Jump to content

iansltx

S4GRU Staff Member
  • Content Count

    1,528
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

iansltx last won the day on March 27

iansltx had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,029 Wireless Expert

About iansltx

  • Rank
    S4GRU Contributing Author
  • Birthday 01/28/1991

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://yanntx.info

Profile Information

  • Phones/Devices
    Galaxy S21
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    North Central Austin
  • Here for...
    4G Information
  • Twitter Handle
    @iansltx

Recent Profile Visitors

11,476 profile views
  1. The spectrum Tetris continues! T-Mobile now has 20x20 B2 LTE here (centered at 1955 MHz), using their 25x25 contiguous block from 1945-1970. CDMA is down to 1x-only, one channel wide (plus 1x in 800 I assume). GSM is at the top and bottom of the band, plus maybe a channel that overlaps 1x somehow. I assume H+ is in between the LTE channel and the 1x channel; spacing seems right, and TMo doesn't have H+ in AWS here. I believe this also subsumes Sprint's secondary B25 carrier here, which was just 5x5 anyway; I'm seeing 10x10 on Sprint, including PCS-G. B41 is still live, but when I con
  2. Swung over to Fredericksburg to get vax'd yesterday. Looks like there are now multiple n41 sites SE of town, including the one that went live in December or so. 40 MHz centered at 2653.35. speeds are 250-280/15-20 because they're usually anchored by 5 MHz B2 or B66. CA with 20x20 n71 there should let things break 300/30 easily. Interestingly, they figured out how to cram in a 20 MHz Sprint B41 channel centered at 2626 MHz. This is a bump from the 15 MHz I saw previously. Assuming 5% guard bands on each side exist on TDD like they do on FDD, that means they have a 350 KHz guard band betwee
  3. Got a Visible SIM in today and...yeesh, deprioritization is a thing. Speeds are all over the map. With that said, ServiceMode isn't blocked like with normal VZW SIMs, and I was able to confirm that they will now aggregste n2 with 66+66+13, for 45 MHz total, 30 of which is LTE. Saw 164/30 on a speed test (albeit with horrid ping) so that was cool. I may test again tonight when the network is unloaded, to see if I hit the 200 Mbps speed cap. I also confirmed that mmW, if the panels I saw are really mmW, isn't het active on the site. Though I had to get within 1/3 mi of the site to even
  4. So, VZW is continuing to insist that its C-Band propagates comparably to, or better than, 2.5: https://www.fiercewireless.com/operators/verizon-defends-c-band-plans The latest argument is that they can get 4db of extra gain from same-size antennas on C-Band vs. 2.5, and their power output can be much higher over a large amount of bandwidth vs. the 2.5 GHz band's restrictions. My immediate questions here are: Is VZW actually deploying the same size antennas a T-Mobile, so they actually get the gain improvement? Is 2.5 even bumping up against power restrictions to star
  5. More upgrades! My nearest n41 site can now hit 500+ Mbps down over its 80 MHz channel. ...and in even more recent news, n71 is live on the site to the south of me (Burnet and Justin are the nearest cross streets). Hit ~200 Mbps down on what appeared to be LTE alone, interestingly preferring B12 as the PCC. When taking advantage of NR, I was able to hit as much as 90 Mbps up! On the same site, it appears VZW has mmW, though I'm not sure if it's active yet. Ordered a Visible SIM to check further. No CBRS from what I can tell. VZW definitely has a sweet spot where you can hit 200 M
  6. That doesn't seem to match with what I'm seeing. If we're talking about a hard throttle here, I wouldn't be able to hit >100 Mbps over TMo B41. I'm also still getting my 8 Mbps on Fast.com. I can't prove deprioritization, but this doesn't look like throttling to me. Now, I'd be fine if they sent me a TNX SIM, but my plan apparently doesn't support that.
  7. The question here is, are they doing either for this particular site...because 2640 completely overlaps the n41 channel. You might as well either run n41 at 60 MHz or not run the 2640 B41 carrier. Unless there's little enough traffic on both that the towers are silent most of the time, and the TDD pattern is set to avoid self-interference. Which...maybe?
  8. This is all 20 MHz channels. Sprint is 2640, 2660, 2680. TMo is 2538, 2558. TMo NR is 80 MHz centered at 2607.75.
  9. Just confirmed that I *can* connect to 312-530 Sprint sites still...got near one, hand-picked, and was good to go.l, including N41, which is still deployed at 2CA here at 2640, 2660, and 2680 MHz, in addition to TMo's 2538 and 2558, in addition to their n41 carrier (80 MHz centered at 2607.75), though I've only been able to get 2CA B41 anywhere. The bizarre thing is that this means the lowest Sprint B41 carrier basically completely overlaps the top of the TMo n41 carrier. But...I guess that's why I can't actually get n41 at my place anymore. VZW deploys DSS and T-Mobile goes "hold my beer
  10. Dumb question time: on B41, is the frequency listed the center of the carrier (like it is for FD?) or the bottom of the carrier? I'm convinced I'm seeing TMo overlapping n41 with Sprint B41 here but am not sure by how much.
  11. Did some cell site surveying this evening. Two sites within 1000' of each other, one Sprint + AT&T (FirstNet but no B5), one TMo + VZW. By every indication, the Sprint one will go away. IInteresting thing is, I'm pretty sure the TMo/VZW site has three different fiber providers to it now. Spectrum has been there since they were TWC; saw TWC Business branding on equipment. Then followed utility locator flags to the road nearby to find new-looking fiber vaults for both Fiberlight and Verizon. Betting T-Mobile is using Fiberlight, while VZW is using their own glass. Which makes me think
  12. Probably because they don't feel a need to deploy it outside airports and stadiums, as they have mid-band available now and that's ideal for 99.9% of cases. The companies talking mmW are the ones that don't have 40+ MHz bid-band channels right now. AT&T mentioned mid-band, but only in the context of (parts of) airports, stadiums, and their own stores. AKA little enough not to matter. mmW isn't a priority.on AT&T even though they aren't in a great spot spectrum wise otherwise.
  13. VZW didn't say when they would meet that mmW traffic % number though. Given that they didn't specify a date, "after 2025" seems like a pretty good guess. I don't expect them to invest much in mmW beyond this year for awhile. Also, VZW is likewise combining mid-band and mmW into a single marketing term. TMo is calling it Ultra Capacity, VZW is calling it UW. Yes, their 60 MHz of C-Band will be branded the same as hundreds of MHz of mmW.
  14. Per today's investor call, T-Mobile still expects 7-8 million home internet subscribers on their network eventually. They had 100k by the end of last year. Wouldn't be surprised if that number has doubled since then.
  15. As of tomorrow, home internet is $60/mo, up from $50. Apparently $50 is so disruptive a price point that TMo can't keep routers in stock I guess, across their now-much-larger service area for the product.
×
×
  • Create New...