I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
continental country, would modern UK tvs get the ignals, all other things
aside like interference etc?

Back in the analogue days the different countries tended to change
parameters like sound vision spacing for example or in the case of the
French, almost everything, to make their system different. Must have been a
nightmare for set makers. There were a few which said thy would work
anywhere like those from Nordmane or however it was spelled.
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.!

On 05/01/2022 07:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the ignals, all other things
> aside like interference etc?
>
On an RF level the muxes are DVB-T or T2, so nothing different there. SD
channels are easy I think, but some of the coding standards used for HD
may not be supported by all UK receivers ?

Brian Gaff wrote:

> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the [signals], all other things
> aside like interference etc?

Once or twice my TV has done overnight scans and added foreign channel names,
nothing that could actually be received in the cold light of day though ...

On 05/01/2022 08:38, Andy Burns wrote:
> Brian Gaff wrote:
>
>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the [signals], all other
>> things
>> aside like interference etc?
>
> Once or twice my TV has done overnight scans and added foreign channel
> names, nothing that could actually be received in the cold light of
> day though ...
>
I gather the national Dutch SFN mux on UHF Ch39 can be regularly
received in Lincolnshire during enhanced conditions

I also gather people along the Kent coast are able to receive under
normal conditions French SD DTT channels (In analogue times it would
have been unlocked negative going video, with un decodable AM audio, so
that's at least progress !)

On 05/01/2022 08:18, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 05/01/2022 07:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the ignals, all other things
>> aside like interference etc?
>>
> On an RF level the muxes are DVB-T or T2, so nothing different there. SD
> channels are easy I think, but some of the coding standards used for HD
> may not be supported by all UK receivers ?

Can't say I've ever had problems with French transmitters from near
Southampton, even using horizontal polarisation from Rowridge. According
to
<https://www.aerialsandtv.com/knowledge/transmitters/rowridge-transmitter/how-to-combat-co-channel-interference#french-co-channel-interference>
the most likely would be Cherbourg (Digosville), although that's only
40kW. I would expect, though, that all its transmission is to the south
(and probably west and east as well) although I haven't been able to
find a diagram of its transmission direction and range. There's a minor
transmitter at Le Havre (20kW), and a major one at Caen (200kW), which
might cause lift interference if it transmits to the north.

--

Jeff

In message <sr3mqr$j1l$1@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
<jmlayman@invalid.invalid> writes
>On 05/01/2022 08:18, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 05/01/2022 07:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
>>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the ignals, all other things
>>> aside like interference etc?
>>>
>> On an RF level the muxes are DVB-T or T2, so nothing different there. SD
>> channels are easy I think, but some of the coding standards used for HD
>> may not be supported by all UK receivers ?
>
>Can't say I've ever had problems with French transmitters from near
>Southampton, even using horizontal polarisation from Rowridge.
>According to
><https://www.aerialsandtv.com/knowledge/transmitters/rowridge-transmitte
>r/how-to-combat-co-channel-interference#french-co-channel-interference>
>the most likely would be Cherbourg (Digosville), although that's only
>40kW. I would expect, though, that all its transmission is to the south
>(and probably west and east as well) although I haven't been able to
>find a diagram of its transmission direction and range. There's a minor
>transmitter at Le Havre (20kW), and a major one at Caen (200kW), which
>might cause lift interference if it transmits to the north.
>
Even when two analogue co-channel signals have the usual five-thirds
line frequency offset, the interfering signal starts to become visible
at around 35 to 40dB down. With digital, the required projection ratio
is much less. I've been out of the business for several years, and can't
recall specific figures - but let's say around 20dB (+/- a few,
depending on the order of the QAM).
--
Ian

On Wed 05/01/2022 08:55, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 05/01/2022 08:38, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Brian Gaff wrote:
>>
>>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
>>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the [signals], all other
>>> things
>>> aside like interference etc?
>>
>> Once or twice my TV has done overnight scans and added foreign channel
>> names, nothing that could actually be received in the cold light of
>> day though ...
>>
> I gather the national Dutch SFN mux on UHF Ch39 can be regularly
> received in Lincolnshire during enhanced conditions
>
> I also gather people along the Kent coast are able to receive under
> normal conditions French SD DTT channels (In analogue times it would
> have been unlocked negative going video, with un decodable AM audio, so
> that's at least progress !)

Is it Mark? I thought that France had gone completely HD vision but
retained the same audio (mp2?) as the original SD channels. Ergo unless
you have satellite and buy a Canal+ box whilst over there, or you buy a
TV that is designed to work by manual selection on any EU system you are
out in the cold.

On 05/01/2022 15:34, Woody wrote:
> On Wed 05/01/2022 08:55, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 05/01/2022 08:38, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Brian Gaff wrote:
>>>
>>>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial
>>>> to a
>>>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the [signals], all
>>>> other things
>>>> aside like interference etc?
>>>
>>> Once or twice my TV has done overnight scans and added foreign
>>> channel names, nothing that could actually be received in the cold
>>> light of day though ...
>>>
>> I gather the national Dutch SFN mux on UHF Ch39 can be regularly
>> received in Lincolnshire during enhanced conditions
>>
>> I also gather people along the Kent coast are able to receive under
>> normal conditions French SD DTT channels (In analogue times it would
>> have been unlocked negative going video, with un decodable AM audio,
>> so that's at least progress !)
>
>
> Is it Mark? I thought that France had gone completely HD vision but
> retained the same audio (mp2?) as the original SD channels. Ergo
> unless you have satellite and buy a Canal+ box whilst over there, or
> you buy a TV that is designed to work by manual selection on any EU
> system you are out in the cold.
>
>
Oh, yes, I think that's the case now. About 5 years ago ?  We're
woefully behind in the UK

On Wed 05/01/2022 19:13, MB wrote:
> On 05/01/2022 18:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>> Oh, yes, I think that's the case now. About 5 years ago ?  We're
>> woefully behind in the UK
>
> Aren't the French authorities less susceptible to public opinion than
> her.  If they want to build a high speed railway, they just build it
> without spending millions of pounds and years on public enquiries.
>
> Not as good of course if it is going past your house or if you are a
> pensioner with only a SD TV set.
>
>

They also have a President that likes to express himself in a certain
form of language?

On 05/01/2022 19:13, MB wrote:
> On 05/01/2022 18:47, Mark Carver wrote:
>> Oh, yes, I think that's the case now. About 5 years ago ?  We're
>> woefully behind in the UK
>
> Aren't the French authorities less susceptible to public opinion than
> her.  If they want to build a high speed railway, they just build it
> without spending millions of pounds and years on public enquiries.
>
> Not as good of course if it is going past your house or if you are a
> pensioner with only a SD TV set.
>
>
Progression will usually generate collateral damage.

In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge of
London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod with am
sound.
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.!
"Jeff Layman" <jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:sr3mqr$j1l$1@dont-email.me...
> On 05/01/2022 08:18, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 05/01/2022 07:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>> I just wondered in lift conditions, if I pointed a high gain aerial to a
>>> continental country, would modern UK tvs get the ignals, all other
>>> things
>>> aside like interference etc?
>>>
>> On an RF level the muxes are DVB-T or T2, so nothing different there. SD
>> channels are easy I think, but some of the coding standards used for HD
>> may not be supported by all UK receivers ?
>
> Can't say I've ever had problems with French transmitters from near
> Southampton, even using horizontal polarisation from Rowridge. According
> to
> <https://www.aerialsandtv.com/knowledge/transmitters/rowridge-transmitter/how-to-combat-co-channel-interference#french-co-channel-interference>
> the most likely would be Cherbourg (Digosville), although that's only
> 40kW. I would expect, though, that all its transmission is to the south
> (and probably west and east as well) although I haven't been able to find
> a diagram of its transmission direction and range. There's a minor
> transmitter at Le Havre (20kW), and a major one at Caen (200kW), which
> might cause lift interference if it transmits to the north.
>
> --
>
> Jeff

On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge of
> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod with am
> sound.
> Brian
>
Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component

On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer
>>> edge of
>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>> with am
>>> sound.
>>>    Brian
>>>
>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>
> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and
> Caen than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>
It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf

It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.

There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
would be due south of Rowridge ?

Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless
local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.

