Jump to content

Paynefanbro

S4GRU Premier Sponsor
  • Posts

    4,913
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    104

Paynefanbro last won the day on September 8

Paynefanbro had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Phones/Devices
    Unlocked iPhone 12 Pro Max
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Brooklyn, NY
  • Here for...
    4G Information

Recent Profile Visitors

18,370 profile views

Paynefanbro's Achievements

Member Level: LTE Advanced

Member Level: LTE Advanced (12/12)

5.5k

Reputation

  1. Definitely! Having it across both flagships will definitely incentivize deployment even more.
  2. New iPhones have n258. Now all we're missing is n262. Soon enough it'll make economic sense for T-Mobile to do mmWave deployments since all of their spectrum will be supported by phones.
  3. Literally two seconds ago I was saying that this would be a good opportunity for T-Mobile to launch a 5GUC icon in their status bar given that their n41 deployment is pretty mature in some cities. I'm pretty excited about this. Also worthy of note is that the new iPhones support n258 which means in markets where T-Mobile owns that spectrum, it now makes sense to deploy it. For example, in NYC that's now 400MHz of spectrum that iPhones on T-Mobile have access to that they didn't previously.
  4. Went back Boston for the first time since February 2020 and got to experience T-Mobile and Verizon's network throughout quite a bit of the metro area. T-Mobile: T-Mobile has contiguous 5G coverage throughout most of the Boston region which was a surprise to me given that so few sites have been confirmed with Band/n71 or Ban/n41 on Cellmapper. My guess is that this is due to a combination of factors. The two most obvious are that: There are a lot of sites that have been upgraded with Band 41 or Band 71 that no one has mapped in Cellmapper yet. T-Mobile is achieving contiguous coverage in many areas through the use of SA 5G. In terms of speeds, I averaged about 20-50Mbps between LTE and 5G. 5G was only slightly faster than LTE in most areas. The network is not slow by any means but it pales in comparison to what I receive in NYC, a city that has n41 deployed on what seems like >75% of the sites. Speaking of n41, T-Mobile's coverage map is a complete lie in that regard. They claim that most of the city of Boston is covered in Ultra Capacity 5G however that is false. I encountered it only a handful of times while I was there. Most notably, at a few sites in Mattapan, Chinatown, and the Seaport District. Speeds while connected were fast as usual but it was disappointing to see that it wasn't as widely deployed as in some other cities. I also noticed a large amount of small cells throughout the metro area. In Newton, T-Mobile uses oDAS nodes to fill in coverage in areas where macros struggle to reach and I even found some newer Ericsson branded small cells in Revere that have been deployed sometime within the last few months. They were LTE only but provided speeds of 130Mbps+. Overall, T-Mobile isn't exceptional in Boston. Instead they" just work". This isn't a bad thing at all, but I'm hoping that soon they can upgrade more of their sites to include both Band/n71 and Band/n41 so that they can get much more capacity online. In areas where n41 exists LTE and 5G perform phenomenally. Verizon: Verizon on the other hand had a very strong LTE network in Boston. Everywhere I went I had strong signal and great speeds. Their network in Boston performs much better than it does in NYC. In many areas I was seeing 100Mbps+ on LTE. My only complaint about Verizon was that their 5G coverage isn't nearly as good as they claim it is. My Verizon line dropped out of 5G coverage frequently and while connected, speeds were often slower than on LTE in the same area. Luckily their LTE network more than makes up for their lacking 5G performance and coverage. I also got to experience Ultra Wideband 5G there. The coverage map was fairly accurate when it comes to showing where you can find mmWave 5G. I was seeing peak speeds of 2Gbps down and 190Mbps up. However mmWave's range is still not impressive even after 2+ years of deployments and optimizations. The second I broke line of site by turning a corner or going into a restaurant, mmWave would disappear. It was funny being on LTE inside a clothing store on Mass Ave and then the second I step outside within line of sight of the node, my phone shows the little 5GUW icon and I'm getting gigabit speeds. Overall: All in all, I actually don't think T-Mobile's slow n41 deployment is their own doing. It has a lot to do with Boston's site permitting laws and the fact that the carriers are virtually forced to conceal or sheath many of their sites to preserve the character of buildings. Because of this, T-Mobile has to redesign a ton of their sites to accommodate the larger antennas necessary to deploy n71 and n41. Verizon and AT&T are probably going to run into the same issue when it comes to deploying C-band. In the meantime, I think that T-Mobile should follow Verizon's lead and take advantage of Boston's more relaxed small cell regulations and deploy LTE and 5G small cells as widely as possible to free up capacity on their macro network since Band 2/12/66 alone is not enough for T-Mobile at this current moment.
  5. NYC DoITT and Public Design Commission approved a new design for multi-tenant small cells last month. They look very similar to the previously approved single-tenant design but they're quite a bit taller. Basically the new design means that going forward, a single light pole or utility can have multiple carriers and technologies on it, reducing the number of new poles that needs to be "converted" to densify 4G/5G coverage. It should definitely speed up mmWave deployment once the city starts allowing carriers to build out 5G small cells here.
