Jump to content

Paynefanbro

S4GRU Premier Sponsor
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,347

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    211

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Paynefanbro

  1. Paynefanbro
    Sprint eNB Unknown -> T-Mobile eNB 875923 Location: 40.667111078004595, -73.84858333943421 Sprint eNB Unknown -> T-Mobile eNB 894870 Location: 40.68362651903586, -73.8854428368001 Sprint eNB 5848 -> T-Mobile eNB 347837 Location: 40.65273285505563, -73.97331867356841 This site is also a gigabit site. — — — — — T-Mobile eNB 894636 got a backhaul upgrade and is now a gigabit site too. — — — — — Passed by T-Mobile eNB 43727 which is a super old flagpole site and saw that it's covered in scaffolding so it's either about to be upgraded or decommed and moved to the Sprint site just below. The site is Band 66 only and probably one of the oldest T-Mobile sites in the city so I'm glad something is finally being done about it. — — — — — Also mapped a bunch of small cells in Vinegar Hill that hadn't been mapped before. I was a bit surprised to see my phone reporting a strong signal throughout the neighborhood despite the only macro being the one next to the Manhattan Bridge. Now I know why. Given the cell numbering scheme it looks like I might've missed one, eNB 134692-6/16. — — — — — A couple of oddities I've noticed with AT&T: There are a couple of AT&T tri-band small cells in Staten Island that they don't have deployed anywhere else. Most AT&T small cells in Staten Island were installed by ZenFi but these were installed by Crown Castle some time in the early 2010's. What makes them stand out is that they're using the AT&T Outdoor DAS and Wide Area DAS cell numbering scheme instead of the typical one they user throughout the city. I've also seen a few small cells using a new numbering scheme that I think may be borrowed from another region but AT&T has used on a couple of sites here from some reason. For example, eNB 117069 in Crown Heights has cell numbers 67 and 81.
  2. Paynefanbro
    I was just back there last week. I noticed that Verizon installed a bunch of oDAS nodes along 2nd Ave in Industry City. I think that they're easily the best performing carrier in that area. Sprint also has a bunch back there that I'm hoping T-Mobile will one day convert. Yup, QCI9. But as I understand it most AT&T plans are only QCI 8 and even their most expensive non-business unlimited plan is QCI 7. Performance hasn't been abysmal in my experience and has more or less matched performance when I've tested AT&T in the past on their branded (non-unlimited) prepaid services. From what I've seen, my experience on Boost Mobile also lines up with the general experience in NYC according to coveragemap.com. Some sites perform really well here, but most of them are generally much slower than anything VZW or TMUS has to offer. In the case of the test you quoted, that's just a poor area for AT&T as I've come across small cells that are as much as 4x faster than that one. AT&T just needs better macro density in much of the city.
  3. Paynefanbro
    At the Yankees game yesterday I got to test out all 3 carriers. It seems like not every area in the stadium has had their DAS upgraded to include 5G. For example in the Legends Suite I only saw LTE on every carrier but it performed really well; > 300Mbps on T-Mobile and over > 200Mbps on Verizon and AT&T. At our seats it was another story. To nobody's surprise Verizon was the best performing. I was seeing 1.2Gbps on Verizon thanks to mmWave but I kept experiencing this weird issue where my Verizon line kept dropping to no service/SOS. I had to do an airplane mode cycle to get reconnected the network multiple times. T-Mobile speeds were a steady 30Mbps both down and up but I did manage to get one test at 240Mbps. It seems like T-Mobile struggled with deciding what to connect to. I'd watch my signal strength go up and down as it bounced between SA 5G, NSA 5G, and LTE. Sometimes the 5GUC icon would appear and then randomly disappear. In spite of this there wasn't a single test I did that was below 30Mbps. Good enough in my opinion. AT&T was the slowest of the bunch. I couldn't get over 5Mbps on AT&T at my seat despite AT&T upgrading their DAS to include all available LTE bands, even Band 14. It was a consistent 5Mbps though and pings were also pretty low. I never saw it drop to the kbps range in my testing. Maybe they just got oversaturated.
