starred/quectel-rgmii-toolkit
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/iamromulan/quectel-rgmii-toolkit.git synced 2026-04-25 14:45:49 +03:00
Code Issues 8 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #142] [TRACKED] Adding Support for RSRP and RSRQ Values for NR5G-SA Bands using QCAINFO=1 #52

New issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-27 14:38:52 +03:00 by kerem · 25 comments
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:52 +03:00
Owner
Copy link

Originally created by @clndwhr on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/iamromulan/quectel-rgmii-toolkit/issues/142

On QuecManager 2.1.5 Beta. When setting AT+QCAINFO=1, the fetch_data.sh?set=1 response array index 13, referencing +QCAINFO query, is missing the newline delimiter between SCC responses before the second SCC +QCAINFO entry.

{ "command": "AT+QCAINFO", "response": "AT+QCAINFO\n+QCAINFO: \"PCC\",501390,12,\"NR5G BAND 41\",153,-11,-11,2549\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",126270,2,\"NR5G BAND 71\",1,93,0,-,-+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",521310,11,\"NR5G BAND 41\",1,153,0,-,-,-11,-11,2549\n", "status": "success" }

Returning to AT+QCAINFO=0 the response contains the correctly expected newline delimiter.

I don't believe this to be an issue in how fetch_data.sh is parsing the response, but more the response from the QCAINFO query does not contain the expected format to parse for all info, missing the newline delimiter.

Originally created by @clndwhr on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/iamromulan/quectel-rgmii-toolkit/issues/142 On QuecManager 2.1.5 Beta. When setting `AT+QCAINFO=1`, the fetch_data.sh?set=1 response array index 13, referencing +QCAINFO query, is missing the newline delimiter between SCC responses before the second SCC +QCAINFO entry. `{ "command": "AT+QCAINFO", "response": "AT+QCAINFO\n+QCAINFO: \"PCC\",501390,12,\"NR5G BAND 41\",153,-11,-11,2549\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",126270,2,\"NR5G BAND 71\",1,93,0,-,-+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",521310,11,\"NR5G BAND 41\",1,153,0,-,-,-11,-11,2549\n", "status": "success" }` Returning to `AT+QCAINFO=0` the response contains the correctly expected newline delimiter. I don't believe this to be an issue in how fetch_data.sh is parsing the response, but more the response from the QCAINFO query does not contain the expected format to parse for all info, missing the newline delimiter.
kerem closed this issue 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025):

We are already aware of this but sadly Quectel still didn't fix how QCAINFO works for RM551E. It doesn't work or behave as intended.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764133259 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025): We are already aware of this but sadly Quectel still didn't fix how QCAINFO works for RM551E. It doesn't work or behave as intended.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

And now what is the difference beetween 1 and 0 ? In LTE I dont see any... why to set it to 1 ? (Default is 0 ?)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764418045 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): And now what is the difference beetween 1 and 0 ? In LTE I dont see any... why to set it to 1 ? (Default is 0 ?)
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

And now what is the difference beetween 1 and 0 ? In LTE I dont see any... why to set it to 1 ? (Default is 0 ?)

Should be for enabling verbosity to QCAINFO result

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764431284 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): > And now what is the difference beetween 1 and 0 ? In LTE I dont see any... why to set it to 1 ? (Default is 0 ?) Should be for enabling verbosity to QCAINFO result
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

Verbosity in a way of more frequent change , or more parameters displayd ? ( since i havn't noticed difference... in what is displayd , same parameters in LTE bands).

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764500394 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): Verbosity in a way of more frequent change , or more parameters displayd ? ( since i havn't noticed difference... in what is displayd , same parameters in LTE bands).
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

"Should be" more parameters but then again, QCAINFO doesn't properly work on RM551E right now.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764504384 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): "Should be" more parameters but then again, QCAINFO doesn't properly work on RM551E right now.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

Ok , in NSA i see the difference:

AT+QCAINFO
+QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-91,-8,-65,9
+QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-11,-66,3,0,-,-
+QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647
OK

and with 1:

AT+QCAINFO
+QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5
+QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,-
+QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526
OK
<!-- gh-comment-id:2764650700 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): Ok , in NSA i see the difference: ``` AT+QCAINFO +QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-91,-8,-65,9 +QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-11,-66,3,0,-,- +QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647 OK ``` and with 1: ``` AT+QCAINFO +QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5 +QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,- +QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526 OK ```
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025):

"Should be" more parameters but then again, QCAINFO doesn't properly work on RM551E right now.

