Mobile Coverage

Discussion about miscellaneous topics not covered by other forums

Mobile Coverage

Postby macliam » Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:52 pm

I had thought that poor mobile network coverage in towns was a thing of the past. When first I moved to Suffolk, I got no Vodafone signal in Woodbridge and a colleague who lived in Framlingham had no 02 signal (when he complained, they even suggested he move to Vodafone!) :roll:

Nowadays, "notspots" seem to be in very rural areas according to this- and although my signal on 3 is not good in the house, their wifi app means I don't have a problem. However, yesterday I was in the centre of Woodbridge and tried to call SWMBO - to find I had NO SIGNAL .... I had to walk to the top of the town before I could call! :wtf:

This seems ludicrous in this day and age and an embarassment in a supposedly advanced country. It's about time OFCOM got off their backsides to force the providers either to close off the notspots, or to share coverage. In Portugal I am 2km down a dirt track in the middle of the countryside, yet I get a 4-bar signal..... and now, due to roaming, I get this even via 3 - yet here in the UK I can be somewhere without coverage!
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me

Thanked by: Dream onblythburgh
macliam
 
Posts: 6959
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:26 am
Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
Has thanked: 1412 times
Been thanked: 6554 times
Sharing: *

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby pabenny » Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:16 am

And how do local tariffs compare in Portugal? I suspect that in the UK, OFCOM have allowed a trade-off between patches of poor coverage and lower prices, whereas in (some) other countries, charges may be higher but with fewer not-spots.

Thanked by: blythburgh
pabenny
 
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 4:21 pm
Has thanked: 328 times
Been thanked: 985 times

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby blythburgh » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:31 am

Norfolk was apparently in the lead and now other dioceses are following suit. Letting the phone companies put a phone mast in the church tower..

I can see this might only benefit the users of one phone company but if they will allow other companies to piggy back on that mast it would be for the benefit of those who live in not spots and those who are just visiting.
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler

Thanked by: Dream on
blythburgh
 
Posts: 12590
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: The Far East
Has thanked: 31417 times
Been thanked: 6538 times
Sharing: *

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby xrppzi » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:39 am

blythburgh wrote:Norfolk was apparently in the lead and now other dioceses are following suit. Letting the phone companies put a phone mast in the church tower..

I can see this might only benefit the users of one phone company but if they will allow other companies to piggy back on that mast it would be for the benefit of those who live in not spots and those who are just visiting.


This has nothing to do with the county! It's the decision of the church diocese. The idea was proposed for our village as we live in a valley and obviously the church is at the highest point, but the diocese refused to entertain the idea.

Thanked by: blythburghDream on
xrppzi
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:39 am
Location: East Yorkshire
Has thanked: 175 times
Been thanked: 711 times

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby William Joseph1 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:49 am

Well its a bit of both really. The PCC decide whether or not they want a phone mast attached to the tower at the request of the Phone company, but before they can do it they have to apply for a faculty from the diocese, this is needed before any alterations can be made to a Church. It is then up to the diocese whether or not they allow the faculty. Whether they agree or not will be a complex decision taking into account lots of different variables.

Thanked by: blythburghkevinchess1Dream on
William Joseph1
 
Posts: 10071
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: The Isle of Dreams
Has thanked: 4653 times
Been thanked: 9103 times

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby kevinchess1 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:49 am

Me local village church was offered £6,000 annual rent to use their spire for a phone mast
They offered to give %10 to the village committee but the village committee and residents were overwhelmingly against the idea because of unfounded nonsense about the danger to children.
All of these people own/use a mobile without a 2nd thouight
Any way the church decide not to go ahead and then 18 months later Farmer Giles put one on his land and dosent give qnay one a penny and there's nothing the village can do about
Idiots :thumbdown:
Politically incorrect since 69

Thanked by: blythburghexpressman33
kevinchess1
 
Posts: 20628
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:02 pm
Location: Miles away from the sea
Has thanked: 13081 times
Been thanked: 15799 times
Sharing: *

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby macliam » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:55 am

pabenny wrote:And how do local tariffs compare in Portugal? I suspect that in the UK, OFCOM have allowed a trade-off between patches of poor coverage and lower prices, whereas in (some) other countries, charges may be higher but with fewer not-spots.

Tariffs appear to be similar - although the cheapest PAYG deal there is 9c pm as opposed to 3p pm on 3 here in the UK. But in Portugal the use of "packages" is far more common, TV, internet and mobile - and from the amount of usage of mobile data etc. observed in restaurants and everywhere else, the tariffs must be acceptable.
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me

Thanked by: blythburgh
macliam
 
Posts: 6959
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:26 am
Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
Has thanked: 1412 times
Been thanked: 6554 times
Sharing: *

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby blythburgh » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:59 am

xrppzi wrote:
blythburgh wrote:Norfolk was apparently in the lead and now other dioceses are following suit. Letting the phone companies put a phone mast in the church tower..

I can see this might only benefit the users of one phone company but if they will allow other companies to piggy back on that mast it would be for the benefit of those who live in not spots and those who are just visiting.


This has nothing to do with the county! It's the decision of the church diocese. The idea was proposed for our village as we live in a valley and obviously the church is at the highest point, but the diocese refused to entertain the idea.

A wrong and sad decision on the face of it but of course I do not know all the details. I can only hope it is not for any of our churches decision. But it is the sort of thing that can be a life saver. There are a lot of poor people in rural communities for whom a landline is an expense they cannot afford but a pay as you go phone is a lifelline. They should be supported by the church leaders whenever possible
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler

Thanked by: macliam
blythburgh
 
Posts: 12590
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: The Far East
Has thanked: 31417 times
Been thanked: 6538 times
Sharing: *

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby Chadwick » Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:26 am

Phone masts in/on church spires/towers is a genius idea.
Avoids having to build an 'unsightly' mast elsewhere and provides a source of income for the church.
So many rural churches seem to run constant fund-raising campaigns to repair the roof etc - if a phone company had a vested interest in the structural integrity of the building, they might also contribute.

Thanked by: kevinchess1macliamblythburgh
Chadwick
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:21 pm
Has thanked: 599 times
Been thanked: 1626 times

Re: Mobile Coverage

Postby macliam » Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:42 am

Chadwick wrote:Phone masts in/on church spires/towers is a genius idea.
Avoids having to build an 'unsightly' mast elsewhere and provides a source of income for the church.
So many rural churches seem to run constant fund-raising campaigns to repair the roof etc - if a phone company had a vested interest in the structural integrity of the building, they might also contribute.

I agree, but it seems incredible that the mobile companies all insist on using their own hardware to provide almost identical services. One would have thought that cooperation would cut costs considerably as well as providing an answer to the "not spots" that still plague us.

If the companies are happy to piggy-back on the best available provider when roaming abroad, how does it make sense that they cannot do so at home? The answer seems to be that historically the networks were built separately as there was no backbone network a la Openreach, National Grid or Network Rail ..... the Government adopt a hands-off approach, having created their agency and OFCOM is too toothless to do anything.
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me

Thanked by: Chadwickblythburgh
macliam
 
Posts: 6959
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:26 am
Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
Has thanked: 1412 times
Been thanked: 6554 times
Sharing: *


Return to Other stuff

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests