Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

Last night I forced B25 downtown and got a T-Mobile carrier using only the G block, rather than the typical Sprint 10x10 carrier that showed up when I went a few blocks north (this was downtown Austin, 1st St bridge). Center frequency was offset 100 KHz vs. the usual G-only Sprint B25 installs. Got like 10 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up in the middle of a fireworks show when AT&T was basically dead, VZW was iffy, and deprio'd T-Mobile was hit or miss (I did too many speed tests and hit the 50 GB soft cap last night).

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, my S21 is suddenly parked on B12 sitting in the front room of my house. I bet they turned off the Sprint B41 at my closest tower to start moving it over. Will have to play with the band selector to see if it's really offline.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I was right (or I know less about TNX band preference than I thought). When I disabled everything except B41, I connected to a weak T-Mobile B41 signal from (I assume) a different tower. With all 5G enabled and just LTE B41, I am sitting on N71, which still shows the 5GUC icon for some reason, but at least it's faster than B12. I assume they're going to move that B41 to N41? Hopefully sooner than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grabber5.0 said:

I think I was right (or I know less about TNX band preference than I thought). When I disabled everything except B41, I connected to a weak T-Mobile B41 signal from (I assume) a different tower. With all 5G enabled and just LTE B41, I am sitting on N71, which still shows the 5GUC icon for some reason, but at least it's faster than B12. I assume they're going to move that B41 to N41? Hopefully sooner than later.

B41 goes further than n41, so my bet is that the site is broadcasting n41, just not loudly enough for your phone to hear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iansltx said:

B41 goes further than n41, so my bet is that the site is broadcasting n41, just not loudly enough for your phone to hear it.

I THINK the above statement may be true, but somebody please verify it.  And if you can verify it, please tell me why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iansltx said:

B41 goes further than n41, so my bet is that the site is broadcasting n41, just not loudly enough for your phone to hear it.

I would think this would be determined by the amount of bandwidth.  My hypothesis would be in a rural area with 20+20 of b41 would go further than 10Mhz of n41, while in a more endowed urban area 100Mhz of n41 would go further than 20+20 of b41. Larger bandwidth can more easily overcome interference.

 

Another hypothesis would be the age and capabilities of the site equipment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of X goes further than Y, I've seen this IRL on sites around here. Same equipment broadcasting both n41 and B41, with B41 usually at a higher frequency than n41. LTE is a less complex signal than NR, and chipsets are more mature, so it just goes further before dropping out. When the closest n41 site to me was ~1 mi away I could pull B41 from that site consistently, but to get anything near reliable n41 I'd have to get within 0.7 mi or so. It's less obvious at this point as n41 coverage is closer to contiguous, but I know for a fact that I was looking at B41 and n41 from the same site, same panels (though IIRC LTE gets broadcast from different M-MIMO antenna elements), and these are the perf characteristics I've seen.

Note that the interference robustness issue shouldn't ever come into play as we're talking about licensed spectrum. Attenuation, sure, but fancier modulations require higher SNR to make work.

Likewise, VZW n2 doesn't reach nearly as far as B2 here, though that may be a function of VZW not trying very hard to keep phones on DSS rather than plain LTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, iansltx said:

In terms of X goes further than Y, I've seen this IRL on sites around here. Same equipment broadcasting both n41 and B41, with B41 usually at a higher frequency than n41. LTE is a less complex signal than NR, and chipsets are more mature, so it just goes further before dropping out. When the closest n41 site to me was ~1 mi away I could pull B41 from that site consistently, but to get anything near reliable n41 I'd have to get within 0.7 mi or so. It's less obvious at this point as n41 coverage is closer to contiguous, but I know for a fact that I was looking at B41 and n41 from the same site, same panels (though IIRC LTE gets broadcast from different M-MIMO antenna elements), and these are the perf characteristics I've seen.

Note that the interference robustness issue shouldn't ever come into play as we're talking about licensed spectrum. Attenuation, sure, but fancier modulations require higher SNR to make work.

Likewise, VZW n2 doesn't reach nearly as far as B2 here, though that may be a function of VZW not trying very hard to keep phones on DSS rather than plain LTE.

Agree that we must discount Verizon. 

What you're observing could also be a design issue of 5g: the complexity of being able to serve so many more devices where signal is strong leads to edge deterioration. I agree that this might be able to be addressed in the future.

I would like you to discount the bandwidth size theory if you can. What is the bandwidth difference in places where you have observed n41 falling short of b41?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile continues to buyout ED (2.5GHz) spectrum in small amounts.  Here is California:

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1671153433&attachmentKey=21487162&attachmentInd=applAttach

 

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1861609718&attachmentKey=21487164&attachmentInd=applAttach

 

And here is a new lease from the Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indian, which was recently acquired from the FCC:

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseMap.jsp?licKey=4345805

 

As you can see from above, this is a significant amount of spectrum that will hopefully allow this Band to receive much better internet.

 

Here is Washington state (none in Oregon):

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=430721178&attachmentKey=21504414&attachmentInd=applAttach

 

Likely many others elsewhere in small amounts.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dkyeager said:

Agree that we must discount Verizon. 

What your observing could also be a design issue of 5g: the complexity of being able to serve so many more devices where signal is strong leads to edge deterioration. I agree that this might be able to be addressed in the future.

I would like you to discount the bandwidth size theory if you can. What is the bandwidth difference in places where you have observed n41 falling short of b41?

I believe I've seen the difference even when n41 was at 40 MHz, though it's been awhile since I checked that. My market is 100 and other places are 80 right now, vs. 2CA B41 (so 40 MHz).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like even the unconverted keep sites are turned off now also here in Louisville. I tried to connect to 2 known keep sites today and both times would get Verizon on B26 and AT&T on B25. On B41 it would just pick up T-Mobile.  

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The purge in Northern Utah is going... I thought as much as I have seen quite a few towers being "worked" on... But it was confirmed today driving by a sprint only tower... GONE  Pole is there but no antenna's I HOPE they put some Tmo back up, because it is hot garbage at and around that tower.. perfect fill in spot.

200 N angel, Kaysville utah... You can see the tower.. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More 2.5 purchased to fulfill merger 5g obligations for Watertown SD area for 8 SD counties and 5 MN counties: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=138600801&attachmentKey=21481609&attachmentInd=applAttach

 

Change in ownership to T-Mobile from Northern Arizona University (already leased).  https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1026040304&attachmentKey=21432847&attachmentInd=applAttach

"The assignment includes EBS license areas covering parts of 42 Cellular Market Areas (“CMAs”) in markets across the United States, including Albany, New York; Knoxville, Tennessee; San Antonio, Texas; Nashville, Tennessee; Orlando, Florida; Rochester, New York; Evansville, Indiana; Rutland, Vermont and Amarillo, Texas and portions of 107 counties in these areas."

 

This one covers the greater Boston area and appears to be a new lease: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=111517181&attachmentKey=21340773&attachmentInd=applAttach

"The Lease Agreement cover portions of eight local markets in portions of seven counties in Massachusetts, four counties in New Hampshire and one county each in Connecticut and Rhode Island and there is no need for any additional competitive review."

 

A weird one from a Burlington Vermont Bank https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=453703197&attachmentKey=21526085&attachmentInd=applAttach  Can you say due diligence? IMO will likely be sold.

 

States recently covered: California, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio,  Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia.  Only looked at pending.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile manages to win the state of Hawaii (sharing with Verizon), Nationally a distant third. Worst states appear to be Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska.

https://rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/national/united-states/2021/2H

https://rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/state/hawaii/2022/1H

https://rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/state/wyoming/2022/1H

https://rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/state/vermont/2022/1H

https://rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/state/alaska/2022/1H

Edited by dkyeager
Note: National ranking not done yet for 2022
  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how far along they are in converting Sprint sites in Vermont.  When I was there in 2015, large parts of the state had Sprint (3G) but not T-Mobile at all, and I don't think that's changed significantly.

- Trip

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Paynefanbro said:

Weird how they've already done all of the metro and state rankings for 1H 2022 but the national ranking is only on 2H 2021.

Good catch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maryland, DC, Virginia results:

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applLeases.jsp?applID=10128331

New lease for the Winchester VA area, about 40Mhz of spectrum.

 

https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp?applID=10128331#

New lease for Roanoke, VA

 

North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida

New purchase for Ashville, NC: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1234792620&attachmentKey=21494016&attachmentInd=applAttach

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The non-keep sites in Columbus starting to go dark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote
  • Since our previous round of testing, AT&T's median download speed increased from 47.8 Mbps to 60.5 Mbps.
  • T-Mobile's median download speed increased from 58.5 Mbps to 92.5 Mbps.
  • Verizon's median download speed increased from 45.6 Mbps to 56.5 Mbps.