  6. Signal looks pretty low. But 20MHz of Band 66 with 4x4MIMO + 80MHz of n41 should be providing much better speeds than that. Even though the jitter is high, the ping is pretty low. I'd have to guess that it's a site provisioning problem. I wish there were some way to flag this to T-Mobile.
  7. I started seeing the same in some permits in Massachusetts. I wonder if they're planning on using DSS or just going all in and repurposing spectrum from LTE to devote to n25/66. In NYC they have two contiguous 25MHz chunks of AWS and PCS so using DSS could potentially be really beneficial to make use of all of that spectrum. Alternatively, they could just light up a standalone 5MHz n66 and n25 carrier here without sacrificing LTE performance and repurpose more spectrum from LTE as users move from LTE to 5G just like they did with HSPA and LTE.
  8. There are areas where I know T-Mobile underperforms in NYC but generally my speeds are more than sufficient and I don't encounter issues with using my phone. The only thing that worries me is that there are some areas where my phone will roam on Sprint's network to make up for T-Mobile's poorer performing network and I'm afraid that T-Mobile may just decommission those Sprint sites without integrating it into their own network, despite the enormous benefit integrating those sites would make.
  9. Adding onto this thread! I went to Roatán, Honduras and CocoCay, Bahamas recently. Here's my experience in both places. Roatán, Hondruas: I bought a 5GB international high speed data pass for $35 from T-Mobile. It lasts 10 days and gives you virtually unrestricted access to partner networks out there. For some background there are 3 networks in Honduras; Tigo, Claro, and Honducel. I did my research and found out that Tigo and Claro are virtually the only two viable carriers in the country. Honducel has a tiny 3G network and controls less than 1% of the market so you'll probably never encounter their network in the country. Upon arrival in Roatán I took my phone off of airplane mode and got a text from T-Mobile welcoming me to Honduras. I also got a text from Claro welcoming me to Honduras which was quite the surprise. Because Roatán is a pretty small island, both Claro and Tigo have signal virtually everywhere with zero coverage dropouts. However it's obvious that Tigo has invested more on the island as they not only have massive macro sites on towers but they have lots of mini-macros/small cells on telephone poles throughout the island to provide infill coverage on mountain roads and in tourist areas. Unfortunately Tigo does not provide T-Mobile customers with access to their LTE network in Roatán, only their HSPA network. Nonetheless it still performed well. Any time I (manually) switched my phone to Tigo's network I had a full signal. Speeds were good everywhere at about 8-10Mbps down and 1 up. On Claro's network, I was seeing average LTE speeds of 7-20 Mbps with peak speeds of 50Mbps. Checking the Service Menu on the iPhone I could see that I was on 20MHz of Band 4 however I'm not sure if it was aggregated with any other bands. Given the speeds I was seeing it definitely seemed like I was only connecting to that single carrier. Claro LTE: CocoCay, Bahamas: The Bahamas has two carriers, BTC which is a state run telecom that is partially owned by Cable & Wireless (the company behind the Flow brand across the Caribbean) and the other carrier is called aliv. Aliv is a relatively new carrier in the has an all LTE network with lower prices than BTC that was created to bring competition to the Bahamian telecom space. I believe that T-Mobile's roaming agreement with BTC predates the arrival of aliv and as a result, T-Mobile doesn't have a roaming deal with them, only with BTC. I couldn't find a coverage map for either carrier on their websites but according to Bell Canada's international roaming map, aliv provides LTE coverage to CocoCay and BTC provides 3G coverage. Upon arrival in The Bahamas, my phone connected to BTC's 3G network and I got a welcome text from T-Mobile. Neither BTC nor aliv has a tower on the actual island of CocoCay. Instead, they have a tower on Great Stirrup Cay, the private island that belongs to Norwegian Cruise Lines about a mile and a half away. This is not an issue though as BTC uses Band 5 for their HSPA network and have power and downtilt set such that you get full signal across the entirety of CocoCay. I was actually getting great 3G speeds from the tower at about 12-18Mbps down and 2-4Mbps up. Ultimately I had nothing to complain about with BTC's network there. BTC 3G:
  10. I saw there was a thread for Central Mexico but I just decided to create a new catch-all thread for all Mexico roaming. Where I Was I visited Costa Maya Port, Mahahual, and the Mayan ruins at Chacchoben. Since I'm visiting on a cruise, I had my phone in airplane mode to avoid cruise roaming charges but as soon as we docked I turned off airplane mode and was greeted with strong signal and a text from T-Mobile welcoming me to Mexico with a message that I could use my phone at no extra charge. Networks & Speeds There were two networks available at the cruise port at Costa Maya. The first is Telcel which is the giant of the Mexican telecom industry, having the largest and fastest network in the country. The second network was the Red Compartida which is a shared network commissioned by the Mexican government that is being built out using Band 28 spectrum by a company called ALTÁN Redes so that they can bring carrier competition to the most underserved regions the country. Sidenote: AT&T