wispiANt

• Still seeing strong T-Mobile HSPA+ and some weak Sprint B26 (311-490) in the north Bedstuy area
• Sprint eNB 6705 (40.70091884265787,-73.94344902067445) is broadcasting the keep PLMN
• Sprint eNB 899078/899079 (40.83022854043739,-73.94830306659236) has been converted, though the site has not yet been lit up. The density up there is pretty insane - 400ft from the site just North, 600ft from the site just South.

• Spotted another Dish site near City College (1606 Amsterdam Ave). This is not a former Sprint site, and the neighboring Sprint site (across the street) has not been decommissioned. Still not seeing the Dish PLMN in this area.

On 6/6/2022 at 2:40 PM, thisischuck01 said:

I've found it actually isn't too difficult to identify the LTE-only oDAS node solely on antenna type (sorry if this is known information):

Verizon: Longer antenna, "cap" on top of the antenna

AT&T: Longer antenna, no "cap" on top of the antenna but knobbed about 1/4 the way down

Sprint: Short antenna

T-Mobile: No antenna on the newer nodes, longer antenna that is completely smooth on the older nodes

It seems the range of the newer LTE-only T-Mobile oDAS nodes tends to be a bit more limited than the other carriers, likely due to not using an external antenna. I'm assuming that's purposeful?

To expand on this:

Verizon: Longer antenna, sometimes a "cap" on top of the antenna. Typically uses Extenet or CC NG for deployment

AT&T: Longer antenna, no "cap" on top of the antenna but knobbed about 1/4 the way down. Typically uses Extenet or CC Solutions for deployment

Sprint: Short antenna. Only uses Extenet or Mobilitie for deployment

T-Mobile: 

• Old Nodes: Longer antenna hard to distinguish from Verizon
• Newer Nodes: Short antenna, similar to the antenna Sprint uses. Only uses CC (and variants) for deployment
• Newer(ish?) Nodes: No antenna.

I guess we've all been in the same neighborhood recently. 

On 2/9/2022 at 9:00 AM, T-MoblieUser207 said:

Verizon eNB 81005 has a small little panel next to its C-band panel, anyone have an idea what it is for?

Was passing by this site and noticed that it was upgraded once again, this time with an unshrouded Samsung RT4401-48A (CBRS).

A couple more confirmed conversions:

New:

• Sprint eNB ?? (40.82117576965106,-73.88502875270659) --> T-Mobile eNB 895048
• Sprint eNB ?? (40.82265456353997,-73.87386511909503) --> T-Mobile eNB 219602

Existing (confirmed completed via DOB permit):

• Sprint eNB 9670/9671/9672 (40.72188895342967,-74.00495330604895) --> T-Mobile eNB 880578

10 minutes ago, T-MoblieUser207 said:

Sprint towers
I was expecting Dish to take over Sprint eNB 6798, but as of today all traces of it being a cell site are gone. T-Mo also removed the leftover Sprint equipment on eNB 15893 after shifting one of their sectors into the location of Sprint panel area, so it looks like Dish doesn't want it either.

I've noticed that T-Mobile will typically file a permit for removal and then Dish will file an entirely separate permit for install (with no mention of the Sprint equipment T-Mobile removed). The Dish site I found in Harlem (1700 Amsterdam) had the Sprint equipment removed months prior to the deployment of the new Dish equipment. 🤷

23 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

Turns out you don't need the little antenna on the top lol. This site hasn't had one since it was built out last summer. I was seeing 5CA for a total of 100MHz of spectrum from this small cell. Band 2 + Band 66 + 3 x Band 46. Speeds weren't that impressive but it does fill in a coverage hole so it's likely acting as a mini-macro for that block.

Yep! The "box" on the side of the pole is RF transparent - many times, Sprint had wireless backhaul equipment in there that would necessitate it.

I've found it actually isn't too difficult to identify the LTE-only oDAS node solely on antenna type (sorry if this is known information):

Verizon: Longer antenna, "cap" on top of the antenna

AT&T: Longer antenna, no "cap" on top of the antenna but knobbed about 1/4 the way down

Sprint: Short antenna

T-Mobile: No antenna on the newer nodes, longer antenna that is completely smooth on the older nodes

It seems the range of the newer LTE-only T-Mobile oDAS nodes tends to be a bit more limited than the other carriers, likely due to not using an external antenna. I'm assuming that's purposeful?

