On 13/10/2021 18:00, Mark Carver wrote:
> Won't the replacement require planning permission (despite it being 'new
> for old' etc) ?

After BBC Transmission was privatised, lots of masts / towers were
replaced so they could have more site-sharers. I think they were usually
the same height as the one replaced.

Many of the original towers were relatively flimsy compared with the new
ones. Trying to remember if the 17m wooden poles were replaced by one
of the same height - I think sometimes by a 17m lattice pole but not sure.

I believe the BBC was not allowed to speculate and use a heavier mast /
tower than they needed so they might in the future get some income from
it, it had to be funded by the site-sharer(s).

On Wed 13/10/2021 22:24, Indy Jess John wrote:
> On 13/10/2021 18:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>> Won't the replacement require planning permission (despite it being 'new
>> for old' etc) ?
>>
>
> Judging from the "planning permission not required" responses from my
> local council, if the external appearance is the same (or close enough
> it makes little difference) and the purpose is the same "usage class",
> then a replacement will not require planing permission.
>

.....except that this location is in a SSSI and AONB which has a whole
shed load of other rules and limitations.

On Thu 14/10/2021 08:47, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 13/10/2021 20:11, Woody wrote:
>>
>> Even the temp mast at Bilsdale has got a good deal of clutter on it
>> already including DAB and FM aerial arrays and I suspect probably some
>> dishes low down as well. What is being done about such as cellular I
>> know not.
> Do you mean the temp 80m  tower (yet to be built) or the temp mast
> that's there now ?
>
> I don't think I've seen any proper pictures of it yet ?

I was referring to the temp guyed lattice mast some pictures of which
can be seen on the front pages of such local publications as the York
Press and the Northern Echo.

I have not seen anything about an 80m 'tower' - where did you get that from?

"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:sk8rl1$ep1$2@dont-email.me...
> On Thu 14/10/2021 08:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 13/10/2021 20:11, Woody wrote:
>>>
>>> Even the temp mast at Bilsdale has got a good deal of clutter on it
>>> already including DAB and FM aerial arrays and I suspect probably some
>>> dishes low down as well. What is being done about such as cellular I
>>> know not.
>> Do you mean the temp 80m tower (yet to be built) or the temp mast that's
>> there now ?
>>
>> I don't think I've seen any proper pictures of it yet ?
>
> I was referring to the temp guyed lattice mast some pictures of which can
> be seen on the front pages of such local publications as the York Press
> and the Northern Echo.
>
> I have not seen anything about an 80m 'tower' - where did you get that
> from?

I wonder if it is reading between the lines of the reports that the current
mast, supported by guy wires secured to "sledges" on the ground, will not be
suitable in very windy or snowy weather of the winter on top of Bilsdale
West Moor. The implication is that this mast will need to be replaced by
another more permanent (but still temporary!) structure. But I've not seen
any more than vague allusions and implications.

In article <sk8rf9$ep1$1@dont-email.me>,
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Wed 13/10/2021 22:24, Indy Jess John wrote:
> > On 13/10/2021 18:00, Mark Carver wrote:
> >> Won't the replacement require planning permission (despite it being 'new
> >> for old' etc) ?
> >>
> >
> > Judging from the "planning permission not required" responses from my
> > local council, if the external appearance is the same (or close enough
> > it makes little difference) and the purpose is the same "usage class",
> > then a replacement will not require planing permission.
> >

> ....except that this location is in a SSSI and AONB which has a whole
> shed load of other rules and limitations.

In the early days of uhf expansion, a transmitter was planned for one of
the dales. A local meeting was held. There were loads of objections from
the townies who used to come out at weekends, then one of the locals said
"Bugger the moor, let's have the telly!" They got it

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 14/10/2021 10:01, Woody wrote:
> On Thu 14/10/2021 08:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 13/10/2021 20:11, Woody wrote:
>>>
>>> Even the temp mast at Bilsdale has got a good deal of clutter on it
>>> already including DAB and FM aerial arrays and I suspect probably
>>> some dishes low down as well. What is being done about such as
>>> cellular I know not.
>> Do you mean the temp 80m  tower (yet to be built) or the temp mast
>> that's there now ?
>>
>> I don't think I've seen any proper pictures of it yet ?
>
> I was referring to the temp guyed lattice mast some pictures of which
> can be seen on the front pages of such local publications as the York
> Press and the Northern Echo.
>
> I have not seen anything about an 80m 'tower' - where did you get that
> from?

