On 06/09/2021 08:15, Woody wrote:
>  Unfortunately (or otherwise) that might mean people in Yorkshire
> having to watch Yorkshire TV instead of Tyne Tees!
>
That was the plan right up to Bilsdale coming on air for ITV

https://www.transdiffusion.org/2001/09/01/off

On Mon 06/09/2021 08:24, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 08:15, Woody wrote:
>>
>> What puzzles me at the moment is that here in Harrogate with a
>> multibeam pointed at Emley (and Bilsdale being around 30deg off line
>> on the back of it) I can get a reasonably strong signal off Arncliffe
>> Wood but the TV will not decode it. Conversely I can get a stonking
>> signal from Belmont which is off the side of my aerial. Eh??
>>
> Arncliffe is using 40,43,46 for the PSBs. Those three channels are also
> used by a number of Emley's relays, I suspect what you're getting is
> just 'signal'
>
> How do you know it's Arncliffe, if you can't decode it ?

Agreed except that there is nothing else around this area that I can
receive in terms of TV and my location on those channels. Chesterfield
is just a bit too far away!

Again by RF channel number and looking at which region is being
received. I know its Belmont I am getting because of (1) the channels I
am receiving and (2) that BBC is Yorks and Lincs - which is the Belmont
identity.

On 06/09/2021 08:54, Woody wrote:
> On Mon 06/09/2021 08:24, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 06/09/2021 08:15, Woody wrote:
>>>
>>> What puzzles me at the moment is that here in Harrogate with a
>>> multibeam pointed at Emley (and Bilsdale being around 30deg off line
>>> on the back of it) I can get a reasonably strong signal off
>>> Arncliffe Wood but the TV will not decode it. Conversely I can get a
>>> stonking signal from Belmont which is off the side of my aerial. Eh??
>>>
>> Arncliffe is using 40,43,46 for the PSBs. Those three channels are
>> also used by a number of Emley's relays, I suspect what you're
>> getting is just 'signal'
>>
>> How do you know it's Arncliffe, if you can't decode it ?
>
> Agreed except that there is nothing else around this area that I can
> receive in terms of TV and my location on those channels. Chesterfield
> is just a bit too far away!

Wouldn't surprise me, also given the weather, that it's (mostly) Sutton
Coldfield with bits of Arncliffe and Emley relays mixed in to produce an
un-decodable mess

>
> Again by RF channel number and looking at which region is being
> received. I know its Belmont I am getting because of (1) the channels
> I am receiving and (2) that BBC is Yorks and Lincs - which is the
> Belmont identity.

Yes,obviously, but that's because you CAN decode Belmont

All of the examples so far are like comparing apples and meat balls though.
In this case they need a permanent solution and planning has rules about
that.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Pete Forman" <petef4+usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87bl56vod0.fsf@gmail.com...
> [top-posting for Brian]
> Income tax was temporary but its third tenure, started in 1842, seems to
> have persisted.
>
> Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> writes:
>> "Temporary" traffic lights on the A82 by Loch Lomond were there for a
>> mere 30 years.
>>
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-21243893
>>
>> Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> The definition of temporary though should I would have thought make
>>> it a lot easer.
>>> If they spend too long talking about it then they will never get it
>>> sorted out.
>>>
>>> I do question such a short temp mast though. I'd have thought it
>>> could be accommodated within the footprint of the old one assuming
>>> its guyed up in some way already, and shorter, its guys must be
>>> closer together.
> --
> Pete Forman
> https://payg.pythonanywhere.com

"Brian Gaff (Sofa)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sh4ikn$2m5$1@dont-email.me...
> All of the examples so far are like comparing apples and meat balls
> though. In this case they need a permanent solution and planning has rules
> about that.

Except that the delay and dispute relates to the temporary mast which will
be a stop gap until the full size mast is ready. The temporary mast is new
and would normally require permission except that it *may* (should be!)
exempt because it is temporary; the replacement is replacing something that
has already had permission for many years and so should not require new
permission because of grandfather rights - unless the SSSI restrictions say
that a replacement is subject to additional conditions which were not
applied retrospectively to the old mast.

