8 ms·

One Man's Quest to Prove Vermont Has Terrible Cell Service

88 points by evo_9 8y ago

beart 8y ago
I've spent a lot of time in Vermont.. It has terrible cell service and no quest is needed to prove that. As a vacation spot, I consider it a positive. I know the residents feel differently.
PaulHoule 8y ago
I believe this is the case everywhere in the U.S. That is, major cell carriers claim widespread coverage in rural and exurban areas that is simply not the case. People have had an incentive to expose this because of the federal funding for wireless expansion, but really it is a "truth in advertising" issue.
- baldfat 8y ago
  Well the northeast mountains have a ton of iron in the rocks is my theory. It makes it almost line of sight for signal. I use to live in Connecticut and it was HORRIBLE. Living in PA it is so much better. When I travel through to my In-laws in WV we get no internet signal for about 2.5 hours. That has to be due to the low population in Western Maryland.
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    Iron ore is neither conducive nor magnetic.
    - hexane360 8y ago
      Well, magnetite (Fe3O4) is, but you're right that its a silly theory to use to explain poor signal. For one, signal would have to be able to penetrate a decent amount underground in the first place, which it can't.
    - baldfat 8y ago
      Yes and since it isn't conductive it causes for weak radio signal. Source - My Dad is an old HAM Radio operator.
      - irq 8y ago
        Ham is not capitalized. It’s not an initialism or an acronym.
        techsupporter 8y ago
        For some OFs (old farts), HAM is written as all uppercase because of the (apocryphal) story of the a station being operated under the "HAM" call sign by Albert Hyman, Bob Almy, and Peggie Murray that came to stand for all of "ham radio" because they made an impassioned plea against a bill in Congress that would have revoked the frequency allocations for all of amateur radio and given them over to the military. Further, since call signs are always written in uppercase (WRR-FM, KIRO-AM, KBTC-TV), some hams are apt to write the name of the hobby as HAM out of habit/solidarity. So while you're technically right that "ham" is more of "ham-fisted" or "what a ham" variety, you're not following the internal culture.
        irq 8y ago
        This is false. Sources: https://web.archive.org/web/20090527172642/http://w1af.harvard.edu/hamorigin.html https://web.archive.org/web/20090527172642/http://w1af.harva... https://www.rcarc.org/presentations/Ham_Radio_History.pdf https://www.rcarc.org/presentations/Ham_Radio_History.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio#False_etymologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio#False_e...
        techsupporter 8y ago
        I know that the story about Hyman and company is false. That’s why I put the word “apocryphal” in there, which means “erroneous or fictitious.” But people still write HAM in all uppercase because of the legend, false or not.
  - PaulHoule 8y ago
    Many of the hilly areas in the Eastern US are plains that have been dissected by water and ice. Where I live in upstate NY, the hilltops are all around 2000 feet and are flanked by valleys such that at best a hilltop has a line of site for the adjacent valleys. Last summer I found I could get about 3Mbps down from an AT&T tower that was two valleys away that was using 700 Mhz spectrum -- with a directional antenna. In some of the more rural areas, the hilltops are roadless so any attempt to put in wireless infrastructure isn't just a matter of running wires for power and data, but actually building roads.
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    It's probably the different type of terrain more than the composition. It isn't like cellular signals blast through most earth surface materials (or even just vegetation).
- rjplatte 8y ago
  I've had a good experience with Verizon in rural areas in New England and Virginia/West VA. I used to use T-Mobile, and lose coverage frequently, but now I can go days without losing signal, even in the middle of nowhere.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - LeoPanthera 8y ago
    I have both a T-Mobile phone and a Verizon phone, and Verizon often provides me with the experience of my phone saying that I have 4 or 5 bars, but being unable to get any data to flow, or sometimes to even make a call. I don't know what causes that, but I have learned to ignore the signal strength display on Verizon.
