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.
Why is your need for silence more important than other people's need to communicate?
How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
81–90 of 179 posts
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#82>There’s another distance limit at work here, and that is the speed of light. It takes milliseconds for the signal in your phone to reach the hotel above ground and be handed over to the mobile network. But if it takes too long to get from phone to hotel, then your phone call s..a.rt..s..t o. br..e..ak up. As it happens, that distance is about 12km, so Boldyn needs nine hotels around London to cover the whole of the…
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
A third of the time? Sorry, nonsense. I use the tube several times a day and it's a real rarity. I do worry about the tube becoming a cacophony of phone calls, but really? Everyone message now anyway so I reckon that'll be a rarity too.
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#84Just to add a piece of data to support this: > It turns out the phone signal inside the station can be better than the one above ground I was surprised when I noticed I had 5G in the tunnel, ran a speed test and hit 641Mbps down! https://www.speedtest.net/result/i/6831252952
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.
Going from £70/mo for gigabit to £65/mo for 500mb is insulting.
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like many of London's woes, that's because of planning, councils have to approve infrastructure and block it: https://www.londoncentric.media/p/why-exactly-is-londons-pho... I'd say it's developing-world tier, but a lot of the developing world has really good 5G signal these days.
There are also some absolute morons out there. Couple of local things around me... First I went to one of the local town planning meetings in my area when they were rolling out FTTC. This one was due to a rather old person objecting to the placement of a streetside box which was not even outside her property and no one who it would have affected could see it or cared about it. I raised my objections about her being a…
Except in the good old days things just got done when there was demand for them and NIMBYs were told to fuck off.
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#86Earlier 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.
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#87Earlier 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.
One might even suspect that the particularly nice parts of London are full of NIMBYs who successfully petition against the eyesore of mobile masts being put up… (Circumstantial evidence is that a particularly extra nice part of central London has no tube station, ostensibly to keep the riff-raff out, and is the only area with a proposed station on Crossrail 2 that voted against having a new station!)
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#88Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
So if I follow, you’re saying that because London’s underground is older than Tokyo’s, it somehow changes the physical environment of the tunnels or their surroundings such that installing the required technology is more difficult? Please expand…
The recently built lines had 5G etc from the start. It’s not difficult when the environment isn’t constraining you. Even malls add indoor 5g these days
Re: How London cracked mobile phone coverage on the Underground
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually against byelaws to play music or other loud sounds on transport in London and they can prosecute you if they so wished... It's about acknowledging it's a shared resource and respecting the space. No loud noises, no littering, no being drunk etc These days people act like they're the only ones travelling
Looks like TFL issued a whopping three fines in total last year... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdx4lje9jpjo
In classic British style they just try to influence and nudge people with campaigns and posters. That way the organisation doesn't have to deal with awkward accusations of racism etc