Wow. Full coverage of the contiguous US is nice, but other than that you can mostly send emergency messages in places that are already close to civilization. Places that probably have cell coverage anyways

▲

mikestew 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

In a ten minute drive from Issaquah, WA (major suburb 20 minutes from Seattle), I can be in the woods with no cell coverage on a mountain frequented by many hikers (parts of Cougar Mt. are especially dead to cell phones). Let alone driving another half hour and having no cell coverage at all once you walk from the trailhead.

And cell service is surprisingly poor at my home in the heart of Redmond suburbs, even. If you rely on a cell phone to get out of a tight spot, stay out of the woods, at least in the U. S. West.

	▲	unshavedyak 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yea I don’t even hike or do anything woodsy and I frequently have zero coverage in western WA. It’s a real issue, common even, depending on where you live (I’m near the capital)

▲

wbl 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The West has much less cell service than you think especially in the pretty places.

	▲	SoftTalker 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		The US in general has much less cell service than you might think. I'm on a major carrier, I get 1 bar at home, there are places in my neighborhood that effectively have none, and I'm within a few miles of state forest where there is definitely no service. If you never leave a city or major transportation routes, you might not realize how much "dark" space there is. Those red maps the mobile service providers like to promote seem to me to be extremely deceptive.

▲

nradov 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Even in the SF Bay Area, a short road bike ride into the hills can quickly get you into areas with zero cell coverage.