WIND Mobile Tower Map

[canadiancow]

I threw this together using some Industry Canada data from 2010-02-03.

http://www.canadiancow.com/wind/index.html

It's the same data behind http://www.jrmy.net/tafl/, but I'm only using frequency allocations for Globalive Wireless.

I'm not sure if there are any other maps out there, but I thought this would be useful for seeing where towers are going to be in new areas (Ottawa, Edmonton, Vancouver).

Industry Canada seems to only update their public database once a month or so, and I don't know how well it correlates to actual tower placement, but I thought it would be useful.

I'll update it whenever IC updates their data.

I've already had one feature request: to differentiate new towers from older ones. I'm not entirely sure that's feasible, given the data source (the only dates I have are when IC allocated the frequency to Wind, which date back to last August).

However, if anyone else has any other recommendations, I'd be glad to hear them.

[kEiThZ]

They got some big gaps in Ottawa. St. Laurent centre is so far away from every tower on that map (till now).

[conor1000]

How far from a tower is considered bad? My area at eglinton and winston churchill is pretty scarce!!!!

[canadiancow]

How far from a tower is considered bad? My area at eglinton and winston churchill is pretty scarce!!!!

It's hard to say. It depends on many factors, such as the transmission power, the location/altitude of the antenna, the beamwidth, and exactly where it's pointed.

With the right algorithms, I could probably generate an estimated coverage map using IC data, but that would be a lot of work.

Just try to look at it logically. Wind doesn't want massive gaps in cities. If there are two towers spread apart, with nothing in between, they're probably configured to provide continuous coverage.

The only guaranteed way to know if you'll have good coverage is to test it. If you have an AWS phone, you can probably download some app that will show you signal strengths to nearby towers.

Edit: And don't forget, this map is only as accurate and current as the data provided by IC. I seem to recall reading somewhere that Wind was putting up 10 new towers every day, on average. Assuming that stat is still accurate, and the towers in the data are already up, there are at least 160 towers that have been erected since this data was compiled.

[callmejim]

Does the map show an actual number of operating tower location or does it include present and planed future tower location?

[xciton]

These IC submissions include present and future. Back in December, there were two sites listed, but nothing physical was present at the site. They are both operational now.

[Lamenade]

I recall wind saying they had towers active in Whistler for the olympics, but nothing is shown on the map. Maybe it isn't all inclusive yet.

[xero9]

Just wanted to add that I actually created a map for mine and someone else's interest, but what I did is have it automatically pull data from IC daily and compares. New towers ate stored in a table with a "dateAdded" field, which would allow to see the newest ones on the map as a different color. Not sure how you're doing it right now but maybe it will give you an idea

[LOUDNOISES]

I recall wind saying they had towers active in Whistler for the olympics, but nothing is shown on the map. Maybe it isn't all inclusive yet.

From what I read before, it gets updated on the first of each month. So its possible they got a few towers up there since. It doesn't take much to cover.

[canadiancow]

Just wanted to add that I actually created a map for mine and someone else's interest, but what I did is have it automatically pull data from IC daily and compares. New towers ate stored in a table with a "dateAdded" field, which would allow to see the newest ones on the map as a different color. Not sure how you're doing it right now but maybe it will give you an idea

IC only updates the data monthly, and just because a tower is in the data, doesn't mean it's online yet. It just means Wind has expressed an interest in building one at that location.

IC does not provide the data necessary to get the effect that you (and most people) want.

[xero9]

IC only updates the data monthly, and just because a tower is in the data, doesn't mean it's online yet. It just means Wind has expressed an interest in building one at that location.

IC does not provide the data necessary to get the effect that you (and most people) want.

I'm not sure I understand. I was simply suggesting a possible way for you to flag the newest entries so you could specifically highlight those on your map.

I agree the IC data isn't ideal, but hey, it's better than nothing I suppose

[SharpieFiend]

I just want to say a quick "thanks!" for this - I was wondering where the towers are!

[kav2001c]

Are these towers actually up? It shows some towers in existing areas (eg of the GTA) which are currently AWAY zones?

[canadiancow]

I'm not sure I understand. I was simply suggesting a possible way for you to flag the newest entries so you could specifically highlight those on your map.

I agree the IC data isn't ideal, but hey, it's better than nothing I suppose

I'll probably add something based on the frequency allocation date, but just because tower A had its frequency allocated three months before tower B, doesn't mean it will be online first.

Are these towers actually up? It shows some towers in existing areas (eg of the GTA) which are currently AWAY zones?

The only way to know for sure is to see if you get coverage there. However, if they're not up yet, they should be fairly soon, which is the point of this map.

[kav2001c]

The only way to know for sure is to see if you get coverage there. However, if they're not up yet, they should be fairly soon, which is the point of this map.

The tower in particular I was puzzling over was the west 401 route (shows a tower in Milton area which is definitely AWAY zone)