PedroDaGr8

Quote

Are you sure that it belongs to that tower? If you're referring to Sprint, they only have 3 bands on air, and they will all automatically be associated with the same tower (unless it's a mini macro on macro setup, then each B41 sector will be different).

To my knowledge, all the providers except AT&T use the same GCI for a given tower (excluding the mini macro situation above), and will all show as one dot. AT&T will sometimes have 2 GCIs, and thus two dots per tower.

6 hours ago, Trip said:

Unfortunately, this is untrue, depending on location.  For every carrier, I've seen the use of separate GCI patterns for the same tower:

Sprint is the worst offender in this regard; due to the 0x1450 offset of Band 41, any site that has Band 41 has at least two GCI patterns.  Use of Mini Macros or Massive MIMO means every sector has a different GCI on Band 41.  And if a site is or was shared with Clear gear, that's another GCI used or formerly used there.

- Trip

This really depends on the area. On the west coast, things are very predictable. From my experience in the PNW, the following is true:

Each tower has a single GCI for all bands. Additionally, the bands tend to follow a pattern: Sectors 0, 9, and 18 are B25, Sectors 2, 11, and 20 are B26, everything else is B41. Single-, dual-, and tri-band towers have sector IDs between 0 and 20. MassiveMIMO and '5x B41 carrier'-towers also follow this pattern but will have sectors numbers greater than 20.

MiniMIMOs are the exception because they get a unique GCI for each RRU. That being said, the GCI tend to be 1 to 2 away from each other and the two B41 sectors per GCI are paired as follows: 49/57, 50/58, and 51/59. Since they are typically deployed in threes here it makes it very easy to figure out which GCI go together because you will never have two of the same sector pair in a cluster. 

The following is a typical MiniMIMO cluster (which replaced a Clearwire site) GCI and sector format: 0xB6BC9 - Sectors 51/59, 0xB6BCA - Sectors 50/58, 0xB6BCC - Sectors 49/57 

On the other hand, when I visited the bourbon trail in KY, it seems that each band on a tower would have its own GCI and they were pretty random. They were all roughly 202000 apart but the exact amount seemed random. 

On 2/21/2020 at 10:59 AM, RAvirani said:

They don't need a permit to swap from an 8T8R to a M-MIMO panel. That's why a lot of sites with KMW 16-port triband antennas have an inactive 8T8R next to them. 

Any chance you were able to snag some photos of the site? If not, the mast is relatively low, and you can probably get good photos from the parking lot of Cedar Park Christian School.

I will try at some point to get some photos, I am not over in that section very often. Anything in particular you want photographed? 

15 hours ago, NEBRASKACHERS said:

Thank you so much that really helps.  Another question, let's say a tower is on the map with 3 bands detected and someone previously has confirmed it so it has a green circle around a red dot.  However driving around this tower it picks up a fourth band but it's only picking it up on one sector due to switching to another established band so it places a red dot on the map near the other established tower estimating where this band is.  I can move the red dot on top of the established tower but how do I manually say this is definitely established here and get a green ring around it? 

 

When you manually move a tower it will confirm the location. This is not the best system but it is the one they went with. This is why ingenium stressed to ensure your tower location is correct. I have found a number of towers in incorrect locations. 

6 hours ago, RAvirani said:

Great find! Do you know if those sites are broadcasting NR yet?

I don't have a 5G phone, so I have no clue. I have seen sector IDs greater than 20 but not sure if that means anything besides the fact it is no longer triband. Interestingly, I can't find a permit for this change despite the fact the change is very recent. 

Seems that Sprint is still going back and selectively upgrading sites to Massive MIMO. I noticed this morning that SE52XC052 (near the intersection of the 522 and 405) is now a M-MIMO tower. 

22 minutes ago, mirskyc said:

Not sure what happened to the screenshots



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

Possibly you were on B25 for the second site? That seems low but in the ballpark of what I regularly get when I end up connect to B25 and am not in perfect conditions. 

Here it is February 2020 and still no Android 9. I think Sprint gave up on this device. 

Just found one more attached document (from when they updated SE03XC355 to Tri-band back in 2018). 

http://permit.kirklandwa.gov/WebDocs/2018061060/daa4174a-e4b5-4a54-bf11-a4cf3cc6fb18.pdf

It indicates the antenna used is a Commscope NNVV-65C-R4

22 hours ago, belusnecropolis said:

What is the conversion total like in your area? 

Clearwire Towers still exist but they are rare (mainly random B2 or B4 sightings). 