  4. Paynefanbro
    Beautiful day yesterday so I went to Six Flags again. Soon we're gonna have to call this the Six Flags thread lol. I finally got a pic of the site that serves the entire park. It was super sunny so the picture was pretty backlit but I managed to edit it a bit to bring out some the detail. Sprint used to be at the very top of the monopole but their entire rack is gone now. T-Mobile was just below them so they didn't bother moving up since they still now have highest position on the site with Sprint gone. T-Mobile has an Ericsson 6449 deployed for n41, an RFS antenna for Band 2/12/66/71 and n25/71, and on one sector they have a a Band 2/66 high capacity antenna that actually has it's own eNB. Verizon has a Samsung massive MIMO C-band antenna, CBRS, and their usual Band 2/5/13/66 antennas. They also have a MatSing Ball antenna on the sector that faces Great Adventure. AT&T has their standard setup on 2 out of 3 sectors and on the third sector that faces Great Adventure they have 3 gigantic high capacity antennas. They have n5 deployed but no n77. Dish is a recent addition to the site, lowest on the monopole, just under AT&T. No high capacity setup on this site, just their normal single antenna per sector setup. To be fair they likely won't have the same amount of traffic as the big three so this is more than enough capacity for now. — — — — — Just like last year T-Mobile was still the fastest carrier in my testing followed by Verizon and then AT&T. None of the carriers were slow, just different levels of fast. I was getting upwards of 400Mbps on T-Mobile, 150Mbps on Verizon, and AT&T was ~50Mbps park wide.
  5. Paynefanbro
    Verizon ‘not just chasing POPs’ in 5G mid-band race https://www.fiercewireless.com/5g/verizon-not-just-chasing-pops-5g-mid-band-race Sounds to me like Verizon is trying its best to ignore its competitors' biggest advantage over itself. Ignoring their competition is exactly what got them into this position. They coasted on their reputation for so long that they never thought they'd see the day where AT&T has a larger and faster LTE network than them and T-Mobile would have a larger and faster 5G network than them. They've got to be feeling the pressure.
  6. Paynefanbro
    Passed by earlier this afternoon and it's not live yet. — — — — — Saw this AT&T site and laughed because check out that uptilt. I thought it might've been a broken mount at first but each sector had one antenna pointed upward like this. Check out the range on this thing!
  7. Paynefanbro
    Spent some time on Roosevelt Island this weekend and managed to map almost all of the small cells on the island. In spite of all of these small cells T-Mobile's performance is really hampered by the lack of upgrades to their macros on the island. They technically have 3 macros, two are on Coler Hospital on the north end of the island and one on the Roosevelt Island Tram Tower in the southern part of the island. Of the 3 sites only one has been upgraded completely with n41/71, the site on the far north of the island. This site doesn't even cover Roosevelt Island. Instead its sectors provide coverage to the Astoria Houses just across the water in Queens and parts of the Upper East Side in Manhattan. The other site on Coler Hospital that actually covers the northern part of the island is ancient with a single RFS and Ericsson AIR32 per sector. The tram tower that's meant to be the primary site for the southern half of the island has an AIR21, AIR32, and one of those older Band 12 antennas per sector leaving us with only Band 2/12/66. T-Mobile isn't ignoring the tram site though. They actually took down the Sprint antennas on it recently. No idea why they're holding out on upgrading it. Verizon on the other hand has upgraded the site to have mmWave and C-band. While standing right in front of it I was getting just under 2Gbps on mmWave and over 200Mbps on LTE. This is in comparison to the ~200Mbps I was getting on n41 from the new site on Rockefeller University Hospital broadcasting across the water. On T-Mobile's LTE network alone, I struggled to get over 50Mbps in front of the macro. AT&T also upgraded both of their sites on the island with C-band so speeds were a consistent 100-200Mbps islandwide. I wonder what the holdup is for T-Mobile on those two sites. Edit: I've been uploading all of my speed tests on all carriers to that site coveragemap.com to contribute data to it. Looks like someone got over 2Gbps around 45th and 6th Ave in Manhattan. Maybe eNB 45491 is a super site lol. Another person got 1.9Gbps right by City Hall. May be a cool way for us to track down those sites with multi-gig backhaul.
