Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

Sometimes, roaming on USCC is the best strategy when there is just low population count in an area.

 

13 minutes ago, mikejeep said:

USCC has great coverage in Northern New England, where Sprint has almost none (and never planned to, based on my conversations with them over the years). When LTE roaming onto USCC went live it was fantastic.

Sprint allowed us to roam on USCC across Nebraska, but now that T-Mobile has taken over that went away and we're forced on Viaero. Wish they would let us back on USCC. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

And what will this all mean for S4GRU?  We are in a wait and see mode before we decide how to adapt.  Until then, we will be here every day with you all, plotting our wireless destiny. Robert

Alright.  There may not be a Sprint anymore, but the same rules apply.  Just incessant complaining about the old Sprint is getting old.  People will start checking out because it just will become a co

And this is the truth that many of us are going to learn.  T-Mobile is not perfect everywhere.  They have some markets where they have some real bad towers here and there.  And there are some entire m

Posted Images

17 hours ago, Dkoellerwx said:

 

Sprint allowed us to roam on USCC across Nebraska, but now that T-Mobile has taken over that went away and we're forced on Viaero. Wish they would let us back on USCC. 

Viaero was pretty decent in SE Colorado last time I went through that area.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

Viaero was pretty decent in SE Colorado last time I went through that area.

I don't know if it was a throttling issue or a network one, but basically my entire trip on I-80/I-76 through central and western Nebraska into northeast Colorado I could barely load maps or stream music on Spotify. Basically less than 100Kpbs performance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dkoellerwx said:

I don't know if it was a throttling issue or a network one, but basically my entire trip on I-80/I-76 through central and western Nebraska into northeast Colorado I could barely load maps or stream music on Spotify. Basically less than 100Kpbs performance. 

I can confirm this as true. I had to go to my radio settings and force 3G. when i did, everything became "bareable" again when roaming on Viaero.

USCC roaming was excellent while it lasted. Grrrrrrr!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, though said:

I can confirm this as true. I had to go to my radio settings and force 3G. when i did, everything became "bareable" again when roaming on Viaero.

USCC roaming was excellent while it lasted. Grrrrrrr!

My experience roaming on them wasn't good either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is cool. Sprint was so ineffective at marketing and partnerships by comparison that I cringed at times.

T-Mobile is just really good at this kind of thing, and it feels good to be on this side of the fence post-merger. I always wondered if Sprint's marketing issues came from a limited budget, from poor vendor selection or from incompetent management. Perhaps a mix of all three.... but this is how you do it right.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I found a couple interesting tidbits. First, network signaling on T-Mobile shows 312-250 as an "equivalent PLMN" to 310-260, meaning it's treated as native and behaves like the Clearwire PLMN did with Sprint back in the Clearwire days. Should have soft handoffs with no IP address change nor drop of a VoLTE call, but I haven't tested this yet.

ZPVddBB.png

 

Second, it seems that T-Mobile has disabled CA for Sprint users without ROAMAHOME or TNX if they're "roaming" on T-Mobile. The carrier policy marks 311-490 as Sprint (whereas it's T-Mobile for non ROAMAHOME or TNX users) and only enables Sprint CA combos on it. Likewise, 312-250 only has some B41 CA combos enabled, but not all, and no B25-41 nor B25-25. This is the carrier policy that it loaded on the eSIM of my Pixel 4 XL without ROAMAHOME. Previously all CA combos were enabled.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<!-- Device configuration file for SRLTE with CHGWL roaming
$Header: //commercial/MPSS.HE.1.0.c12/Main/modem_proc/mmcp/policyman/configurations/Carrier/Sprint/1xSRLTE/CHGWL_roam/subsidized/carrier_policy.xml#1 $
-->
<policy name        = "generic"
        changelist  = "$Change: 19460658 $"
        policy_ver  = "28.1.17"
>

  <initial>

    <mcc_list name="sxlte_mccs"> 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 330 </mcc_list>