It is working properly, the formatting isn't what is expected. Since Quectel isn't willing to put the effort in release a firmware update to fix this formatting bug and probably others for the moment, why not split the response on +QCAINFO instead of \n?This kind of split then supports both non-verbose and verbose output for NR5G bands and LTE Bands combine.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764753622 --> @clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 30, 2025): > "Should be" more parameters but then again, QCAINFO doesn't properly work on RM551E right now. It is working properly, the formatting isn't what is expected. Since Quectel isn't willing to put the effort in release a firmware update to fix this formatting bug and probably others for the moment, why not split the response on `+QCAINFO` instead of `\n`?This kind of split then supports both non-verbose and verbose output for NR5G bands and LTE Bands combine.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

Actually, theres no problem with NSA and LTE since Im using servingcell for NR5G band. This combination could properly display the needed values without changing the default behavior of QCAINFO. However, the SCC bands of NR5G-SA doesnt return the expected values even with verbosity activated (QCAINFO=1) as shown here:

+QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_ba
nd>,<PCID>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b
andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[…]

Thats why I said that QCAINFO on RM551E is still bugged. Sorry but no plans to change the QCAINFO behavior for now since it doesnt really help much. I also don't have a copy of NSA with 2 SCC NR5G bands so no idea how servingcell and QCAINFO responses would be shown.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764852438 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): Actually, theres no problem with NSA and LTE since Im using servingcell for NR5G band. This combination could properly display the needed values without changing the default behavior of QCAINFO. However, the SCC bands of NR5G-SA doesnt return the expected values even with verbosity activated (QCAINFO=1) as shown here: ``` +QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_ba nd>,<PCID>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] […] ``` Thats why I said that QCAINFO on RM551E is still bugged. Sorry but no plans to change the QCAINFO behavior for now since it doesnt really help much. I also don't have a copy of NSA with 2 SCC NR5G bands so no idea how servingcell and QCAINFO responses would be shown.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

Even at this part, it doesnt show the expected response.

AT+QCAINFO
+QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5
+QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,-
+QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526
OK

From RM551E document:

In EN-DC mode:
+QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<pcell_s
tate>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR>
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<scell_
state>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR><UL_
configured>,<UL_bandwidth>,<UL_EARFCN>]
[…]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<PCID>][,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b
andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
<!-- gh-comment-id:2764853748 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): Even at this part, it doesnt show the expected response. > ``` > AT+QCAINFO > +QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5 > +QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,- > +QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526 > OK > ``` From RM551E document: ``` In EN-DC mode: +QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<pcell_s tate>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR> [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<scell_ state>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR><UL_ configured>,<UL_bandwidth>,<UL_EARFCN>] […] [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b and>,<PCID>][,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] ```
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@iamromulan commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

With time comes progress

I heard a rumor that
RM551EGL00AAR01A03M8G_A0.001.A0.001 is coming very very soon.

Hopefully it will be fixed.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764855923 --> @iamromulan commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): With time comes progress I heard a rumor that ``RM551EGL00AAR01A03M8G_A0.001.A0.001`` is coming very very soon. Hopefully it will be fixed.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

The new firmware fixed some of the AT+QCAINFO's bugged response data. Will close this for now as I will rewrite the needed parsing logic to fit the new firmware as well as add support for older one.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2764983723 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): The new firmware fixed some of the AT+QCAINFO's bugged response data. Will close this for now as I will rewrite the needed parsing logic to fit the new firmware as well as add support for older one.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

With time comes progress

I heard a rumor that RM551EGL00AAR01A03M8G_A0.001.A0.001 is coming very very soon.

Hopefully it will be fixed.

And it is for sure realesed yesterday.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2766390504 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): > With time comes progress > > I heard a rumor that `RM551EGL00AAR01A03M8G_A0.001.A0.001` is coming very very soon. > > Hopefully it will be fixed. And it is for sure realesed yesterday.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

In AT+QENG="servingcell" thera are all parameters. But not sure if it is presents only one band for 5G...

And there are also commands: AT+QRSRP AT+QRSRQ AT+QSINR ....

<!-- gh-comment-id:2766441466 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): In AT+QENG="servingcell" thera are all parameters. But not sure if it is presents only one band for 5G... And there are also commands: AT+QRSRP AT+QRSRQ AT+QSINR ....
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

Even at this part, it doesnt show the expected response.

AT+QCAINFO
+QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5
+QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,-
+QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526
OK

From RM551E document:

In EN-DC mode:
+QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<pcell_s
tate>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR>
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<scell_
state>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR><UL_
configured>,<UL_bandwidth>,<UL_EARFCN>]
[…]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<PCID>][,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b
andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]

NSA mode with 2 NR5G SCC bands doesn't have the same issue that NR5G SA multiple SCC bands produces. I think it's relative to the output of just the NR5G SCC bands specifically in SA mode.