In message <sr6anf$5to$1@dont-email.me>, "Brian Gaff (Sofa)"
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> writes
>In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge of
>London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod with am
>sound.
> Brian
>
When sporadic-E was about, Lille would sometimes clobber Band 1 Ch5
(Pontop Pike) in Northumberland. The 819-line signal would lock on a
405-line set, and produce two tall-and-thin, side-by-side pictures.
--
Ian

On 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer
>>>> edge of
>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>>> with am
>>>> sound.
>>>>    Brian
>>>>
>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>
>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and
>> Caen than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>
> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days

No doubt!

> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>
> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>
> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
> air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
> would be due south of Rowridge ?

Cherbourg (either 20kW or 40kW according to source) is about 100 miles
due south of Rowridge. Another 100 miles, almost due south of Cherbourg,
is the Rennes transmitter (80kW).

> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
> mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
> 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
> aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless
> local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.

The HP COMs at Rowridge are 200kW for MUXs 1 - 3 and 50kW for MUXs 4 - 6.

--

Jeff

On Thu 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer
>>>> edge of
>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>>> with am
>>>> sound.
>>>>    Brian
>>>>
>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>
>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and
>> Caen than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>
> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days
>
> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>
> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>
> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
> air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
> would be due south of Rowridge ?
>
> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
> mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
> 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
> aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless
> local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.
>

Forgive me Mark, but I thought Rowridge has had both H & V for decades -
is that not so?

On 06/01/2022 16:48, Woody wrote:

> Forgive me Mark, but I thought Rowridge has had both H & V for decades -
> is that not so?
>
>

Memory says, "One decade".

Bill

On 06/01/2022 16:48, Woody wrote:
> On Thu 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer
>>>>> edge of
>>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>>>> with am
>>>>> sound.
>>>>>    Brian
>>>>>
>>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>>
>>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and
>>> Caen than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>>
>> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days
>>
>> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>>
>> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>>
>> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's
>> off air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site,
>> but it would be due south of Rowridge ?
>>
>> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
>> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component
>> to mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge
>> are on 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or
>> replacing an aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and
>> the pointless local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.
>>
>
> Forgive me Mark, but I thought Rowridge has had both H & V for decades
> - is that not so?
>
>
No, it was HP only until DSO, (10 years ago next month !)

It's unique for a high power TV station to have H _and_ V components,
and all beaming in the same directions.

There's a handful of relays that are H and V (and these date back to
analogue), but even these only have H and V components going in
different directions.

"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j3ome0Fsnu4U1@mid.individual.net...

> There's a handful of relays that are H and V (and these date back to
> analogue), but even these only have H and V components going in different
> directions.

Is it still true, as a broad-brush generalisation, that main transmitters
tend to use HP and relays tend to use VP? Or is that generalisation less
true nowadays?

On 06/01/2022 17:26, NY wrote:
> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:j3ome0Fsnu4U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> There's a handful of relays that are H and V (and these date back to
>> analogue), but even these only have H and V components going in
>> different directions.
>
> Is it still true, as a broad-brush generalisation, that main
> transmitters tend to use HP and relays tend to use VP? Or is that
> generalisation less true nowadays?

Yes, it's generally the case.

Bill

On 06/01/2022 17:26, NY wrote:
> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:j3ome0Fsnu4U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> There's a handful of relays that are H and V (and these date back to
>> analogue), but even these only have H and V components going in
>> different directions.
>
> Is it still true, as a broad-brush generalisation, that main
> transmitters tend to use HP and relays tend to use VP? Or is that
> generalisation less true nowadays?

It's still the same today. All main UHF stations were HP, and most
relays were VP, to mitigate against CCI from a distant main station.

There were exceptions, particularly in 'busy' areas with lots of relays
(South Wales) where CCI was more likely from a nearby relay, than a
distant main station.

The most notable example of an HP relay, is Ally Pally UHF in North
London. That's HP because the fairly high power relay at Hertford was
co-channel.

I don't think the polarisation of any transmitter has been changed,
because otherwise all of its viewers would need to also change the
polarization of their receiving aerials.