Mexico's coverage map shows that they have coverage in Costa Maya Port and Mahahual but in reality it's just roaming on the Red Compartida. My phone defaulted to Telcel and even though the Red Compartida shows coverage available on their coverage map, my phone wouldn't connect to it. This is likely because it was never intended to operate as a standalone network that anyone could connect to. The fact that I was never able to connect to it was not a problem as speeds were insanely fast on Telcel. I was seeing peak download speeds of 250Mbps and peak upload speeds of around 50Mbps+ Coverage I have become so accustomed to having coverage everywhere whether native or roaming that seeing my phone drop out of coverage completely for about 30 minutes as we took the one road out of Costa Maya Port (Carretera a Mahahual) to go to Chacchoben really baffled me. The area that the highway goes through is a protected mangrove-like area with a near-zero population for about 30 miles so it's not worth it for any carrier or even the Red Compartida to actually cover. Eventually you reach Highway 307 and have contiguous LTE coverage that is super fast, with peaks speeds of over 200Mbps. According to all of the coverage maps, I should have had coverage at Chacchoben however I couldn't get my phone to connect to the network there at all. Checking the iOS network selector, I saw Telcel listed which indicated that my phone was seeing the network however it may have been too weak to establish a connection to it or Telcel's network was blocking me from connecting. Shortly after leaving there and getting back on the highway though I saw my phone connect to 3G and then LTE, providing those same 200Mbps speeds in plenty of areas that I would consider to be super rural. Summary I can see why Telcel often refers to their LTE network as 4.5G. Speeds in the Costa Maya region of Quintana Roo were insanely fast and comparable to the lowband 5G networks and the best LTE network speeds you'll find in the U.S. However, it looks like Telcel may be overstating their coverage a bit so there may be some areas where you'd expect coverage but it just doesn't exist.
  11. JFK speeds are impressive while connected to the DAS and while connected to the macro in the airport. These were my 5G speeds just before the security gate at Terminal 4: These are LTE and 5G speeds inside Terminal 2:
  12. Was in Cape Canaveral because I'm going on a cruise and while at Port Canaveral, I was able to compare Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile's networks. The port is served by 2 sites. A monopole that is a bit south of Port Canaveral that has AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile on it and what looks like some sort of silo on the port's property that has Sprint on it. The Verizon site has Band 2/13/66 on it and no 5G at all. The T-Mobile site is Band 2/12/66/71 and n71. The Sprint site is Band 25/26/41. Verizon's LTE performance was bad. On Verizon I had similar signal strength to T-Mobile but much slower speeds. I was getting maximum speeds of 2Mbps down and 23Mbps up. This is in comparison to my maximum T-Mobile 5G speeds of 53Mbps down and 40Mbps up. At some point I noticed my phone switch to LTE and my signal strength increased significantly. When I took a look at my ServiceMode screen I saw that I was on Band 41 which instantly made me realize that my phone had switched to Sprint's network. Running a speed test I was able to get 98Mbps down and 5Mbps up. This was my first experience where my T-Mobile device switched to Sprint while still in the presence of a T-Mobile site with good signal strength. Hopefully T-Mobile decides to keep this site, even if it's to only serve the port. Doing so would free up capacity significantly as it seems like the site T-Mobile is on with Verizon is meant to serve Cape Canaveral more than Port Canaveral. Verizon: T-Mobile: Sprint: Edit: I also forgot that I latched onto Sprint's Band 41 at Orlando International Airport again despite not being outside of T-Mobile's coverage. From the speeds it looks like this may have been 40-60MHz of Band 41. Cell ID indicated I connected to Sprint eNB 387939.
  13. Yup I got really lucky! Optimum was running a promotion for gigabit service at $65/month for life for new customers. I already had Optimum internet but it was under another name in my household so to take advantage of the promo I just cancelled the service under the other person and signed up again using my name so I was technically a new customer. These days the gigabit promos are typically only discounted for a year before they balloon in price. I got my own modem too so I'm not paying any rental fees either. I also checked last month and saw that my house is officially available for T-Mobile Home Internet but my deal with Optimum is just too good to give up. It's good that there's at least some sort of viable alternative to Optimum here though considering FiOS doesn't serve my home and Starry seems focused on wiring their service for buildings, not homes right now. My home site has pings in the teens and speeds of 500Mbps+ at all times of the day so anyone using T-Mobile Home Internet here is extremely lucky.
  14. While T-Mobile is still deploying new small cells I sadly haven't seen any upgrades to existing small cells. For example, the three that correspond to eNB 55177 are as slow as ever, especially the one on Nostrand.
  15. Your third photo isn't appearing on my end but are you referring to how the shroud on that site is vented? Separately what is the new antenna that they put there? It looks like it has a lot more ports than the previous two antennas. Are they running Band 2/5/13/66 off of a single antenna?
×
×
  • Create New...