LG V30; Officially the first 600Mhz phone

**brad15** · 09-01-2017, 10:57 PM

Originally Posted by DRNewcomb

How else do they do it other than one site at a time? Besides, we don't really know how many sites they have in each of these markets. Only that they've activated 600 somewhere in those two markets.

Exactly.. get it up now, try different configurations to see how a "real world" approach will work.. then go from there!

I'm willing to bet they are trying the omnidirectional to see how fast it does get all loaded up, as that set up will work well in a rural environment that will not need as much capacity.

**GSMinCT** · 09-02-2017, 09:22 AM

So the big question in my mind is will T-Mobile deploy B71-only sites, where you're hosed if you don't have a B71 phone, or will new sites also have B2/4/12 so that B71 will only be a minor improvement at the edges of the cell? If you're on B2 or B4 on B71 spaced sites, it would be patchy, but a lot better than getting nothing at all.

**DRNewcomb** · 09-02-2017, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

So the big question in my mind is will T-Mobile deploy B71-only sites, where you're hosed if you don't have a B71 phone, or will new sites also have B2/4/12 so that B71 will only be a minor improvement at the edges of the cell? If you're on B2 or B4 on B71 spaced sites, it would be patchy, but a lot better than getting nothing at all.

Well, I predicted that T-Mobile would not deploy any band-12-only sites. I was wrong about that. So, I'm not going to predict this one.

**ravercwb** · 09-02-2017, 12:16 PM

What are the other bands supported by this phone?

Sent from my FRD-L04 using HoFo mobile app

**jakeuten** · 09-02-2017, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by ravercwb

What are the other bands supported by this phone?

Sent from my FRD-L04 using HoFo mobile app

For T-Mobile? 2/4/5/12/66/71 i'd imagine at least. maybe 13/25/26/29/30/41 as well for complete roaming capability.

**ravercwb** · 09-03-2017, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by jakeuten

For T-Mobile? 2/4/5/12/66/71 i'd imagine at least. maybe 13/25/26/29/30/41 as well for complete roaming capability.

That would be nice, as the LG V20 has not that many bands. Don't know why they don't add all bands like Samsung, Apple, and even Pixel phones.

Sent from my FRD-L04 using HoFo mobile app

**jet1000** · 09-04-2017, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

So the big question in my mind is will T-Mobile deploy B71-only sites, where you're hosed if you don't have a B71 phone, or will new sites also have B2/4/12 so that B71 will only be a minor improvement at the edges of the cell? If you're on B2 or B4 on B71 spaced sites, it would be patchy, but a lot better than getting nothing at all.

I disagree that patchy is not better than nothing at all. Patchy will get people very irritated as they drive down the road and are constantly dropping calls on B2 or B4. Yes, they will have B71 only sites because of the amount of area a single B71 site can cover. If someone in that area wants to use the service, they'll buy a B71 phone.

**L33** · 09-05-2017, 05:29 AM

Originally Posted by jet1000

I disagree that patchy is not better than nothing at all. Patchy will get people very irritated as they drive down the road and are constantly dropping calls on B2 or B4. Yes, they will have B71 only sites because of the amount of area a single B71 site can cover. If someone in that area wants to use the service, they'll buy a B71 phone.

Of course they will have B71 only sites. There's many rural areas in the US where they still do not have 700 MHz licenses but now have 600 MHz one.

**GSMinCT** · 09-05-2017, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by jet1000

I disagree that patchy is not better than nothing at all. Patchy will get people very irritated as they drive down the road and are constantly dropping calls on B2 or B4. Yes, they will have B71 only sites because of the amount of area a single B71 site can cover. If someone in that area wants to use the service, they'll buy a B71 phone.

That logic makes no sense. Having massive holes with no coverage at all for a B2/4/12 phone is in no way better than having spotty coverage. We're not really sure how well B71 will carry, but B2 carries very well, and may end up covering almost as much terrain as B71 does.

Originally Posted by L33

Of course they will have B71 only sites. There's many rural areas in the US where they still do not have 700 MHz licenses but now have 600 MHz one.

I'm pretty sure they have nationwide B2/B4. Having a B71-only site would be utterly incomprehensibly stupid, considering how many B2/4/12 devices are out there already. It might create swiss cheese coverage on B2, but at least it's something to work with, and would likely cover towns and attractions pretty well.

**DRNewcomb** · 09-05-2017, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

That logic makes no sense. .....

I made exactly the same argument wrt band-12-only sites. T-Mobile installed them anyway.

**ac21365** · 09-05-2017, 06:58 PM

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

That logic makes no sense. Having massive holes with no coverage at all for a B2/4/12 phone is in no way better than having spotty coverage. We're not really sure how well B71 will carry, but B2 carries very well, and may end up covering almost as much terrain as B71 does.

RF engineers know exactly how far a band 71 signal will carry. Sure, T-Mobile chose to put band 12 on more towers and angle the signal so its reach wouldn't be as wide as it could be, but given the 5x5mhz slice is all T-Mobile had to work with, it makes sense from their end.

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

I'm pretty sure they have nationwide B2/B4. Having a B71-only site would be utterly incomprehensibly stupid, considering how many B2/4/12 devices are out there already. It might create swiss cheese coverage on B2, but at least it's something to work with, and would likely cover towns and attractions pretty well.

