dkyeager

In areas like Columbus, where Sprint controls all of the B41 spectrum except for the gaps, with FCC permission, Sprint could have 9 198MHz carriers plus a 15MHz carrier with 0.8Mhz for buffer space. They should leave the 8T8Rs up plus the Massive MIMOs. The real issue is likely the cost of backhaul. Don't forget it will be 4G LTE plus 5NR.

My bad. It should have read: I have heard from sources of mixed reliability that T-Mobile will be adding a lot 600Mhz sites in Cleveland over the coming weeks They currently have one site near the lake on the east side.

Well, since you All have Sprint sims, I would expect they should all be the same, but obviously not. It looks like firmware is the issue. Perhaps the unlocked needs to be manually updated? Else Sprint is only making a subset of their features available to the unlocked? A good question for Samsung.

What firmware version are each of you on?

I have heard from sources of mixed reliability that T-Mobile will be adding a lot 600Mhz sites in the coming weeks They currently have one site near the lake on the east side.

For clarity, does the Unlocked S9+ have ##data# menu options to support B26 + B25 CA and B26 + B25 + B25 CA? Thanks

I believe the issue is the signal from the phone reaching the tower. Towers are obviously more powerful so downlink should not be as much of a problem. Simply put, b26 travels further. Yet it also a very precious commodity. FDD is historically limited by download, since more customers download about ten times more than they upload. Therefore this allows the B26 upload (which has extra capacity) to be used to reach the tower, followed by the download being split between B25 and B26. Thus it offloads b26 downloads (which is likely congested) by sharing them with B25 where possible. The biggest issue is not many phones support B26 + B25 CA, let alone B26 + B25 + B25.

It should be about half or less than it was before, depending on the B25 download bandwidth and performance at that location, ie B26 5x5 plus 5Mhz or 10MHz b25 or more rarely 15MHz (unless it is B26 + B25 + B25). Might really help where B26 is 3x3.

Ah so able to use B26 for upload/download, but the b26 download being shared with b25 thus effectively offloading b26 as mentioned by RAvirani above or for the HPUE like aspects I mentioned (so long as there is 3G present, a band can not have HPUE, which boosts the handset transmit power).

There is no doubt that Sprint is short of low band, especially for VoLTE. The former clear markets will benefit from Tribanding the existing sites. As for the other markets Sprint needs more of the Band 26 small cells, which are quite rare (else the merger). Considering that band 26 should be the band of last resort, I have never quite understood how it being CAed will help, unless it basically acts as HPUE by strengthening the upload signal which tends to have plenty of capacity since it is FD, and then is able to use the Band 25 or Band 41 for download. Is this correct?

Basically the same as the S9. Only this time it's 4x4 MIMO on up to 20 streams vs 16 [credit: lilotimz]

While T-Mobile could have awesome mmWave 5G in Ohio, the more important 5G story is the 600MHz nationwide. It is believed they have been saving half of it for 5G, which should basically double speeds at the edge. Even more if they CA it with 4G. So rather than a few people in the heart of major city downtowns benefiting, those inside buildings and at the edge of service should benefit the most.

If Sprint had money they could dominate 5G at least until the duo had significant density. But they don't. Sprint is still paying catch-up. Despite the huge number of sites that have been tribanded, it did not show up in the Rootmetrics stats for the last half of 2018. They other guys were also adding more bands, 4x4 MIMO and 256QAM to all of their sites. The construction crews still keep telling me that most of the RRUs they have been putting up for the duo are 5G compatible. Outside of the Massive MIMOs and I have not heard that for Sprint's latest equipment. Personally laying low until some of dust settles.

The Magic Boxes require reasonable macro band 41 signal in a market with enough spectrum to give a carrier to them. Airaves require ISP service with minimal jitter and GPS and must be in a county with Sprint Macro sites. Each fills a different need.

map of all of C-Spire's PCS licenses: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/ULSGis/ULSearchGis.jsp?session_id=R4LxcGqHqdr9gQNvKD6pG3Bgcn1F9mlGSfwf2VqM9slJ5x2sm1d7!229082329!-578637931!1552312871512&externalServer=true&licName=clear&refresh=true&newSearch=searchAdvanced.jsp&results=true&tempTableName=LicSearch40774957&appServerLink=http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/&refineNum=1 Takes a minute to populate.

