Topics

DZOTA (Dead Zones On The Air) for Placer County coverage holes...

Jef - N5JEF
 

Coming from an emergency communications perspective, I've mentioned the idea of filling in detail on the various radio coverage gaps within our county.  

Inspired by some related discussion on one of the Elecraft lists today, I would like to add a new aspect to that same (proposed) project of better understanding coverage throughout Placer County:  DZOTA (Dead Zones On The Air) would be about taking the wildly deceptive optimistic coverage maps provided by the cell phone carriers (AT&T, Verizon, Sprint & T-Mobile), and providing details on which of our area repeaters provide good service within the actual cell-phone gaps.

FWIW,

- Jef  N5JEF

Nathan Chilton - K6NDC
 

So, are you thinking we'd drive around the area and map out locations that do/don't have good repeater coverage?  

Jef - N5JEF
 


On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:25 PM Nathan Chilton - K6NDC <k6ndc@...> wrote:
So, are you thinking we'd drive around the area and map out locations that do/don't have good repeater coverage?  

Well, this would be about locations that don't have cell coverage but do have repeater coverage.  And winning DZOTA props in the process! ;-)

It's not my most serious proposal ever, but it does fit with promoting better knowledge of radio coverage within our county.

- Jef 

Greg D
 

Jef - N5JEF wrote:

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:25 PM Nathan Chilton - K6NDC <k6ndc@...> wrote:
So, are you thinking we'd drive around the area and map out locations that do/don't have good repeater coverage?  

Well, this would be about locations that don't have cell coverage but do have repeater coverage.  And winning DZOTA props in the process! ;-)

It's not my most serious proposal ever, but it does fit with promoting better knowledge of radio coverage within our county.

- Jef 
_._,_._,_
Hi Jef,

As we learned during the first of the outages a few months ago, "no cell coverage" is hard to define.  It depends on carrier, service (2G, 4G, LTE, et al), and even the "you're holding it wrong" sorts of things.  My cell coverage died a few hours after midnight, but the next day I got a few SMS notifications even with zero "bars".  (It was usually the PG&E announcement that my power was out.)

So a worthwhile exercise, but you'd really need to pin down the evaluation criteria in order for it to be reproducibly useful.

Greg  KO6TH
 

Jef - N5JEF
 

Yup, I agree it would be hard to define, like those supposed "coverage" maps published by the carriers.

I didn't intend this so much as a practical suggestion, but more to stimulate thinking about improving knowledge of coverage in our area.

Where are the gaps?  Which hills or mountain tops are the effective and accessible in an emergency that takes out much (or key parts) of our existing communications?  Of the hams who check in to the local club net or ARES net, who can hear whom via simplex?  Of the serious cellular dead zones, which repeaters are most useful?  And so on...

- Jef

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:48 PM Greg D <ko6th.greg@...> wrote:
Jef - N5JEF wrote:

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:25 PM Nathan Chilton - K6NDC <k6ndc@...> wrote:
So, are you thinking we'd drive around the area and map out locations that do/don't have good repeater coverage?  

Well, this would be about locations that don't have cell coverage but do have repeater coverage.  And winning DZOTA props in the process! ;-)

It's not my most serious proposal ever, but it does fit with promoting better knowledge of radio coverage within our county.

- Jef 
_._,_._,_
Hi Jef,

As we learned during the first of the outages a few months ago, "no cell coverage" is hard to define.  It depends on carrier, service (2G, 4G, LTE, et al), and even the "you're holding it wrong" sorts of things.  My cell coverage died a few hours after midnight, but the next day I got a few SMS notifications even with zero "bars".  (It was usually the PG&E announcement that my power was out.)

So a worthwhile exercise, but you'd really need to pin down the evaluation criteria in order for it to be reproducibly useful.

Greg  KO6TH