Coverage Maps

[dglively]

Hey Folks,

I read, in some discussion thread somewhere, that carriers have detailed maps of their coverage areas and are well aware of their strengths and weaknesses in any particular area they serve. Now being an armature economist and a big fan of a free market economy, it's perfectly understandable that no carrier would want that level of detail, regarding their ability to service an area, to get out. However, there are leaks and some detail always seems to get out, even if it's a tad dated.

Does anyone know where this information is, or more appropriately, if it's accessible at all?

I probed the FCC and a few consumer group's web sites but the information was fairly general.

Happy new year!

[Matt]

you can get fairly detailed maps of "high-level coverage" which isn't total coverage, of the GSM carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile and Cingular) at gsmworld.com

T-Mobile stores have access to an interactive coverage map, searchabel by zip code, that shows three levels of coverage and is fairly detailed.

[larry]

Sprint has the same type of detailed RF propogation maps but they are not available to the public. I was show one of these maps when I attended a public hearing for a new Sprint antenna near my house.

[AnthroMatt]

Sometimes wireless stores will have such maps, whether they let you look at them or not is another issue. When I lived in Gainesville USCC had maps in their "flagship" store showing detailed individual tower RF propogation for north Florida and south Georgia.

[Fathead]

Verizon certainly has them, as I've seen them for NSR and AC, but good luck getting ahold of one.

[ILUVSOCAL]

I've seen Edge Wireless's RF maps in their office in Ukiah, very cool, wish I could get one! For this being a mountainous and tree filled area, they have it covered very well. Verizon probably has one too, but it looks like Measles on a dart board I bet lol

[dglively]

I guess I'm hearing what I expected: there is nothing very precise published and generally available. Vagueness and generalities....


"...This map is a general representation of wireless coverage and the areas shown are approximate. Actual coverage depends on system availability and capacity, system repairs and modifications, customer equipment, terrain, signal strength, weather and other conditions. This map is not representative of where service can be purchased. Long-distance charges may apply. Roaming rate may apply whenever a your favorite carrier name here network is used to place or receive the call regardless of location...."

Translated: This may be the coverage you get, but who knows...

[ILUVSOCAL]

Perfect translation [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[dglively]

Thank you, thank you very much... Good night!

[ILUVSOCAL]

Elvis has left the buildng [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] lol

[BillRadio]

Originally posted by: dglivelyDoes anyone know where this information is, or more appropriately, if it's accessible at all?

It exists, but usually isn't available to the public. There are a handful of software suppliers who are pitching the carriers to offer a way to let users check coverage without showing all their cards. The most helpful software lets you pick a location online, and it shows a map of that location and the quality of service there, whether that spot is good for in-mobile/in-building/no service.

In the meantime, there are various sources for actual cell site locations. We have them listed at:

Cell Site Locator

-Bill

[NokiaKrazy]

Is everyone talking about a map like this one?

Look at this company's map.

[Matt]

That's what people want, but none of the national carriers offer that to the public on their websites or in their brochures.

[dglively]

[quote]
Originally posted by: NokiaKrazy
Is everyone talking about a map like this one?[quote]


That's a very good example of a useful coverage map. One would think that those carriers with the best coverage in a given area would use that to win business. Understadably though, it does reveal a lot to the competition....

[ILUVSOCAL]

The competition already knows where the other guys rf is.

[NokiaKrazy]

So I wonder, why don't more carriers provide detailed maps of their coverage?

[dglively]

Exactly!

If every carrier knows where the other carrier covers the what's the big secret?! Is it some sort of market collusion, or is it based on hopes of securing more customers out on the fringe coverage areas by not revealing too specifically just where the coverage isn't?

I'm sure it also has to do with the litigious nature of American society. We American do love to sue, and it doesn't take much to get us going...[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

[NokiaKrazy]

Originally posted by: dglively
Exactly!

If every carrier knows where the other carrier covers the what's the big secret?! Is it some sort of market collusion, or is it based on hopes of securing more customers out on the fringe coverage areas by not revealing too specifically just where the coverage isn't?

