T-Mobile Launches Mid-Band Standalone 5G "Nationwide"

mwdewey

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2021
Messages
492
T-Mobile announced yesterday that they will launch standalone 5G nationwide starting today. The definition of nationwide is always subject to wildly varying interpretation of course.

T-Mobile claims their 5G Ultra Capacity (5GUC) network currently covers 250 million people and will cover 260 million by year end. Personally, I question this number based on study of T-Mobile's coverage maps. Due to their 20-mile site placement norm, there are a huge number of cities and towns across the country where the site that supposedly serves a community is located far enough away from the town that a mid-band signal cannot reach the community, or it might only cover one side of town, half, or quarter. And yet, T-Mobile is probably considering the total number of residents in that community as being covered.

I can use my own community as a classic example of this. The T-Mobile site that serves this town is located 6 miles away. That is far enough that the new mid-band UC 5G that it puts out does not reach this town at all. Low-band 5G just barely reaches the town for that matter. And yet, I will bet anything that T-Mobile considers the population of this community as covered with the new standalone 5GUC. Of course, adding a site IN the community on one of the two existing towers in town would take care of the problem, but they have shown no interest in doing that, just like they are doing in some much bigger cities in the area and across the country. T-Mobile's biggest problem is site placement and getting sites built IN the cities they supposedly serve. There are thousands of towers all across the country that contain AT&T and Verizon sites but T-Mobile is not to be found.
 
Does all of T Mobile's 5G capable phones support SA or is it just select 5G phone models that can do SA?
 
The way they calculate if a person is covered is if a there is coverage in the census tract where they were enumerated.
 
The way they calculate if a person is covered is if a there is coverage in the census tract where they were enumerated.

Interesting, I did not know that.

You can look up census tracts here:
https://www2.census.gov/data/api-do...IGERweb/How to Find Geo Info from Address.pdf

Maps here:
https://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US40153953100-census-tract-9531-woodward-ok/

In the link example map, is there any wonder why T-Mobile isn't interested in spending a lot of money to cover it with
a population of 2,052 in 545.9 square miles - 3.8 people per square mile? Ponder the economics of that.
 
I have a slightly different interest. I am waiting for their T-Mobile 5G Home Internet to arrive at my exact location. I saw one place that thinks it is in my town but checking eligibility results in not here and on waiting list. May try their lite service but there are drawbacks to that. Not picky but fed up with very slow DSL from AT&T.
 
I have a slightly different interest. I am waiting for their T-Mobile 5G Home Internet to arrive at my exact location. I saw one place that thinks it is in my town but checking eligibility results in not here and on waiting list. May try their lite service but there are drawbacks to that. Not picky but fed up with very slow DSL from AT&T.

How is your T-Mobile signal and speed where you are? TMHI is great if you can get good speed. I bet you are very ready to kick DSL (and AT&T) to the curb.

A recent report from T-Mo said that they evaluate eligibility for TMHI down to the areas serviced by each sector of cells.

Some people have reported success in getting TMHI when online says no by going to a store. A non-corporate store may be more willing to look the other way about what the qualifier says.

Others have ordered the service at some arbitrary address that qualifies and having the billing and shipping address as your real address.

They are capable of geolocating where the device is used, but have not enforced that so far.

None of this does any good if your T-Mo signal and speed is poor. It would just be an exercise in frustration.
 
I'm just curious as to when they're going to enable SA on the 5G Home units, as SA71 and SA41 CA'd together should be a better/more consistent experience for the end user.. especially in areas that n41 has 160+MHz deployed.
 
With the move to 5G SA on its Ultra Capacity network, T-Mobile is opening up new possibilities for 5G carrier aggregation (NR CA) – which means combining different layers of 5G spectrum together for greater speed and capacity. This year the Un-carrier will begin combining three channels of Ultra Capacity 5G, which in tests produced peak speeds topping 3 Gbps (mind-blowingly fast). Customers with the Samsung Galaxy S22 will be the first to leverage this new capability in the coming weeks, and it will expand to additional devices in the near future.

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/t-mobile-lights-up-standalone-ultra-capacity-5g-nationwide


Here's the info on the 3 Gbps test in June:

Simply stated, 5G Carrier Aggregation (NR CA) allows T-Mobile to combine multiple 5G channels (or carriers) to deliver greater speed and performance. In this test, the Un-carrier merged three 5G channels – two channels of 2.5 GHz Ultra Capacity 5G and one channel of 1900 MHz spectrum – creating an effective 210 MHz 5G channel. That’s all mid-band spectrum, by the way. And over 3 Gbps of speed!

NR CA is live in parts of T-Mobile’s network today, combining two 2.5 GHz 5G channels for greater speeds, performance and capacity. Customers with the Samsung Galaxy S22 will be among the first to experience a third 1900 MHz 5G channel later this year.

TMO_CarrierAggregationGIF.gif

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/netwo...standalone-5g-carrier-aggregation-achievement
 
In the link example map, is there any wonder why T-Mobile isn't interested in spending a lot of money to cover it with a population of 2,052 in 545.9 square miles - 3.8 people per square mile? Ponder the economics of that.
They pick a point for every census tract (e.g. centroid) and if that point has service, everyone in the tract is counted as having service. The reason is that data for recent censuses is only released to the tract level. No finer granulation is available outside the Census Bureau.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, I did not know that.

You can look up census tracts here:
https://www2.census.gov/data/api-do...IGERweb/How to Find Geo Info from Address.pdf

Maps here:
https://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US40153953100-census-tract-9531-woodward-ok/

In the link example map, is there any wonder why T-Mobile isn't interested in spending a lot of money to cover it with
a population of 2,052 in 545.9 square miles - 3.8 people per square mile? Ponder the economics of that.

I hate to break it to you, but T-Mobile has already made the investment to service that Census Tract in Oklahoma you reference, so T-Mobile must have felt the economics justified the investment

Screenshot 2022-11-16 at 4.07.34 AM.jpg


The Oklahoma Census Tract you reference may not have a lot of people living in it but it contains thousands of oil and gas wells and processing facilities to handle the production from those wells so the products can be transported via truck or pipeline across the country for use by those who do live in more populated areas. Those wells and facilities are visited, tended, and operated by hundreds of workers every day, so is it your position that T-Mobile, or any carrier for that matter, should not make any attempt to service that market?

The sheer number of oil/gas service vehicles I see running around every day with WeBoost antennas on them in these sorts of areas would seem to indicate that those people do feel they have a need for cellular service as they go about their daily work routines. And it would seem to indicate that the service of whichever carrier that worker uses is not perfect and has gaps in places they need to go to do their work.

It's not just population numbers that cellphone companies use to make a determination as to whether they serve an area or not. No one lives in the National Parks, and yet the carriers provide service to them as much as possible because people pass through and visit them and want service while they are there. The same goes for people who work in remote areas all across the US.
 
I'm just curious as to when they're going to enable SA on the 5G Home units, as SA71 and SA41 CA'd together should be a better/more consistent experience for the end user.. especially in areas that n41 has 160+MHz deployed.

It would be ironic if T-Mobile just converted 'some' of B2 / B66 into SA and claimed midband n2/n66. It would save them a lot of rural n41 deployment initially.
 
How is your T-Mobile signal and speed where you are? TMHI is great if you can get good speed. I bet you are very ready to kick DSL (and AT&T) to the curb.

A recent report from T-Mo said that they evaluate eligibility for TMHI down to the areas serviced by each sector of cells.

Some people have reported success in getting TMHI when online says no by going to a store. A non-corporate store may be more willing to look the other way about what the qualifier says.

Others have ordered the service at some arbitrary address that qualifies and having the billing and shipping address as your real address.

They are capable of geolocating where the device is used, but have not enforced that so far.

None of this does any good if your T-Mo signal and speed is poor. It would just be an exercise in frustration.

I do not have T-Mobile although I did years ago. Then AT&T started offering what I needed for an app that helps with using a cell phone in-spite of being almost deaf. I switched to them and have stayed via an MVNO that is giving me five bars of their version of 5G.

I did just do more searching about T-Mobile's strength here using https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/coverage-map?icid=MGPO_TMO_U_5GNETWORK_5Z1THLE5A7C62VS9P30215. It looks like I am in the midst of a area of 5G Ultra Capacity and what little in town in not shown as that is shown as 5G Extended Range. I have not been across town to the one T-Mobile store we have to see what help they might be.
 
It would be ironic if T-Mobile just converted 'some' of B2 / B66 into SA and claimed midband n2/n66. It would save them a lot of rural n41 deployment initially.

I don't think phones have n2 yet. (either SA or NSA). They do have N66.
 
It would be ironic if T-Mobile just converted 'some' of B2 / B66 into SA and claimed midband n2/n66. It would save them a lot of rural n41 deployment initially.

Oh i'm more than willing to bet it happens, but on the other hand 20MHz of n25 is going to be faster/more efficent than 20MHz of LTE - so while it will not be breakneck speeds, it'll still be a welcome "upgrade"

Although, i'm more willing to bet they do still install n41 on those sites, and continue with the "layercake" approach - as let's be honest if people can keep a steady 50+Mbps on their phone/home 5G (especially rurally), it'll still be a welcome upgrade until they can get n41 more uniform.
 
Personally, I suspect that this would be done for a couple of reasons... at least in CA, where they have obligations. Deploying n25 or n66 will be quick. it will meet the 50Mbps to 99% of CA / 94% of rural 'quicker '. especially if it has to be 5g. n71 can do it for rural, but has less capacity vs 4x4 mimo on midband. eg. 15x15 B2 LTE = 150Mbps. 15x15 n71 SA = 150Mbps.
5x5 B25 LTE 4x4 Mimo = +50Mbps,
5x5 B12 LTE = 30Mbps.

dual carrier 5g (n71+n25) would do well, just as n71 + lte does in rural areas.
in my urban area, I've hit well over 400Mbps with n71 nsa + lte. This will increase capacity, and oy move off of 4g lte

Sent from my SM-G991U using HoFo mobile app
 
It would be ironic if T-Mobile just converted 'some' of B2 / B66 into SA and claimed midband n2/n66. It would save them a lot of rural n41 deployment initially.

Of course T-Mobile will (and already has) moved mid-band LTE spectrum to NR. Just in the last week I have used n25 in SLC, Chicago, and Florida. BUT , T-Mobile doesn't claim n25 as "Ultra Capacity". I have yet to see n25 on sites that do not have n41 as well. Not saying it won't happen in extremely rural areas with topographical challenges and little capacity needs, but I haven't seen it yet. I saw a new site build last week in a town with 1,600 people where T-Mobile is deploying n41...nobody else even has a site at all in this town.
 
T-Mobile hasn't added n25 to their website yet as one of their 5G frequencies:


T-Mobile network frequencies & technology

Frequencies that can provide XR 5G:
Band n71 (600 MHz)

Ultra Capacity (UC) 5G

Frequencies that can provide UC 5G:
Band n41 (2.5 GHz)
Band n258 (24 GHz)
Band n260 (39 GHz)
Band n261 (28 GHz)

https://www.t-mobile.com/support/coverage/t-mobile-network
While this is true, the statements above claim 'TMobile deploys midband standalone 5g nationwide'.... Not 'TMobile deploys midband 5g UC nationwide '. This is more of a statement on what is stated above. Devil is in the details


Sent from my SM-G991U using HoFo mobile app
 
Back
Top