If it is, please, someone, help me understand it better. So my point is that I will be very unenthusiastic about ponying up $1,500 per year more to receive essentially the same services and devices that I receive on my current plan. I have done the arithmetic, and it just doesn't balance. This is not a rant. It is only in this thread because others introduced the subject here, and because the Framily thread has become almost indecipherable. If deemed inappropriate, please let me know and I will delete here and repost elsewhere.

1. Are you receiving the music on LTE or EVDO? 2. If on LTE, have you looked at the LTE SNR value? There were rumors a few months ago about another provider interfering with Sprint LTE, and the supposed indicator was an outrageously poor signal-to-noise ratio. The rumor was never verified, but look for SNR values near zero even in the presence good signal strength, which might indicate interference (or might indicate very heavy subscriber overloading).

Hey, Dekalb got an upgrade last week. That's only . . . 19 months. Or is it 20? And only 2 more sites to go. You should be fully upgraded by 2019 or so. You're right up there with the real world!!! [For those of you who are not blessed/cursed with the sarcasm gene, please disregard the above post. I am sometimes overwhelmed by my own incisive sense of humor. But, Damn!, I do make me laugh!]

The "BSL offset" issue has been discussed in several threads, and is in fact an artifact of public safety/911 requirements from several years ago. Some markets have had the issue (e.g., Milwaukee), others have not (Chicago). Apparently, NV sites do squawk their actual locations once they are upgraded.

How about, "Aloha!". Get's him coming and going.

Now that I am back in my corner of the Arctic (5-8 inches of snow today where I live plus blizzard-like winds -- Oh, how I loved getting on that plane yesterday!), a FWIW from my 8-day sojourn in the land of Mickey and the Minions: After good-to-excellent Sprint coverage in the Disney areas and the OC Convention Center during the week, 8 of us went to Universal on Saturday. 4 GS3's and 4 Satan phones (OK, they were iPhone 5c's --sorry if my prejudices sometimes overwhelm me), all fully charged at the beginning of the day. Sprint coverage virtually everywhere at/near Universal ranged from lousy to non-existent. Moreover, the GS3's spent their time vainly switching back and forth between mediocre 3G data and even worse 4G LTE as they hunted for coverage, with the result that all 4 GS3 batteries basically died well before the end of the day. The iPhones had slightly better connectivity and much better battery survival. I live in an area with good Sprint coverage, and I travel all over the western US, and I have never seen the battery problem that the GS3's had at universal on Saturday. I wonder if Universal has some sort of arrangement with Big Red or The Dark Side (that would be Verizon and AT&T to the less spiteful) which prevents Sprint from placing cells in proximity to the Universal property. I have not read through all 125 preceding pages of this thread, so if I am repeating what 78 other people have already observed, I apologize. But the situation certainly seemed unusual to me.