Almost all = Clearwire locations have been converted over to Nokia MM/SC clusters, though some have been upgraded to Tri-band towers. I assume the Clearwire sightings are from full-towers which also have legacy Clearwire equipment. Recently, some of the Nokia MM/SC clusters are starting to be upgraded to Tri-Band. 

2 hours ago, RAvirani said:

That is actually the permit to do the physical upgrade.  The original planning permit was filed in 2018 and was finally approved this month.  Here is the link: https://permitsearch.mybuildingpermit.com/PermitDetails/WIR18-00056/Kirkland.

Hopefully they will get that site upgraded soon.  That area could really use a coverage boost.

 You aren't kidding, I frequent Flat Stick in downtown a lot and other than right by the door, there is ZERO service. Additionally, up the hill to the north into Norkirk by Kirkland Jr. High and onto the Forbes Creek area are pretty much total dead zones. The only major ones I have encountered which aren't covered by any roaming either.  

Edit: It looks like they are getting started on the 11250 Kirkland Way site as well: 

 https://permitsearch.mybuildingpermit.com/PermitDetails/ENR20-00296/Kirkland

Edit 2: I just noticed that Clearwire/Sprint used to have a tower up by Kirkland Jr high. That tower would have definitely improved service to that area if they had converted to triband. As stated, that region is BY FAR the biggest dead zone in the area. 

On 7/17/2019 at 4:42 PM, RAvirani said:

You are correct. 

FYI Sprint just applied to upgrade the Portsmith Condos location from B41 MM/SC to I assume Tri-Band (as discussed). Unfortunately, no attached PDFs this time:

https://permitsearch.mybuildingpermit.com/PermitDetails/BNR20-00353/Kirkland

Figured I would throw up a photo of one from the ground. You can see it on the top rack on the left of the 8t8r antenna. It really illustrates how small they are compared to the old antennas.

3 hours ago, RAvirani said:

Yes - I'm out in Louisville, KY now and I've noticed that. It makes any type of tracking very hard. 

I spy Commscope split-sector AT&T panels on the bottom left. Do you know if Verizon has installed a rack on that tower yet? They permitted to do so a little while back. 

I do not, the shown antenna are the only ones on the tower. 

Oh and the cell tower in Monroe also has M-MIMO equipment.

Kirkland, Bothell, and Woodinville don't have Massive MIMO. Hell, even Duvall doesn't have it but Monroe does.

Also the aforementioned tower has 3 Samsung Massive-MIMO panels, as expected: one pointing down I-5 towards Seattle, one pointing up I-5 towards Everett, and one pointing down I-405 towards Bothell. I was surprised how much smaller they are than the older panels right next to it.

As an aside, I went on the Kentucky Bourbon Trail over the holidays. Wow are the eNBs different there. Up here, outside of MM/SC cells, each tower has a single eNB for all bands. In Kentucky, it seems like each band on each tower has its own eNB (meaning tri-band towers have three eNBs). Even worse, for B41 the Cells look like MM/SC. Made it really hard to map very many towers.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk

Is it new?

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Finally! Spotted a Samsung 64x Massive-MIMO panel in the wild. The tower at the Lynnwood intersection of the 5 and the 405 (by the Target) has one on the top rack pointing down the 405 corridor.

Saw a 5 carrier B41 on the 520 by UW. Also, have noticed B12 showing up on my phone as Sprint.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk

On 7/21/2019 at 2:36 PM, mattp said:

I say what a wase to design turn to fail in 5 years instead of design then to last for a long time better for environment

Since they are in low earth orbit, the amount of fuel for correcting for atmospheric drag determines the lifespan of the satellite. More fuel = more weight = more expensive to launch. Plus it is not that cut and dry from an environmental perspective, heavier satellites require more rocket fuel to launch into orbit. This does notable environmental damage as well. My guess is they did a cost/benefit analysis and determined this is roughly the optimal point.  Cheaper launches means less hesitation to launch. Additionally, it means that in 5 years time, they could roll out new satellites which have higher bandwidths, better back hauls, etc. This keeps them from becoming outdated and vulnerable to a new upstart with newer satellites and more efficient operations. 

17 hours ago, RAvirani said:

Is the site you're looking for close to Kirkland Marina or the intersection of 405 and 85th? There are two mini macro sites within range of SE03XC353. 

I already identified the one near the 405 (eNBs: B6BCD, B6BD1, and B6BD2).

I am looking at the one near the marina, which I think is eNBs: B6BC9, B6BCA, and B6BCC. I am certain B6BCA is there and the other two seem to radiate out from there as well. I think it is on top of the Portsmith Condominiums near the Marina. 

19 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

Yes, Sprint was required by the US government to decommission all Huawei equipment due to security concerns. 

Sprint has historically had issues with the property owner of that Motel 6. It was one of the last sites upgraded to LTE, and it will probably be one of the last sites upgraded to triband. 

That permit is for the Clear site by Kirkland marina. There is a mini-macro setup on the roof of Evergreen Hospital by Totem Lake. 

Sorry, I wasn't clear, the Evergreen Hospital MM setup I already located a while ago. The eNBs for those were: B6BD7, B6BD9, B6BDB.

I meant for the cluster of MM which I can't locate in Kirkland. Just like Totem Lake and the John Muir school, there are three MM nearby with their eNB separated by 2 digits and one reports as an MM/SC. As expected, SE03XC353 tends to overwhelm them in most normal areas, making location more difficult. It seems that their job is to fill in the "shadows" for SE03XC353. My guess is all three are located at the aforementioned Clear site in Kirkland, but I am not 100% certain on that yet. I will drive around to see if I can collect better data on CellMapper.

As an aside, it seems like it is common in a cluster of three for one of them to report as an MM/SC on SignalCheck. Even the one I found which had the last eNB off by one, instead of two, still had one of them as an MM/SC. 

11 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

Sprint doesn't love MM/SC setups, they were just the cheapest way to replace Huawei Clear equipment per government order. 

That particular site was a Clear equipment swapout. It is scheduled to get triband this year, I believe. 

Any MM clusters in the area are from former Clear sites. We do not have any MM on NV setups in this area. 

That makes sense, I said "loves" strictly because I have encountered so many of them near me. I didn't know about the Huawei aspect of things. They are very well located normally, providing coverage for weak spots from the "main" tower. 

 As for Evergreen, that would make sense, it's a high location in what has become a VERY busy area. I am guessing that is why the tower over on the Motel 6 nearby has not been upgraded.

Also, that is good to know about all of the MM clusters. That combined with this permit makes me think that I am correct on the location. The only thing I need to determine if all three eNB are at the same site.

Seems that Sprint REALLY loves MM and MM/SC type cells in this area, often grouping them in three's.  For example, Evergreen Hospital in Totem Lake has three B41MM to supplement the 3G/B25 tower nearby. 

At this point, I have identified three clusters of three MM cells and  am trying to track down what I think is one more cluster possibly located at what was previously a Clearwire B41 LTE/WiMax site. 

On 7/12/2019 at 5:33 PM, mikejeep said:

 

Perhaps the B25 and B41 are not coming from the same site?

-Mike

 

Unfortunately, not in this case. Signal strength increases up to this tower from every direction for all bands. So clearly something is a bit screwy with my phone if nobody else has noticed this. 

Anyways I have taken up enough of your time on something unrelated to your software. Thanks for the guidance though!

On 7/11/2019 at 11:25 AM, PedroDaGr8 said:

I figured it wasn't an app issue, either way, I will test today near the tower that I used to test the B25 values. I was only able to test it yesterday on B25 because there was a period where it seemed that B41 wasn't broadcasting.

 

Either way, even the values at 4 and 5 are not really accurate either. So it could be my device more than anything else.

Yep, must be my device if normally Sprint B41 is the most accurate. Same exact location (approx 100ft away from the antenna) when I had TA=0 for B25 shows a TA of 3-4 for B41. So yeah, for Sprint LG V30+, the B41 TA is not correct. Makes it very hard for me to track down this MM/SC that I can't seem to find. 

6 minutes ago, mikejeep said:

 

TA support varies by device. Band 41 seems to be most accurate across the board; some devices require a correction factor applied when on certain bands (B25 & B26 at least). Perhaps it's not dropping below 3 because you were under the shadow of that site, similar to how you typically see strongest signal strengths a short distance away from a site due to antenna tilt, etc?

I don't know a lot about the science behind TA; SCP simply reports the value the OS is reporting--with the only exception being if you enabled the correction factor option (then it doubles the given value, except on B41). The distance values are based on published formulas and converted to meters or feet (or miles in the latest version).

-Mike

I figured it wasn't an app issue, either way, I will test today near the tower that I used to test the B25 values. I was only able to test it yesterday on B25 because there was a period where it seemed that B41 wasn't broadcasting.

Either way, even the values at 4 and 5 are not really accurate either. So it could be my device more than anything else.