Mobile phone masts

G a z . wrote:

>> Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the more
>> robust the network and generally greater the capacity
>>
>> Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in lower the handsets output
>>
>
> Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe that the above
> is why the network install ever increasing amount of masts, more
> importantly why local government is impotent to legally stop them!

Why do you think they install more masts - is it to increase the value
of the balance sheet?

---

› See More: Mobile phone masts

G a z . wrote:

>> Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the more
>> robust the network and generally greater the capacity
>>
>> Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in lower the handsets output
>>
>
> Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe that the above
> is why the network install ever increasing amount of masts, more
> importantly why local government is impotent to legally stop them!

Why do you think they install more masts - is it to increase the value
of the balance sheet?

"Colin Forrester" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]
> G a z . wrote:
>
> > > Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the
> > > more robust the network and generally greater the capacity
> > >
> > > Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in
> > > lower the handsets output
> >
> > Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe
> > that the above is why the network install ever
> > increasing amount of masts, more importantly why local
> > government is impotent to legally stop them!
>
> Why do you think they install more masts - is it to
> increase the value of the balance sheet?

I'd be willing to bet that most of those who bleat about masts would be
the first to complain when their phones stopped working.

Ivor

"Colin Forrester" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]
> G a z . wrote:
>
> > > Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the
> > > more robust the network and generally greater the capacity
> > >
> > > Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in
> > > lower the handsets output
> >
> > Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe
> > that the above is why the network install ever
> > increasing amount of masts, more importantly why local
> > government is impotent to legally stop them!
>
> Why do you think they install more masts - is it to
> increase the value of the balance sheet?

I'd be willing to bet that most of those who bleat about masts would be
the first to complain when their phones stopped working.

Ivor

"Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I've been looking at http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and notice that
> orange have littered my town with cells while the other networks can make
> do with just one or two. It might be a dumb question but why is this? It's
> not a large town and I get a reception where ever I am with only one cell!
>
> Dan
>

because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only systems..........

"Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I've been looking at http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and notice that
> orange have littered my town with cells while the other networks can make
> do with just one or two. It might be a dumb question but why is this? It's
> not a large town and I get a reception where ever I am with only one cell!
>
> Dan
>

because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only systems..........

"G a z ." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> says...
>
> > Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the more
> > robust the network and generally greater the capacity
> >
> > Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in lower the handsets
output
> >
>
> Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe that the above
> is why the network install ever increasing amount of masts, more
> importantly why local government is impotent to legally stop them!

It's one of the reasons. A few others, off the top of my head:

- Provide additional local capacity where needed (although admittedly extra
hardware on existing sites is another option here)

- Provide additional depth of coverage (say, in-building) or plug a local
blackspot where the main "umbrella" cell might be a little weak.

- Providing dedicated capacity or coverage to an area of particularly high
usage - say, business or leisure parks for example. It means the "on-site"
cell can deal with the local traffic and let the umbrella cell deal with the
"wide area" coverage.

As for local government being "impotent to legally stop them", I think
you'll find even that's not true. I don't have the exact references and
quotes to hand, but there's a government planning document that details what
factors planning authorities can and cannot take into account when
considering these applications.

Visual amenity etc, is very much "allowed". Perceived health risks and any
"technical" (i.e. "our phones already work perfectly well here") arguments
are not allowed. IMO, quite right too. Some of the "objections" put up my
residents in this part of the world for these sites are so weak and false
it's almost funny. "The mast might interfere" with my Sky dish is the best
one I've seen so far - it's a different part of the radio spectrum for
goodness' sake!!

Regards

Jon.

--
Jon Pitts
Email: [email protected] Attachments: [email protected]

"G a z ." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> says...
>
> > Think of GSM network like the WWW, the more cells the more
> > robust the network and generally greater the capacity
> >
> > Also closer and stronger the signal, resulting in lower the handsets
output
> >
>
> Please, please, PLEASE do not tell me that you believe that the above
> is why the network install ever increasing amount of masts, more
> importantly why local government is impotent to legally stop them!

It's one of the reasons. A few others, off the top of my head:

- Provide additional local capacity where needed (although admittedly extra
hardware on existing sites is another option here)

- Provide additional depth of coverage (say, in-building) or plug a local
blackspot where the main "umbrella" cell might be a little weak.

