Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 95

Thread: Why is Verizon VoLTE coverage so bad in my area (compared with CDMA)?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,632
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post
    If you used B46, then it was basically the same as WiFi in 5GHz band... It needs to coexist, so it's mostly usable for indoor coverage.
    So? That means those people are not using the other bands on the tower which frees up bandwidth for everyone else.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,306
    Device(s)
    N/A
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon Wireless;
    Feedback Score
    0
    Exactly. I expect B46 to be primarily useful for stadiums, perhaps airports, subway station, and the like, and the generally high population areas that already have microcells on every block, where it'll take all that load off the other bands.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,632
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hwertz View Post
    Exactly. I expect B46 to be primarily useful for stadiums, perhaps airports, subway station, and the like, and the generally high population areas that already have microcells on every block, where it'll take all that load off the other bands.
    I think a lot of people don't get this. Also as much as people complain that mmwave can't cover a whole stadium that should be less of an issue with 5.9 GHz vs 28 GHz

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    164
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hwertz View Post
    Not CDMA; LTE has narrow 1.4 and 3mhz options (mostly meant to be more of a drop-in replacement in case some cell co running CDMA/EVDO's 1.25mhz channels and no fresh spectrum didn't have to turn off 4 at a time to fit a 5mhz LTE channel.) I'm wondering, if LTE's range issues are due to the wide 5mhz, 10mhz, and 20mhz channels, if running one 1.4mhz LTE channel (probably on band 5, 850mhz) would help coverage. (And if that 1.4mhz channel gets too much traffic, turn off like 5mhz of LTE and run several 1.4mhz channels.)
    It's true that in general wider channels result in reduced range compared to narrower channels. However with LTE, a 1.4 MHz channel won't give you a better range than a 20 MHz channel. The reason is LTE uses subcarriers to transmit signal, and each subcarrier is always only 15kHz. The only difference is a 20 MHz channel consists of more subcarriers than a 1.4 MHz channel. But it doesn't really matter for the range, because a VoLTE call only uses a small number of these subcarriers anyway. A wider channel is always preferable, because it can allocate different subcarriers (or rather resource blocks) for different calls and increase the capacity without compromising the range.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,873
    Device(s)
    Note 10+
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jack4 View Post
    It's true that in general wider channels result in reduced range compared to narrower channels. However with LTE, a 1.4 MHz channel won't give you a better range than a 20 MHz channel. The reason is LTE uses subcarriers to transmit signal, and each subcarrier is always only 15kHz. The only difference is a 20 MHz channel consists of more subcarriers than a 1.4 MHz channel. But it doesn't really matter for the range, because a VoLTE call only uses a small number of these subcarriers anyway. A wider channel is always preferable, because it can allocate different subcarriers (or rather resource blocks) for different calls and increase the capacity without compromising the range.
    I was under this presumption a few years back. It was explained to me that the power consumption is slightly higher on wider channels. So the amplifiers themselves have more available power for range with narrower channels. Purely power itself, different than the whole GSM vs CDMA range.

    Sent from my SM-N960U 6GB aka Note 9 using Tapatalk

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    164
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Joeybutts View Post
    I was under this presumption a few years back. It was explained to me that the power consumption is slightly higher on wider channels. So the amplifiers themselves have more available power for range with narrower channels. Purely power itself, different than the whole GSM vs CDMA range.
    And the real physical LTE channel is only 15 kHz. LTE just runs a lot of these channels in parallel. This is similar to GSM, where a channel is 200 kHz, but one base station usually broadcasts multiple such channels to increase the capacity. Of course higher number of 15 kHz channels need more power. But you shouldn't care about it unless you're the one paying the energy bill. The problem is not the total power consumption, but the power limit set by the regulator. This limit stays the same whether you have 1.4 MHz LTE or 20 MHz LTE deployed.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    3,838
    Device(s)
    iPhone 11 Pro 256 GB Midnight Green
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T Mobility
    Feedback Score
    0
    Another thing to keep in mind with LTE channel size is power output. With power limits on all RF bands, this is always something to keep in mind. To go from 5 to 10 MHz, you’re looking at a 3 dB increase in power or double the power to get the same signal strength. 10 MHz to 20 MHz, another 3 dB. You could run a 5 MHz channel with 4x as much power or 6 dB more power as a 20 MHz channel, which would increase range, unless I’m missing something.


    Sent from my iPhone using HoFo

    Chicago, IL
    2+46+46+46+4

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,632
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeuten View Post
    Another thing to keep in mind with LTE channel size is power output. With power limits on all RF bands, this is always something to keep in mind. To go from 5 to 10 MHz, you’re looking at a 3 dB increase in power or double the power to get the same signal strength. 10 MHz to 20 MHz, another 3 dB. You could run a 5 MHz channel with 4x as much power or 6 dB more power as a 20 MHz channel, which would increase range, unless I’m missing something.


    Sent from my iPhone using HoFo
    Increased range which means more people connecting but since only 5 MHz less bandwidth which means much slower speeds.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    3,838
    Device(s)
    iPhone 11 Pro 256 GB Midnight Green
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T Mobility
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Increased range which means more people connecting but since only 5 MHz less bandwidth which means much slower speeds.
    Not talking about LTE TPUT, the thread was about VoLTE.


