T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[Paynefanbro]

H+ 7.2, 14.4, 21 all use 5 MHz FDD.

Oh, then I suppose it is a software and backhaul thing.

[mellimel2212]

I don't have Tmobile (yet) but on this thread, AJ and some other people gave examples of in city coverage that TMO lacks.

I don't call this lacking though.

 

Sent from my T-Mobile LG Escape using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

I don't call this lacking though.

 

Sent from my T-Mobile LG Escape using Tapatalk 2

That doesn't prove there is no area in a given city that lacks TMO coverage. It merely proves that in at least a few places, TMO doesn't lack coverage.

 

The major gripe with TMO on this thread is they have no (public) plans to upgrade their 14-15k rural towers. Somewhere in here is quoted TMO execs staying that only 37k of their towers - current 3g/4g footprint - will be upgraded to LTE. TMO has 228 million HSPA+

http://www.tmonews.com/2013/07/t-mobile-announces-huge-lte-expansion-116-markets-and-157-million-people/

 

They had 225mil HSPA+ 4 months ago

http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251624&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1809846&highlight=

so I guess they're making good progress. In another year, they may have 237mil LTE.

 

 

 

No one is faulting them for their lack of 300mil coverage but they should at least upgrade the 14k towers that are currently only EDGE.

 

If they'd upgrade all 52k with LTE, they'd probably have 250mil LTE.

Have you looked at their coverage map, zoomed in enough so you can see 2G vs 3G/4g? The 2g area is ginormous. If they'd upgrade all towers to LTE, all that would be LTE.

Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[milan03]

In NYC it's finally without that annoying 30Mbps rate limit.

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

In NYC it's finally without that annoying 30Mbps rate limit.

 

The advertisement is ironic.

[Fraydog]

That doesn't prove there is no area in a given city that lacks TMO coverage. It merely proves that in at least a few places, TMO doesn't lack coverage.

 

The major gripe with TMO on this thread is they have no (public) plans to upgrade their 14-15k rural towers. Somewhere in here is quoted TMO execs staying that only 37k of their towers - current 3g/4g footprint - will be upgraded to LTE. TMO has 228 million HSPA+

http://www.tmonews.com/2013/07/t-mobile-announces-huge-lte-expansion-116-markets-and-157-million-people/

 

They had 225mil HSPA+ 4 months ago

http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251624&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1809846&highlight=

so I guess they're making good progress. In another year, they may have 237mil LTE.

 

 

 

No one is faulting them for their lack of 300mil coverage but they should at least upgrade the 14k towers that are currently only EDGE.

 

If they'd upgrade all 52k with LTE, they'd probably have 250mil LTE.

Have you looked at their coverage map, zoomed in enough so you can see 2G vs 3G/4g? The 2g area is ginormous. If they'd upgrade all towers to LTE, all that would be LTE.

I think T-Mobile's current plan to build LTE from the inside of their footprint out is quite solid. It is pointless, at this stage, to build out rural sites solely for HSPA+. I'd much rather they do one set of upgrades in rural areas once they have their HSPA+ footprint fully LTE, and just jump from EDGE to LTE. T-Mobile can do the physical labor in one fell swoop, refarm spectrum, launch HSPA+ then LTE. It makes much more sense to do the upgrades that way at this point. I'd like to see T-Mobile get all their native done by the end of 2014, ideally, the key is if DT thinks it is feasible to do this. Once T-Mobile has LTE over their current native footprint, they can survey if/where expansion opportunities exist, and be in position for any 600 MHz spectrum opportunities out there.

[maximus1987/lou99]

I think T-Mobile's current plan to build LTE from the inside of their footprint out is quite solid. It is pointless, at this stage, to build out rural sites solely for HSPA+. I'd much rather they do one set of upgrades in rural areas once they have their HSPA+ footprint fully LTE, and just jump from EDGE to LTE. T-Mobile can do the physical labor in one fell swoop, refarm spectrum, launch HSPA+ then LTE. It makes much more sense to do the upgrades that way at this point. I'd like to see T-Mobile get all their native done by the end of 2014, ideally, the key is if DT thinks it is feasible to do this. Once T-Mobile has LTE over their current native footprint, they can survey if/where expansion opportunities exist, and be in position for any 600 MHz spectrum opportunities out there.