    <!-- These are the serving system PLMNs for which SRLTE will be allowed
     -->
    <!-- NOTE: Proper functioning of the SXLTE policy requires that there
         be an PLMN list named "sxlte_plmns". Do NOT rename this list.
    -->
    <!-- Google: Add Sprint hplmn 312530, add roaming partner plmn -->
    <!-- Pixel MOD, b/148088645#comment8 - add USCC plmn(311-580) into list -->
    <plmn_list name="sxlte_plmns" include="hplmn ehplmn">
      310-120 311-490 311-870 311-940 311-180 310-410 310-150 310-170 310-380 310-560 310-680 310-070 310-090 310-030 310-280 312-530 312-420 312-660 311-910 311-810 310-130 310-580 312-290 311-930 312-570 311-340 310-920 310-500 312-720 310-136 311-580
    </plmn_list>

    <plmn_list name="plmn_tmo">310-160 310-200 310-210 310-220 310-230 310-240 310-250 310-260 310-270 310-310 310-490 310-660 310-800</plmn_list>

    <define_fullrat_config>
      <ue_mode> CSFB </ue_mode>
    </define_fullrat_config>

    <!-- Google: Remove 5G RAT-->
    <rat_capability base="none">
      <include> C H G W L </include>
    </rat_capability>

    <ue_mode_if> 1X_CSFB_PREF </ue_mode_if>

    <rf_bands base="hardware" />

    <feature single_sim="srlte"> dualmmode </feature>

  </initial>
  
  <!-- Google: Add Sprint and TMO CA combo list -->
  <!-- Pixel MOD, b/148088645#comment10 - add UL BW class for CA_41E -->
  <if precond="none">
    <cond> <location_mcc_in list="sxlte_mccs" /> </cond>
    <then>
      <if>
        <cond> <serving_plmn_in list="plmn_tmo" /> </cond>
        <then>
          <ca_band_combos string="12AA-2A-mAll;12A-2AA-mAll;2AA-2A-mAll;46A-2AA-mAll;48AA-2A-mAll;48A-2AA-mAll;4AA-2A-mAll;4A-2AA-mAll;5AA-2A-mAll;5A-2AA-mAll;66AA-2A-mAll;66A-2AA-mAll;71AA-2A-mAll;71A-2AA-mAll;2CA-mAll;66AA-12A-2A-mAll;66A-12AA-2A-mAll;66A-12A-2AA-mAll;12AA-2A-2A-mAll;12A-2AA-2A-mAll;4AA-2A-2A-mAll;4A-2AA-2A-mAll;66AA-2A-2A-mAll;66A-2AA-2A-mAll;71AA-2A-2A-mAll;71A-2AA-2A-mAll;46A-46A-2AA-mAll;66AA-46A-2A-mAll;66A-46A-2AA-mAll;46C-2AA-mAll;48AA-48A-2A-mAll;48A-48A-2AA-mAll;66AA-48A-2A-mAll;66A-48AA-2A-mAll;66A-48A-2AA-mAll;48CA-2A-mAll;48C-2AA-mAll;12AA-4A-2A-mAll;12A-4AA-2A-mAll;12A-4A-2AA-mAll;4AA-4A-2A-mAll;4A-4A-2AA-mAll;5AA-4A-2A-mAll;5A-4AA-2A-mAll;5A-4A-2AA-mAll;71AA-4A-2A-mAll;71A-4AA-2A-mAll;71A-4A-2AA-mAll;66AA-66A-2A-mAll;66A-66A-2AA-mAll;71