  8. Paynefanbro
    New keep sites: Sprint eNB 6705 -> T-Mobile 879271 Location: 40.700897107313175, -73.94338796296525 Sprint eNB 9063 -> T-Mobile eNB 344410 Location: 40.68192690523196, -73.84800823154443 Sprint eNB 73989 -> T-Mobile eNB 216502 Location: 40.67885867359578, -73.80499277403715 — — — — — Also confirmed that I'm mapping a bunch of Sprint keep sites under 310-120. I hit 9043, 6867, 6193, 6256, and 6178 today. While I'm still able to manually connect to 312-250 to see if a site is a keep site or not, my phone is automatically connecting to them via the 310-120 PLMN now.
  9. Paynefanbro
    I mapped 15848 recently last week so it's definitely still live. I think I also mapped it under the Sprint PLMN on my A13 as opposed to 312-250. While I don't think I've mapped 6178 recently my iPhone still connects to it while driving by so I know it's still live and being recognized as a keep site. I don't understand why it hasn't been upgraded yet. Every other carrier is on it so it shouldn't be such a hassle to upgrade.
  10. Paynefanbro
    Deutsche Telekom regains majority control of T-Mobile US https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/deutsche-telekom-regains-majority-control-of-t-mobile-us/2023/04/
  11. Paynefanbro
    Another new keep site in Gowanus. eNB 880679 It's either the site near Lowe's that'll hopefully finally provide good coverage to the Home Depot on the other side of the Culver Viaduct or it's site at the corner of 5th St and Smith St. I won't be able to confirm until tomorrow. — — — — — Edit: It's the site near Lowe's. They kept the Sprint antenna but it's not connected.
  12. Paynefanbro
    T-Mobile Fiber expansion. They're charging $55 for 500Mbps. 1Gbps is available but no price listed. This appears to be a native buildout to individual homes as opposed to what they're doing in NYC which is reselling another company's pre-built fiber. That makes 3 cities where this is available now: NYC Pueblo, Colorado Northglenn, Colorado
  13. Paynefanbro
    Bloosurf is petitioning to deny T-Mobile's request for an STA specifically in their service area. https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp;ATTACHMENTS=Ghl9knTSFp8J4nVm1P9qL4541XR1gy58whH7Yyz0MwGs037gQrNV!-2042069078!-79842837?applType=search&fileKey=1297203795&attachmentKey=21718533&attachmentInd=applAttach Short read but pretty much they're saying that T-Mobile's operations in the BRS/EBS band has been interfering with Bloosurf's LTE-based WISP network and that this has caused them harm (lose customers, etc.) They claim that allowing T-Mobile access to all of the spectrum they bought in or near Bloosurf's service area would cause even more interference. To be fair they aren't wrong. They mention that in 2021 the FCC investigated and determined that T-Mobile was operating outside of its licensed spectrum band there. However, I get the sense that Bloosurf is just trying to stop a competitor from operating in their service area. Typically carriers work this kind of stuff out among each other. Here in NYC, 3/4ths of Brooklyn has 140MHz of n41 deployed and the southern 1/4th of it has 80MHz deployed thanks to an incumbent that leases the spectrum from the archdiocese. In spite of that there are no complaints of interference from NextWave in such a dense environment. Seems to me like Bloosurf just doesn't want to coordinate with T-Mobile and would rather complain to delay the deployment of spectrum for as long as possible. EDIT: It's not just their service area, it's a larger area surrounding their service area as well. Something's fishy about this request.