"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:sh4f63$bbl$1@dont-email.me...

> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything other
> than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare that against
> the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company to mass produce a
> low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there wouldn't be that much
> difference.

There will be the cost of the dish and the installation, together with a lot
of head-scratching as to how a dish can be installed on a house which does
not have a south-facing wall or which is a communal or listed or covenanted
(*) building where dishes are not allowed.

And it would need to be a PVR as well as a tuner, so people could *record*
programmes as well as watch them live. So the dish would need to have at
least two LNBs to allow for recording from a different mux to the one being
watched - and maybe more if it is replacing aerial feeds to other rooms, to
allow for additional outlets which may want to tune to a polarisation and/or
frequency range that is nto being used by the other outlets.

I was amused by the common suggestions about "oh, they can always use
iPlayer and other catchup sites". The problem is that a lot of the rural
locations away from towns have piss-poor internet which struggles to get
over 1 Mbps download.

I wonder what the contingency plans are for other transmitters failing
catastrophically like Bilsdale did. It bet they've been revised and
beefed-up in the light of The Bilsdale Experience - making sure that a site
is identified and has all the relevant permissions in place *now*, in
advance of the day when the site may (but hopefully won't) be needed.

(*) For example, my previous house which was newly built when I bought it in
2000 was subject to a builder's covenant that there were to be no external
aerials on the front (south-facing) side of the house for n years, to allow
for the builder to take publicity photographs that were "unsullied" by
aerials on the roof or dishes on the front wall. In practice, people started
putting up dishes after a year or so, long before the covenant expired,
using the "sod this for a game of soldiers" excuse.

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:16:29 +0100
"NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:sh4f63$bbl$1@dont-email.me...
>
>> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
>> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything other
>> than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare that against
>> the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company to mass produce a
>> low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there wouldn't be that much
>> difference.
>
>There will be the cost of the dish and the installation, together with a lot
>of head-scratching as to how a dish can be installed on a house which does
>not have a south-facing wall or which is a communal or listed or covenanted
>(*) building where dishes are not allowed.

Home satellite dishes really are tech that should have been left in the 20th
century. Unless you live in the arse end of nowhere you've got no excuse to
mount one of those ugly warts on your wall, just use broadband.

<MisterMule@stubborn.uk> wrote in message
news:sh4mj6$1472$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:16:29 +0100
> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>news:sh4f63$bbl$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
>>> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything
>>> other
>>> than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare that
>>> against
>>> the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company to mass produce
>>> a
>>> low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there wouldn't be that much
>>> difference.
>>
>>There will be the cost of the dish and the installation, together with a
>>lot
>>of head-scratching as to how a dish can be installed on a house which does
>>not have a south-facing wall or which is a communal or listed or
>>covenanted
>>(*) building where dishes are not allowed.
>
> Home satellite dishes really are tech that should have been left in the
> 20th
> century. Unless you live in the arse end of nowhere you've got no excuse
> to
> mount one of those ugly warts on your wall, just use broadband.

How about all the programmes that are transmitted on terrestrial or
satellite channels but which are not available on catchup websites?

And could the present internet infrastructure (especially web servers)
really handle the extra load if everybody switched from broadcast to offline
(web) delivery or programmes?

Broadcast has the advantage that you can keep your recording until you have
watched it, without the fear that it will time out after 30 days or
whatever. OK, there's GetiPlayer which allows BBC programmes to be
downloaded, but there's no equivalent for any other broadcasters.

