why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a friend but
unsuccessfully.

In article ,
(max) wrote:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message of Tue, 15
Feb 2011 07:19:38 in uk.transport.london,
writes
In article ,
(max) wrote:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.


I am happy this is so, underground. A couple of years ago, there was no
commercial case for making mobile phones usable underground. I wish they
were not usable on trains above ground and subsurface. Window covering
opaque to radio would suit me.

Alternatively, let's have quiet cars as we used to have non-smoking
cars. Sadly, my experience of c2c quiet cars is that mobile phone users
assume they can inflict there conversations on everyone, everywhere. I
have no objection to anyone using a mobile phone, privately. I do have
problems when there calls are imposed on me.
--
Walter Briscoe

On 15/02/2011 15:04, Walter Briscoe wrote:
In message_r6dnQyKcuz34MfQnZ2dnUVZ8sSdnZ2d@giganews. com of Tue, 15
Feb 2011 07:19:38 in uk.transport.london,
writes
In ,
(max) wrote:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.


I am happy this is so, underground. A couple of years ago, there was no
commercial case for making mobile phones usable underground. I wish they
were not usable on trains above ground and subsurface. Window covering
opaque to radio would suit me.

Alternatively, let's have quiet cars as we used to have non-smoking
cars. Sadly, my experience of c2c quiet cars is that mobile phone users
assume they can inflict there conversations on everyone, everywhere. I
have no objection to anyone using a mobile phone, privately. I do have
problems when there calls are imposed on me.

People who actually make these calls appear mainly to be young people in
their early 20s, normally talking about some party.

Walter Briscoe wrote

Alternatively, let's have quiet cars as we used to have non-smoking
cars. Sadly, my experience of c2c quiet cars is that mobile phone
users
assume they can inflict their conversations on everyone, everywhere.
I
have no objection to anyone using a mobile phone, privately. I do
have
problems when their calls are imposed on me.

There are now thousands of users who would find coverage useful and
would not disturb anyone.

The Kindle ebook reader comes with a free 3G data link (GPRS or EDGE if
no 3G) mainly intended for downloading books but which including a
simple internet browser. And I have just acquired one (£152).

A user could check Live Departure Boards on the way to the station
without presenting, as a smart phone would, the temptation to use voice
and thus annoy fellow travellers.

I am gathering transport related uses:
http://www.nextbuses.mobi/
(for buses)
http://m.vpike.com
for a google street and/or sat map centred where you wish.


--
Mike D

In message 01cbce1e$13a7dce0$LocalHost@default, Michael R N Dolbear
writes
The Kindle ebook reader comes with a free 3G data link (GPRS or EDGE if
no 3G) mainly intended for downloading books but which including a
simple internet browser. And I have just acquired one (£152).

A user could check Live Departure Boards on the way to the station
without presenting, as a smart phone would, the temptation to use voice
and thus annoy fellow travellers.

Ah, but you *can* annoy fellow travellers by using the Kindle's
text-to-speech option, which is surprisingly good. For those that want
to annoy, of course (and so many seem to want to do that). It doesn't
work on web pages, as far as I can see.


--
Clive Page

On Feb 17, 9:14*pm, Clive Page wrote:

In message 01cbce1e$13a7dce0$LocalHost@default,
Michael R N Dolbear writes

The Kindle ebook reader comes with a free 3G data link (GPRS or EDGE if
no 3G) mainly intended for downloading books but which including a
simple internet browser. And I have just acquired one (£152).

A user could check Live Departure Boards on the way to the station
without presenting, as a smart phone would, the temptation to use voice
and thus annoy fellow travellers.

Ah, but you *can* annoy fellow travellers by using the Kindle's
text-to-speech option, which is surprisingly good. *For those that want
to annoy, of course (and so many seem to want to do that). *It doesn't
work on web pages, as far as I can see.

And I can annoy annoying Kindle users by threatening to lamp them! I
must admit I hadn't realised it could talk - of course it seems
entirely obvious now that you've said it.

It's an opinion I doubt many on here will share, but I think it's
rather a shame there's now a web browser present on the new Kindle - I
really liked the idea of a pure single purpose book-like reading
device, unencumbered with the infinite distractions of the web - the
joy of immersive, long-form, non-hyperlinked reading.

In message , at 07:19:38
on Tue, 15 Feb 2011, remarked:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.

It's the law of "trying to get someone else to pay for the
installation".
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message ,
at 07:19:38 on Tue, 15 Feb 2011, remarked:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.

It's the law of "trying to get someone else to pay for the installation".


Do you mean LU trying to get someone other than themselves to pay? If so,
damn right - LU shouldn't pay for such provision.

I think LU have made pretty clear they'd be quite happy to co-operate in
providing mobile coverage below ground, but it's up to the network operators
to sort it out and come up with a feasible plan. Of course, the installation
of such kit on the Underground network is going to be a far more involved
job than it would be elsewhere - there's very stringent fire safety
regulations to comply with (as there should be), space is rather limited,
and working conditions are limiting.

Previous discussions have all revolved around the installation of BTSs at
stations only, and not in the running tunnels which would just add an
enormous extra layer of complexity and cost for little return (I'm thinking
of the deep-level tube tunnels in particular here).

In message , at 15:42:03 on
Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Mizter T remarked:

why there's no mobile coverage within the tube? I tried to call a
friend but unsuccessfully.

I think the Laws of Physics have something to do with it.

It's the law of "trying to get someone else to pay for the installation".

Do you mean LU trying to get someone other than themselves to pay? If
so, damn right - LU shouldn't pay for such provision.

The reverse wasn't it? LU paying to have the infrastructure fitted so
they could talk to train drivers, and the public also using it being a
bonus.

Previous discussions have all revolved around the installation of BTSs
at stations only, and not in the running tunnels which would just add
an enormous extra layer of complexity and cost for little return (I'm
thinking of the deep-level tube tunnels in particular here).

They've managed it in the HEx tunnels.
--
Roland Perry