    - snazz 8y ago
      And I’ve used most every major carrier, and they all do that fairly frequently. The strength display is especially inaccurate when you’re moving or when you are in a particularly unpopulated place. That said, the iPhone I used for a while did better than my old Nokia and my current Samsung, so it certainly seems to pertain to the hardware, too. I’m guessing many people change carriers at the same time as they change phones, which might make it hard to figure out which one is to blame.
    - jdod 8y ago
      created an account just for this: i spend a lot of time in airports, one of my conversation starters is 'tell me something about your work i can't find on google'. i said this to a person who inspects/installs cell towers. this person told me that a few years ago instead of installing new or upgrading towers for 4G LTE, on a lot of the towers the company had them install a chip that makes it look like users have 4g LTE signal but it's only 4g or 3g and not LTE. i'm sure someone will come along in the comments and tell me this person lied and this is impossible, and that may be true, just throwing my two pennies out there.
- twothamendment 8y ago
  I'm sure it is everywhere. I'm in NW Montana and was recently checking out coverage maps of various carriers. I had never noticed the fine print telling me something like "coverage" was defined as slow and would only work outdoors. If I'm in my house, I'm lucky to get a signal on one side of it. I really do count it as lucky. My neighbor doesn't get anything at all - inside or out, but the coverage map says he's good. A few years ago, before buying a phone, he borrowed a Verizon phone (from them) to make sure it worked at home. It did, he bought it and a few months later it quit working. The phone is fine, I guess they are no longer using the tower that served him. I don't think they updated their coverage map.
- ldoughty 8y ago
  Look at their advertised claims closely. They say they cover 98% (ish) of Americans. You can cover that amount of Americans while only covering 60% of the land mass. This means rural areas are typically lower priority ... But they always soon to get interstates.
cialowicz 8y ago
Here's the interactive map: http://vtpsd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=444a3d49c2374d509958f1c0e1d0d21b http://vtpsd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id... And the page that links to the full report: https://publicservice.vermont.gov/content/mobile-wireless-2018-drive-test https://publicservice.vermont.gov/content/mobile-wireless-20...
williesleg 8y ago
Thanks to the Commie guy, Bernie Sanders. Good thing Hillary aborted him.
Spooky23 8y ago
God bless the guy, and too bad that the state is too cheap to buy better equipment for the purpose. All carriers have this data for all of the carriers in each region. If you’re a big customer, they will even show it to you under NDA.
- gruez 8y ago
  >and too bad that the state is too cheap to buy better equipment for the purpose. What would be "better equipment" in this case? Professional/enterprise/labatory radio equipment, rather than cell phones? CNC milled/3d printed racks rather than a cardboard box? I don't think there's much you can improve here.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  We should tweak the law then to require carriers to report this data to the FCC for public consumption as a condition of radio spectrum licensing and usage.
  - Spooky23 8y ago
    I agree. They would fight hard to keep that data proprietary, as certain property owners might be more aggressive about lease pricing or royalties.
- PhantomGremlin 8y ago
  All carriers have this data for all of the carriers in each region. Many many years ago the FM radio station at college wanted to get FCC approval to increase broadcast power to 10 KW. In order to justify that, some students drove around taking signal strength measurements all over the area. They then picked the worst measurements to submit to the FCC. This wasn't a violation of any rules. Let's say (for example) that the FCC submission needs 50 measurements spaced apart a certain distance. If you have actually taken 150 measurements then you can easily select a coherent set of 50 that show just how bad things are and justify why you need that 10 KW non-commercial license. It's possible for the cell carriers to do something like this, but in reverse. It may make business sense for them to only retain/report measurement data that makes them look good? Cell towers