Impressive EE 4G Coverage

Leeds_Guy · 07-01-2014, 15:58

It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near.

Well done EE

WelshBluebird · 07-01-2014, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leeds_Guy

It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near.

Well done EE

And Three who have 4G nowhere (the trial does not count IMO).
I'm almost tempted to get a dual sim adapter and a PAYG EE 4G sim just so I can use 4G when I need it (especially as in some of the areas where EE have 4G, I have had some slow speeds on Threes normally fast 3G network).
I do really hope Three get a move on!

jabbamk1 · 07-01-2014, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by WelshBluebird

And Three who have 4G nowhere (the trial does not count IMO).

Leeds guy was comparing EE 4G to O2/Voda 3G. Saying that EE have 4G in places where O2 and Voda don't even have 3G. Three and EE would be the only networks to have 3G there and EE would have 4G.

qasdfdsaq · 07-01-2014, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leeds_Guy

It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near.

Well done EE

Could say bad things based on a single example as well.

Really disappointing to see no 4G coverage after a year in places you would expect it. For example, Musselburgh in East Lothian. Very heavily populated, the largest town on the outskirts of Edinburgh.

This further shames EE as O2 and Vodafone both have full indoor 4G coverage there despite EE having a year's headstart.

There've also been a few reports by individuals (The Lord Lucan being one of the more reputable ones) that the coverage maps do not match actual coverage, in some of the "new" areas coverage is nowhere near what the map indicates it should be.

jabbamk1 · 07-01-2014, 16:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

There've also been a few reports by individuals (The Lord Lucan being one of the more reputable ones) that the coverage maps do not match actual coverage, in some of the "new" areas coverage is nowhere near what the map indicates it should be.

That applies for every network really. Vodafone had huge areas of coverage showing on coverage maps where there were actually no 4G masts active as well.

qasdfdsaq · 07-01-2014, 18:12

Yes I know, I said myself the Vodafone map looks more like an opportunistic misprint than an actual coverage map.

But that's my whole point, ever network has good spots and bad spots. Some more than others. Generalizing basing on one spot though...

uno · 07-01-2014, 23:34

Does anybody know are EE having problems in rolling out double speed coverage e.g 20mhz bandwidth ? As they have launched 40-50 new places in the last year but have not announced or launched any more double speed areas so wondered whether EE have given up on that in any more places.

qasdfdsaq · 08-01-2014, 00:07

I can't quite figure out what exactly they call "double speed", because it's not 20Mhz.

Nearly everywhere in Edinburgh that shows as non-double speed is actually 20Mhz. Lots of the new areas had double speed showing on the coverage maps but were later removed.

In areas covered by just a single 20Mhz-only mast, some parts of its' coverage are shown as double speed whereas weaker coverage areas from the same mast are not.

In simple terms, "double speed" does not directly correlate with 20Mhz coverage.

jabbamk1 · 08-01-2014, 00:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I can't quite figure out what exactly they call "double speed", because it's not 20Mhz.

That is the reason why they call it double speed...

qasdfdsaq · 08-01-2014, 01:25

But it's not what they actually call double speed.

Nor does it relate to what's called "double speed" in relation to the "double speed" tariffs.

The Lord Lucan · 08-01-2014, 01:58

No point in showing an area as Double Speed if the site has old backhaul.

qasdfdsaq · 08-01-2014, 02:35

That is indeed, part of why I suspect it is not down to the presence of purely 20Mhz transmissions.

qasdfdsaq · 09-01-2014, 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lord Lucan

No point in showing an area as Double Speed if the site has old backhaul.

Oh but there is - double spectrum improves speeds across the board even with old backhaul. Particularly as EE's RRC is very well tuned to produce balanced speeds regardless of signal.

So even if a 20Mhz mast with old backhaul won't achieve higher peak speeds (which I personally never see anyway) it'll still achieve much higher speeds while indoors and with poor signal - and they do say the majority of mobile use is indoors.

As an example, where both EE "double speed" 20Mhz and O2 10Mhz deliver the same 55Mbps outdoors from a colocated mast, the double spectrum and better balancing means once indoors and the signal drops EE still deliver 30Mbps while O2's 10Mhz network barely manages 10Mbps, even with a stronger signal.

The Lord Lucan · 09-01-2014, 03:53

That is correct. However Double Speed is an internal standard for EE. The SyncE & 20 Mhz both have to be in place.

uno · 09-01-2014, 14:16

It does not still explain why EE have not done any more double speed areas since they first launched it.

I can understand that there may be certain masts that are waiting for new backhaul but not whole counties and large cities.

A guy I know in the EE shop in Leicesyer told me it was due to the amount of use the 1800 mhz 2G network got in areas if use was high they could not do double speed upgrades. He said also that the 2G network is also used for M2M and for example if a electric company is using EE in the East midlands for their meter readings then higher use than say in Birmingham also a lot of bus companies use the network for bus tracking

japitts · 09-01-2014, 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by uno

A guy I know in the EE shop in Leicesyer told me it was due to the amount of use the 1800 mhz 2G network got in areas if use was high they could not do double speed upgrades. He said also that the 2G network is also used for M2M and for example if a electric company is using EE in the East midlands for their meter readings then higher use than say in Birmingham also a lot of bus companies use the network for bus tracking

There may be an element of truth, who knows, but....