That is from the 1H22 Boston market test -- that is a statistically significant jump and massive lead by T-Mobile.. yet they finished #2 in the market for network speed. Kind of funky.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My home of Milwaukee has made incredible gains:

  • Since our previous round of testing, T-Mobile's median download speed increased from 49.3 Mbps to 294.3 Mbps.
  • T-Mobile's median upload speed increased from 14.1 Mbps to 22.7 Mbps.

Sprint and T-Mobile used to fight for the distant bottom here.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I've now seen how things work in Kobe, Hiroshima, and Osaka, as well as some areas south of Osaka (e.g. Wakayama, Kinokawa), and tried three more SIMs. The two physical SIMs (different branding for each) both use IIJ, which provides a Japanese IP address/routing on NTT, aleit LTE-only, so latency is ~45ms to Tokyo. The catch with NTT is that it uses two frequency bands (B42/3500 MHz LTE, n79/4900 MHz NR) that you're not going to get on an Android sold in the US, and I'm guessing that B42 would be helpful speed-wise on that network, as it doesn't have B41. I also found one place that doesn't have cell service: a vending machine in the back of the Osaka Castle tower. Or, rather, the B8/18/19 signal is weak enough there to be unusable. Going back to 5G for a moment, I saw a fair amount of Softbank n257 in Hiroshima, as well as in some train stations between Osaka and Kobe. 4x100 MHz bandwidth, anchored by B1/3/8, with speeds sometimes exceeding 400 Mbps on the US Mobile roaming eSIM. Not quite the speeds I've seen on mmW in the States, but I've probably been on mmW for more time over the past few days than I have in the US over the past year, so I'll take it. My fastest speed test was actually on SoftBank n77 though, with 100 MHz of that plus 10x10 B8 hitting ~700 Mbps down and ~80 Mbps up with ~100ms latency...on the roaming eSIM...on the 4th floor of the hotel near Shin-Kobe station. Guessing B8 was a DAS or small cell based on signal levels, and the n77 might have been (or was just a less-used sector of the site serving the train station). I'm now 99% sure that all three providers are running DSS on band 28, and I've seen 10x10 on similar frequencies from both NTT and SoftBank IIRC, on both LTE and 5G. I also picked up one more eSIM: my1010, which is different from 1010/csl used by US Mobile's eSIM unfortunately, as it's LTE-only. On the bright side, it's cheap (10GB/7 days is like $11, and 20GB for the same period would be around $15), and can use both KDDI and SoftBank LTE. It also egresses from Taiwan (Chunghwa Telecom), though latency isn't really any better than the Singapore based eSIMs. Tomorrow will include the most rural part of our journey, so we'll see how networks hold up there, and from tomorrow night on we'll be in Tokyo, so any further reports after that will be Tokyo-centric.
    • I think the push for them is adding US Mobile as a MVNO with a priority data plan.  Ultimately, making people more aware of priority would allow them (and other carriers) to differentiate themselves from MVNOs like Consumer Cellular that advertise the same coverage. n77 has dramatically reduced the need for priority service at Verizon where the mere functioning of your phone was in jeopardy a couple of years ago if you had a low priority plan like Red Pocket. Only have heard of problems with T-Mobile in parts of Los Angeles. AT&T fell in between. All had issues at large concerts and festivals, or sporting events if your carrier has no on-site rights. Edit: Dishes native 5g network has different issues: not enough sites, limited bandwidth. Higher priority would help a few. Truth is they can push phones to AT&T or T-Mobile.
    • Tracfone AT&T sims went from QCI 8 to 9 as well a couple years ago. I'm pretty neutral towards AT&T's turbo feature here, the only bad taste left was for those who had unadvertised QCI 7 a couple months ago moved down to 8. In my eyes it would have been a lot better for AT&T to include turbo in those Premium/Elite plans for free to keep them at QCI 7, while also introducing this turbo add on option for any other plans or devices. As it stands now only a handful of plans can add it, and only if you're using a device on a random list of devices AT&T considers to be 5G smartphones.
    • My Red Pocket AT&T GSMA account was dropped to QCI 9 about a year ago.  Most recently 8 for the last few years prior.  Voice remains at 5.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...