[dntrkv]

Of course someone had to make this comment, but don't you worry, I've driven plenty of remote trails.

Obviously there are many places where there isn't cell coverage, but the vast majority (of even very remote places) has some type of coverage. I've been hours from the nearest asphalt road, in the middle of the desert and still have coverage. This is more often than not the case. Use a cell booster with an antenna on a pole, and you can extend this range even further.

My point is that you will not need 24/7 satellite connection just for taking calls, the vast majority of the time you will be near a service area. If taking calls is important to you, you can almost always find a place to camp with service (or carry a satellite phone). I also don't find many people in the truly remote areas camping out for extended periods of time. Most of the time, people want to be relatively close to services, for many other reasons.

[shkkmo]

> Obviously there are many places where there isn't cell coverage, but the vast majority (of even very remote places) has some type of coverage.

And from personal experience I can tell you that this is not true. It is not hard to find remote places with no cell coverage.

So you either aren't that adventurous, or you haven't explored very widely yet.

> I also don't find many people in the truly remote areas camping out for extended periods of time.

You don't find them, because they're in places you don't seem to go yourself or are not aware of.

> If taking calls is important to you, you can almost always find a place to camp with service (or carry a satellite phone).

Yes, there are other options and people have been making it work since before star link was available.

While I agree that most people won't need starlink on 24/7, it simply isn't true to say that you can count on some sort of cell service in the vast majority of places you can reach with a car.

[dntrkv]

> So you either aren't that adventurous, or you haven't explored very widely yet.

I've explored CA, NV, UT, and CO very thoroughly, and WA, OR, WY, and AZ but not to the same extent. I've had many rigs throughout the years (Tacos, 4Runners, ADV bikes, vans, campers, roof tents, I've tried it all), currently building out an E350 (retired ambulance). I've done week long moto-camping trips through-out CA and OR (week is my limit for moto). I've been at it for about 15 years now and have camped many hundreds of nights, mostly outside of developed campgrounds. My Google maps is filled with hundreds of markers for great boondocking spots that I've found over the years. You're not talking to someone that goes out to Moab once a year and stays in a yurt.

> While I agree that most people won't need starlink on 24/7, it simply isn't true to say that you can count on some sort of cell service in the vast majority of places you can reach with a car.

It is factually correct since just Verizon's cell coverage is something like 70% of the US land area. But of course, I can get in my 4Runner right now and find a place within a 30-mile radius that doesn't have cell coverage.

[shkkmo]

> It is factually correct since just Verizon's cell coverage is something like 70% of the US land area.

2/3rds isn't what I would call a vast majority and the coverage for the western states is much lower than that. If you only include places where boondocking is legal, I think the coverage drops significantly below 50%.

It is certainly feasible and can be satifying to only boondock in areas where you can get cell coverage, which I think was the point you were trying to make.