The issue is backhaul. Robert said (above somewhere) that unless they started last year (or two), then it's gonna take them 2 years to get fiber backhaul to all 14k rural i.e. 2015.

 

But yeah, if they get all 52k + 2k (metro) LTE, that'll be an insane density. Sprint has 39k sites and it covers about-ish (AJ) area of TMO.

Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[milan03]

The advertisement is ironic.

Not sure if that ad will help them much after their "Next" strategy...

[Nickel]

In NYC it's finally without that annoying 30Mbps rate limit.

Dang, look at that signal. 

[Conan Kudo]

The issue is backhaul. Robert said (above somewhere) that unless they started last year (or two), then it's gonna take them 2 years to get fiber backhaul to all 14k rural i.e. 2015. But yeah, if they get all 52k + 2k (metro) LTE, that'll be an insane density. Sprint has 39k sites and it covers about-ish (AJ) area of TMO.

Well, T-Mobile actually has started the process of upgrading backhaul in many of the non-upgraded areas in 2011. It's  a difficult challenge. Additionally, T-Mobile actually did begin upgrading rural areas to HSPA+ in the last year or so (admittedly on an opportunistic basis). As cell sites break down (as 15-20 year old cell sites are wont to do), T-Mobile has been replacing them with new multi-mode ones. That's why the POPs count actually went up in the last four months. T-Mobile has been expanding the HSPA+ coverage, just not strategically right now.

 

Also, T-Mobile is receiving grants from the government to upgrade several rural regions to HSPA+/LTE this year, and that coincides with the ending of the 37K cell site upgrade (now expanded to 40K out of 62K). The problem in the past was that Nokia Networks and Ericsson have over-promised and under-delivered in terms of physical equipment, making it very difficult for T-Mobile to upgrade everywhere. It is my belief that T-Mobile needs a third vendor that can handle the remaining cell sites.

 

Ericsson and Nokia Networks are stretched very thin right now. As a result, I'm not sure they could keep up enough to meet T-Mobile's goal of having 3G/4G all over the native footprint by early 2015. If T-Mobile were to get a third vendor, then perhaps the upgrade goals could be met in time. Nokia Networks is especially stretched thin, because it's going to be replacing the Alcatel-Lucent gear T-Mobile inherited from MetroPCS next year. That's around 6K cell sites right there (mostly in the MetroPCS PCS markets). Ericsson, as the vendor for everyone, can't keep up. It's failing to meet orders and is continually negotiating for substitutes with T-Mobile. For example, all of NYC is supposed to use the new AIR 21 system. But Ericsson can't produce enough for T-Mobile, so Ericsson negotiated for a hybrid deployment.

 

I just hope Neville Ray realizes this and gets a third vendor to complete the upgrade of the native network...

[maximus1987/lou99]

Well, T-Mobile actually has started the process of upgrading backhaul in many of the non-upgraded areas in 2011. It's a difficult challenge. Additionally, T-Mobile actually did begin upgrading rural areas to HSPA+ in the last year or so (admittedly on an opportunistic basis). As cell sites break down (as 15-20 year old cell sites are wont to do), T-Mobile has been replacing them with new multi-mode ones. That's why the POPs count actually went up in the last four months. T-Mobile has been expanding the HSPA+ coverage, just not strategically right now.

 

Also, T-Mobile is receiving grants from the government to upgrade several rural regions to HSPA+/LTE this year, and that coincides with the ending of the 37K cell site upgrade (now expanded to 40K out of 62K). The problem in the past was that Nokia Networks and Ericsson have over-promised and under-delivered in terms of physical equipment, making it very difficult for T-Mobile to upgrade everywhere. It is my belief that T-Mobile needs a third vendor that can handle the remaining cell sites.

