Tower Id in debug screen question (bonus map too)

First I'd like to thank the folks who showed me how to get to the
DEBUG SCREEN on my N200. (Menu 8-0-040793).

Also the TEST mode is interesting too...

Anyway,

I was wondering it seems like sometimes the P number which I am
thinking is the cell tower I am on corresponds to the number from
sprintsites.com

Other times, I don't have a clue where that number is coming from.

Is there any correlation between the two?

Also, I created a map for those of you with Map Point 2002 that has
every cell tower that sprint lists in its db on sprintsites.com

http://www.phoenix-sys.com/software/SPCS_08132003.ptm

-- please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.

---

› See More: Tower Id in debug screen question (bonus map too)

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:

> please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.

I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
map maker.

Phillipe <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:
>
> > please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> > data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> > for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> > download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.
>
> I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
> Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
> will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
> database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
> reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
> planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
> put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
> map maker.

I was also referring to the one tower that sprint PCS has the
incorrect Lat/Long and it shows up in Greenland!

That is an obvious error...(I think)

Scott

"Scott Emick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Phillipe <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:
> >
> > > please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> > > data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> > > for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> > > download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.
> >
> > I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
> > Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
> > will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
> > database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
> > reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
> > planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
> > put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
> > map maker.
>
> I was also referring to the one tower that sprint PCS has the
> incorrect Lat/Long and it shows up in Greenland!
>
> That is an obvious error...(I think)
>
> Scott
I don't believe they own licences in Greenland. I could be wrong though.

Wooohoo! If I go to greenland I'll have coverage!

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

The P is the PN code for the sector you are communicating on the cell
network (primarily) with. You communicate with 3 at once. The
strongest is what you read. You will only see towers that are on the
neighborlist of a site. If you see the PN then you are talking to that
sector. Believe me when I say they do not list all the sites on that
map. There are hundreds of sites most cities. Each site typically has
3 sectors 120 degrees offset.

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:

> please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.

I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
map maker.

"Scott Emick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Phillipe <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:
> >
> > > please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> > > data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> > > for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> > > download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.
> >
> > I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
> > Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
> > will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
> > database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
> > reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
> > planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
> > put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
> > map maker.
>
> I was also referring to the one tower that sprint PCS has the
> incorrect Lat/Long and it shows up in Greenland!
>
> That is an obvious error...(I think)
>
> Scott
I don't believe they own licences in Greenland. I could be wrong though.

Phillipe <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Scott Emick) wrote:
>
> > please don't email or question its accuracy, I just imported the
> > data from sprint, and there is some bad data in there. It is correct
> > for the most part. It is very easy for anyone to do this, just
> > download the data from sprintsites and import into Map Point 2002.
>
> I bet I know how incorrect data gets in there. Here is my hypothesis.
> Once a year during the budgetary process, they plan where the new towers
> will be. When the budget is approved, those points get entered in the
> database. However when tower construction time begins for myriad
> reasons, a tower may have to be at a different location than orginally
> planned, so for economic or environmental or political reasons it gets
> put in a different place, but that information never gets back to the
> map maker.

I was also referring to the one tower that sprint PCS has the
incorrect Lat/Long and it shows up in Greenland!

That is an obvious error...(I think)

Scott