I'm curious to see the new firmware and if it resolves the formatting issues.

@MiG-41, I'm fairly certain those are only providing signal data for the PCC band

<!-- gh-comment-id:2766595042 --> @clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): > Even at this part, it doesnt show the expected response. > > > ``` > > AT+QCAINFO > > +QCAINFO: "PCC",225,75,"LTE BAND 1",1,234,-92,-10,-64,5 > > +QCAINFO: "SCC",1599,50,"LTE BAND 3",2,423,-94,-13,-62,0,0,-,- > > +QCAINFO: "SCC",647424,12,"NR5G BAND 78",647,-12,-11,526 > > OK > > ``` > > From RM551E document: > > ``` > In EN-DC mode: > +QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<pcell_s > tate>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR> > [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<bandwidth>,<band>,<scell_ > state>,<PCID>,<RSRP>,<RSRQ>,<RSSI>,<RSSNR><UL_ > configured>,<UL_bandwidth>,<UL_EARFCN>] > […] > [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b > and>,<PCID>][,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] > [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b > and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b > andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] > ``` NSA mode with 2 NR5G SCC bands doesn't have the same issue that NR5G SA multiple SCC bands produces. I think it's relative to the output of just the NR5G SCC bands specifically in SA mode. I'm curious to see the new firmware and if it resolves the formatting issues. @MiG-41, I'm fairly certain those are only providing signal data for the PCC band
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

Actually, theres no problem with NSA and LTE since Im using servingcell for NR5G band. This combination could properly display the needed values without changing the default behavior of QCAINFO. However, the SCC bands of NR5G-SA doesnt return the expected values even with verbosity activated (QCAINFO=1) as shown here:

+QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_ba
nd>,<PCID>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b
and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b
andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]]
[…]

Thats why I said that QCAINFO on RM551E is still bugged. Sorry but no plans to change the QCAINFO behavior for now since it doesnt really help much. I also don't have a copy of NSA with 2 SCC NR5G bands so no idea how servingcell and QCAINFO responses would be shown.

For your reference, NSA Mode with 2 LTE/2NR5G

{ "command": "AT+QCAINFO", "response": "AT+QCAINFO\n+QCAINFO: \"PCC\",854,50,\"LTE BAND 2\",1,126,-93,-9,-66,12\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",66736,50,\"LTE BAND 66\",1,15,-89,-9,-72,17,0,-,-\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",501390,12,\"NR5G BAND 41\",153,-11,-11,2378\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",521310,11,\"NR5G BAND 41\",1,153,0,-,-,-11,-11,2378\n", "status": "success" }

<!-- gh-comment-id:2766610768 --> @clndwhr commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): > Actually, theres no problem with NSA and LTE since Im using servingcell for NR5G band. This combination could properly display the needed values without changing the default behavior of QCAINFO. However, the SCC bands of NR5G-SA doesnt return the expected values even with verbosity activated (QCAINFO=1) as shown here: > > ``` > +QCAINFO: "PCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_ba > nd>,<PCID>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] > [+QCAINFO: "SCC",<freq>,<NR_DL_bandwidth>,<NR_b > and>,<scell_state>,<PCID>,<UL_configured>,<NR_UL_b > andwidth>,<UL_ARFCN>[,<NR_RSRP>,<NR_RSRQ>[,<NR_SNR>]] > […] > ``` > > Thats why I said that QCAINFO on RM551E is still bugged. Sorry but no plans to change the QCAINFO behavior for now since it doesnt really help much. I also don't have a copy of NSA with 2 SCC NR5G bands so no idea how servingcell and QCAINFO responses would be shown. For your reference, NSA Mode with 2 LTE/2NR5G `{ "command": "AT+QCAINFO", "response": "AT+QCAINFO\n+QCAINFO: \"PCC\",854,50,\"LTE BAND 2\",1,126,-93,-9,-66,12\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",66736,50,\"LTE BAND 66\",1,15,-89,-9,-72,17,0,-,-\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",501390,12,\"NR5G BAND 41\",153,-11,-11,2378\n+QCAINFO: \"SCC\",521310,11,\"NR5G BAND 41\",1,153,0,-,-,-11,-11,2378\n", "status": "success" }`
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

In new fw there is mentioned:
Secure Login AT+QADBKEY was no longer supported

Not sure if this couse ,that there will be no possible to wget toolkit via adb...