I feel like something is missing...

Spotted two more oDAS nodes in Williamsburg.

1. (Pictured) Corner of Graham and Boerum (40.7062348, -73.9431029). Extenet II.
2. (Not Pictured) Havemeyer St, between S 3rd and S 2nd (40.7111516, -73.9578876). Extenet II.

AT&T has an LTE-only node a half block away from the first sighting and an application in for a new node about a block away from the second node (under New Cingular). So guessing both of these are, once again, Verizon mmWave.

On 5/24/2022 at 2:00 PM, dkyeager said:

Thanks. Yes the engineering screen shows n41.

The S21 ultra works fine. Removed typo "not".

I'm getting n38 and occasionally n7 with my S21U (on the May 2022 security patch and latest SCP). Sent at least one diagnostic log your way, @mikejeep. @RAvirani, would you like me to send you a list of gNBs to fix? It looks like I mapped 15-20 between NYC and Rochester.

Also, I'm still seeing SCP map T-Mobile's SA NR (primary SIM) to AT&T (secondary SIM) on my S21. In-app, SCP seems to recognize the two networks as being separate. So I'm not really sure how I can replicate this to send a diagnostic log.

Not sure if there is a easy way for you to mass-delete all these on the map, @RAvirani.

Spotted a handful of new oDAS nodes in Bushwick yesterday.

In order of appearance:

1. Madison St between Broadway and Bushwick Ave (40.6885471, -73.9193988). Mobilitie II.
2. Corner of Evergreen Ave and Putnam Ave (40.6907846, -73.9162553). ExteNet I.
3. Corner of Myrtle Ave and Stockholm St (40.6981186, 73.9240539). ExteNet I.

Didn't stop to double-check who they might be, but I was mapping AT&T LTE and T-Mobile LTE at the time so if they're live and either of those carriers they should show up on CellMapper. Though my assumption is that they're both VZW mmWave.

Another converted keep site:

Sprint eNB 9436 -> T-Mobile eNB 895067 (40.60777246698788,-74.16199692361377)

Looks like they're using the FFVV-65A-R2-V1 here, as well!

Edit:

Also, I know this technically isn't NYC, but here's a Jersey City conversion. Not 100% sure on either eNB.

Sprint eNB 105863 -> T-Mobile eNB 876452 (40.72265196811989,-74.08804945021805)

1 hour ago, RAvirani said:

Weight limitation is a super common reason for using smaller antennas, however it doesn’t look like there is a weight limitation on this setup since it is on a rooftop. Weight limitations are much more common on utility poles, tall pipe mounts, etc.

Ah, gotcha. I suppose I was under the impression that dead/transient roof load, even on commercial buildings, was more of a concern. At first look, the other site this antenna is deployed does look to be a situation where weight might be an issue - the RRUs weren't even roof-mounted until 2019. But the DOB does not make structural analysis public (at least through their permit portal), so that is nothing more than conjecture and armchair engineering.

1 hour ago, RAvirani said:

Another possible reason for the shorter antenna is site density. Using a higher-gain antenna can cause sector overlap (i.e. degradation of SNR and increased noise floor) if neighboring sites are close by. You can usually use a combo of mech/etilt to control the range of these higher-gain antennas, but that sometimes causes problems with vertical coverage. These problems are especially bad on sites with higher RAD centers as you’re effectively pointing the already-narrow beam into the ground. We run into these issues a lot in urban RF planning…

Definitely. That said, at least in NYC, T-Mobile has been pretty adamant about deploying their typical config - no matter how ridiculous site density may be (sites 250ft apart, for example). So when they do take a different approach, my first thought is "there had to be a reason why they were unable to opt for their typical config". Not "T-Mobile is finally taking notice of their SNR", ha

11 hours ago, RAvirani said:

Lower gain figures in exchange for increased vertical beamwidth. 

I believe there was some conjecture regarding this antenna (FFVV-65A-R2-V1) being used on sites with a height and/or weight limitation. 

T-Mobile's preferred NYC config:

• Dual APXVAR18_43-C-NA20 (94.8lbs total, 68 inches tall)
• APX16 (40.7lbs, 55.9 inches tall)
• AIR 6449 (103.6lbs, 33 inches tall)
• Total: 239.1lbs, 68 inches max height

This config:

• FFVV-65A-R2-V1 (72.752lbs, 48.189 inches tall)
• AIR 6449 (103.6lbs, 33 inches tall)
• Total: 176lbs, 48 inches max height

VBW between the APX16 and FFVV-65A-R2-V1 seems near identical in the AWS/PCS range. Granted, T-Mobile typically drops the APX16 for a "lightweight" config, in which case the APXVAR18_43-C-NA20 does perform more poorly in terms of VBW. That said, the environment (eNB 876480) doesn't seem to necessite a significantly higher VBW (two story building serving two cemeteries and multiple one/two story buildings - the tallest structure in the area is the elevated train line).

I might be totally missing something, however.

Another confirmed keep site:

Sprint eNB ? -> T-Mobile eNB 895067 (40.73485489368193,-74.0089370311213)

4 hours ago, T-MoblieUser207 said:

2 New estimated keep sites added.

1. Sprint eNB 253741 -> T-Mobile eNB 875537/875538
(40.702222459831056, -73.83051329597173)

2. Sprint eNBs 843179/80/81 -> T-Mobile eNB 880563
(40.705603020960396, -73.79917111257114)
This one has a work permit filed under Job#  Q00514589, so I would assume its a confirmed keep.

1. I think this site is actually at (40.70170960850086,-73.83302208208359). Whatever is at (40.702222459831056, -73.83051329597173) hasn't been touched since first install (late 2009).
2. Yeah, I think you can mark this as confirmed. Looks like it needed landmark approval, which is why it took so long. Lots of cool info in that document:

T-Mobile's n41 performed admirably this morning, despite the crowds at Cadman Plaza.

On 5/12/2022 at 12:46 PM, Paynefanbro said:

Just ran some speed tests and they're all between 0-1% on my iPhone. Highest I've gotten is 0.88%. Is this happening across multiple sites or just one?

5 hours ago, T-MoblieUser207 said:

Since losing the n41 SA option I haven't had any SA band active, but I'll enable n71 SA and see what happens. Like Paynefanbro said, it remains low/non-existent for me as well, but I have been on NSA only for months now.

Seems to be happening on multiple sites. It doesn't happen every time, though - sometimes I'll have no issues and other times this will happen (taken while waiting for the train at the Marcy Ave JMZ stop):

7 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

T-Mobile recently requested a permit to remove the Sprint antennas from eNB 5863.

T-Mobile has really been going hard with the permits/decomms! I noticed that eNB 837896/7/8 near me was decommed earlier this week, and I've been seeing tons of permits for decomm on other redundant sites. I'll be interested to see how much of a physical network Sprint will have left by the time of the LTE shutdown.

That said, I'm still kinda unsure of what T-Mobile's plan is for parts of Harlem (Hamilton Heights, for example). For example, T-Mobile opted to let Dish takeover the site at 1700 Amsterdam - even though the site they have across the street (eNB 43916) is an old B2/B66/B12 setup with no active upgrade permits? There's a ton of similar sites - eNB 55893 (B2/B66), eNB 43174 (B2/B66), eNB 55944 (B2/B66), eNB 55554 (B2/B66) - none of these have active upgrade permits and none of the nearby Sprint sites are broadcasting the keep PLMN.

Another thing I've stumbled upon while searching for permits is old NYCWiN decomms. Interestingly enough, it seems as though it was far from uncommon for NYCWiN and Sprint to collocate. Here's an example in Williamsburg (antenna on the far right is NYCWiN gear).

6 hours ago, T-MoblieUser207 said:

T-Mobile eNB 875531 has been switched from estimated to confirmed, I passed by the site yesterday. I missed my opportunity to check T-Mobile eNB 880561, but I did add B12 for it, but not B41, so im leaving it alone for now.

Here's another conversion:

Sprint eNB 75733/4/5 (40.73427357479022,-73.99206117098873) --> T-Mobile eNB 216068/507263/216069

I'm wondering if the 216xxx numbering scheme is the new go-to. I've also spotted them using it for Sprint conversions upstate.

12 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

Looks like this site's location was already confirmed by @thisischuck01 on Cellmapper.

Location: 40.68386106415719, -73.87804143759858

Beat me to the punch! But yes, there's an open DOB conversion permit for this site.

31 minutes ago, Paynefanbro said:

Can confirm Crown Heights is officially at 100MHz n41. Just like last time we got a bump in carrier size, the most noticeable impact is higher upload speeds. I just got 129Mbps inside my house but download speeds are still capping out around 650Mbps. The most noticeable change on the download side is that I'm getting those 600Mbps+ speeds even further from my home site.

Once again, the only thing holding T-Mobile back is backhaul.

100MHz live in Bedstuy/Bushwick, as well.

Has anyone else been seeing a lot of packet loss during speedtests (5-30%)? Was finally able to troubleshoot this - when my device is locked to NR-SA, NR-NSA, or LTE-only I don't see any issues. But when I let the device/network chose, it'll vacillate between NR-SA and NR-NSA mid-test (causing packet loss). Not sure if that's a device issues (S21U), network issue, or site config issue. From some preliminary testing, locking my phone to NSA also seems to fix the issues I've seen with speedtests peaking at 500+Mb/s but then finishing at 250Mb/s.

Just now, clbowens said:

What are we looking at here?

Sprint -> Dish conversion. And I believe the first Dish deployment anyone has spotted in the city?

1700 Amsterdam.

And one more:

Sprint eNB 9015 (40.611676310378726,-73.95661853395423) --> T-Mobile eNB 895054

A couple more confirmed conversions:

New:

• Sprint eNB ?? (40.84778722663444,-73.90112347661943) --> T-Mobile eNB 879602

Existing (confirmed via DOB permit):

• Sprint eNB ?? (40.771670921303496,-73.90858392917544) --> T-Mobile eNB 880569

10 hours ago, T-MoblieUser207 said:

There is another Sprint site in Bed-Stuy that is a keep site, Sprint eNB 6708. However, neither the 310-120 or 312-250 maps are helpful for finding it, so I haven't placed it on the map.

Looks to be a part of the 7133/7134/7135 cluster, which I've located (40.70141059365565,-73.95256124180243)!

On 4/17/2022 at 1:36 PM, thisischuck01 said:

I can never remember the model, but this is OLD Nokia mmWave gear. Both AT&T and T-Mobile have deployed this model, AT&T in NYC and T-Mobile in Miami.

Finally remembered the model designation, this is a Nokia AEUA. 

A few more confirmed converted sites:

• Sprint eNB 75164 (40.830909700713164,-73.91274396177037) --> T-Mobile eNB 894632
• Sprint eNB 6546 (40.82873871854494,-73.90084489740744) --> T-Mobile eNB 895003/895005/895006 (this is already on the map)
• Sprint eNB ?? (40.82579879329904,-73.87880804296192) --> T-Mobile eNB 894999
• Sprint eNB 899824 (40.82776698245422,-73.84969023526706) --> T-Mobile eNB 894906

And some guesses:

• Sprint eNB 843127 (40.8150492953508,-73.93011322948612) --> T-Mobile eNB 880536
• Sprint eNB 79912 (40.86354284127182,-73.92347240008023) --> T-Mobile eNB 875989
• Sprint eNB 6191 (40.71334211473999,-73.85695992811125) --> T-Mobile eNB 880065
• Sprint eNB 6189 (40.711822483661706,-73.83526556454387) --> T-Mobile eNB 877995

19 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

Saw an interesting Verizon C-band site in the Financial District. Any idea what that little antenna on the far right is? CBRS maybe?

I can never remember the model, but this is OLD Nokia mmWave gear. Both AT&T and T-Mobile have deployed this model, AT&T in NYC and T-Mobile in Miami.

19 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

iPhone Field Test reported that I was connected to eNB 127915 during this test but I'm not sure where it's located exactly.

That eNB looks to be an oDAS node.