- Providing dedicated capacity or coverage to an area of particularly high
usage - say, business or leisure parks for example. It means the "on-site"
cell can deal with the local traffic and let the umbrella cell deal with the
"wide area" coverage.

As for local government being "impotent to legally stop them", I think
you'll find even that's not true. I don't have the exact references and
quotes to hand, but there's a government planning document that details what
factors planning authorities can and cannot take into account when
considering these applications.

Visual amenity etc, is very much "allowed". Perceived health risks and any
"technical" (i.e. "our phones already work perfectly well here") arguments
are not allowed. IMO, quite right too. Some of the "objections" put up my
residents in this part of the world for these sites are so weak and false
it's almost funny. "The mast might interfere" with my Sky dish is the best
one I've seen so far - it's a different part of the radio spectrum for
goodness' sake!!

Regards

Jon.

--
Jon Pitts
Email: [email protected] Attachments: [email protected]

"Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I've been looking at
> > http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and notice that
> > orange have littered my town with cells while the other
> > networks can make do with just one or two. It might be
> > a dumb question but why is this? It's not a large town
> > and I get a reception where ever I am with only one
> > cell! Dan
> >
>
> because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only
> systems..........

Here we go, here we go, here we go again ;-)

Hello, Jim..!

Ivor

"Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I've been looking at
> > http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and notice that
> > orange have littered my town with cells while the other
> > networks can make do with just one or two. It might be
> > a dumb question but why is this? It's not a large town
> > and I get a reception where ever I am with only one
> > cell! Dan
> >
>
> because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only
> systems..........

Here we go, here we go, here we go again ;-)

Hello, Jim..!

Ivor

"Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I've been looking at http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and
notice that
> > orange have littered my town with cells while the other networks
can make
> > do with just one or two. It might be a dumb question but why is
this? It's
> > not a large town and I get a reception where ever I am with only
one cell!
> >
>


Many people don't realise that unless there is base station across the
road, most mobile phone shops owned by the SPs have a picocell within
the shop or maybe a microcell on the outside.

No point in trying to sell a phone if it won't work through lack of
signal!


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

>> because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only
>> systems..........
>
> Here we go, here we go, here we go again ;-)
>
> Hello, Jim..!
>
> Ivor
>
>

Hello Ivor..........how is the enjin' ........

In article <[email protected]>, harrogate3
<[email protected]> writes
>
>"Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > I've been looking at http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/ and
>notice that
>> > orange have littered my town with cells while the other networks
>can make
>> > do with just one or two. It might be a dumb question but why is
>this? It's
>> > not a large town and I get a reception where ever I am with only
>one cell!
>> >
>>
>
>
>Many people don't realise that unless there is base station across the
>road, most mobile phone shops owned by the SPs have a picocell within
>the shop or maybe a microcell on the outside.
>
>No point in trying to sell a phone if it won't work through lack of
>signal!
>
>
>--
>Woody
>
>harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com
>
>

There is a plan round here to put a O2 site in by the side of the road
next to a school. Seems that there was a cock-up bu the council planners
who either didn't object how they should have done or something like it
and it went past the appropriate number of objection days. Anyway O2 are
coming under fire from the locals re this mast.

Now there are some other sites nearby but there're on private land and
it seems the council, rather highways authority, will let them site it
beside the road for no rental charge. Course if they go to the other
nearby site they will be charged. Seems that all councils do this i.e.
don't charge for roadside sites. Is this a reason why mobile Telcos do
this in preference or do other local highway authorities charge site
rental for them.

If so then the highways authorities are missing out or the Telcos are
having an easy time of it!.....
--
Tony Sayer

"Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:GX%[email protected]
> > > because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only
> > > systems..........
> >
> > Here we go, here we go, here we go again ;-)
> >
> > Hello, Jim..!
> >
> > Ivor
>
> Hello Ivor..........how is the enjin' ........

Steaming away nicely, thanks for asking ;-)

Ivor

"Ivor Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Jim GM4DHJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:GX%[email protected]
>> > > because Orange and T Mobile as pissy 1800 Mhz only
>> > > systems..........
>> >
>> > Here we go, here we go, here we go again ;-)
>> >
>> > Hello, Jim..!
>> >
>> > Ivor
>>
>> Hello Ivor..........how is the enjin' ........
>
> Steaming away nicely, thanks for asking ;-)
>
> Ivor
>
>

and Idris ? .........