Share:

Rogers Completes SkyTrain Wireless Network as Evergreen Extension Goes Live

Share:

Rogers and TransLink have announced this morning wireless coverage is now complete across the entire SkyTrain system in Metro Vancouver. This week saw the 2.5 kilometre Burquitlam Tunnel on the Evergreen extension of the Millennium Line finish, along with final LTE and voice expansion across Dunsmuir, Edmonds and Columbia stations as well.

Screenshot 2017 12 27 10 22 11

The wireless networks completes “just in time for the holidays” for Rogers and Fido customers, announced the company in a press release issued to iPhone in Canada.

“Our customers want to stay in touch wherever they are, including while using public transportation like the SkyTrain,” said Perm Jawanda, Regional Vice-President, Rogers Communications, in a statement. “That’s why we’re committed to investing in communities and businesses across British Columbia, and are proud of our team’s hard work to complete wireless service across the entire SkyTrain system.”

Derrick Cheung, Vice-President Strategic Sourcing and Real Estate, TransLink, added “We’re pleased to have worked with Rogers to bring LTE connectivity to all of the Expo and Millennium line tunnels, which ensures Rogers and Fido customers can experience the convenience that consistent connectivity affords, and all passengers – regardless of carrier – have the safety and security of dialing 911 on their devices.”

According to TransLink, there are over 1.2 million boardings daily across the transit network.

Last year, Apple Maps added transit info for Vancouver, detailing stops along with entrances and exits for SkyTrain and Canada Line stations.

Share:

  • Bill___A

    Public transport should have complete coverage for all carriers, and all carriers should share in the cost of it. We should be past the point where you have to get one carrier to get coverage in the skytrain in Vancouver, another carrier if you use the subway in Toronto, etc. Although it is great to have Rogers coverage on the Skytrain (I have a Rogers phone), I imagine that there are significant numbers of other carriers customers who would like to be. I am not privy to the numbers, but I can’t help but imagine the transit authorities gained some money for allowing exclusive access, and is this in the public interest? I think not.

  • Aceclutch

    It’s not a simple switch that is turned on. Translink never paid anybody. Rogers asked to provide coverage in the skytrain and they are paying for it not taxpayers. Rogers put up equipment in the skytrains to provide coverage. All carriers can still make 911 calls but only Rogers/Fido customers can call and browse the web. It still has room for 3 more carriers Rogers has said, but no other carriers want to expand there as of yet.

  • NOHoldsBar

    Nothing is that simple we all know this. That doesn’t justify or provide a solid rationale why the other two carriers don’t see this as a priority.

  • Aceclutch

    Well just Telus. No way freedom The budget for that. Bell uses Telus in the west so it’s really just Telus lacking.

  • raslucas

    I think it should be noted that Freedom customers aren’t getting the emergency 911 access. They should probably look into fixing that.

  • raslucas

    (It’s not something Freedom should have to pay for, it was a regulation requirement)

  • raslucas

    Yes. Rogers is charging for access. I’m hoping Shaw puts in Wi-Fi Passpoints in the stations as a way around it. Couple that with Wi-Fi calling and Freedom can give reception in the SkyTrain route without playing Rogers. Imperfect, but meh

  • Bill___A

    I didn’t say translink paid anyone, I wasn’t referring specifically to translink, but was saying in general, public transit operators should only allow infrastructure that includes all of the carriers. No one said it was “simple” but it is “doable”.And it should be doable in a fashion that no one feels ripped off, and it should not be a significant “revenue generator” for the transit authority. The carriers should have to pay the “costs” of setting up and supporting the network and nothing more. I don’t think anyone should have to base their carrier decision upon whom has access in a public place and who does not. I’m talking every major city here, not just Vancouver. As said, I have Rogers, so it is fine for me, I want to use the same carrier wherever I go, and I think that anyone else who gets server on a “tier 1” network should expect the same. Transit, airports, train stations, ports, ferries, etc.

  • Bill___A

    Telus is not going to be able to pay Rogers to come onboard and have “Bell come along automatically”. Bell and Telus program each other to their towers, but that doesn’t mean they are one and the same. Bell will have to make their own arrangement.

  • Dene Sa Lawisam

    Darn im with telus and shaw, i was with rogers but found mister rogers to be a rip off scam artist.

  • Brenda

    I agree. Even if you switch to Rogers to use the service in Vancouver, you’re out of luck when travelling elsewhere. Wireless service should be available to everyone everywhere. I’m forwarding this article to Montreal’s STM. The wireless service here is spotty and the rollout to all parts of the system is very slow.

  • Why?
    I mean, Public transport is public space just like outside. If someone is not willing to pay to build it, they should not have the right to piggy back on someone else’s investment.
    What should not happen, is public transit paying a company or giving exclusivity to a company.

  • Aceclutch

    I’m certain there will at least one Rogers/Fido Customer on board to call 911

  • Bill___A

    You’re missing the point. In the absence of seeing the agreements for Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, I am at a disadvantage. But as far as Toronto is concerned, the third party building it is wanting to charge people to go on the network, I also don’t know how much they paid the TTC for “rights” to build. Rogers somehow got permission to build a network in the SkyTrain network? Did they pay for it? I’m absolutely sure. Was their a premium paid for it? That I don’t know. Does anyone know? By the time you add everyone’s “profit” into these things, they become expensive. Give me a single other reason why Bell, who has lots of customers, and TELUS, who also have lots of customers, are not on this SkyTrain network? As far as I can imagine, the one single reason would be money – and the question is, how much money was asked of them to join in this network? They aren’t going to put four separate networks within the SkyTrain network. We need more explanation, and what I would be asking TransLink is why there is only a single carrier on their public system???

  • I think you misunderstand how carriers work.
    If Rogers has coverage in Nunavut, but Bell and TELUS do not, Bell and TELUS customers are not entitled to use Rogers’ network.
    How is that different from Rogers building its own network in the SkyTrain while the others do not?
    My point is that, it’s anti-consumer when public transit decides to give exclusivity to one company. All other things equal, it’s simply competition.

    Transit companies are in the business of providing transit, not cellular connectivity. As such, they should never get in the way of carriers wanting to build networks. It’s public space, just like outside.

Deals