http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=817128&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING

If the direct link  doesn't work, go to the North York Moors planning
search
http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/ApplicationSearch.aspx
and enter reference NYM/2021/0754/FL

Basically it will replace the existing 'Quarry' mast.  The local paper
shot  of that just shows DTT panels on a spine at the top. Which makes
sence, only the 7 main muxes are being radiated, no DAB or FM

The proposed 80m tower has all sort of extra goodies on it

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:10:14 +0100, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19641117.bilsdale-transmitter-tv-signal-restored-wednesday-say-freeview/
>
>Not yet announced on
>https://www.arqiva.com/news-views/news/update-on-incident-at-bilsdale-mast,
>so not confirmed yet.

Whitby Gazette says "all TVs must be returned" LOL
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On 14/10/2021 10:52, charles wrote:
> In the early days of uhf expansion, a transmitter was planned for one of
> the dales. A local meeting was held. There were loads of objections from
> the townies who used to come out at weekends, then one of the locals said
> "Bugger the moor, let's have the telly!" They got it

And the townies would be the first to complain when they retired to
their second home "to get away from it all" but realised TV reception
was very poor.

In article <isq5ciF875sU1@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
>On 13/10/2021 20:53, tony sayer wrote:
>> In article <isohldFtd2vU1@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
>> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
>>> On 13/10/2021 17:47, tony sayer wrote:
>>>> Makes me wonder now that they have knocked down olde Bilsdale why don't
>>>> they just get on with building a new replacement mast?, surly Alan Dick
>>>> or Balflour Beatty can lay hands on one somewhere?.
>>>>
>>> Won't the replacement require planning permission (despite it being 'new
>>> for old' etc) ?
>>>
>>> However, I'm wondering, if they're wondering, whether they could make do
>>> with the 80m tower (that is coming next) permanently ?
>>>
>>> I suspect they will assess carefully the dead spots from the 80m tower,
>>> it might be cheaper to fill in those with some relays ?
>> Well now theres a thought;?..
>>
>> Would said mast have enough capacity to take any FM and DAB phone
>> microwave link services etc?...
>>
>The planning permission drawing shows FM and DAB provision.
>
>What's intriguing is none of the non-broadcast third party users have
>pitched up at Bilsdale with their own masts,
>so was a lot of the clutter on the old mast redundant, and/or not really
>required any more ?

Quite possible, i hear that they aren't so interested in high comms
sites as much as they used to be, roadside ones 20 metres are fine and i
don’t think they pay as much for those in site rentals either!...

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <sk92aq$503$2@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> scribeth
thus
>On 14/10/2021 10:52, charles wrote:
>> In the early days of uhf expansion, a transmitter was planned for one of
>> the dales. A local meeting was held. There were loads of objections from
>> the townies who used to come out at weekends, then one of the locals said
>> "Bugger the moor, let's have the telly!" They got it
>
>And the townies would be the first to complain when they retired to
>their second home "to get away from it all" but realised TV reception
>was very poor.
>
>

Like they do for mobile phone coverage!....
--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <sk8rf9$ep1$1@dont-email.me>, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
scribeth thus
>On Wed 13/10/2021 22:24, Indy Jess John wrote:
>> On 13/10/2021 18:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> Won't the replacement require planning permission (despite it being 'new
>>> for old' etc) ?
>>>
>>
>> Judging from the "planning permission not required" responses from my
>> local council, if the external appearance is the same (or close enough
>> it makes little difference) and the purpose is the same "usage class",
>> then a replacement will not require planing permission.
>>
>
>
>....except that this location is in a SSSI and AONB which has a whole
>shed load of other rules and limitations.

