O2 poor coverage - why?

[Anonymous]

I have been with O2 for about 6 months after 16 years with Orange. On my last upgrade, O2 had better deals.

But I am amazed at how poor O2's coverage is, especially when compared with Orange/T-Mobile. I live within a mile of Canterbury city centre and within a mile of the dual carriageway A2 but the signal is not good enough to keep a voice conversation going. My phone always shows that Orange or T-Mobile are in range but the O2 signal just keeps dropping out.

We have just been to the Chichester area. Same again - although very near the A27, O2 coverage is terrible. Again, Orange coverage is fine.

It looks as if I made a big mistake changing to O2. Are they not investing in their network? I wonder if as one of the older providers they are not upgrading their antiquated transmission equipment?

I had expected much better.

[Anonymous]

Indeed, it looks like no investment in towers. Just advertising.
There is no real excuse for such poor coverage in such a small country with such a large population.

[perksie]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Indeed, it looks like no investment in towers. Just advertising.
There is no real excuse for such poor coverage in such a small country with such a large population.

---

O2 actually spend over a million pounds a day on network improvements, but there will always be areas where coverage is patchy.

It's wireless not magic unfortunately, if you study the coverage maps you will see how difficult it is to cover the whole country, which is unlikely to ever happen.

http://www.o2.co.uk/coveragechecker

[Anonymous]

---

@perksie wrote:

O2 actually spend over a million pounds a day on network improvements

---

I have asked O2 Admin to be directed to the proof of this claim by O2 but so far it has not been posted.

£365,000,000 p.a. is a lot of dosh......even if it's just working days, £253,000,000 is still a heck of a bundle.

Personally, I would doubt the claim until specific data was published. 

[ewanrw]

You know that the coverage checker (as with all networks) is based on a mathematical prediction, and does not represent actual coverage?

All the networks claim circa 99% population coverage, and 95% landmass but it's rubbish. The BBC did a survey in 2010/11 which mapped out actual coverage, and the networks should be embarrassed (will try and find the link to survey results).

Personally I very much doubt that any network is currently investing in their 3G coverage, as 4G will make it null and void in a year or two.

ewan

[perksie]

Re-stated by the CEO here, why would he not be telling the truth?

http://news.o2.co.uk/2012/08/17/post-olympics-4g-is-lining-up-in-the-network-fast-lane/

[perksie]

---

@ewanrw wrote:
Personally I very much doubt that any network is currently investing in their 3G coverage, as 4G will make it null and void in a year or two.

ewan

---

No doubt much of that infrastructure will still be needed.

[ewanrw]

No doubt some of the infrastructure (masts/power supply) will still be needed, but I believe 4G will require entirely new transmission equipment in most cases, so I just don't see any network spending huge amounts on improving the 3G footprint, when 4G is just around the corner. Not too mention the £Bns the 4G rollout will cost them.

Anyway, regards coverage in general, in Scotland, unless you are on O2 or Voda, you will struggle for signal outside of cities and large towns. To say a network has poor coverage is usually in relation to a specific set of circumstances, and if O2 doesn't work for you, try Voda (will soon be identical to O2 coverage) or T-Mob/Orange/3 who use the poorer quality 1800MHz frequency.

Just my 2p worth.

ewan

[adamtemp64]

All the o2 equipment that is being replaced as part of the 3 year deal jan 2011 (2 companies one up north one down south) will make all the existing 2g and 3g kit compatable with 4g as a software update when required the 2g and 3g bands will still be used and 4g will provide the main data path as far as I can make out reading all the snippets posted on many news sites.

re 3 year upgrade see here http://www.fiercewireless.com/europe/story/ericsson-and-nsn-share-o2-uk-network-upgrades/2011-01-28  .

[ewanrw]

So new transmission equipment then

I wonder if they need permission from the local authority the base station is located in to turn on a new frequency?

Also, regarding the point about how much the networks spend on improvements, if the network sharing programs that EE and now Voda/O2 are doing, are expected to save them £Bn's in maintenence costs, do you reckon they'll still quote £1M or £1.5M per day of investment? Surely they can't reduce costs, yet continue to invest on the same overhead? Or will the savings lead to increased investment? 

ewan

P.S. Or the savings could just be translated as extra profit!

[adamtemp64]

new equipment yes hence the 1.5 million a day quoted elsewhere

And no planning would be required as far as I understand it only for new sites. A good guide to planning law regarding masts http://www2.redbridge.gov.uk/cms/planning_and_the_environment/planning/mobile_phone_masts.aspx hints that not all new masts need planning