Boosted20V

I'm not exactly sure what to upload, but this is what I've got from Sensorly.

Nice to see Indiana LTE.

Sure. I will try to keep the explanation brief in this post. If you would like a more detailed explanation, though, let me know.

 

An idle state handset hashes to a particular CDMA1X carrier (e.g. PCS 0050, CEL 0283, SMR 476, etc.), then sleeps and monitors the paging channel every few seconds on the PN (i.e. sector) with the best Ec/Io. This typically requires no network intervention, other than the initial registration and periodic registrations thereafter.

 

A traffic state handset has a traffic channel set up on a particular CDMA1X carrier. The network selects the CDMA1X carrier based upon loading. While in traffic state on that CDMA1X carrier, the handset can measure the Ec/Io of other PNs, but only on that CDMA1X carrier. If a certain PN meets established Ec/Io criteria, then the handset can request that it be added to its active set (i.e. soft/softer handoff).

 

What is relevant to this 800/1900 MHz discussion, however, is inter frequency handoff (i.e. hard handoff). Since CDMA1X is a continuously transmitted (i.e not time slotted) airlink, a traffic state handset has no downtime in which to measure the Ec/Io of PNs on other CDMA1X carriers. So, just as the network chose the CDMA1X carrier on which to set up the traffic channel, only the network can dictate an inter frequency hard handoff to a traffic channel on a different CDMA1X carrier (e.g. PCS 0050 to SMR 476).

 

AJ

So let's use a real world example here... Let's say that the network dictates a 1900mhz carrier and you travel to an area where that signal begins to fade and realisticaly, you need to be moved to the lower frequency carrier. How does the network "know" this move needs to be made? I guess really this is the exact same question asked above. I suppose this may have something to do with why they default users to the 800mhz carrier?

Also, Verizon currently has 1x on 850mhz Cellular and 1900mhz PCS, correct? So they must be using this functionality as well?

Robert,

Believe it or not, I'm not so heavily invested in this that I've done extensive research: ) Even though I've looked at the sponsor maps for Chicago, I've never compared to other launch markets, and regardless it is certainly is not intuitive as to why Sprint would launch their other markets with crap and then Chicago in pristine condition with a best-in-class network. So what may be obvious to an expert is less obvious to me : ) Thanks for the assurance (which is what I was looking for) and as always the great site. I'll wait until the official launch and then get a Sprint iPhone 5 with the option to return within 14 days if not satisfied with the network. Cheers.

I would say Chicago is different simply based on the issue they had with legacy hardware and NV hardware. I wouldn't think they would launch a market when calls are dropping like crazy.

No, handsets control only idle state handoffs. The network directs traffic state handoffs.

 

AJ

Care to explain any further? I thought on a CDMA network the handset always was in control of which sector it was connected to?

Robert,

Have you found yourself in a situation where the 1900 1X voice was extremely weak and had your phone switch to the 800 1X.

To state it better, have you seen a 1900 voice signal get down to -100 or worse and successfully transfer a working call to 800 meg. Can you prove a call will survive a transfer back and forth from 1900 to 800 and vice versa???

Sprint is going to look awful bad if they do not have this working correctly.

There is no reason for it not to.... that is controlled by the handset.

EDIT - This should be no different than the handset picking a signal from one tower over another. It's just choosing a different carrier based on EC/IO.

As pointed out above, iDEN thinning is complete. The final decommissioning of remaining iDEN will not occur until June 30, 2012.

 

However, 800MHz voice is already starting to be deployed and is not dependent on a full iDEN shutdown to be implemented. CDMA 800 has already been turned on in half the Chicago sites completed and in Waco, Texas. It will be added to more markets over the next 6 months or so.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Robert,

I have a question about the deployed 800 mhz 1xA. If I'm deep in a building and only picking up this signal and no EVDO or LTE (which even with 800mhz LTE might very well be the case), what kind of speeds will 1xA provide? I remember reading that it can either be deployed for efficiency or speed, so I'm assuming ~150k/s? Thanks!

I've been roaming since yesterday in an area I shouldn't be. I happened to drive by the tower and there were a bunch of trucks parked there. On my way back I stopped and spoke briefly with a gentleman who said he was the electrician. He told me I was roaming because the tower is shut down. He said he was there to shut everything down so the guys from Alcatel Lucent could work on the cabinets for the network upgrades they are starting in the area. The Alcatel Lucent guys were busy working in the fenced in area.

Try to get pictures when you can of the new panels!

Another nail in the coffin. Down with VoLTE. Death to VoLTE. Voice and data should be kept separate but equal.

 

 

AJ

Realistically though, I don't see how carriers can move 100% to LTE given its coverage limitations. From your technical understanding of LTE, do you think there will be revisions to the LTE standards which will improve this?

EDIT - Also, wasn't there talk of the FCC freeing up some ~600mhz spectrum? That would certainly help.

Thanks, I find this very interesting. My biggest question regarding it all would be.. if you run a hybrid of both 1xA and VoLTE, would traffic flow seamlessly between both or would you have dropped calls? For example, I'm on the street, great LTE signal is being received and I'm using VoLTE. If I walk into a building and then need to drop back to 800mhz 1xA, would the handoff be seamless?

