On 06/09/2021 11:45, SH wrote:
> 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

Yes, we have it on the website.

Bill

On 06/09/2021 12:54, NY 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.
>
> 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.

http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/reference/dish-screened-by-roof.pdf

Bill

On 06/09/2021 13:16, Mark Carver wrote:
> 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

An HP aerial looking towards Emley could conceivably get a sniff from
Sutton C I suppose.

Bill

On 06/09/2021 12:57, Woody wrote:

>> 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.

They don't need to be in your area. Sometimes a path can exist that
seems highly unlikely.

Bill

On 06/09/2021 12:59, Woody wrote:

>> 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.
>

http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/reference/dish-screened-by-roof.pdf

Bill

On 06/09/2021 14:52, williamwright wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 13:16, Mark Carver wrote:
>> 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
>
> An HP aerial looking towards Emley could conceivably get a sniff from
> Sutton C I suppose.

It's a regular visitor here in North Hampshire. I've just measured the
distance from SC to Harrogate, and SC to here, and it's exactly the same
for both, 157km !

On 06/09/2021 14:46, williamwright wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 11:45, SH wrote:
>> 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
>>
>
>
> Yes, we have it on the website.
>
> Bill

So you do!

Just seen the picture at https://www.donvalley.tv/starlink-installations

That starlink dish in the piccy looks puts Jodrell Bank and fylingdales
to shame against the background odf skyscrapers and and what looks like
3 TV or radio transmitters!

That could be off putting to potential customers?

Its actually about 60 cm diameter and it has a elevation and a azimuth
motor in it so it tracks the Starlink sats in their figure of eight
orbits....

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:09:53 +0100
"NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
><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?

When did I say don't use freeview? I'm simply saying that satellite dishes
as well as being fugly have been superceded as a technology especially given
that even freeview has over a hundred channels anyway now. When Sky first
appeared we had 4 analogue TV channels and streaming was a distant dream.

>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?

Youtube serves magnitudes more streams than iPlayer.

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:28:20 +0100
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>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

Oh the hardship!

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:41:12 +0100
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
>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?

I don't remember seeing a few dozen of them mounted up multi story buildings
but I guess if the players are really tall...

On 06/09/2021 16:29, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:09:53 +0100
> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> <MisterMule@stubborn.uk> wrote in message
>> news:sh4mj6$1472$1@gioia.aioe.org...

Obviously, the latest nymshi(f)t from our resident potato-brained troll.

>>> 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.

That is a laughable idea to many people in rural places, where, if they
can get landline broadband at all, they can only just about manage
1Mbps. Of course, one of the practical alternatives for many years has
been, er, satellite broadband.

>> How about all the programmes that are transmitted on terrestrial or
>> satellite channels but which are not available on catchup websites?
>
> When did I say don't use freeview? I'm simply saying that satellite dishes
> as well as being fugly have been superceded as a technology especially given
> that even freeview has over a hundred channels anyway now. When Sky first
> appeared we had 4 analogue TV channels and streaming was a distant dream.

Freeview requires aerials no less fugly than satellite dishes, and only
an idiot would suggest it in a thread about FV being taken out in an
entire area because of a fire at a mast.

>> 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?
>
> Youtube serves magnitudes more streams than iPlayer.

But around here, not more than broadcast TV. I can deduce that without
asking my neighbours because I know their broadband speeds.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/09/2021 16:30, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:28:20 +0100
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>
> Oh the hardship!

Sarcasm doesn't adequately answer Andy's point.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Mon 06/09/2021 14:45, williamwright wrote:
> 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

Humble apologies Sire, I just naturally exclude you and Paul......

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:41:47 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 06/09/2021 16:29, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:09:53 +0100
>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> <MisterMule@stubborn.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:sh4mj6$1472$1@gioia.aioe.org...
>
>Obviously, the latest nymshi(f)t from our resident potato-brained troll.

No fooling you is there sherlock.

>>>> 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.
>
>That is a laughable idea to many people in rural places, where, if they
>can get landline broadband at all, they can only just about manage
>1Mbps. Of course, one of the practical alternatives for many years has
>been, er, satellite broadband.

LOL :) I had a friend who tried it , it was shit. Frequent carrier loss if
it was bad weather and a fixed not insignificant for certain applications
delay no matter what.

>> When did I say don't use freeview? I'm simply saying that satellite dishes
>> as well as being fugly have been superceded as a technology especially given
>> that even freeview has over a hundred channels anyway now. When Sky first
>> appeared we had 4 analogue TV channels and streaming was a distant dream.
>
>Freeview requires aerials no less fugly than satellite dishes, and only

Sure, if your name is a Mr S Wonder.

>an idiot would suggest it in a thread about FV being taken out in an
>entire area because of a fire at a mast.

And that happens how often? Satellites have been taken out by debris or have
lost control too.

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:43:38 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 06/09/2021 16:30, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:28:20 +0100
>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>> Oh the hardship!
>
>Sarcasm doesn't adequately answer Andy's point.

The difference is unnoticable on most consumer TVs and if you really care so
much about inconsequential improvements in resolution buy a blue ray player.