"A guy in the EE shop" is rather removed from the reality of network operations, performance and capacity management.

Meter readings over M2M are pretty low volumes of data. As for high 2G usage preventing L1800 double-speed upgrades, I'd be interested in how he explains away central London. Probably one of the busier parts of the network and no shortage of double-speed sites there...

qasdfdsaq · 09-01-2014, 23:34

Tru dat.

Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity.

beecart · 10-01-2014, 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Tru dat.

Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity.

What does half rate codec mean?

qasdfdsaq · 10-01-2014, 03:48

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_Rate

japitts · 10-01-2014, 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Tru dat.

Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity.

Appreciate that a 2G call used the HR codec, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it was due to capacity issues.

plymouthbloke1974 · 10-01-2014, 22:50

O2 use half rate codec on every site, don't they??

beecart · 10-01-2014, 23:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by plymouthbloke1974

O2 use half rate codec on every site, don't they??

Do they???

qasdfdsaq · 11-01-2014, 00:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by japitts

Appreciate that a 2G call used the HR codec, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it was due to capacity issues.

Never seen a call switch from EFR to HR on the same mast for any other reason...

japitts · 11-01-2014, 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Never seen a call switch from EFR to HR on the same mast for any other reason...

I was working on a 2G site only this afternoon that did exactly that.

Plenty of spare timeslots and yet half a dozen calls shifted onto HR
. Other sectors of the same site pretty close to being maxed out, yet no HR in sight.

Sorry to spoil your theory an' all!

qasdfdsaq · 11-01-2014, 01:10

Working on it because of a fault I presume...

Well of course, but you can't consider the fault scenario to be normal behaviour.

I'm not sure why pointing out an exception to the rule means what does happen the majority of the time is automatically wrong. By it's very nature the exception is less likely to be the case.

Mind you if you say there were half a dozen calls on HR, then obviously there can't have been plenty of free time slots. There are only 7 timeslots in total on a GSM channel, excluding those unuseable for calls

07-01-2014, 15:58	#1
Leeds_Guy Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 16	Impressive EE 4G Coverage It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near. Well done EE

07-01-2014, 16:01	#2
WelshBluebird Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 720	Quote: Originally Posted by Leeds_Guy It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near. Well done EE And Three who have 4G nowhere (the trial does not count IMO). I'm almost tempted to get a dual sim adapter and a PAYG EE 4G sim just so I can use 4G when I need it (especially as in some of the areas where EE have 4G, I have had some slow speeds on Threes normally fast 3G network). I do really hope Three get a move on!

07-01-2014, 16:11	#3
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by WelshBluebird And Three who have 4G nowhere (the trial does not count IMO). Leeds guy was comparing EE 4G to O2/Voda 3G. Saying that EE have 4G in places where O2 and Voda don't even have 3G. Three and EE would be the only networks to have 3G there and EE would have 4G.

07-01-2014, 16:15	#4
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by Leeds_Guy It looks like the EE 4G coverage maps have been updated in the last 24 hours. It's really impressive to see 4G appearing in places you wouldn't expect it. For example, Leyburn in North Yorkshire - very sparsely populated. This further shames O2 and Vodafone who don't even have 3G coverage anywhere near. Well done EE Could say bad things based on a single example as well. Really disappointing to see no 4G coverage after a year in places you would expect it. For example, Musselburgh in East Lothian. Very heavily populated, the largest town on the outskirts of Edinburgh. This further shames EE as O2 and Vodafone both have full indoor 4G coverage there despite EE having a year's headstart. There've also been a few reports by individuals (The Lord Lucan being one of the more reputable ones) that the coverage maps do not match actual coverage, in some of the "new" areas coverage is nowhere near what the map indicates it should be.

07-01-2014, 16:25	#5
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq There've also been a few reports by individuals (The Lord Lucan being one of the more reputable ones) that the coverage maps do not match actual coverage, in some of the "new" areas coverage is nowhere near what the map indicates it should be. That applies for every network really. Vodafone had huge areas of coverage showing on coverage maps where there were actually no 4G masts active as well.

07-01-2014, 18:12	#6
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Yes I know, I said myself the Vodafone map looks more like an opportunistic misprint than an actual coverage map. But that's my whole point, ever network has good spots and bad spots. Some more than others. Generalizing basing on one spot though...

07-01-2014, 23:34	#7
uno Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Leicestershire Posts: 507	Does anybody know are EE having problems in rolling out double speed coverage e.g 20mhz bandwidth ? As they have launched 40-50 new places in the last year but have not announced or launched any more double speed areas so wondered whether EE have given up on that in any more places.