    Sent from my iPhone using HoFo

  10. #85
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,290
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    So? That means those people are not using the other bands on the tower which frees up bandwidth for everyone else.
    Not true.
    The people gathereing in one spot create congestion only on those (neighboring) cells. That is bad for them... not for everyone else.
    Adding bandwidth there eliminates or alleviates the congestion in that spot only (the stadium for example), and maybe people walking in the parking lot. Not for anyone else (for example living at 1 mile away).

    So B46 is just fixes a local problem, not everyone's else.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    164
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeuten View Post
    Another thing to keep in mind with LTE channel size is power output. With power limits on all RF bands, this is always something to keep in mind. To go from 5 to 10 MHz, you’re looking at a 3 dB increase in power or double the power to get the same signal strength. 10 MHz to 20 MHz, another 3 dB. You could run a 5 MHz channel with 4x as much power or 6 dB more power as a 20 MHz channel, which would increase range, unless I’m missing something.
    That was the case for band 5 only. And even for band 5 it was changed later.

    From https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-17-27A1.pdf
    We here incorporate into our Cellular rules two radiated power metrics already incorporated into the technical rules for spectrum bands commonly used for the provision of mobile broadband service. “PSD” describes the amount of effective radiated power (ERP) that would be allowed per unit of bandwidth from a base station antenna (e.g., 100 watts/MHz), such that wider bandwidth emissions would be permitted more power commensurate with their bandwidth.
    ...
    The current Cellular base station power limit of 500 watts (W) ERP (1000 W ERP for rural areas) was adopted in 1988 to facilitate economical coverage in rural areas and to account for technological developments. At that time, industry groups and the Commission were just beginning to explore the possibilities of digital technologies for the Cellular Service. In 2007 and 2008, the Commission revised the radiated power rules to implement a PSD model for several wireless services, including PCS and AWS, the 700 MHz Service, and 700 MHz public safety broadband operations. It declined to revise the Cellular ERP rules, primarily because of significant restructuring (800 MHz rebanding) ongoing in the immediately adjacent frequencies used by public safety entities. The Commission also noted a lack of industry support at that time and the need for more time to assess the potential impact of using the PSD model for the Cellular Service.
    ...
    Because efficient deployment of more advanced wideband technologies such as LTE may not be possible under the current Cellular Service rules, the Further Notice proposed to revise Section 22.913 to permit a PSD model for measurement of base transmitter and Cellular repeater power. It noted that the current Cellular power limits favor use of narrowband systems over wideband technologies, because those limits currently apply to each emission without regard to bandwidth. Under the current limits, a Cellular licensee using 5 megahertz could theoretically deploy four CDMA channels (each having 1.25 megahertz of bandwidth) with an aggregate power of 2000 W ERP (4 x 500 W), or 12 GSM channels (each having 200 kilohertz of bandwidth) with an aggregate power of 6000 W ERP (12 x 500 W). A Cellular carrier using the same 5 megahertz for a wideband deployment such as LTE, however, is limited to only 500 W ERP for the entire emission—in other words, only 1/4 or 1/12 of the power permitted for narrowband technologies. The Further Notice tentatively concluded that an optional PSD model would better accommodate wideband technologies by establishing ERP limits per 1 MHz of an emission’s bandwidth rather than limiting the ERP per each emission bandwidth.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,632
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post
    Not true.
    The people gathereing in one spot create congestion only on those (neighboring) cells. That is bad for them... not for everyone else.
    Adding bandwidth there eliminates or alleviates the congestion in that spot only (the stadium for example), and maybe people walking in the parking lot. Not for anyone else (for example living at 1 mile away).

    So B46 is just fixes a local problem, not everyone's else.
    Trust me any of the currently 4G bands Verizon uses can go over 1 mile. Those people at that stadium using band 46 are NOT using band 13 NOT using band 5 NOT using band 2 NOT using band 4 NOT using band 66. Which means people over 1 mile away that are using the same tower are going to have LESS congestion. Get it yet?

    And even if it just fixed a "local" problem, so what? Not making a situation better for those people doesn't matter? You're weird.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    6
    Feedback Score
    0
    Jack,

    People can have different priorities and opinions then you. Trying being nice for once and that would give your statements and opinions some credibility.
    Last edited by veriztd; 11-12-2019 at 08:16 AM. Reason: insult removed

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    18,575
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Please keep the conversations friendly or I guarantee this thread will be closed and posts deleted.
    Don't make me turn this car around.....

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,632
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by raygerogiano View Post
    Jack,

    People can have different priorities and opinions then you. Trying being nice for once and that would give your statements and opinions some credibility.
    Nothing wrong with what I said. MY post wasn't the one that had to be edited. What exactly did I say that way wrong? I'm looking at my post and I can't see anything wrong. Oh and it's ironic you state other people can have opinions, but apparently not me. Because that is the only conclusion you leave me with. I made an opinion then you hurl insults that have to be removed and say OTHERS get to have opinions. I'd put you on ignore but only 6 posts in 7 years I doubt I'll have to worry about seeing too many of your posts.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-06-2006, 07:44 PM
  2. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-27-2005, 10:18 PM
  3. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-27-2003, 11:29 PM
  4. Why is Verizon's coverage so complete?
    By RogerPodacter in forum AT&T
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-24-2003, 02:25 AM
  5. Why is Verizon TEXT MESSAGING SO EXPENSIVE
    By WeneedJapPhones in forum Verizon Wireless
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-02-2003, 09:14 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks