On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:51 AM Wilfred Pinfold <w...@wilfredpinfold.com
> Are there any rules/metrics used by these carriers to define what coverage means?
My cynicism about what happens in DC is going to leak out here, but
whatever rules/metrics that exist were almost certainly written by the
lobbyists for the entities being "regulated". All of the maps I've
seen come out of the FCC have been, on casual inspection,
indistinguishable from garbage. A broadband map back in the BTOP era
(2009-2010) claimed that all of Wasco County had fiber. When you
clicked through, it was a single *wireless* ISP that, as far as you
could tell, hadn't gotten much past the "I have a website" phase of
their business plan. Maybe they were planning to put up some towers to
do fixed wireless to wheat ranches, but it wasn't clear they had
gotten very far.
As far as I can tell, the DC pattern is to hunt around for an obvious
crisis that they can pretend to solve by pouring money into the
pockets of their friends. It could be so much more, and has been
during brief spurts (like Rural Electrification, Public Power, e.g.
BPA and TVA), but for the most part it isn't.
I could be wrong about this, and I would love to see some evidence to
convince me otherwise.
My faith in government increases the more local it gets.
> For example should someone driving through an area that is marked as covered be able to maintain a reliable connection while roaming between cells? For example between the Dalles and Maupin on US197 all four carriers show good voice cover. I have driven this route on many occasions with three of the carriers AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon. It is not possible to use any of them to maintain a conversation on this road. There are one or two spots where voice will connect and even one or two spots where data will connect but this map does not reflect user experience.
> I raise this because much of first response in rural areas is done over cell networks, in fact first responders are encouraged to sign up for FirstNet to get critical information. If these maps give law makers the impression that they can send people relying on timely information into wildfires and other emergencies in these areas they are putting them at risk. If these are simply marketing maps then I understand carriers are likely to stretch the point and say these areas are in range of a cell without regard to topology or forestation.
I think that wildfire operations people have things more together, at
least once they get organized. I've seen (a decade or more ago) solar
powered relay sites that have apparently been helicoptered into remote
places to support fire fighting communications needs.
> On 8/6/21 7:56 AM, 'Gary' via ptp-general wrote:
> “The map shows 4G LTE mobile coverage as of May 15, 2021, with broadband and voice on separate layers, for each of the nation’s four largest mobile carriers: AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile, UScellular, and Verizon. These four mobile wireless service providers have voluntarily submitted the coverage data used to create this map as part of the effort to improve the data on mobile broadband availability throughout the United States that is collected and made available to the public by the Commission.”
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ptp-general/543a85cb-9ccb-5d28-05c6-00ccb1944b19%40wilfredpinfold.com