On 06/09/2021 17:10, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:41:47 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 06/09/2021 16:29, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:09:53 +0100
>>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <MisterMule@stubborn.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:sh4mj6$1472$1@gioia.aioe.org...
>>
>> Obviously, the latest nymshi(f)t from our resident potato-brained troll.
>
> No fooling you is there sherlock.

So why keep doing it, when all it accomplishes is you looking even more
like a troll than the dire quality of your posts makes you look already.

>>>>> 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.
>>
>> That is a laughable idea to many people in rural places, where, if they
>> can get landline broadband at all, they can only just about manage
>> 1Mbps. Of course, one of the practical alternatives for many years has
>> been, er, satellite broadband.
>
> LOL :) I had a friend who tried it , it was shit. Frequent carrier loss if
> it was bad weather and a fixed not insignificant for certain applications
> delay no matter what.

But around here still better than landline broadband.

>>> When did I say don't use freeview? I'm simply saying that satellite dishes
>>> as well as being fugly have been superceded as a technology especially given
>>> that even freeview has over a hundred channels anyway now. When Sky first
>>> appeared we had 4 analogue TV channels and streaming was a distant dream.
>>
>> Freeview requires aerials no less fugly than satellite dishes, and only
>
> Sure, if your name is a Mr S Wonder.

No, just if your name is Mr Even-Handed.

>> an idiot would suggest it in a thread about FV being taken out in an
>> entire area because of a fire at a mast.
>
> And that happens how often? Satellites have been taken out by debris or have
> lost control too.

Exactly, so they're not in any measurable way much different from FV in
appearance, reliability, and functionality.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/09/2021 17:12, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:43:38 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 06/09/2021 16:30, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:28:20 +0100
>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> Oh the hardship!
>>
>> Sarcasm doesn't adequately answer Andy's point.
>
> The difference is unnoticable on most consumer TVs

"Sure, if your name is a Mr S Wonder." Andy obviously doesn't think so,
otherwise he wouldn't have raised the point, and I suspect others here
would disagree with you as well.

> and if you really care so
> much about inconsequential improvements in resolution buy a blue ray player.

Since when could blue-ray players receive broadcast TV?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 11:09:53 +0100, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>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?

It might struggle if everybody switched tomorrow, but it seems a near
certainty that this is the way all communications are going.

Not that long ago, it wasn't conceivable that it would be possible to
send high definition colour video with stereo sound through a phone
line at all, and yet here we are now doing it routinely, with more
places gradually being provided with optical fibres to replace the
cables. It won't happen overnight, but the question now is not if it
will happen, but when. TCP/IP may not even have been designed for the
purpose but that hasn't stopped development so far, and it's unlikely
to prevent development of anything else for the future if enough
people want it.

Rod.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> 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
>
>

Indeed, it costs around £12/month in electricity alone.

On 06/09/2021 18:21, Tweed wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> Indeed, it costs around £12/month in electricity alone.
>

yes it is (currently) expensive but with its download speeds of 150
Mbit/sec and an upload of 20 Mbit/s, that blows the rural wet string
speeds of 1 Mbit/sec out of the water.

With time, prices for both hardware and monthly charge will fall and the
line speed will increase to 300 Mbit/s once the rest of the Starlink
satellites are in orbit.

On 06/09/2021 16:31, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:41:12 +0100
> williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
>> 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?
>
> I don't remember seeing a few dozen of them mounted up multi story buildings
> but I guess if the players are really tall...
>
What's multistorey buildings got to do with it? They normally had a
distribution system. Dishes on blocks of flats are normally installed by
foreigners who want to avoid integrating.

Bill

On 06/09/2021 22:00, williamwright wrote:
>
> Dishes on blocks of flats are normally installed by foreigners who want
> to avoid integrating.

More nauseating shite from boring Mr Bigot.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/09/2021 22:00, williamwright wrote:
> Dishes on blocks of flats are normally installed by
> foreigners who want to avoid integrating.

Are there that many Irish wanting to watch hurling?

On 06/09/2021 22:00, williamwright wrote:
> On 06/09/2021 16:31, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:41:12 +0100
>> williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
>>> 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?
>>
>> I don't remember seeing a few dozen of them mounted up multi story
>> buildings
>> but I guess if the players are really tall...
>>
> What's multistorey buildings got to do with it? They normally had a
> distribution system. Dishes on blocks of flats are normally installed by
> foreigners who want to avoid integrating.
>
> Bill

or who want to recieve tv or radio in thier first langauge or to keep up
to date with whats happening in their home country or even to help their
children be bi-lingual?

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 22:00:26 +0100
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
>On 06/09/2021 16:31, MisterMule@stubborn.uk wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:41:12 +0100
>> williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
>>> 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?
>>
>> I don't remember seeing a few dozen of them mounted up multi story buildings
>> but I guess if the players are really tall...
>>
>What's multistorey buildings got to do with it? They normally had a
>distribution system. Dishes on blocks of flats are normally installed by
>foreigners who want to avoid integrating.

Clearly you've never heard of Council House TV.