T-Mobile rolls out low-band LTE upgrades to additional cell sites

tmobiletowermagenta

Days after rolling out mid-band LTE capacity upgrades, T-Mobile has deployed some low-band upgrades, too.

T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray recently confirmed that T-Mo has rolled out low-band LTE to more cell sites to improve coverage. These upgrades low-band LTE upgrades typically include both 600MHz and 700MHz spectrum.

Some of the cities included in this latest round of low-band LTE upgrades include Long Beach, CA; Atlanta, GA; Las Vegas, NV; and Norfolk, VA. As usual, I’ve got the full list of cities at the bottom of this post.

Has your city been included in this latest batch of low-band LTE upgrades?

  • Opelika, AL
  • Salem, AL
  • Phoenix, AZ
  • Rogers, AR
  • Long Beach, CA
  • Newbury Park, CA
  • La Mesa, CA
  • Cardiff By the Sea, CA
  • El Cajon, CA
  • Encinitas, CA
  • Vista, CA
  • San Diego, CA
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • San Francisco, CA
  • Palo Alto, CA
  • San Mateo, CA
  • Concord, CA
  • Lafayette, CA
  • Oakland, CA
  • Berkeley, CA
  • Milpitas, CA
  • Scotts Valley, CA
  • San Jose, CA
  • Ceres, CA
  • Livingston, CA
  • Modesto, CA
  • Sacramento, CA
  • Yuba City, CA
  • Alturas, CA
  • Truckee, CA
  • Denver, CO
  • Central City, CO
  • Stratford, CT
  • Port Orange, FL
  • Tampa, FL
  • Lehigh Acres, FL
  • Punta Gorda, FL
  • Bonita Springs, FL
  • Sarasota, FL
  • Decatur, GA
  • Lilburn, GA
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Forsyth, GA
  • Norman Park, GA
  • West Point, GA
  • Columbus, GA
  • Ewa Beach, HI
  • Nampa, ID
  • Rolling Meadows, IL
  • Bolingbrook, IL
  • Naperville, IL
  • Chicago, IL
  • Indianapolis, IN
  • Fair Oaks, IN
  • Olathe, KS
  • Louisville, KY
  • New Orleans, LA
  • Bowie, MD
  • Kingston, MA
  • Riverview, MI
  • Detroit, MI
  • Portage, MI
  • Grand Portage, MN
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Las Vegas, NV
  • Reno, NV
  • Freehold, NJ
  • Lakewood, NJ
  • Santa Fe, NM
  • Espanola, NM
  • New York, NY
  • Mount Vernon, NY
  • New Rochelle, NY
  • Clifton Park, NY
  • Sharon Springs, NY
  • Corning, NY
  • Columbus, OH
  • Chagrin Falls, OH
  • Mentor, OH
  • Cleveland, OH
  • Akron, OH
  • Oklahoma City, OK
  • Stigler, OK
  • North Augusta, SC
  • Mount Juliet, TN
  • Woodbury, TN
  • Nashville, TN
  • Chattanooga, TN
  • Holladay, TN
  • Irving, TX
  • Mesquite, TX
  • Dallas, TX
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Wichita Falls, TX
  • Abbott, TX
  • Brownsville, TX
  • Austin, TX
  • El Paso, TX
  • Salt Lake City, UT
  • Caret, VA
  • Norfolk, VA
  • Fort Lee, VA
  • Freeland, WA
  • Spokane, WA
  • Upper Tract, WV

Source: Neville Ray (Twitter)

Tags: , , , ,

  • J.J.

    Keep it up. I still have a horrible experience in rural ne Indiana all directions around fort Wayne Indiana. Honestly all rural in the North half of Indiana(North of Indianapolis) is spotty all the way West until you hit larger towns close to Chicago. But I’ve seen they have lit up some small towns along that rural drive West from fort Wayne so i will see next trip. Highway traveling has been exponentially better but still hard to recommend TMobile for rural in Indiana.

    • KMB877

      I’m just curious, do you have a cellphone with support on all T-mobile LTE bands (2, 4, 5, 12 and 66)?

      • SirStephenH

        *T-Mobile is bands 2, 4, 12, 66, and 71.

        • marque2

          I think he was asking about a slightly older phone there. Most of us don’t have band 71 yet. I will wait until November myself – because that is when it becomes applicable to me.

      • J.J.

        Yup. TMobile Note 8. Just missing 71 but I’ll likely pick that up with the note 9

    • marque2

      What about Gary, In, Gary, In, Gary, Indiannna?

      • J.J.

        Lol i try to stay out of that town! Just keep driving unless you want to lose your ride.

  • Damon Mack

    What’s the difference between low/mid/high band and what does that mean for us?

    • Andrew Singleton

      Low band means lower frequency (700mhz), which when compared to higher frequency (1900mhz, 2100mhz), travels farther and penetrates materials better. So it’s great for rural areas because tmo can build half the towers for the same amount of people, and people who are inside of large buildings, basements, elevators, etc. tmo has been calling low band “extended range LTE.”

      • KMB877

        I don’t disagree with you, but I’m wondering where did you get the information “because tmo can build half the towers for the same amount of people…”? The “…half the towers…” is the intriguing part.

        • superg05

          LOW BANDS TRAVEL FURTHER (MEANS LESS TOWER BUILD OUT NEEDED TO COVER AREA)WHICH IS WHY ATT AND VERIZION HAD A HUGE ADVANTAGE FOR SO LONG BUT MID-BAND CARRIES MORE DATA THROUGHPUT FOR FASTER SPEEDS AND CAPACITY

        • (J²)

          I think that part is understood. As far as reduction of towers, that isn’t necessarily true, especially not today.

          As frequencies are usually stacked either more of the same or others are allocated in a particular market.

          Low frequency is more reliable but also associated with terribly slow speeds, so that alone will not do in the way in which Andrew described.

        • KMB877

          I told you I’m not arguing with the phenomena of higher/lower frequency of radio waves atmospheric propagation.

          I just asked where did you get the information regarding “…half the towers…”? Why half, or 60% or 45%, etc? Thanks

        • (J²)

          Think you are responding to the wrong person, I’m actually in complete agreement with you lol

        • Andrew Singleton

          i said half but i simply meant less. rural towers have a radius. when signal travels farther, less towers are required because of each tower’s further reach. for example, i25 north of Cheyenne has thousands of miles of road to cover, and higher range signal will require less access points.

        • KMB877

          Understood, half was just an expression meaning less. I’m ok now, thanks.

        • marque2

          Assuming a flat surface I get 1/16. This is just math of course – I know terrain plays into it – and data speeds. If you need more throughput you need more cells. But that said, it should be nice for some really rural roads where there is no cell service now. Like parts of i395 into the Sierras. They would need to put up very few towers to get at least minimal coverage where there is none now.
          Do you know the typical range of a current tower @ 1900?

        • KMB877

          Hahahahaha, cool! Thanks!

        • KMB877

          Read better first. My question was regarding “…half number of towers…”.

          Did your caps lock got defective?

        • marque2

          True, but to get the data out to the masses, you might need more cells anyhow. You can’t put an infinite number of people on one tower cell and expect any reasonable data speed. That is why they talk about micro cells, and femto cells …

      • (J²)

        You’re right but that has nothing to do with the number of towers. Lower frequencies do travel further and are better at signal penetration but lower frequency spectrum is usually deployed alongside mid and high frequency meaning no real reduction in towers.

        • SirStephenH

          There IS a reduction in towers needed. Because of low-band’s longer range, towers don’t have to be built as close together to cover the same area as if they were built utilizing mid-band alone. Ever wonder why so many rural areas have access to only band 12? It’s because the towers aren’t built close enough together to provide access to the shorter range mid-bands.

          Verizon and AT&T saved a fortune by deploying low-band in rural areas, greatly reducing the need for densification.

  • dontsh00tmesanta

    No way to determine if 700 or 600?

    • KMB877

      Do you have a cellphone with 600 MHz support? Wow! I will count more in 1700/1900 than 700!

      • dontsh00tmesanta

        no

    • SirStephenH

      Generally no unless you can determine if T-Mobile owns band 12 in the area (if not then it has to be band 71) or if band 71 deployment is blocked in the area (then it has to be band 12.

      You could map the network yourself if you have a band 12 and 71 capable phone but that won’t tell you anything about this announcement, only whether you have access to those bands in the area or not.

      • dontsh00tmesanta

        They own b71 in my area and are not blocked from deploying

      • marque2

        Well there are apps that let you know what band you are on, and sometimes can tell you what bands are available. One could try downloading one of those.

  • Bryck

    What about Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine??. I never see those states on on any of those list .

  • SirStephenH

    I can guarantee that Spokane, WA is band 71 (no band 12 owned in the area) and Freeland, WA is band 12 (band 71 is blocked by active stations).

    • This is unfortunate since my phone supports band 12 and doesn’t support band 71 .

  • Eric

    Still no Leesville,LA or Fort Polk,LA

    • Squidward Grumpy!

      Fort Polk sucks, I hated the short short time I was there…..all 4 times!

  • James Smith

    Still nothing in Venice, FL. What a joke of a company.

    • Jerry Rich

      An armpit of Florida, save some money and move.

    • disqus_u7J1D3ELeh

      Why would waste money for a place with 10 people

  • marque2

    On a technical Low Band is in the 30 – 300 kilohertz range. No one plans to use Low Band for cell use. Then comes lesser known MF, HF and of course VHF is in the 30 – 300 MHz range. UHF is 301Mhz to 3 GHz. So far everything Tmo is UHF. “We got it all, We got it all on UHF”