On Mon 06/09/2021 10:16, NY wrote:
> "Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:sh4f63$bbl$1@dont-email.me...
>
>> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
>> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything
>> other than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare
>> that against the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company
>> to mass produce a low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there
>> wouldn't be that much difference.
>
> There will be the cost of the dish and the installation, together with a
> lot of head-scratching as to how a dish can be installed on a house
> which does not have a south-facing wall or which is a communal or listed
> or covenanted (*) building where dishes are not allowed.
>
> And it would need to be a PVR as well as a tuner, so people could
> *record* programmes as well as watch them live. So the dish would need
> to have at least two LNBs to allow for recording from a different mux to
> the one being watched - and maybe more if it is replacing aerial feeds
> to other rooms, to allow for additional outlets which may want to tune
> to a polarisation and/or frequency range that is nto being used by the
> other outlets.
>
> I was amused by the common suggestions about "oh, they can always use
> iPlayer and other catchup sites". The problem is that a lot of the rural
> locations away from towns have piss-poor internet which struggles to get
> over 1 Mbps download.
>
>
>
> I wonder what the contingency plans are for other transmitters failing
> catastrophically like Bilsdale did. It bet they've been revised and
> beefed-up in the light of The Bilsdale Experience - making sure that a
> site is identified and has all the relevant permissions in place *now*,
> in advance of the day when the site may (but hopefully won't) be needed.
>
>
>
> (*) For example, my previous house which was newly built when I bought
> it in 2000 was subject to a builder's covenant that there were to be no
> external aerials on the front (south-facing) side of the house for n
> years, to allow for the builder to take publicity photographs that were
> "unsullied" by aerials on the roof or dishes on the front wall. In
> practice, people started putting up dishes after a year or so, long
> before the covenant expired, using the "sod this for a game of soldiers"
> excuse.

That is one annoying thing about dish installers - shortest cable route
possible. In such an instance the dish can be pole mounted at the back
and unless the roof is very tall and steep the dish will 'see' over it
from about 1m above the gutter. Not visible from the front, good signal,
easy access for cables into the loft in many cases. Simples.

MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:

> Home satellite dishes really are tech that should have been left in the 20th
> century. Unless you live in the arse end of nowhere you've got no excuse to
> mount one of those ugly warts on your wall, just use broadband.

And downgrade BBC HD channels from 1920x1080 to 1280x720

On 06/09/2021 11:23, Woody wrote:
>
> That is one annoying thing about dish installers - shortest cable
> route possible. In such an instance the dish can be pole mounted at
> the back and unless the roof is very tall and steep the dish will
> 'see' over it from about 1m above the gutter. Not visible from the
> front, good signal, easy access for cables into the loft in many
> cases. Simples.

......or the cable slung over the top of the roof, and back down the
front into the, err, front room.

As with anybody, Freesat, Sky, or especially BT Openreach, make sure
you're there to say 'NO' to any corner cutting.

On 06/09/2021 10:21, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:16:29 +0100
> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> "Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:sh4f63$bbl$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
>>> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything other
>>> than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare that against
>>> the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company to mass produce a
>>> low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there wouldn't be that much
>>> difference.
>>
>> There will be the cost of the dish and the installation, together with a lot
>> of head-scratching as to how a dish can be installed on a house which does
>> not have a south-facing wall or which is a communal or listed or covenanted
>> (*) building where dishes are not allowed.
>
> Home satellite dishes really are tech that should have been left in the 20th
> century. Unless you live in the arse end of nowhere you've got no excuse to
> mount one of those ugly warts on your wall, just use broadband.
>
>

Even if you live in the arse end of nowhere, you can still have fast
broadband and watch in 4K.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTQi37nnCd8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-pluge-Cx8

https://www.spaceinternetsolutions.com/

Bill, this could be a very lucrative earner for your retirement as they
are quoting a fixed price install of £200 on top of the kit cost....

https://www.spaceinternetsolutions.com/starlink-installations-huddersfield

On 06/09/2021 10:16, NY wrote:
> And it would need to be a PVR as well as a tuner, so people could*record*
> programmes as well as watch them live.

I don't know about satellite but some streaming services do not seem to
actually record programmes, they just store a link to the server which
means you cannot keep a copy long term or give a recording to a friend.

On 06/09/2021 11:45, SH wrote:
> Even if you live in the arse end of nowhere, you can still have fast
> broadband and watch in 4K.....

Only installation cost of Starlink given, no mention of running costs
which makes me suspicious.

On 06/09/2021 12:23, MB wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 10:16, NY wrote:
>> And it would need to be a PVR as well as a tuner, so people
>> could*record*  programmes as well as watch them live.
>
> I don't know about satellite but some streaming services do not seem
> to actually record programmes, they just store a link to the server
> which means you cannot keep a copy long term or give a recording to a
> friend.