aren't cheap to put up. If carriers can obtain "decent" coverage with fewer towers, then it's smart for them to do that? Of course, the carriers already have very very very granular data. They should be able to gather, and perhaps actually do gather, data from every single cellphone transmission as it establishes both voice and data connections. The carriers could/should use that information to erect more towers and to tweak antenna orientations on existing towers. In my experience, however, this doesn't seem to happen. The same areas around me have dead spots that persist for years. This is in relatively flat suburban terrain, without too many large hills or tall buildings to interfere. So in my anecdotal experience, Verizon doesn't give a shit about poor signal strength. And they're perhaps? the best at caring, so what does that say about the others?
jt2190 8y ago
> At stake in the state's project [of having an Vermont Department of Public Service employee drive around the state for six weeks taking download speed tests] is potentially millions of dollars in federal money. The FCC has $4.53 billion available to use around the country. > "What we were looking at was being almost completely foreclosed from any of it because our state was considered nearly completely covered with 4G LTE service," [Clay] Purvis, [the state's telecommunications director] said. "And now we've opened up a significant amount of that space."
rmason 8y ago
Just wrote a friend who is a telecom professor and suggested they run a summer experiment here in Michigan like this guy did with students collecting the data. I don't know what he will think of the idea but I'd sure like to see a coverage map with real data, not the carriers version of the truth.
parksy 8y ago
I think this is great but would having the phones all lined up in a box like that cause any significant detriment / interference in their networking / radio communications? I hope the state gets the funding it needs.
- PhantomGremlin 8y ago
  would having the phones all lined up in a box like that cause any significant detriment When I saw that picture I thought the same thing. But since their goal was to document how bad the reception is, any extra interference could only help make their case. :) I put a smiley there, but this did seem very haphazard; not a well thought out setup.
clubm8 8y ago
This is a bit off topic but the article made me think about it: I am considering getting a landline for my next home, and just realized I have no idea what a fair price is. I have not had a landline my entire life (always used a cell). Is a hardline cheap in these areas or do they charge about as much as a cell since they know there is demand for a reliable connection?
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Reasonable is between $20-30/month.
- smnrchrds 8y ago
  What is the advantage of landline over VOIP?
  - zrobotics 8y ago
    Much more likely to work in an emergency-voip won't work in a power outage.
  - clubm8 8y ago
    > What is the advantage of landline over VOIP? A few things. First, there is a small bit of power going over traditional copper lines, and you are able to dial 911 even if the power goes out or the internet goes down. Second it's a sociological mechanism. People in modern times are incredibly entitled, so saying "I didn't want to answer your call because I was busy" makes them irrationally angry. But if you give out your landline you can just say you weren't at home.
chiph 8y ago
Cell signal strength would be an interesting addition as a layer to Open Street Maps.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  OpenStreetMap doesn't have layers. It's also not really a great fit for data that you'd want to gather systematically. For signal strength, you'd get lots of data in places that people frequent (and that tend to have good signal) and little data in more remote places, where the measurements would be of more value.
- joecool1029 8y ago
  It's not perfect, but cellmapper.net has signal strength and the bands pulled in all on a crowdsourced map.
amichal 8y ago
This map matches 1-1 in the areas I drive regularly. it orrectly shows no coverage at home and 2-3 places on the way to work 20 miles away where there is zero signal
hognewra 8y ago
Horribly..
7952 8y ago
I wonder how the cell coverage maps are generated. I think it is common to use terrain data and tower positions to determine line of site to a tower. Is that flawed in some way, or are the results being manipulated to improve them?