AA-66A-2A-mAll;71A-66AA-2A-mAll;71A-66A-2AA-mAll;66CA-2A-mAll;66C-2AA-mAll;66AA-2C-mAll;66A-2CA-mAll;66AA-66A-12A-2A-mAll;66A-66A-12AA-2A-mAll;66A-66A-12A-2AA-mAll;66CA-12A-2A-mAll;66C-12AA-2A-mAll;66C-12A-2AA-mAll;66AA-12A-2A-2A-mAll;66A-12AA-2A-2A-mAll;66A-12A-2AA-2A-mAll;12AA-4A-2A-2A-mAll;12A-4AA-2A-2A-mAll;12A-4A-2AA-2A-mAll;66AA-66A-2A-2A-mAll;66A-66A-2AA-2A-mAll;71AA-66A-2A-2A-mAll;71A-66AA-2A-2A-mAll;71A-66A-2AA-2A-mAll;66CA-2A-2A-mAll;66C-2AA-2A-mAll;66AA-46A-46A-2A-mAll;66A-46A-46A-2AA-mAll;66AA-46C-2A-mAll;66A-46C-2AA-mAll;46D-2AA-mAll;71AA-66A-66A-2A-mAll;71A-66AA-66A-2A-mAll;71A-66A-66A-2AA-mAll;71AA-66C-2A-mAll;71A-66CA-2A-mAll;71A-66C-2AA-mAll;66AA-66A-2C-mAll;66A-66A-2CA-mAll;66AA-46C-46A-2A-mAll;66A-46C-46A-2AA-mAll;66AA-46D-2A-mAll;66A-46D-2AA-mAll;46E-2AA-mAll;12AA-4A-mAll;12A-4AA-mAll;46A-4AA-mAll;4AA-4A-mAll;5AA-4A-mAll;5A-4AA-mAll;71AA-4A-mAll;71A-4AA-mAll;46A-46A-4AA-mAll;46C-4AA-mAll;12AA-4A-4A-mAll;12A-4AA-4A-mAll;71AA-4A-4A-mAll;71A-4AA-4A-mAll;46D-4AA-mAll;66AA-12A-mAll;66A-12AA-mAll;66AA-66A-12A-mAll;66A-66A-12AA-mAll;66CA-12A-mAll;66C-12AA-mAll;66AA-46A-mAll;66AA-46A-46A-mAll;66AA-46C-mAll;66AA-46D-mAll;48AA-48A-mAll;66AA-48A-mAll;66A-48AA-mAll;48CA-mAll;66AA-48A-48A-mAll;66A-48AA-48A-mAll;48CA-48A-mAll;48C-48AA-mAll;66AA-48C-mAll;66A-48CA-mAll;48DA-mAll;66AA-48D-mAll;66A-48DA-mAll;48EA-mAll;66AA-48E-mAll;66A-48EA-mAll;66AA-66A-mAll;71AA-66A-mAll;71A-66AA-mAll;66BA-mAll;66CA-mAll;71AA-66A-66A-mAll;71A-66AA-66A-mAll;66CA-66A-mAll;66C-66AA-mAll;71AA-66C-mAll;71A-66CA-mAll;41AA-41A-mAll;41CA-mAll;41CC-mAll;41CA-41A-mAll;41C-41AA-mAll;41DA-mAll;41DC-mAll;"/>
          <continue/>
        </then>
        <else>
          <ca_band_combos string="25AA-25A-mAll;26AA-25A-mAll;26A-25AA-mAll;41A-25AA-mAll;25AA-25A-25A-mAll;26AA-25A-25A-mAll;26A-25AA-25A-mAll;41C-25AA-mAll;41D-25AA-mAll;41AA-41A-mAll;41CA-mAll;41CC-mAll;41CA-41A-mAll;41C-41AA-mAll;41DA-mAll;41DC-mAll;41CA-41A-41A-mAll;41C-41AA-41A-mAll;41DA-41A-mAll;41D-41AA-mAll;41CA-41C-mAll;41E4422A-0;41E4222A-0;"/>
          <continue/>
        </else>
      </if>
    </then>
    <else>
      <!-- Choose an CA band that is not supported by HW, CA will be disabled by doing this -->
      <ca_band_combos string="41AA-39A-0;" />
      <rf_bands base="hardware" />
      <continue/>
    </else>
  </if>

