Coverage at 82%

[Ben]

In this article about Three UK's recent subscriber numbers, it is mentioned that they now boast population coverage of 82%. That's a fractional increase when you consider how rapidly those numbers shot up initially. Of course, that extra 2% probably represents a reasonable amount of physical coverage - the last 20% of the population is going to be hard going for all the UK's 3G networks.

Will Three ever achieve anything like GSM coverage levels in the UK? At this rate, it's going to take a long, long time.

[Hands0n]

Is that 82% actually 3G coverage or is it the total availability of H3 generally (i.e. 3G and 2.5G via MMO2)? Looking at H3's coverage map on their website I would say that it is the latter.

[miffed]

I would suspect it is 3G coverage - after all, o2 have 99% - so Three (via their roaming agreement ) at worst have 99% GSM coverage

What are their obligations under the licensing ? - I suspect that cverage will never get up as high as GSM due to the nature of the transmission fields (at this point I am totally out of my depth , lol , but I am guessing that the 3G frequencies are so high that coverage becomes a "line of sight" kind of affair - and to get total coverage transmitters would need to be installed in every "nook & cranny" ) Perhaps someone can confirm or deny this ?

[Jon3G]

Thats impressive for 3 and something to be proud of. However they now need to sort out the service and CS support.... oh and there own GSM network and they will be neally there to being a top provider

[miffed]

Originally Posted by Jon3G

Thats impressive for 3 and something to be proud of. However they now need to sort out the service and CS support.... oh and there own GSM network and they will be neally there to being a top provider

couldn't agree more - because increasing 3G coverage is not a good thing in terms of service (at least that is the opinion of some )

Even Three dealers have been known to give advice on how to trick your way to "unofficially" roam onto o2 when their is ample 3G coverage !

[Ben]

"What are their obligations under the licensing ?"

80%, afaik, so they're home and dry. The network is improving though. Having one of those Nokia 6630's on Three probably wouldn't be too painful at all!

[3g-g]

Originally Posted by miffed

...I suspect that cverage will never get up as high as GSM due to the nature of the transmission fields (at this point I am totally out of my depth , lol , but I am guessing that the 3G frequencies are so high that coverage becomes a "line of sight" kind of affair - and to get total coverage transmitters would need to be installed in every "nook & cranny" ) Perhaps someone can confirm or deny this ?

You're right that the change in frequencies means more transmitters to retain the same coverage as GSM.. but it's not a line of sight affair, you can still get service from a fair distance on some cells, it's all down to how the antennas are set up. Expect UMTS in the cities and GSM EDGE in rural areas..

If anything I'd suspect O2 and Voda will have the most difficult time setting up their UMTS coverage. With GSM900 it wasn't difficult to get the coverage wrong, it would beam for miles and down over the tops of hills no problem. In the sticks they've found it easy to outperform Orange and T-Mob as they're on 1800... and as the two I've just mentioned have been planning and using a higher frequency for years I think they'll find it easier to get their UMTS network coverage right sooner rather than later. We shall wait and see!