88 points by evo_9 8y ago

I've spent a lot of time in Vermont.. It has terrible cell service and no quest is needed to prove that. As a vacation spot, I consider it a positive. I know the residents feel differently.

PaulHoule 8y ago

I believe this is the case everywhere in the U.S. That is, major cell carriers claim widespread coverage in rural and exurban areas that is simply not the case. People have had an incentive to expose this because of the federal funding for wireless expansion, but really it is a "truth in advertising" issue.

baldfat 8y ago
Well the northeast mountains have a ton of iron in the rocks is my theory. It makes it almost line of sight for signal. I use to live in Connecticut and it was HORRIBLE. Living in PA it is so much better. When I travel through to my In-laws in WV we get no internet signal for about 2.5 hours. That has to be due to the low population in Western Maryland.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  Iron ore is neither conducive nor magnetic.
  - hexane360 8y ago
    Well, magnetite (Fe3O4) is, but you're right that its a silly theory to use to explain poor signal. For one, signal would have to be able to penetrate a decent amount underground in the first place, which it can't.
  - baldfat 8y ago
    Yes and since it isn't conductive it causes for weak radio signal. Source - My Dad is an old HAM Radio operator.
    - irq 8y ago
      Ham is not capitalized. It’s not an initialism or an acronym.
      - techsupporter 8y ago
        For some OFs (old farts), HAM is written as all uppercase because of the (apocryphal) story of the a station being operated under the "HAM" call sign by Albert Hyman, Bob Almy, and Peggie Murray that came to stand for all of "ham radio" because they made an impassioned plea against a bill in Congress that would have revoked the frequency allocations for all of amateur radio and given them over to the military. Further, since call signs are always written in uppercase (WRR-FM, KIRO-AM, KBTC-TV), some hams are apt to write the name of the hobby as HAM out of habit/solidarity. So while you're technically right that "ham" is more of "ham-fisted" or "what a ham" variety, you're not following the internal culture.
        irq 8y ago
        This is false. Sources: https://web.archive.org/web/20090527172642/http://w1af.harvard.edu/hamorigin.html https://web.archive.org/web/20090527172642/http://w1af.harva... https://www.rcarc.org/presentations/Ham_Radio_History.pdf https://www.rcarc.org/presentations/Ham_Radio_History.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio#False_etymologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio#False_e...
        techsupporter 8y ago
        I know that the story about Hyman and company is false. That’s why I put the word “apocryphal” in there, which means “erroneous or fictitious.” But people still write HAM in all uppercase because of the legend, false or not.
- PaulHoule 8y ago
  Many of the hilly areas in the Eastern US are plains that have been dissected by water and ice. Where I live in upstate NY, the hilltops are all around 2000 feet and are flanked by valleys such that at best a hilltop has a line of site for the adjacent valleys. Last summer I found I could get about 3Mbps down from an AT&T tower that was two valleys away that was using 700 Mhz spectrum -- with a directional antenna. In some of the more rural areas, the hilltops are roadless so any attempt to put in wireless infrastructure isn't just a matter of running wires for power and data, but actually building roads.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  It's probably the different type of terrain more than the composition. It isn't like cellular signals blast through most earth surface materials (or even just vegetation).
rjplatte 8y ago
I've had a good experience with Verizon in rural areas in New England and Virginia/West VA. I used to use T-Mobile, and lose coverage frequently, but now I can go days without losing signal, even in the middle of nowhere.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- LeoPanthera 8y ago
  I have both a T-Mobile phone and a Verizon phone, and Verizon often provides me with the experience of my phone saying that I have 4 or 5 bars, but being unable to get any data to flow, or sometimes to even make a call. I don't know what causes that, but I have learned to ignore the signal strength display on Verizon.
  - snazz 8y ago
    And I’ve used most every major carrier, and they all do that fairly frequently. The strength display is especially inaccurate when you’re moving or when you are in a particularly unpopulated place. That said, the iPhone I used for a while did better than my old Nokia and my current Samsung, so it certainly seems to pertain to the hardware, too. I’m guessing many people change carriers at the same time as they change phones, which might make it hard to figure out which one is to blame.
  - jdod 8y ago
    created an account just for this: i spend a lot of time in airports, one of my conversation starters is 'tell me something about your work i can't find on google'. i said this to a person who inspects/installs cell towers. this person told me that a few years ago instead of installing new or upgrading towers for 4G LTE, on a lot of the towers the company had them install a chip that makes it look like users have 4g LTE signal but it's only 4g or 3g and not LTE. i'm sure someone will come along in the comments and tell me this person lied and this is impossible, and that may be true, just throwing my two pennies out there.
twothamendment 8y ago
I'm sure it is everywhere. I'm in NW Montana and was recently checking out coverage maps of various carriers. I had never noticed the fine print telling me something like "coverage" was defined as slow and would only work outdoors. If I'm in my house, I'm lucky to get a signal on one side of it. I really do count it as lucky. My neighbor doesn't get anything at all - inside or out, but the coverage map says he's good. A few years ago, before buying a phone, he borrowed a Verizon phone (from them) to make sure it worked at home. It did, he bought it and a few months later it quit working. The phone is fine, I guess they are no longer using the tower that served him. I don't think they updated their coverage map.
ldoughty 8y ago
Look at their advertised claims closely. They say they cover 98% (ish) of Americans. You can cover that amount of Americans while only covering 60% of the land mass. This means rural areas are typically lower priority ... But they always soon to get interstates.

cialowicz 8y ago

Here's the interactive map: http://vtpsd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=444a3d49c2374d509958f1c0e1d0d21b http://vtpsd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id... And the page that links to the full report: https://publicservice.vermont.gov/content/mobile-wireless-2018-drive-test https://publicservice.vermont.gov/content/mobile-wireless-20...

williesleg 8y ago

Thanks to the Commie guy, Bernie Sanders. Good thing Hillary aborted him.