Well, yes, it's part of their business model !

On 06/09/2021 12:27, MB wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 11:45, SH wrote:
>> Even if you live in the arse end of nowhere, you can still have fast
>> broadband and watch in 4K.....
>
> Only installation cost of Starlink given, no mention of running costs
> which makes me suspicious.
>

The Starlink equipment cost is £450 and the monthly UNLIMITED broadband
contact is £89 / month but both figures are expected to drop and the
broadband speed increased once the rest of the satrlinks are in orbit.

MB wrote:

> Only installation cost of Starlink given, no mention of running costs
> which makes me suspicious.

£89/month plus 100W of electricity

£493 delivered for the dishy

On 06/09/2021 08:15, Woody wrote:

>
> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything
> other than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare that
> against the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company to mass
> produce a low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there wouldn't be that
> much difference.
When I was doing the 'wind turbines buggering up people's TV reception'
studies I realised that it was necessary to factor into any scheme where
equipment was provided the costs of maintenance for what could be an
indefinite period.

> The coverage for the Vale of York
Not an issue because they prefer Emley.

> and northwards from
> Teesside could be covered by higher powered transmitters at Arncliffe
> Wood, and the southern end (e.g. parts of York and Harrogate) could be
> 'back-filled' by either a transmitter at Woolmoor or at Acklam Wold or
> Settrington Beacon. Unfortunately (or otherwise) that might mean people
> in Yorkshire having to watch Yorkshire TV instead of Tyne Tees!

Most of them use Emley anyway.

>
> What puzzles me at the moment is that here in Harrogate with a multibeam
> pointed at Emley (and Bilsdale being around 30deg off line on the back
> of it) I can get a reasonably strong signal off Arncliffe Wood but the
> TV will not decode it. Conversely I can get a stonking signal from
> Belmont which is off the side of my aerial. Eh??
>
Despite your aerial being HP that sounds like the local relays causing CCI.

Bill

On 06/09/2021 08:54, Woody wrote:
>> How do you know it's Arncliffe, if you can't decode it ?
>
> Agreed except that there is nothing else around this area that I can
> receive in terms of TV and my location on those channels. Chesterfield
> is just a bit too far away!

Co-channel signals can prevent decoding even when they are very weak. If
the wanted signal is only just above the normal threshold level it takes
a tiny CCI signal to stop it working.

Bill

"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:sh4q80$l1u$1@dont-email.me...

>> (*) For example, my previous house which was newly built when I bought it
>> in 2000 was subject to a builder's covenant that there were to be no
>> external aerials on the front (south-facing) side of the house for n
>> years, to allow for the builder to take publicity photographs that were
>> "unsullied" by aerials on the roof or dishes on the front wall. In
>> practice, people started putting up dishes after a year or so, long
>> before the covenant expired, using the "sod this for a game of soldiers"
>> excuse.
>
> That is one annoying thing about dish installers - shortest cable route
> possible. In such an instance the dish can be pole mounted at the back and
> unless the roof is very tall and steep the dish will 'see' over it from
> about 1m above the gutter. Not visible from the front, good signal, easy
> access for cables into the loft in many cases. Simples.

Ah, is the satellite high enough in the sky for a dish as low as 1 m above
the gutter to be able to see over the ridge for a typical roof? I hadn't
realised that. Dishes always look to be pointing at a very low angle, but
it's difficult what the effective angle is when you take into account the
position of the receiver on its arm.