  14. Paynefanbro
    Really cool blog post from OpenSignal giving a broad overview over the mobile network experience in NYC. https://www.opensignal.com/2023/03/30/localized-analysis-reveals-huge-network-experience-gaps-between-mobile-users-in-the-us
  15. Paynefanbro
    Sprint eNB 5777 -> T-Mobile eNB 219211 Located at 40.598077070553046, -74.06554695233527 I actually passed by this site last summer when I was searching for Staten Island keep sites and at the time it wasn't broadcasting the keep PLMN. Sprint eNB 74209 -> T-Mobile eNB 219521 Located at 40.763144172633055, -73.97134451879535 This Sprint conversion replaces a decommisioned Band 66-only site across the street (eNB 42185). Sprint eNB 196271 that's on the keep site map as converted but not live is live now. It's T-Mobile eNB 331073. — — — — — Also the Sprint conversion on the billboard next to the BQE in Red Hook is a gigabit site.
  16. Paynefanbro
    Yup 80MHz C-band + 40MHz DoD for a total of 120MHz. They should be pretty well setup post-clearance. — — — — — Famous Verizon site on Atlantic referenced in this reddit post got moved to the top of the building next door. — — — — — Also looks like I mapped a T-Mobile oDAS node eNB 347812 in Brooklyn Heights. Streetview shows it as one of the CC nodes with no antenna on top as of May 2022 but this specific eNB was first mapped this month. I didn't notice that I mapped it until I got home but the range on it is significantly greater than the normal "antenna-less" nodes T-Mobile deploys. I'm wondering if it got upgraded to the new 5G oDAS design but I won't be able to check it out until next weekend.
  17. Paynefanbro
    By my count we're at 597 Dish permits in NYC. Not sure how many sites though as some permits are for site modifications like adding a sector, etc. I've been impressed so far with Dish's progress on their buildout here. Seems like they have a good understanding of the type of density needed to provide adequate service in this city. If Washington Heights and Inwood are anything to go by then they'll likely have macro density matching or exceeding Sprint's pre-merger macro network which is pretty cool.
  18. Paynefanbro
    Permits submitted for conversion of: Sprint eNB 5888 located at: 40.62612420782191, -73.93492681183974 Sprint eNB 74215 located at: 40.76799258032864, -73.96145498789635 Sprint eNB 6705 (This is already on the keep site map) — — — — — Completed conversions: Sprint eNB 74159 ->T-Mobile eNB 315013 Located at 40.77920256366785, -73.98366535050262 Sprint eNB eNB ID 899078/899079 -> T-Mobile eNB 219280 Located at 40.83020468769792, -73.94832166648911 — — — — — Sprint eNB 253884 located right next to the Manhattan Bridge doesn't seem to be broadcasting the keep PLMN anymore.
  19. Paynefanbro
    One more! Sprint eNB 81393 is now T-Mobile eNB 307641 Location: 40.73821436023412, -73.99052297757794
  20. Paynefanbro
    Hoboken is littered with small cells on all 3 carriers. AT&T's small cells look similar to what they deploy on utility poles in NYC but performance can be hit or miss. They all have great range, covering up to similar to what I see in Brooklyn but speeds vary widely. On some, I'll get 110Mbps and on others I'll only get 20Mbps. Verizon's has blanketed much of Hoboken in small cells as well. Almost every small cell has a combo of mmWave, CBRS, and Band 2/66. Here's what they look like. Like AT&T they have decent range and thanks to how small, dense, and lax w/ regard to small cell regulation Hoboken is, you're never too far from another mmWave node. I was peaking at around 1.4Gbps just driving around the city. T-Mobile has deployed these Ericsson Band 2/46/66 strand-mount small cells and they're all insanely fast. It's my understanding that newer T-Mobile nodes in NYC are using the same antennas but have them in an RF transparent enclosure due to city regulations. That way they don't have to install an antenna on top of the pole, though they do sacrifice coverage a bit when doing so. Speeds are great on them though, easily over 500Mbps and in some areas so densely deployed that you just hop from small cell to small cell without ever touching a macro. Recently Extenet has also been deploying some new cantenna-styled small cells for T-Mobile in Hoboken. They have really great range like a mini-macro but I didn't get to test performance at all and I'm not certain if they also have LAA. — — — — — Here's a pic of a T-Mobile strand mount I connected to along w/ speeds.