I'm sure it also has to do with the litigious nature of American society. We American do love to sue, and it doesn't take much to get us going...[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

Coverage maps are provided for informational purposes only; actual service coverage, quality, and availability may vary. Information provided here is not a guarantee of service availability.

That is the phrase at the bottom of a coverage map. I can accept the fact that an actual RF map can and will vary from day to day, season to season and weather. But I think if more RF maps were made available, competition would be tighter, and things could improve. Competion is good for the customer.

[danny boi]

From a company standpoint, there is also somewhat of a security concern to release the exact location of specific cell sites to the public. Although some have posted such information, the majority have not. Why would a company want to broadcast specific information to the public with nutty people around waiting for an opportunity to do damage? For the same reason we put up anti virus programs and firewalls on our pc's to protect our ip addresses and personal information, corporate institutions also need to protect their investments. What better way to cripple our nation's communications by telling everyone where every communication device is? Poor security.

[larry]

Originally posted by: YourDaddy
From a company standpoint, there is also somewhat of a security concern to release the exact location of specific cell sites to the public. Although some have posted such information, the majority have not. Why would a company want to broadcast specific information to the public with nutty people around waiting for an opportunity to do damage? For the same reason we put up anti virus programs and firewalls on our pc's to protect our ip addresses and personal information, corporate institutions also need to protect their investments. What better way to cripple our nation's communications by telling everyone where every communication device is? Poor security.

sprintsitesusa.com gives exact addresses of tower locations. I wonder if anyone has vandalized any of them?

[NokiaKrazy]

Originally posted by: YourDaddy
From a company standpoint, there is also somewhat of a security concern to release the exact location of specific cell sites to the public. Although some have posted such information, the majority have not. Why would a company want to broadcast specific information to the public with nutty people around waiting for an opportunity to do damage? For the same reason we put up anti virus programs and firewalls on our pc's to protect our ip addresses and personal information, corporate institutions also need to protect their investments. What better way to cripple our nation's communications by telling everyone where every communication device is? Poor security.

It is quite obvious to everyone what a cell site looks like. Not all are hidden in flagpole and palm trees. Most are out in plain view of everyone. And so is most other landline company equiptment. I have never heard of vandalism at a cell phone site. I understand anything can happen though. I do know that our Cellular One tower has an alarm on their building. Why I know is because I work 911 and got the call from Cellularone. Stated someone has entered their building. Come to find out it was PageNet doing some work.

And most sites have fences around them complete with barbwire.

And lilke Larry said, Sprint PCS has their addresses of their sites online complete with addresses and photos. I wonder what problems they have had.

[AnthroMatt]

I agree, I don't see any harm in publishing cell site location info. Only if someone has a vendetta against a specific company might that be problematic. It's pretty darn easy to find a cell site without being given any address information. If someone has bad intentions, they wouldn't have any problem finding the sites and messing with them.

[danny boi]

Damage to cell sites has occured; even more than you guys think. Only in the last two years would something like that even be news worthy. Just a few years ago, it happened twice close to a location where I was selling service. It never made the headlines, but it does and can happen. Usually it's: "network down/unavailable ," or some other excuse from the carrier to explain it.


The TierOne network my company uses is the largest in the world with network access to over 150 countries. Although we provide consistent wireline and wireless LAN/WAN service to our customers, we would never give out any network access points other than general hub location.

This is just my opinion so knock it if you want...... I hope for the sake of you guys your carriers give you all the specs. you need. All I know is that I have reliable service and chances are it will work more so than some other carriers. If not, I'll go to a payphone or start a bonfire somewhere and flag down a helicopter....

[danny boi]

Okay, maybe not a bonfire. I don't want to be accused of starting anymore fires here in So. Cali...[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

[GoodmanR]

I agree with you. I think both vandalism, and competition are reasons not to publish accurate RF maps. Also, most consumers are not capable of understand the fluctuations or temporary outages of sites. They'll see that hey it says I should get full service here, I'm not, thats a breach of contract, Im not paying an ETF and Im leaving. Thats why carriers provide no accurate maps and no guarantees on signal strength in specific locations.