Spooky23 8y ago

God bless the guy, and too bad that the state is too cheap to buy better equipment for the purpose. All carriers have this data for all of the carriers in each region. If you’re a big customer, they will even show it to you under NDA.

gruez 8y ago
>and too bad that the state is too cheap to buy better equipment for the purpose. What would be "better equipment" in this case? Professional/enterprise/labatory radio equipment, rather than cell phones? CNC milled/3d printed racks rather than a cardboard box? I don't think there's much you can improve here.
toomuchtodo 8y ago
We should tweak the law then to require carriers to report this data to the FCC for public consumption as a condition of radio spectrum licensing and usage.
- Spooky23 8y ago
  I agree. They would fight hard to keep that data proprietary, as certain property owners might be more aggressive about lease pricing or royalties.
PhantomGremlin 8y ago
All carriers have this data for all of the carriers in each region. Many many years ago the FM radio station at college wanted to get FCC approval to increase broadcast power to 10 KW. In order to justify that, some students drove around taking signal strength measurements all over the area. They then picked the worst measurements to submit to the FCC. This wasn't a violation of any rules. Let's say (for example) that the FCC submission needs 50 measurements spaced apart a certain distance. If you have actually taken 150 measurements then you can easily select a coherent set of 50 that show just how bad things are and justify why you need that 10 KW non-commercial license. It's possible for the cell carriers to do something like this, but in reverse. It may make business sense for them to only retain/report measurement data that makes them look good? Cell towers aren't cheap to put up. If carriers can obtain "decent" coverage with fewer towers, then it's smart for them to do that? Of course, the carriers already have very very very granular data. They should be able to gather, and perhaps actually do gather, data from every single cellphone transmission as it establishes both voice and data connections. The carriers could/should use that information to erect more towers and to tweak antenna orientations on existing towers. In my experience, however, this doesn't seem to happen. The same areas around me have dead spots that persist for years. This is in relatively flat suburban terrain, without too many large hills or tall buildings to interfere. So in my anecdotal experience, Verizon doesn't give a shit about poor signal strength. And they're perhaps? the best at caring, so what does that say about the others?

jt2190 8y ago

> At stake in the state's project [of having an Vermont Department of Public Service employee drive around the state for six weeks taking download speed tests] is potentially millions of dollars in federal money. The FCC has $4.53 billion available to use around the country. > "What we were looking at was being almost completely foreclosed from any of it because our state was considered nearly completely covered with 4G LTE service," [Clay] Purvis, [the state's telecommunications director] said. "And now we've opened up a significant amount of that space."

rmason 8y ago

Just wrote a friend who is a telecom professor and suggested they run a summer experiment here in Michigan like this guy did with students collecting the data. I don't know what he will think of the idea but I'd sure like to see a coverage map with real data, not the carriers version of the truth.

parksy 8y ago

I think this is great but would having the phones all lined up in a box like that cause any significant detriment / interference in their networking / radio communications? I hope the state gets the funding it needs.

PhantomGremlin 8y ago
would having the phones all lined up in a box like that cause any significant detriment When I saw that picture I thought the same thing. But since their goal was to document how bad the reception is, any extra interference could only help make their case. :) I put a smiley there, but this did seem very haphazard; not a well thought out setup.

clubm8 8y ago

This is a bit off topic but the article made me think about it: I am considering getting a landline for my next home, and just realized I have no idea what a fair price is. I have not had a landline my entire life (always used a cell). Is a hardline cheap in these areas or do they charge about as much as a cell since they know there is demand for a reliable connection?

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Reasonable is between $20-30/month.
smnrchrds 8y ago
What is the advantage of landline over VOIP?
- zrobotics 8y ago
  Much more likely to work in an emergency-voip won't work in a power outage.
- clubm8 8y ago
  > What is the advantage of landline over VOIP? A few things. First, there is a small bit of power going over traditional copper lines, and you are able to dial 911 even if the power goes out or the internet goes down. Second it's a sociological mechanism. People in modern times are incredibly entitled, so saying "I didn't want to answer your call because I was busy" makes them irrationally angry. But if you give out your landline you can just say you weren't at home.

chiph 8y ago

Cell signal strength would be an interesting addition as a layer to Open Street Maps.

maxerickson 8y ago
OpenStreetMap doesn't have layers. It's also not really a great fit for data that you'd want to gather systematically. For signal strength, you'd get lots of data in places that people frequent (and that tend to have good signal) and little data in more remote places, where the measurements would be of more value.
joecool1029 8y ago
It's not perfect, but cellmapper.net has signal strength and the bands pulled in all on a crowdsourced map.

amichal 8y ago

This map matches 1-1 in the areas I drive regularly. it orrectly shows no coverage at home and 2-3 places on the way to work 20 miles away where there is zero signal

hognewra 8y ago

Horribly..

7952 8y ago

I wonder how the cell coverage maps are generated. I think it is common to use terrain data and tower positions to determine line of site to a tower. Is that flawed in some way, or are the results being manipulated to improve them?