Makes you wonder if given a few other locations if Arqiva would be glad
to close it down! OK its in a high location but the difficulty of
getting to it, doing most anything there, and the planning local rules
and all?..
--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On 14/10/2021 12:42, tony sayer wrote:
> In article <isq5ciF875sU1@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
>
>> The planning permission drawing shows FM and DAB provision.
>>
>> What's intriguing is none of the non-broadcast third party users have
>> pitched up at Bilsdale with their own masts,
>> so was a lot of the clutter on the old mast redundant, and/or not really
>> required any more ?
> Quite possible, i hear that they aren't so interested in high comms
> sites as much as they used to be, roadside ones 20 metres are fine and i
> don’t think they pay as much for those in site rentals either!...
>
I reckon 50:50 chance the 80m tower will end up being the permanent
replacement

On Thu 14/10/2021 11:07, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 14/10/2021 10:01, Woody wrote:
>> On Thu 14/10/2021 08:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 13/10/2021 20:11, Woody wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Even the temp mast at Bilsdale has got a good deal of clutter on it
>>>> already including DAB and FM aerial arrays and I suspect probably
>>>> some dishes low down as well. What is being done about such as
>>>> cellular I know not.
>>> Do you mean the temp 80m  tower (yet to be built) or the temp mast
>>> that's there now ?
>>>
>>> I don't think I've seen any proper pictures of it yet ?
>>
>> I was referring to the temp guyed lattice mast some pictures of which
>> can be seen on the front pages of such local publications as the York
>> Press and the Northern Echo.
>>
>> I have not seen anything about an 80m 'tower' - where did you get that
>> from?
>
> http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=817128&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING
>
>
> If the direct link  doesn't work, go to the North York Moors planning
> search
> http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/ApplicationSearch.aspx
> and enter reference NYM/2021/0754/FL
>
> Basically it will replace the existing 'Quarry' mast.  The local paper
> shot  of that just shows DTT panels on a spine at the top. Which makes
> sence, only the 7 main muxes are being radiated, no DAB or FM
>
> The proposed 80m tower has all sort of extra goodies on it
>

Am I reading something different? It purely refers to a 80m LATTICE mast
- says nothing about a tube. The temp mast is 80m lattice.....

"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:sk9a5c$t1u$1@dont-email.me...
>> http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=817128&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING

> Am I reading something different? It purely refers to a 80m LATTICE mast -
> says nothing about a tube. The temp mast is 80m lattice.....

I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment
cabinets" - I presume "no." stands for "number". What's wrong with "together
with 10 [or ten] equipment cabinets"? Everyone knows that 10/ten is a number
so there's no need to state it explicitly.

NY wrote:

> I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment cabinets"

It harks back to "old hat" phrasing, but it's still pretty standard language on
quotes and specs.

On 14/10/2021 14:14, NY wrote:

> I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment
> cabinets" - I presume "no." stands for "number". What's wrong with
> "together with 10 [or ten] equipment cabinets"? Everyone knows that
> 10/ten is a number so there's no need to state it explicitly.

It's jargon. It's purpose is to confuse those outside the trade or
profession.

Bill

williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
> On 14/10/2021 14:14, NY wrote:
>
>> I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment
>> cabinets" - I presume "no." stands for "number". What's wrong with
>> "together with 10 [or ten] equipment cabinets"? Everyone knows that
>> 10/ten is a number so there's no need to state it explicitly.
>
> It's jargon. It's purpose is to confuse those outside the trade or
> profession.
>
> Bill
>

I think it comes from the need to distinguish from a model number, probably
more so in the military. You might have, for example, a type 10 equipment
cabinet.

On 14/10/2021 14:09, Woody wrote:
> On Thu 14/10/2021 11:07, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 14/10/2021 10:01, Woody wrote:
>>> On Thu 14/10/2021 08:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> On 13/10/2021 20:11, Woody wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Even the temp mast at Bilsdale has got a good deal of clutter on
>>>>> it already including DAB and FM aerial arrays and I suspect
>>>>> probably some dishes low down as well. What is being done about
>>>>> such as cellular I know not.
>>>> Do you mean the temp 80m  tower (yet to be built) or the temp mast
>>>> that's there now ?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think I've seen any proper pictures of it yet ?
>>>
>>> I was referring to the temp guyed lattice mast some pictures of
>>> which can be seen on the front pages of such local publications as
>>> the York Press and the Northern Echo.
>>>
>>> I have not seen anything about an 80m 'tower' - where did you get
>>> that from?
>>
>> http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=817128&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/NorthYorkMoors/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING
>>
>>
>> If the direct link  doesn't work, go to the North York Moors planning
>> search
>> http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/ApplicationSearch.aspx
>> and enter reference NYM/2021/0754/FL
>>
>> Basically it will replace the existing 'Quarry' mast.  The local
>> paper shot  of that just shows DTT panels on a spine at the top.
>> Which makes sence, only the 7 main muxes are being radiated, no DAB
>> or FM
>>
>> The proposed 80m tower has all sort of extra goodies on it
>>
>
> Am I reading something different? It purely refers to a 80m LATTICE
> mast - says nothing about a tube. The temp mast is 80m lattice.....