<!-- gh-comment-id:2766721863 --> @MiG-41 commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): In new fw there is mentioned: `Secure Login AT+QADBKEY was no longer supported` Not sure if this couse ,that there will be no possible to wget toolkit via adb...
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025):

We are already using the latest firmware. Just make sure that you have unlocked adb before flashing this version.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2767452649 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2025): We are already using the latest firmware. Just make sure that you have unlocked adb before flashing this version.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

@iamromulan @dr-dolomite
wander where can i get the a03 firmware

also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6
i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768162449 --> @STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): @iamromulan @dr-dolomite wander where can i get the a03 firmware also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6 i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so?
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

@iamromulan @dr-dolomite
wander where can i get the a03 firmware

also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6
i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so?

https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR

New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768170865 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): > @iamromulan @dr-dolomite > wander where can i get the a03 firmware > > also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6 > i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so? https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

@iamromulan @dr-dolomite
wander where can i get the a03 firmware
also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6
i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so?

https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR

New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB.

4CC NR5G-SA isn't my concern since my carrier doesn't support it.
And i have already unlocked ADB.

i am currently running the a01 firmware, would you recommend updating to a02 or a03?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768179825 --> @STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): > > [@iamromulan](https://github.com/iamromulan) [@dr-dolomite](https://github.com/dr-dolomite) > > wander where can i get the a03 firmware > > also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6 > > i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so? > > https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR > > New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB. 4CC NR5G-SA isn't my concern since my carrier doesn't support it. And i have already unlocked ADB. i am currently running the a01 firmware, would you recommend updating to a02 or a03?
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

You could test it out and personally see if there are improvements on your end. The toolkit and QuecManager is compatible with the latest firmware.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768184462 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): You could test it out and personally see if there are improvements on your end. The toolkit and QuecManager is compatible with the latest firmware.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

You could test it out and personally see if there are improvements on your end. The toolkit and QuecManager is compatible with the latest firmware.

OK
Thanks a lot.
In fact i am using some tricks to convert a Fibcom FM190W-GL into RM551E-GL, wander if i can follow the normal update procedure designed for a real RM551E-GL. Or do i need to flash the firmware and the xqcn file.

https://github.com/doner005/RMFaux51/blob/master/RMFaux51.md
This is the guide i follow

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768203077 --> @STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): > You could test it out and personally see if there are improvements on your end. The toolkit and QuecManager is compatible with the latest firmware. OK Thanks a lot. In fact i am using some tricks to convert a Fibcom FM190W-GL into RM551E-GL, wander if i can follow the normal update procedure designed for a real RM551E-GL. Or do i need to flash the firmware and the xqcn file. https://github.com/doner005/RMFaux51/blob/master/RMFaux51.md This is the guide i follow
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025):

Just finished updating.
Everything works fine, and NV Restore process is not needed.
After a quick speedtest it seems like the new firmware imporves both speed and stability for my use case.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2768477761 --> @STEVEBRZZW commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2025): Just finished updating. Everything works fine, and NV Restore process is not needed. After a quick speedtest it seems like the new firmware imporves both speed and stability for my use case.
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@clndwhr commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2025):

@iamromulan @dr-dolomite
wander where can i get the a03 firmware
also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6
i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so?

https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR

New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB.

Is there a chance for the 4CC fix with the new firmware?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2776557120 --> @clndwhr commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2025): > > [@iamromulan](https://github.com/iamromulan) [@dr-dolomite](https://github.com/dr-dolomite) > > wander where can i get the a03 firmware > > also https://forums.quectel.com/t/requesting-rm551egl00aar01a03m8g-a0-001-a0-001/45554/6 > > i see romulan saying it's worse than the a02 firmware, why say so? > > https://mega.nz/folder/CRFWlIpQ#grOByBgkfZe5uLMkX2M2XA/file/3d9EVbYR > > New firmware removed the 4CC for NR5G-SA. It also removed the AT commands for unlocking ADB. Is there a chance for the 4CC fix with the new firmware?
kerem commented 2026-02-27 14:38:53 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2025):

Its a Quectel issue so theres nothing we can do about it rather than to wait for another firmware or hope that someone leaks a proprietary fix.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2776972478 --> @dr-dolomite commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2025): Its a Quectel issue so theres nothing we can do about it rather than to wait for another firmware or hope that someone leaks a proprietary fix.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
development-SDXLEMUR
SDXPINN
development-SDXPINN
SDXLEMUR
overhaul-SDXLEMUR
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels   
pull-request

Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request

No labels
pull-request
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/quectel-rgmii-toolkit#52
No description provided.