They more or less do indeed have Band 2/4 licenses nationwide. Perhaps, pause for a moment and look at the rural issue you cite as "utterly incomprehensibly stupid" from a different point of view...

This is just one example, but it applies to a LOT of places if you consider the staggeringly large amount of landmass T-Mobile's about to try and cover (this is assuming we're talking about sites that will cover new territory that B2/4 can't reach):

Imagine we're traveling down a state highway in the rural south. There's dotted towns of 1-3k people, but large swaths of rural countryside to cover. Sure, ideally you'd want to have sites in the towns/cities, with band 2/4 for capacity and 12/71 for range. There will inevitably be holes in that B12/71 coverage that you want to cover, but it's over land where there's no existing towers in a town, or no towns large enough to warrant B2/4 close to the site. Picture the 100'-1000' guyed towers that dot the landscape of basically everywhere. Perfect place to put cell antenna. Given B71's capacity in most rural areas (20x20), it wouldn't make sense to spend the many thousands of dollars to install and maintain equipment for a full-fledged (GSM/WCDMA/LTE2/4/12/71) site that you might find in a city. The few people that live in each 20x20 B71 sector are unlikely to overload it, and all that would be on the site otherwise are passerby's. If you don't need the capacity in rural areas, why spend money on it? Once a site is established, they can always come back and add more equipment.

Sure, if a site is along a state highway or near a larger city, you'd absolutely want B2/4 to keep B71's capacity cleared up for the folks past B2/4's coverage area.

I'm also keeping in mind that B71 handsets won't be prolific for another year or two... but neither will widespread B71. You can bet your bottom dollar as soon as T-Mobile has new galaxies and iphones with B71, we'll see an all-out push to get those handsets into the wild.

**shilohcane** · 09-05-2017, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by DRNewcomb

I made exactly the same argument wrt band-12-only sites. T-Mobile installed them anyway.

I agree with Band 12 that is a single block wasn't enough spectrum. Granted there are areas with less however with Band 71 most of the rural areas nation wide have four blocks for 20x20 and a few areas even have five blocks for 25x25. A lot of those areas don't have many people there and 20x20 Mhz should be more than enough spectrum for a 100 customers in those tower areas. Granted I am making up numbers but I have flown over Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Wyoming and North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Colorado and West Texas and there isn't a lot of people living there outside of metro areas. Unless T-Mobile wanted to get into the fix wireless ISP market I don't see a lot of those areas even needing 20x20 with 5G on the horizon.

**jet1000** · 09-05-2017, 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by GSMinCT

That logic makes no sense. Having massive holes with no coverage at all for a B2/4/12 phone is in no way better than having spotty coverage. We're not really sure how well B71 will carry, but B2 carries very well, and may end up covering almost as much terrain as B71 does.

If B2 covers so well, why would T-Mobile waste money buying 600 spectrum in those areas? The answer is that it doesn't cover that well. That's why it's not already rolled out and that's why they bought so much spectrum in this recent auction.

Having poor coverage is never good. Driving through areas and constantly losing a signal because the band 2 can't hand off from one tower to the next is just going to cause people to switch away to another carrier as soon as they try out the service. The solution to that is to not put B2 there in the first place. Require that people buy a device with B71 if they want the coverage.

Having a B71-only site would be utterly incomprehensibly stupid, considering how many B2/4/12 devices are out there already. It might create swiss cheese coverage on B2, but at least it's something to work with,

So you tolerate dropped calls currently? You tolerate swiss cheese coverage? I don't know anyone who tolerates that. Yet, you think people would "work with" it. What you're saying doesn't make sense.

Either the person should buy a B71 device or stick with a carrier that covers it well. Nobody that I can think of would tolerate working with poor coverage.

**shilohcane** · 09-05-2017, 08:04 PM

Let's ask a question. Does the new 600 Mhz Band 71 tower radios that require the bigger antennas still able to broadcast Band 2, 4, 12 & 66 without needing more space on the tower? I assume the new big band 12 antennas could have smaller Band 2, 4, 12 & 66 antennas inside but I am only guessing.

If there is no extra cost on the tower for monthly lease on the tower I can see always using every spectrum band. However if T-Mobile needs to pay for more tower space then it has to fit the market base in that area. Band 71 has the most bang for the buck in rural areas.

**JimMcGraff** · 09-05-2017, 08:38 PM

Without getting into specifics the larger antennas I see can broadcast on the lower bands (B12/B71) while the other antennas still broadcast on some combination of B2 and B4/B66 across varying technologies. Typically the B12 antennas were standalone so they'll be able to be swapped out without needing the extra space. They're also looking to implement shared RRUs so you'd have B12 and B71 running off of the same unit. If another RRU is needed solely for B71 then they'd still have to pay for that additional equipment on the tower. Also I'm not sure if any added cables are needed but that could add to cost as well.

I only work in Ericsson markets so I can't speak for any of the new Nokia antennas I see people talking about. There are configurations were they can shove all of their technologies into two, even one antenna (those suckers are HUGE), but three antennas per sector seems to be the norm. Ultimately I don't expect there to be many additional antennas unless a site is really antiquated and needs a full overhaul.