  <!-- DSDS: Remove LTE on non-DDS when VOLTE is disabled in home. -->
  <if>
    <all_of>
    <not> <is_subs_dds /> </not>
    <not> <volte_enabled /> </not>
    <location_mcc_in list="sxlte_mccs" />
    </all_of>
    <then>
      <rat_capability base="none">
        <include> C H G W </include>
      </rat_capability>
      <continue/>
    </then>
    <else>
      <rat_capability base="none">
        <include> C H G W L </include>
      </rat_capability>
      <continue/>
    </else>
  </if>

  <if>
    <any_of>
      <not> <phone_operating_mode> ONLINE </phone_operating_mode> </not>
      <not> <have_serving_system /> </not>
    </any_of>
    <then>
      <stop />
    </then>
  </if>

  <!-- Beyond this point, the device is ONLINE and has a location. -->
  <if>
    <all_of>
      <any_of>
        <serving_rat_in> C H </serving_rat_in>
        <serving_plmn_in list="sxlte_plmns" />
      </any_of>
      <location_mcc_in list="sxlte_mccs" />
    </all_of>
    <then> <ue_mode> 1X_CSFB_PREF </ue_mode> </then>
    <else> <ue_mode> CSFB </ue_mode> </else>
  </if>

</policy>

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ingenium said:

Likewise, 312-250 only has some B41 CA combos enabled, but not all, and no B25-41 nor B25-25.

Interesting. Last I checked I was getting 25+25 on the 312-250 sites around here, along with 41+41. Never saw 25+41 so didn't expect that. Samsung S20 FE with the standard SIM, so roamahome I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2020 at 12:49 PM, RedSpark said:

Now this is cool. Sprint was so ineffective at marketing and partnerships by comparison that I cringed at times.

Pulling out of mainstream sports and going all in on soccer was a dumb move by Sprint. You could tell Marcelo pushed for this as he loves soccer and had a financial interest in it. It was a move made by someone who is way out of touch with what America likes.

This is the US. Not enough people care about soccer. The sport pales in comparison to the big three sports. This was a terrible investment from the very beginning and the fan boys defended it by saying "but soccer is the largest growing sport in the country". Sprint needed the exposure today, not tomorrow. 

  • Love 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, greenbastard said:

Pulling out of mainstream sports and going all in on soccer was a dumb move by Sprint. You could tell Marcelo pushed for this as he loves soccer and had a financial interest in it. It was a move made by someone who is way out of touch with what America likes.

This is the US. Not enough people care about soccer. The sport pales in comparison to the big three sports. This was a terrible investment from the very beginning and the fan boys defended it by saying "but soccer is the largest growing sport in the country". Sprint needed the exposure today, not tomorrow. 

Sprint also had huge sponsorship deals with NASCAR and the NBA. Of course, if you look at the customer metrics at the time, that's when the network began to get creaky and Sprint began to lose a substantial number of customers over time. Sprint would have been better off spending the money on the network instead and none on sponsorships. I'd love to see a customer survey of how many people stayed with Sprint because of its sponsorship agreements vs how many left because of a poor network experience. In fact, I'd love to see it broken down to a per-person cost.

The bean-counters came in and shut-down the NASCAR sponsorship and NBA sponsorship.

You are absolutely correct. Marcelo inexplicably, but simply, doubled down on this failed strategy by going all-in on soccer as a vanity project because of his outside financial interest. Nothing about it was about substantially improving the network so that the customer metrics would actually improve. Seriously, these sponsorships had to be one of the worst Return on Investment initiatives that Sprint had ever done.