Rowridge had a vertical component added, so existing HP aerials were not
affected. As said, with a new aerial you're better off using VP for
Rowridge. I've noticed a gentle increase of VP receiving aerials in its
service area since DSO

Also of course, now the channels are almost all occupied here in outer
London there is little chance of receiving such signals any more unless they
go to vhf or something in one country, when we have not and then you could
use something like the old Tleverter to get the channels.
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.!
"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j3npdhFn7btU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge of
>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod with am
>> sound.
>> Brian
>>
> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component

I think at UHF its the topology in between that makes it so variable. I
remember may European Analogue uhf signals used to fade, probably due to the
long path over water. It was less of a problem when they used Band 1 of
course, but then interference was worse too, as aerials were less
directional.
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.!
"Jeff Layman" <jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:sr73b5$csl$1@dont-email.me...
> On 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer
>>>>> edge of
>>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>>>> with am
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> Brian
>>>>>
>>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>>
>>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and
>>> Caen than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>>
>> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days
>
> No doubt!
>
>> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>>
>> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>>
>> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
>> air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
>> would be due south of Rowridge ?
>
> Cherbourg (either 20kW or 40kW according to source) is about 100 miles due
> south of Rowridge. Another 100 miles, almost due south of Cherbourg, is
> the Rennes transmitter (80kW).
>
>> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
>> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
>> mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
>> 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
>> aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless
>> local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.
>
> The HP COMs at Rowridge are 200kW for MUXs 1 - 3 and 50kW for MUXs 4 - 6.
>
> --
>
> Jeff

Does anyone remember the very tall receiving tower on the downs not far from
Eastbourne?. It was run by Redifusion, who I worked for and they had a big
mesh screen to stop some interference from the continent, they used to
provide London ITV through a gap in the downs from Crystal Palace, as well
as the more local stations.
Good old days those.
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.!
"Woody" <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:sr76gs$4j6$1@dont-email.me...
> On Thu 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge
>>>>> of
>>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod with
>>>>> am
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> Brian
>>>>>
>>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>>
>>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and Caen
>>> than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>>
>> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days
>>
>> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>>
>> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>>
>> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
>> air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
>> would be due south of Rowridge ?
>>
>> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
>> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
>> mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
>> 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
>> aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless local
>> mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.
>>
>
> Forgive me Mark, but I thought Rowridge has had both H & V for decades -
> is that not so?
>
>

I'd have thought that V was less directional with the average aerial design
myself, from experiments, however if you can tweak it a bit off you can
sometimes remove co channel as long as the path to both is pretty constant,
I suppose.
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.!
"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j3ome0Fsnu4U1@mid.individual.net...
> On 06/01/2022 16:48, Woody wrote:
>> On Thu 06/01/2022 11:21, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2022 11:10, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2022 09:00, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>>> On 06/01/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>>>>>> In the old Analogue days Lille was very strong here in the outer edge
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> London if you were high enough, but of course it was positive mod
>>>>>> with am
>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>> Brian
>>>>>>
>>>>> Digital Lille is the reason Rowridge now has a vertical component
>>>>
>>>> But Lille is about 200 miles due east of Rowridge. Only those on the
>>>> Dorset coast from Bournemouth to perhaps Weymouth would have aerials
>>>> pointing east. Granted that with lift anything is possible, I'd have
>>>> though that Southampton and Winchester, with aerials pointing south,
>>>> would have been more likely to get interference from Cherbourg and Caen
>>>> than anyone in the region would from Lille. Has DTV co-channel
>>>> interference from Lille been noted occasionally?
>>>>
>>> It was a major issue for the Poole area, and its relay in analogue days
>>>
>>> http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1993-04.pdf
>>>
>>> It still shares Rowridge's allocations today with DTT.
>>>
>>> There was something else in France that used to corrupt Hannington's off
>>> air feed from Rowridge during lifts, I can't remember the site, but it
>>> would be due south of Rowridge ?
>>>
>>> Also Rowridge shares its COM muxes with Stockland Hill, and Crystal
>>> Palace, so I think they decided to give Rowridge a vertical component to
>>> mitigate problems from those two sites too. The COMs at Rowridge are on
>>> 50kW HP compared with 200kW VP, so if you're putting up or replacing an
>>> aerial for Rowridge, make it vertical. Only COM 7 and the pointless
>>> local mux at Rowridge at HP only. COM 7 will be gone soon.
>>>
>>
>> Forgive me Mark, but I thought Rowridge has had both H & V for decades -
>> is that not so?
>>
>>
> No, it was HP only until DSO, (10 years ago next month !)
>
> It's unique for a high power TV station to have H _and_ V components, and
> all beaming in the same directions.
>
> There's a handful of relays that are H and V (and these date back to
> analogue), but even these only have H and V components going in different
> directions.