Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

ianvisits.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 179 posts

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#151

Post by speedbird »

ljm wrote: post #84
dgxyz wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That always hurts. I live in a particularly nice bit of London and there is virtually no mobile phone service other than voice and can only get 80 meg ADSL. Yet the mole people get better service. Grr.

I have the opposite problem where I can only get HyperOptic. Not even OpenReach stuff. No problem with bandwidth but zero price competition, and 5G broadband isn’t viable either. Going from £70/mo for gigabit to £65/mo for 500mb is insulting.

Sigh. Urban expectations. Come live in the sticks where I do and pay £35/m for about 15Mb. Actually had to go Starlink to be able to work from home properly. Swish fibre came round a few years ago and dug up all our roads and put fibre to all the phone poles but then vanished and nothing has happened since.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#152

Post by Mindwipe »

throw567643u8 wrote: post #32
dbish wrote: post #5

Pretty neat but as someone who commutes every day on the New York subway I hope it’s never “cracked” here. Phone usage without headphones is already annoying enough and I greatly appreciate the various people trying to take calls eventually lose service.

This behaviour is so bad on London (above ground) trains, if they ever do 'crack it' and roll out mobile signal to the Underground, those tiny carriages will be unbearable.

There's literally already signal on half the Underground, has been for six months to a year, and as someone who gets the tube twice a day I've literally never seen someone do voice call. Literally ever.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#153

Post by drnick1 »

master-lincoln wrote: post #117
youngtaff wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ten of so years ago I was on a train and the women opposite me gave all her credit card details to someone over the phone — anyone close by could have had fun with them

Is that still a thing in the USA that you can buy with just a credit card number, validity date, name and 3 digit code? In the EU we have psd2 mandating a second factor. Usually an app where the transaction has to be confirmed.

The second factor is a true annoyance, especially because in Europe it tends to be an "app" that requires iOS or Google-certified phones.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#154

Post by zulln »

justincormack wrote: post #100
zith wrote: post #19

Interesting! I know Sweden was not first, but Stockholm has had 3g coverage in the subway since 2005 and 4g since 2016.

Lots of countries do where the underground is near the surface, but London it is very deep.

Quick googling gave that Stockholm is deeper on average, although the deepest point of London metro is currently deeper than Stockholm. No drastical differences that should affect this question I think.

(This will change when they are done with Sofia station, a new station in Stockholm that they are building 100 m below the surface.)

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#155

Post by simonw »

drnick1 wrote: post #149
ceejayoz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a good number of places in the world where people of varied incomes live relatively close.

I am not sure why you would want that however.

A better society.

Imagine living somewhere that people who work service or retail jobs (or nursing or teaching or all manner of underpaid but essential professions) can also afford to live!

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#156

Post by drnick1 »

Havoc wrote: post #50
cedws wrote: post #48

Definitely not. Try it in Tokyo, every single line, every single station has high speed coverage. I can’t recall signal ever dropping out for me.

London’s first line predates tokyos by like 60 years and was literally the test ground for how to make underground’s The challenge isn’t the technology but rather the environment you’re trying to retrofit

The real issue is lack of investment. The old lines with tiny trains not tall enough to stand in other than in the middle should have be rebuilt (much) larger long ago with enough space for AC and modern amenities, but the British never bothered because "it's fine, London is not that hot anyway."

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#157

Post by drnick1 »

simonw wrote: post #155
drnick1 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you would want that however.

A better society. Imagine living somewhere that people who work service or retail jobs (or nursing or teaching or all manner of underpaid but essential professions) can also afford to live!

Even people with highly paid jobs living in nice areas commute to work.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#158

Post by KaiserPro »

drnick1 wrote: post #149
ceejayoz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a good number of places in the world where people of varied incomes live relatively close.

I am not sure why you would want that however.

Because it means that you don't get areas of extremes. (well not as much.)

It also means that local services can't be compartmentalised so that only rich people get decent services.

For example, southwark uses the same police force to cover the southbank (cultural centre) the £5m apartment blocks, as well as the shithole council estates (well they aren't shitholes anymore.)

TLDR: you don't get no-go areas.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#159

Post by KaiserPro »

cm2187 wrote: post #52
p10jkle wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There already is signal on many underground lines, and it’s pretty rare that people are playing things out loud in my experience?

London, increasingly common. I’d say a third of the time when I take the tube. Combine that with people making loud calls, 100% of the time. But I find people imposing their music or tiktok videos more obnoxious than a builder discussing his next job a bit loudly.

The tube is ~80db (depending on line) so you're not going to hear it anyway.

but, if I was mayor, I would be getting the transport police to have a word with phones on speakers.

Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground

#160

Post by arcanemachiner »

traceroute66 wrote: post #131
alexfoo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

London tends to get that because it has never really been planned. It just grew over the course of 1600 years and absorbed other areas as it went. There are plenty of areas where a row of £20m+ homes are opposite blocks of 3-bed flats that go for a hundredth of that price. Hundreds of years ago, before the rail or underground network, you still needed plenty of working class to live near where the rich people lived a…

> London tends to get that because it has never really been planned. Not particularly true. Go to a city in the world that REALLY has "never been planned", then come back and tell me London hasn't. ;)

If you're gonna do the No True Scotsman thing, the least you could do is give an example of a "REALLY" unplanned city.
Post reply on HN