Also, this brings up a very good point regarding low frequency spectrum. Moving forward towards LTE, low frequency spectrum becomes all that much more valuable based on the lack of strength of LTE signals to maintain decent in-building coverage. This puts carriers such as T-Mobile at a very distinct disadvantage.

Once VoLTE is worked out, Sprint could use it as an overlay. It could become the major carrier of voice traffic, and Sprint could reduce its number of voice carriers. Just leaving one 1x carrier on CDMA 800 for distance and penetration, to cover area where VoLTE stops short.

 

However, since 1x Advanced is notably more efficient than VoLTE, Sprint should ride that gravy train all the way to the end of the line. They probably should start adding VoLTE capability to devices in the next year or so, so they can shunt additional traffic as needed to VoLTE without deploying more spectrum robbing 1x carriers. But at this point, this is nowhere near a priority.

 

1x Advanced is a voice workhorse. Whose voice capacity and coverage are just unrivaled at this point. HD voice can be run over 1x the same as VoLTE.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Thanks, I find this very interesting. My biggest question regarding it all would be.. if you run a hybrid of both 1xA and VoLTE, would traffic flow seamlessly between both or would you have dropped calls? For example, I'm on the street, great LTE signal is being received and I'm using VoLTE. If I walk into a building and then need to drop back to 800mhz 1xA, would the handoff be seamless?

 

 

Exactly. This is a commonly misunderstood point. VoLTE tower spacing is significantly tighter on the same frequency as 1x. VoLTE is only good to approximately -93dBm RSSI, whereas 1x voice can be used to roughly -103dBm. 10dBm is huge and represents a lot of coverage difference.

 

Sprint would have to run VoLTE on LTE 800 just to get in the ballpark of CDMA 1900 coverage. And then it would be nowhere near as good as 1x is on 800.

 

Robert via ICS Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

So then Verizon would have the same issues with spacing on their 700mhz, no? They don't have great density yet, correct?

 

 

Haha... You're jokingly upset, right?

Yes I am.

They have about 38,000 towers, and all but 100 won't get LTE.

Freakin Sprint, makes sense. I should have known their entire footprint wouldn't be covered!

So it's my understanding that Sprint is sticking with 1x Advanced for calling due to the fact that it's more efficient than LTE. This will have some interesting implications with pretty much every other carrier moving to VoLTE. Are any other carriers using 1x Advanced? How will this impact their roaming agreement with Verizon? I suppose Verizon will have their 1x running for quite a while yet even once they start using VoLTE.

EDIT - Also, we can assume at some point Sprint will start using VoLTE, no?

Bronx is not Westchester.

 

I know it seems like it sometimes. Lol

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

No, there was another glimpse of LTE there. Both places.

.

Repost * 3.

I've never had an issue in South/Center City Philly with speeds. As I mentioned in another thread, last week I noticed that everywhere I traveled in the Lehigh Valley was connected via eHRPD. Only reason I mention this is because it's the same market as Philly. I imagine the same should be true for there.

How is that NOT good? That is almost 2mbps and 1mbps up on a 3G connection. You are not going to get much more than that in real world conditions. Hell you have a weak signal at -106 too

Someone always has to be a downer. Theoretical peak is 3.1mb/s... WTF SPRINT!?!?!?!

It appears Sprint is finally starting to hit their stride regarding NV deployment. Lots of threads popping up about LTE sightings in different cities. I think we will start to see those totals increasing rapidly for # of towers completed.

Not Sprint.

So it would appear that Shentel is taking the same approach as Sprint(outside of Chicago) and is hitting sites all over their footprint, rather than focusing on one area at a time. We have sites upgraded in Lebanon, PA, Harrisburg, PA, Hagerstown, MD etc.

Well, it seems to be more complicated than that. In the beginning, all the LTE devices had the threshold issue. But all were given OTA's that solved the problem. And in all the other devices, the OTA solved the problem. But not in the EVO LTE. In fact, the EVO LTE has had three OTA's and it hasn't solved the problem.

 

When you marry these points with the fact that we reported that the EVO LTE was having LTE connectivity issues even during lab testing, before the device even started shipping, it lends credence to this issue is much more than just a threshold setting for the EVO LTE: http://s4gru.com/ind...the-evo-4g-lte/

 

Robert

While obviously it seems more complex, what intrigues me about this all is that the SIII, Photon Q and EVOLTE all use the same Snapdragon processor which has a built in radio, correct? I'm damn near positive I read this in some Qualcomm documentation. Now I realize the antenna design is different, but did you see a major difference in signal strength when comparing the two? It just would appear most things are "equal" outside of the software.

 

 

Here is the combined coverage of T-Metro. Looks basically the same. To me, this was about spectrum and customers( who could potentially leave for another prepaid provider or carrier). It helps them in urban areas they already cover, but I do not see them expanding their coverage to compete with the Big Two.

Without sub-Ghz spectrum, it would be cost prohibitive to even try.

Update, yup, it's definitely sprint nv. Radios are in place behind the panels. Actually passed a truck with sprint logos on 30 while staring at the panels. Happy to see them in town!

The other day I saw a Ford Escape with a Sprint logo on the doors. Was the first time I've ever seen such a thing!