  21. Paynefanbro
    T‑Mobile to Acquire and Turbocharge Mint Mobile and Ultra Mobile, Brands Will Continue Delivering Value on the Un‑carrier’s 5G Network
  22. Paynefanbro
    That's not to say it's bad all of the time. Their performance just lags T-Mobile and Verizon. Both of these tests were done outdoors on different sites in Crown Heights. The first was done while standing right in front of the site and the other was done outdoors about a quarter mile from the site w/o line of sight. AT&T will probably improve a ton on the speed side once they get more DoD spectrum deployed and they have access to the full 80MHz of C-band here. Their loaded pings could use some work though. — — — — — Sites broadcasting keep PLMN: Sprint eNB 79875 located at 40.826362068044936, -73.92218591640425 Sprint eNB 6801 located at 40.8328577437497, -73.9282779016007
  23. Paynefanbro
    New keep sites: Sprint eNB 5782 -> T-Mobile eNB 344159 Located at 40.631128643985576, -74.01866899548162 Sprint eNB 6650/74793 -> T-Mobile eNB 894781 Located at 40.82232944902255, -73.8167720163949 Sites on the keep site map that are now live: Sprint eNB 9294 -> T-Mobile eNB 874561 Sprint eNB 9987/9988 -> T-Mobile eNB 331079 — — — — — Drove around Staten Island trying to confirm some sites for AT&T specifically but also got to test out that new Tello SIM. No more drops to 2G or switching over to VZW which is great. I've spotted a lot of DoD antennas in Staten Island but I couldn't connect to it on any of them. Also spotted a Link5G that's actually a location where there aren't any macros nearby. (spot the signature AT&T slight uptilt for maximum range) Also figured I'd share this speed test that I did while out there. Great speeds for 40+40 n41.
  24. Paynefanbro
    Switched to the promotional $25 "Unlimited" Boost Mobile plan so that I can test AT&T's performance more frequently. I also switched to a $5 Tello plan to map T-Mobile's network because my inactive T-Mobile SIM has been kind of finicky. It was a business SIM so it had access to Verizon's network via roaming and I found that it would frequently push me over to VZW and get stuck on their network in areas with weaker signal, the same areas where my iPhone would show 1-2 bars. I also realized that recently the T-Mobile SIM would get stuck on 2G and not move me over to LTE until I restarted the device. Super annoying. — — — — — As much as I love AT&T's excessive use of small cells citywide, I've also noticed that it's no substitute for macro density (at least on the midband 5G side of things). Take a look at these speed tests in Downton Brooklyn, taken on Bridge St btwn Fulton and Willoughby. This isn't really a fair comparison considering there is a T-Mobile site pointing straight down the street but it's more to illustrate the point about AT&T. Three things about AT&T here: No C-band. No amount of toggling airplane mode could connect me to C-band. This is in spite of the two nearest macros having C-band antennas installed. My phone connected to the macro for n5 but connected to a small cell (eNB 117207-49) for the the LTE side of things with a -70dBm signal, so pretty strong on the LTE side. AT&T's ping is great so I'm assuming capacity isn't an issue thanks to all of those small cells but they still struggle on the throughput side in comparison to VZW and TMUS who both have greater macro density.
  25. Paynefanbro
    My phone occasionally does the same but it still get's mapped as AT&T on Cellmapper so I never thought much of it.
×
×
  • Create New...