Open the pdf entitled '2021-09-23 public - plans.pdf' and scroll down
the document. You will see the plans for a 80m (well 77.65m) latice TOWER !

You can get yourself a pdf reader at www.adobe.com

On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 15:19:30 +0100, williamwright
<wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:

>On 14/10/2021 14:14, NY wrote:
>
>> I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment
>> cabinets" - I presume "no." stands for "number". What's wrong with
>> "together with 10 [or ten] equipment cabinets"? Everyone knows that
>> 10/ten is a number so there's no need to state it explicitly.
>
>It's jargon.
>
Surely in current BBC TV news parlance that should be;-
"It's purpose is to confuse those outside OF the trade or
>profession".

--
brightside S9

On 14/10/2021 16:49, BrightsideS9 wrote:
> Surely in current BBC TV news parlance that should be;-
> "It's purpose is to confuse those outside OF the trade or

Many seem to often complain about others using 'jargon' when often it
just technical terms but will continue to use jargon in their own trade
or profession.

Am 13.10.2021 um 11:54 schrieb NY:
>
> What is the plan for Sutton Bank now that mini-Bilsdale is running? Is
> it still needed, or can mini-Bilsdale cover the area south-west that
> Sutton Bank was designed for?

According to https://www.freeview.co.uk/help/bilsdale :

"Sutton Bank won’t be turned back on as the temporary mast at Bilsdale
covers the area it served."

Regards,
Uli

"Ulrich Onken" <usenet-0621.uonken@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
news:isr4o7Fe5kuU1@mid.individual.net...
> Am 13.10.2021 um 11:54 schrieb NY:
>>
>> What is the plan for Sutton Bank now that mini-Bilsdale is running? Is it
>> still needed, or can mini-Bilsdale cover the area south-west that Sutton
>> Bank was designed for?
>
> According to https://www.freeview.co.uk/help/bilsdale :
>
> "Sutton Bank won’t be turned back on as the temporary mast at Bilsdale
> covers the area it served."

Ah. Makes sense. I wondered whether the polar diagram for Bilsdale would
exclude the bearings that Sutton Bank had covered, and concentrate on west
clockwise round to south. But it's much better to have one transmitter that
covers the full range of bearings that old Bilsdale used to cover - higher
altitude of antenna above sea level and much higher ERP. Looks as if Sutton
Bank was just a very short-term stopgap until the 80 m mast at Bilsdale was
ready. I wonder why it took them so long to get Sutton Bank going - why they
initially concentrated on the relays rather than also working with the same
priority on a substitute for the main mast at Bilsdale.

I wonder what sort of reception people in the fringes are getting from
mini-Bilsdale - eg Wensleydale south and west of Leyburn where there is
marginal line of sight and they are relying on diffraction over the brows of
hills.

"Andy Burns" wrote in message news:isqq1qFc554U1@mid.individual.net...

NY wrote:

> I wonder why the description says "together with 10 no. equipment
> cabinets"

>It harks back to "old hat" phrasing, but it's still pretty standard
>language on quotes and specs.

It is pretty standard planning speak.

Life can get a bit confusing when it's written as 3 2 bed houses and 2 3 bed
houses

So I would write that up as 3no 2b4p houses and 2no 3b5p houses.

James

On 14/10/2021 20:28, NY wrote:
>  I wonder why it took them so long to get Sutton Bank going -

Paper work, getting site access, legalities, etc etc etc.

You can't just pitch up somewhere on a third party's mast, and bolt your
kit on it (Like pirate radio stations do)

In article <isr4o7Fe5kuU1@mid.individual.net>,
Ulrich Onken <usenet-0621.uonken@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

https://www.freeview.co.uk/help/bilsdale :

According to that, not only did they restore COM7 to Bilsdale
temporary mast but they've added it to another transmitter - Eston
Nab. That transmitter isn't on my list of 25 main transmitters that
carry COM7.

Bob.