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 , 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

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

"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

"max" wrote in message
...

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

It's because

1) *y o u a r e u n d e r g r o u n d* and there are usually at least a
few yards of earth between you and the mast, also

2) People don't want to hear you shouting, "I AM ON THE TRAIN" over the
racket of a tube train so no-one is going to go to the expense of enabling
it.

Suggest you

1) Learn a little patience, or

2) Travel WITH the friend, so you can talk to them properly, and (anyway)

3) Get a f*cking life.

--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."
www.imagebus.co.uk/shop

In message , Brian Watson
writes

It's because

1) *y o u a r e u n d e r g r o u n d* and there are usually at least a
few yards of earth between you and the mast, also

2) People don't want to hear you shouting, "I AM ON THE TRAIN" over the
racket of a tube train so no-one is going to go to the expense of enabling
it.

I never cease to be amazed at the number of phones users who shout down
their mobiles "Hello, hello! Can't you hear me?" as the Piccadilly
plunges down to the depths after Baron's Court. I guess they never
studied physics.
--
Paul Terry

In message , Roland Perry
writes
LU paying to have the infrastructure fitted so they could talk to
train drivers, and the public also using it being a bonus.
Drivers on the Victoria line could talk to control via the juice rails
in 67, I would have thought that it would have been universal by now.
--
Clive

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.