 

Ericsson and Nokia Networks are stretched very thin right now. As a result, I'm not sure they could keep up enough to meet T-Mobile's goal of having 3G/4G all over the native footprint by early 2015. If T-Mobile were to get a third vendor, then perhaps the upgrade goals could be met in time. Nokia Networks is especially stretched thin, because it's going to be replacing the Alcatel-Lucent gear T-Mobile inherited from MetroPCS next year. That's around 6K cell sites right there (mostly in the MetroPCS PCS markets). Ericsson, as the vendor for everyone, can't keep up. It's failing to meet orders and is continually negotiating for substitutes with T-Mobile. For example, all of NYC is supposed to use the new AIR 21 system. But Ericsson can't produce enough for T-Mobile, so Ericsson negotiated for a hybrid deployment.

 

I just hope Neville Ray realizes this and gets a third vendor to complete the upgrade of the native network...

Samsung?

[Conan Kudo]

Samsung?

According to the oft-neglected Samsung Networks website, the Smart MBS platform (of which Network Vision Samsung markets use), supports GSM, UMTS, and LTE. So, Samsung would be a good vendor. Also, since Samsung has developed a Band 12 LTE solution and a Band 5 GSM/UMTS/LTE solution, Samsung could provide for the two special markets, as well.

 

The alternatives aren't that great, unfortunately. Alcatel-Lucent has been doing very poorly in keeping up in wireless. It has been largely the CDMA business with rural/regional operators in the US has been keeping the wireless business afloat and Alcatel-Lucent is expected to shut it down or divest it (to a company that's not likely to be considered approved for the US market) in the next 6-12 months in favor of becoming a wireline/data center/backbone network specialist. That's why T-Mobile is replacing all legacy Lucent and Alcatel-Lucent gear in its network with Nokia's gear. Huawei would not be permitted. ZTE would require significant wrangling that isn't worth the effort. No other vendors exist in this market. Most of them are dead or merged.

 

The potential shut-down of the Alcatel-Lucent wireless business does not bode well. Of course, ALU's gear is the least advanced of the three vendors in Network Vision, which is why Sprint gave them the smallest physical footprint. However, this is going to screw over the entire rural/regional operator community, because nearly all of them depend exclusively on Alcatel-Lucent.

[Paynefanbro]

But to me, they also gave Alcatel-Lucent the largest markets too. NYC, LA, Boston...

[bigsnake49]

But to me, they also gave Alcatel-Lucent the largest markets too. NYC, LA, Boston...

Plus both AT&T and Verizon gave them some business. Plus they might get somne business from China Mobile/China Telecom.

[WiWavelength]

But to me, they also gave Alcatel-Lucent the largest markets too. NYC, LA, Boston...

 

If memory serves me correctly, those are legacy Lucent infrastructure markets.  So, it only makes sense to keep them in the Lucent fold.  Think of the many problems that legacy Motorola infrastructure market have in transitioning to Samsung.  Would you really want the potential for more such problems in many more markets?

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

Well, T-Mobile actually has started the process of upgrading backhaul in many of the non-upgraded areas in 2011. It's a difficult challenge. Additionally, T-Mobile actually did begin upgrading rural areas to HSPA+ in the last year or so (admittedly on an opportunistic basis). As cell sites break down (as 15-20 year old cell sites are wont to do), T-Mobile has been replacing them with new multi-mode ones. That's why the POPs count actually went up in the last four months. T-Mobile has been expanding the HSPA+ coverage, just not strategically right now.

 

Also, T-Mobile is receiving grants from the government to upgrade several rural regions to HSPA+/LTE this year, and that coincides with the ending of the 37K cell site upgrade (now expanded to 40K out of 62K). The problem in the past was that Nokia Networks and Ericsson have over-promised and under-delivered in terms of physical equipment, making it very difficult for T-Mobile to upgrade everywhere. It is my belief that T-Mobile needs a third vendor that can handle the remaining cell sites.

 

Ericsson and Nokia Networks are stretched very thin right now. As a result, I'm not sure they could keep up enough to meet T-Mobile's goal of having 3G/4G all over the native footprint by early 2015. If T-Mobile were to get a third vendor, then perhaps the upgrade goals could be met in time. Nokia Networks is especially stretched thin, because it's going to be replacing the Alcatel-Lucent gear T-Mobile inherited from MetroPCS next year. That's around 6K cell sites right there (mostly in the MetroPCS PCS markets). Ericsson, as the vendor for everyone, can't keep up. It's failing to meet orders and is continually negotiating for substitutes with T-Mobile. For example, all of NYC is supposed to use the new AIR 21 system. But Ericsson can't produce enough for T-Mobile, so Ericsson negotiated for a hybrid deployment.

 

I just hope Neville Ray realizes this and gets a third vendor to complete the upgrade of the native network...

Are you talking about 6k Metro DAS? I posted above article stating TMO is removing 10k out of 12k Metro cell sites and keeping its 6k DAS.

 

Why didn't TMO select more vendors?

Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[Conan Kudo]

Are you talking about 6k Metro DAS? I posted above article stating TMO is removing 10k out of 12k Metro cell sites and keeping its 6k DAS. Why didn't TMO select more vendors?

No. I'm referring to the 6K Metro cell sites they are keeping in place of T-Mobile redundant 2G cell sites in metro markets. Most of these cities MetroPCS has PCS in are markets where T-Mobile maintains separate cell sites for 2G and 3G/4G. The densification of the 3G/4G network will result in much greater performance and capacity, with no loss in GSM capability. In fact, since many of them are SunCom/Powertel markets, GSM capabilities will be greatly improved, as the fallback will no longer be GPRS (like in many parts of Florida).

 

It's cheaper because the backhaul is better at the MetroPCS sites over the T-Mobile GSM ones.

 

 

If memory serves me correctly, those are legacy Lucent infrastructure markets.  So, it only makes sense to keep them in the Lucent fold.  Think of the many problems that legacy Motorola infrastructure market have in transitioning to Samsung.  Would you really want the potential for more such problems in many more markets?

 

AJ

 

 

That's correct. However, it could horribly backfire now, if Alcatel-Lucent decides to exit the wireless infrastructure market.

 

As for AT&T/Verizon, Alcatel-Lucent isn't providing new cell site gear. The agreement merely allows ALU to bolt on LTE to existing Lucent cell sites.

[Fraydog]

The alternatives aren't that great, unfortunately. Alcatel-Lucent has been doing very poorly in keeping up in wireless. It has been largely the CDMA business with rural/regional operators in the US has been keeping the wireless business afloat and Alcatel-Lucent is expected to shut it down or divest it (to a company that's not likely to be considered approved for the US market) in the next 6-12 months in favor of becoming a wireline/data center/backbone network specialist. That's why T-Mobile is replacing all legacy Lucent and Alcatel-Lucent gear in its network with Nokia's gear. Huawei would not be permitted. ZTE would require significant wrangling that isn't worth the effort. No other vendors exist in this market. Most of them are dead or merged.

 

The potential shut-down of the Alcatel-Lucent wireless business does not bode well. Of course, ALU's gear is the least advanced of the three vendors in Network Vision, which is why Sprint gave them the smallest physical footprint. However, this is going to screw over the entire rural/regional operator community, because nearly all of them depend exclusively on Alcatel-Lucent.

If AlLu gets sold or shut down that would hurt the entire US mobile industry except for T-Mobile. Verizon in particular would be hurt. AT&T also uses Alcatel-Lucent a lot, although their lead LTE vendor is Ericsson while Verizon's is AlLu. Sprint actually has less exposure to AlLu troubles than the duopoly.

[Nickel]

Oh man, I hope someone is able to buy Alcatel-Lucent networking division and is able upgrade their stuff so everyone currently using them can continue to do so.  