I thought Sprint acquired their PCS? https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/atandt-is-collecting-lots-of-700mhz-spectrum-licenses-possibly-for-5g/d/d-id/749991?

My comments on https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10308962711593/(Public) In-Home Ex Parte with CL - FINAL v2.pdf 1) I do see an issue in entering the address for qualification -- many rural addresses are P.O. Boxes or rural routes not pinned down to a lat long. 2) They guarantee a "minimum speed of 25/3Mbps". Much lower speeds would be likely acceptable by the customers, especially if they could use satellite for download. 3) let us not forget that SpaceX and others have also targeted these customers in future years. 4) It will be restricted in area: "T-Mobile’s network engineers ... calculated the areas within the In-Home Broadband Coverage Area where sufficient network capacity existed to offer in-home broadband services (the “In-Home Broadband Eligible Area”)" 5) "While many of these areas need some 2.5 GHz to be deployed in order to provide sufficient capacity to meet New T-Mobile’s performance thresholds, traffic in these areas would end up putting very little load on the 2.5 GHz spectrum, leaving much of it available to provide wireless fixed broadband service. The result is that New T-Mobile will gain substantial excess capacity in a number of areas for a very low cost." The issues with this are many: 1) Many rural areas don't currently have much in the way of 2.5 spectrum. 2) WISPs may already be operating in the area, but possibly with less technical expertise. 3) Sprint users may already have heavily taxed this resource. 6) there is no discussion of the priority of mobile versus fixed wireless customers. They do discuss limiting the number of wireless customers in a given area in a technical appendix. 7) It would give the new T-Mobile more revenue in some rural areas that would otherwise not be worth serving.

link is now live: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10308962711593/(Public) In-Home Ex Parte with CL - FINAL v2.pdf

Or it could be the DOJ and FCC drilling further into the data and scenarios. There is a disconnect between the policies of the current administration and the bureaucratic responses. Global warming is a good example of this. This adds unpredictability to how this proposed merger will be resolved. Logically you would think if they don't allow T-Mobile and Sprint to merge then AT&T and Verizon should be broken up. I sincerely doubt the later would happen. I am also not certain that T-Mobile or Sprint are that politically aware either, given these multiple public revisions.

In areas where Sprint controls all the 2.5 spectrum you end up with 3 carriers, buffer, 2 carriers, buffer, 3 carriers. The FCC can allow access to these buffer zones (J &K). With 194 MHz you could get 9 20Mhz carriers and a 10Mhz carrier. However Sprint 4G LTE B41 carriers are actually 19.8MHz wide, would give you 9 carriers plus 15.8MHz for possible a 15Mhz carrier. We don't fully understand how 5G will handle spectrum allocations. It may be more oriented toward 15MHz. If so, in many areas you could end up with 40MHz for 4G LTE (CA) plus 15MHz for 5G. To truly pull off wireless internet in rural areas, the allocation/auction of the remain 2.5 spectrum would be needed. It is not guaranteed that Sprint would win. If it does not have to be leased, Verizon may be interested. AT&T has already played the spoiler in places like San Francisco. You also have a number of WISPs already present and various spectrum hoarders. It says access denied. I went and looked at the FCC docket and no other documents yet made public other than announcement. I prefer not to trust the uneducated press on wireless matters.

We need to post the links for these filings and see what they say.

5g backhaul version of Magic box promised by end of year: https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/small-cells/airspans-5g-magic-box-for-sprint-coming-soon/d/d-id/749731?:

When you add the dimension of time, truth becomes an even fuzzier concept. I think you guys can carry on your debate without me.

"Honest" politicians and lawyers do this all the time. They give you the truthful portion of the story that suits their purposes. Truly honest people can also do this based on their perception. On that basis there can be more than one truth.

Time to give up safe cracking 😑