08-01-2014, 00:07	#8
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	I can't quite figure out what exactly they call "double speed", because it's not 20Mhz. Nearly everywhere in Edinburgh that shows as non-double speed is actually 20Mhz. Lots of the new areas had double speed showing on the coverage maps but were later removed. In areas covered by just a single 20Mhz-only mast, some parts of its' coverage are shown as double speed whereas weaker coverage areas from the same mast are not. In simple terms, "double speed" does not directly correlate with 20Mhz coverage.

08-01-2014, 00:12	#9
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq I can't quite figure out what exactly they call "double speed", because it's not 20Mhz. That is the reason why they call it double speed...

08-01-2014, 01:25	#10
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	But it's not what they actually call double speed. Nor does it relate to what's called "double speed" in relation to the "double speed" tariffs.

08-01-2014, 01:58	#11
The Lord Lucan Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Scotland Posts: 4,966	No point in showing an area as Double Speed if the site has old backhaul.

08-01-2014, 02:35	#12
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	That is indeed, part of why I suspect it is not down to the presence of purely 20Mhz transmissions.

09-01-2014, 00:26	#13
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by The Lord Lucan No point in showing an area as Double Speed if the site has old backhaul. Oh but there is - double spectrum improves speeds across the board even with old backhaul. Particularly as EE's RRC is very well tuned to produce balanced speeds regardless of signal. So even if a 20Mhz mast with old backhaul won't achieve higher peak speeds (which I personally never see anyway) it'll still achieve much higher speeds while indoors and with poor signal - and they do say the majority of mobile use is indoors. As an example, where both EE "double speed" 20Mhz and O2 10Mhz deliver the same 55Mbps outdoors from a colocated mast, the double spectrum and better balancing means once indoors and the signal drops EE still deliver 30Mbps while O2's 10Mhz network barely manages 10Mbps, even with a stronger signal.

09-01-2014, 03:53	#14
The Lord Lucan Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Scotland Posts: 4,966	That is correct. However Double Speed is an internal standard for EE. The SyncE & 20 Mhz both have to be in place.

09-01-2014, 14:16	#15
uno Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Leicestershire Posts: 507	It does not still explain why EE have not done any more double speed areas since they first launched it. I can understand that there may be certain masts that are waiting for new backhaul but not whole counties and large cities. A guy I know in the EE shop in Leicesyer told me it was due to the amount of use the 1800 mhz 2G network got in areas if use was high they could not do double speed upgrades. He said also that the 2G network is also used for M2M and for example if a electric company is using EE in the East midlands for their meter readings then higher use than say in Birmingham also a lot of bus companies use the network for bus tracking

09-01-2014, 23:16	#16
japitts Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally Posted by uno A guy I know in the EE shop in Leicesyer told me it was due to the amount of use the 1800 mhz 2G network got in areas if use was high they could not do double speed upgrades. He said also that the 2G network is also used for M2M and for example if a electric company is using EE in the East midlands for their meter readings then higher use than say in Birmingham also a lot of bus companies use the network for bus tracking There may be an element of truth, who knows, but.... "A guy in the EE shop" is rather removed from the reality of network operations, performance and capacity management. Meter readings over M2M are pretty low volumes of data. As for high 2G usage preventing L1800 double-speed upgrades, I'd be interested in how he explains away central London. Probably one of the busier parts of the network and no shortage of double-speed sites there...

09-01-2014, 23:34	#17
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Tru dat. Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity.

10-01-2014, 00:54	#18
beecart Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 383	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq Tru dat. Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity. What does half rate codec mean?

10-01-2014, 03:48	#19
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_Rate

10-01-2014, 15:28	#20
japitts Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq Tru dat. Last time I made a 2G phone call in London on EE (well, it was Orange at the time) it had to use the half rate codec because of a lack of capacity. Appreciate that a 2G call used the HR codec, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it was due to capacity issues.

10-01-2014, 22:50	#21
plymouthbloke1974 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Destination: Hard Brexit Posts: 6,368	O2 use half rate codec on every site, don't they??

DS Forums

Impressive EE 4G Coverage

10-01-2014, 23:14	#22
beecart Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 383	Quote: Originally Posted by plymouthbloke1974 O2 use half rate codec on every site, don't they?? Do they???

11-01-2014, 00:11	#23
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by japitts Appreciate that a 2G call used the HR codec, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it was due to capacity issues. Never seen a call switch from EFR to HR on the same mast for any other reason...

11-01-2014, 00:41	#24
japitts Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq Never seen a call switch from EFR to HR on the same mast for any other reason... I was working on a 2G site only this afternoon that did exactly that. Plenty of spare timeslots and yet half a dozen calls shifted onto HR . Other sectors of the same site pretty close to being maxed out, yet no HR in sight. Sorry to spoil your theory an' all!

11-01-2014, 01:10	#25
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Working on it because of a fault I presume... Well of course, but you can't consider the fault scenario to be normal behaviour. I'm not sure why pointing out an exception to the rule means what does happen the majority of the time is automatically wrong. By it's very nature the exception is less likely to be the case. Mind you if you say there were half a dozen calls on HR, then obviously there can't have been plenty of free time slots. There are only 7 timeslots in total on a GSM channel, excluding those unuseable for calls