[bigsnake49]

No. I'm referring to the 6K Metro cell sites they are keeping in place of T-Mobile redundant 2G cell sites in metro markets. Most of these cities MetroPCS has PCS in are markets where T-Mobile maintains separate cell sites for 2G and 3G/4G. The densification of the 3G/4G network will result in much greater performance and capacity, with no loss in GSM capability. In fact, since many of them are SunCom/Powertel markets, GSM capabilities will be greatly improved, as the fallback will no longer be GPRS (like in many parts of Florida).

 

It's cheaper because the backhaul is better at the MetroPCS sites over the T-Mobile GSM ones.

 

 

 

That's correct. However, it could horribly backfire now, if Alcatel-Lucent decides to exit the wireless infrastructure market.

 

As for AT&T/Verizon, Alcatel-Lucent isn't providing new cell site gear. The agreement merely allows ALU to bolt on LTE to existing Lucent cell sites.

 

 

No. I'm referring to the 6K Metro cell sites they are keeping in place of T-Mobile redundant 2G cell sites in metro markets. Most of these cities MetroPCS has PCS in are markets where T-Mobile maintains separate cell sites for 2G and 3G/4G. The densification of the 3G/4G network will result in much greater performance and capacity, with no loss in GSM capability. In fact, since many of them are SunCom/Powertel markets, GSM capabilities will be greatly improved, as the fallback will no longer be GPRS (like in many parts of Florida).

 

It's cheaper because the backhaul is better at the MetroPCS sites over the T-Mobile GSM ones.

 

 

They better use the Metro sites in Florida. Much better coverage than T-mobile.

[mellimel2212]

That doesn't prove there is no area in a given city that lacks TMO coverage. It merely proves that in at least a few places, TMO doesn't lack coverage.

 

The major gripe with TMO on this thread is they have no (public) plans to upgrade their 14-15k rural towers. Somewhere in here is quoted TMO execs staying that only 37k of their towers - current 3g/4g footprint - will be upgraded to LTE. TMO has 228 million HSPA+

http://www.tmonews.com/2013/07/t-mobile-announces-huge-lte-expansion-116-markets-and-157-million-people/

 

They had 225mil HSPA+ 4 months ago

http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251624&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1809846&highlight=

so I guess they're making good progress. In another year, they may have 237mil LTE.

 

 

 

No one is faulting them for their lack of 300mil coverage but they should at least upgrade the 14k towers that are currently only EDGE.

 

If they'd upgrade all 52k with LTE, they'd probably have 250mil LTE.

Have you looked at their coverage map, zoomed in enough so you can see 2G vs 3G/4g? The 2g area is ginormous. If they'd upgrade all towers to LTE, all that would be LTE.

In my experiences every carrier lacks somewhere someplace.

 

Sent from my T-Mobile LG Escape using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

Does anyone know how much AWS TMUS had before the USM purchase in the affected areas?

 

 

T-Mobile scoops up some of U.S. Cellular's AWS spectrum for $308M

 

Read more: T-Mobile scoops up some of U.S. Cellular's AWS spectrum for $308M - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-scoops-some-us-cellulars-aws-spectrum-308m/2013-06-28#ixzz2ZclyE5KQ

Subscribe at FierceWireless

[maximus1987/lou99]

In my experiences every carrier lacks somewhere someplace.

 

Sent from my T-Mobile LG Escape using Tapatalk 2

Can't wait for TMUS to get 5x5 600 MHz nationwide!

[4ktvs]

Can't wait for TMUS to get 5x5 600 MHz nationwide!

If they do, then they better upgrade all there 2G footprint. I live in an area where T-Mobile's "4G" doesn't make it to my house or any were else in my town even though the map they have online says most of the town is under "4G". (My house though is 50/50 in the map may or may not be 3/4G. )

[ericdabbs]

If they do, then they better upgrade all there 2G footprint. I live in an area where T-Mobile's "4G" doesn't make it to my house or any were else in my town even though the map they have online says most of the town is under "4G". (My house though is 50/50 in the map may or may not be 3/4G. )

 

If TMUS gets a nationwide 5x5 block they will have to upgrade their 2G sites to be compliant.  I hope that is what forces Tmobile to upgrade all their 2G sites to not only 600 MHz LTE but AWS LTE as well.