On Mon 06/09/2021 12:43, williamwright wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 08:15, Woody wrote:
>
>>
>> The other way of looking at it would be for Arqiva to do the sums to
>> provide a Freesat box of some sort to those that cannot get anything
>> other than Bilsdale (such as in Helmsley for instance) and compare
>> that against the the cost of mast replacement. Get a Chinese company
>> to mass produce a low-cost Freesat box and dish and I bet there
>> wouldn't be that much difference.
> When I was doing the 'wind turbines buggering up people's TV reception'
> studies I realised that it was necessary to factor into any scheme where
> equipment was provided the costs of maintenance for what could be an
> indefinite period.
>
>
>> The coverage for the Vale of York
> Not an issue because they prefer Emley.
The Vale of York goes quite a long way north which does cause issues for
Emley
>
>
>> and northwards from Teesside could be covered by higher powered
>> transmitters at Arncliffe Wood, and the southern end (e.g. parts of
>> York and Harrogate) could be 'back-filled' by either a transmitter at
>> Woolmoor or at Acklam Wold or Settrington Beacon. Unfortunately (or
>> otherwise) that might mean people in Yorkshire having to watch
>> Yorkshire TV instead of Tyne Tees!
>
> Most of them use Emley anyway.
I think may people in Harrogate would love to watch Emley but when you
live on one of the several north-facing slopes around the town Emley is
a definite no-no. Agreed many can and do use Heyshaw if they can put up
with Freeview Lite!
>
>>
>> What puzzles me at the moment is that here in Harrogate with a
>> multibeam pointed at Emley (and Bilsdale being around 30deg off line
>> on the back of it) I can get a reasonably strong signal off Arncliffe
>> Wood but the TV will not decode it. Conversely I can get a stonking
>> signal from Belmont which is off the side of my aerial. Eh??
>>
> Despite your aerial being HP that sounds like the local relays causing CCI.
>
That was precisely my point Bill, there are no local relays in my area
that could cause such CCI. There's only Heyshaw and Wharfedale anywhere
near and the latter is blocked by a dirty great hill at my end. Granted
Heyshaw uses 39 which is the same a Leeds TV on Emley, and Wharfedale
uses the same A-band channels as Bilsdale but those channels are not
used on Arncliffe Wood.

Which leaves me back where I started!

On Mon 06/09/2021 12:54, NY wrote:
> "Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:sh4q80$l1u$1@dont-email.me...
>
>>> (*) For example, my previous house which was newly built when I
>>> bought it in 2000 was subject to a builder's covenant that there were
>>> to be no external aerials on the front (south-facing) side of the
>>> house for n years, to allow for the builder to take publicity
>>> photographs that were "unsullied" by aerials on the roof or dishes on
>>> the front wall. In practice, people started putting up dishes after a
>>> year or so, long before the covenant expired, using the "sod this for
>>> a game of soldiers" excuse.
>>
>> That is one annoying thing about dish installers - shortest cable
>> route possible. In such an instance the dish can be pole mounted at
>> the back and unless the roof is very tall and steep the dish will
>> 'see' over it from about 1m above the gutter. Not visible from the
>> front, good signal, easy access for cables into the loft in many
>> cases. Simples.
>
> Ah, is the satellite high enough in the sky for a dish as low as 1 m
> above the gutter to be able to see over the ridge for a typical roof? I
> hadn't realised that. Dishes always look to be pointing at a very low
> angle, but it's difficult what the effective angle is when you take into
> account the position of the receiver on its arm.

The elevation offset is about 25deg upwards. The elevation figure is
often embossed on the dish mounting bracket.

On 06/09/2021 12:57, Woody wrote:
> That was precisely my point Bill, there are no local relays in my area
> that could cause such CCI. There's only Heyshaw and Wharfedale
> anywhere near and the latter is blocked by a dirty great hill at my
> end. Granted Heyshaw uses 39 which is the same a Leeds TV on Emley,
> and Wharfedale uses the same A-band channels as Bilsdale but those
> channels are not used on Arncliffe Wood.
>
> Which leaves me back where I started!
>
>
No it doesn't. I was being perfectly serious about Sutton Coldfield

On 06/09/2021 10:21, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
> Home satellite dishes really are tech that should have been left in the 20th
> century. Unless you live in the arse end of nowhere you've got no excuse to
> mount one of those ugly warts on your wall, just use broadband.

How do you feel about basket ball hoops and targets?

Bill

On 06/09/2021 11:23, Woody wrote:
> That is one annoying thing about dish installers - shortest cable route
> possible.

Excuse me! SOME dish installers if you don't mind!

Bill