In comparison, if you look at what T-Mobile is doing here with Drone Racing League, this is a growing sport and it's in a key demographic in which the exposure of T-Mobile's branding of 5G would actually resonate. The partnership doesn't feel forced. It feels like a natural fit for the T-Mobile brand. T-Mobile's also a real leader in 5G, with a network to back it up. The quarterly customer metrics at T-Mobile are insane. Customer growth is through the roof, and partnerships like this help solidify it. They don't come at the expense of network spend, as was the case with Sprint.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedSpark said:

Sprint also had huge sponsorship deals with NASCAR and the NBA. Of course, if you look at the customer metrics at the time, that's when the network began to get creaky and Sprint began to lose a substantial number of customers over time. Sprint would have been better off spending the money on the network instead and none on sponsorships. I'd love to see a customer survey of how many people stayed with Sprint because of its sponsorship agreements vs how many left because of a poor network experience. In fact, I'd love to see it broken down to a per-person cost.

The bean-counters came in and shut-down the NASCAR sponsorship and NBA sponsorship.

The NASCAR sponsorship was there from the Nextel days (hence "Nextel Cup"). Nextel's brand meshed well with NASCAR. Sprint's? Not so much...but that's just as much a testament to the Sprint-Nextel merger as anything else (Sprint should've merged with Alltel, though had that happened the 2.5 GHz band would've looked very different ownership-wise).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iansltx said:

The NASCAR sponsorship was there from the Nextel days (hence "Nextel Cup"). Nextel's brand meshed well with NASCAR. Sprint's? Not so much...but that's just as much a testament to the Sprint-Nextel merger as anything else (Sprint should've merged with Alltel, though had that happened the 2.5 GHz band would've looked very different ownership-wise).

That's a good point. Had Sprint's network been performing well, and had Sprint made substantial investments in NASCAR cities and venues during this timeframe, I would say that the NASCAR sponsorship would have been an extravagant expenditure. However, Sprint's network was already faltering, and this was only exacerbated further when it got the iPhone in Fall 2011. When I think of each million dollars sunk into a marketing or sponsorship effort that didn't result in any appreciable customer gains (and probably had no effect on retention either given the customer losses over that period), I can't help but think of how many cell sites Sprint could have been built or upgraded for each million. Truth is, you don't need that many sites to have a substantial improvement on a customer experience in an area:

  • Airports, Train Stations, Bus Stations
  • Business Centers and Work Sites
  • Entertainment Venues
  • Highways and Roads
  • Home (but can usually be addressed with WiFi Calling)

Those are the primary areas where customers spend most of their time and where network improvements would have the most significant impact on the customer experience. An improvement at any one of these areas would have begun to move the needle on the customer experience.

That's an interesting point about Alltel.

T-Mobile's approach to partnerships is very different (and better). They got the network experience right first, and they're leveraging it for marketing. Sprint never got its network in order first and the marketing was just money thrown into bin without any appreciable ROI or customer gains. Truth is, I think Sprint would have had the same (or nearly the same) customer metrics without the marketing. The only promotions that Sprint ever got any traction on was the "free service for a year" promotion and the "50% off your bill" promotion. Neither of these contributed positively to the bottom line from what I recall.

It's clear why Sprint became the minority company in the merger rather than the majority company.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, greenbastard said:

Pulling out of mainstream sports and going all in on soccer was a dumb move by Sprint. You could tell Marcelo pushed for this as he loves soccer and had a financial interest in it. It was a move made by someone who is way out of touch with what America likes.

This is the US. Not enough people care about soccer. The sport pales in comparison to the big three sports. This was a terrible investment from the very beginning and the fan boys defended it by saying "but soccer is the largest growing sport in the country". Sprint needed the exposure today, not tomorrow. 

This is a very good point.  True, soccer ("football") may be the largest sport in the world - by far - but this isn't the rest of the world.  This is the U.S. and soccer just isn't on the radar really here in the sort of capacity that would make any difference to/resonate with Sprint subs or potential subs.  

 

You're not going to reach mainstream folks pushing what amounts at least in this country to a niche sport.  

It is shocking the number of missteps they took over the years.  Even more shocking is that they survived as long as they did.  I would contend that is at least partially (if not wholly) due to the massive upgrades made to their network from 2H 2012 on.  

To suggest that the Sprint network didn't improve tremendously across the board would be a bold faced lie.

They did a good job with threadbare resources.  Ya gotta give em that.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RedSpark said:

In comparison, if you look at what T-Mobile is doing here with Drone Racing League, this is a growing sport and it's in a key demographic in which the exposure of T-Mobile's branding of 5G would actually resonate. The partnership doesn't feel forced.

I'm guessing that the DRL partnership costs a small fraction of what the NASCAR or NBA deals did too..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mikejeep said:

I'm guessing that the DRL partnership costs a small fraction of what the NASCAR or NBA deals did too..

No doubt about that.

T-Mobile also has a tremendous social media presence which magnifies and spreads any news or partnerships. Sprint was never very good at social media. All you had to do was look at the follower count and the level of engagement on Twitter/Facebook for both companies. Sprint trailed T-Mobile substantially on these metrics. T-Mobile was/is also better at getting press coverage because its PR/Comms team was/is simply better.

So the Drone Racing League can essentially be as big as any other announcement T-Mobile would make. Each social media follower can see, engage and share this news. On top of that, the Tech Press can write about it and further share to their own followers, etc. T-Mobile understood/understands the terrain.

It’s finally sunk in how normal this is post-merger. Sprint was really a parallel universe of mismanagement and poor messaging.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JonnygATL said:

This is a very good point.  True, soccer ("football") may be the largest sport in the world - by far - but this isn't the rest of the world.  This is the U.S. and soccer just isn't on the radar really here in the sort of capacity that would make any difference to/resonate with Sprint subs or potential subs.  

 

You're not going to reach mainstream folks pushing what amounts at least in this country to a niche sport.  

It is shocking the number of missteps they took over the years.  Even more shocking is that they survived as long as they did.  I would contend that is at least partially (if not wholly) due to the massive upgrades made to their network from 2H 2012 on.  

To suggest that the Sprint network didn't improve tremendously across the board would be a bold faced lie.

They did a good job with threadbare resources.  Ya gotta give em that.  

Yup. Marcelo completely misjudged what would appeal to mainstream customers, but what's most shocking is that he continued down that road despite customer metrics and NPS reports showing him that Sprint was rotting at the core due to insufficient network capex. Either he didn't understand what was happening or he didn't care, knowing that a merger was in the cards eventually.

Yeah, the Sprint network did improve substantially at the end. I agree that there was only so much they could do with the lack of interest and resources from SoftBank. I give the engineering team a lot of credit. They did what they could with what was leftover from the marketing budget.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

I give the engineering team a lot of credit. They did what they could with what was leftover from the marketing budget.

As the saying goes: "Bad companies make good and efficient managers"

On an interesting note, my phone (Note 20 Ultra) is back on the Sprint network this morning without me forcing anything. I can force it onto the T-Mobile network (310-260) as there are bands available (though they are around -110db), so I still have access a la ROAMAHOME. I am unsure if it is preferring Sprint again or they changed the preference to actually switch between networks before the data coverage gets REALLY spotty.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PedroDaGr8 said:


On an interesting note, my phone (Note 20 Ultra) is back on the Sprint network this morning without me forcing anything. I can force it onto the T-Mobile network (310-260) as there are bands available (though they are around -110db), so I still have access a la ROAMAHOME. I am unsure if it is preferring Sprint again or they changed the preference to actually switch between networks before the data coverage gets REALLY spotty.

Never mind, the tower I was connecting to just got the 312-250 PLMN. It wasn't showing it earlier this morning but is now. I guess me connecting to that tower this morning was related to that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PedroDaGr8 said:

Never mind, the tower I was connecting to just got the 312-250 PLMN. It wasn't showing it earlier this morning but is now. I guess me connecting to that tower this morning was related to that. 

Yep sites with that PLMN allow you to connect whenever in range and is treated as the same T-Mobile network. Working well here in Omaha in T-Mobile low spots that have Sprint keep sites.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dkoellerwx said:

Yep sites with that PLMN allow you to connect whenever in range and is treated as the same T-Mobile network. Working well here in Omaha in T-Mobile low spots that have Sprint keep sites.

I find it interesting that the tower reports AT LEAST two different PLMNs. I noticed if I was connected to a T-Mobile (310-260) tower before connecting to a 312-250 tower, then the tower will report 312-250. On the other hand, if I switch from a Sprint tower which is reporting either 310-120 or 312-530, then the same tower will report 312-530. This makes it really hard to find these towers, since locking my signal to any Sprint band will inherently force me onto 310=120 or 312-530. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PedroDaGr8 said:

This makes it really hard to find these towers, since locking my signal to any Sprint band will inherently force me onto 310=120 or 312-530. 

312-250 still shows in the engineering screen. I've taken to using the split screen, keeping engineering on one part and SCP on the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an iPhone 12 on Sprint but on TNX. I read a comment on Reddit from a person that said they did not get global roaming when traveling overseas.

Anyone experience this issue here?

I’m not traveling overseas anytime soon but when I do, I don’t want to encounter this issue. The person in Reddit said they had to revert back to a Sprint SIM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PedroDaGr8 said:

I find it interesting that the tower reports AT LEAST two different PLMNs. I noticed if I was connected to a T-Mobile (310-260) tower before connecting to a 312-250 tower, then the tower will report 312-250. On the other hand, if I switch from a Sprint tower which is reporting either 310-120 or 312-530, then the same tower will report 312-530. This makes it really hard to find these towers, since locking my signal to any Sprint band will inherently force me onto 310=120 or 312-530. 

It's kind of kooky, isn't it? Sprint was the only network provider that I'm aware of that actively used multiple PLMN IDs.. curious if T-Mobile will have everything on 310-260 when the merger dust settles.

For those not following the main SignalCheck thread, I'll be adding an option to use an alternate PLMN method if you prefer.. that will make 312-250 appear when applicable.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PedroDaGr8 said:

I find it interesting that the tower reports AT LEAST two different PLMNs. I noticed if I was connected to a T-Mobile (310-260) tower before connecting to a 312-250 tower, then the tower will report 312-250. On the other hand, if I switch from a Sprint tower which is reporting either 310-120 or 312-530, then the same tower will report 312-530. This makes it really hard to find these towers, since locking my signal to any Sprint band will inherently force me onto 310=120 or 312-530. 

Sprint has 5-6 that they broadcast:

Ruu6xo2.jpg

QilvJhF.jpg

312-120 is seemingly non-VoLTE. 312-530 is VoLTE. 310-830 is for Magic Boxes and small cells to connect to (note that it's marked as "reserved". This means it needs a special SIM to access it). 311-882 I think is prepaid? 311-490 is for T-Mobile roaming, and 312-250 on some sites for T-Mobile native. The others are on all sites. 

Magic Boxes broadcast 3. 310-120, 312-530, and 311-490. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ingenium said:

Sprint has 5-6 that they broadcast:

Ruu6xo2.jpg

QilvJhF.jpg

312-120 is seemingly non-VoLTE. 312-530 is VoLTE. 310-830 is for Magic Boxes and small cells to connect to (note that it's marked as "reserved". This means it needs a special SIM to access it). 311-882 I think is prepaid? 311-490 is for T-Mobile roaming, and 312-250 on some sites for T-Mobile native. The others are on all sites. 

Magic Boxes broadcast 3. 310-120, 312-530, and 311-490. 

Which one you device connects to can vary, dependent upon what you were connected to previously.  It's all as clear as mud right now!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...