A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

Reception problem confusion



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 29th 17, 12:26 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
AnthonyL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 152
Default Reception problem confusion

On Sun, 28 May 2017 21:36:58 +0100, charles
wrote:

In article ,
AnthonyL wrote:
A friend is having problems with the reception particularly on the
higher TV channel numbers.


I've just checked on Wolfbane which reports clear line of sight to the
Nottingham transmitter indicating that it is 1 mile away.


Wolfbane suggests a set-top aerial - my friend will have standard
aerials (they've got more than one TV).


https://www.freeview.co.uk/channels-...ddress/results says the
nearest transmitter is Waltham, why? Has it determined Nottingham is
to near. 20+ miles away, again clear line of sight, and extra hi-gain
aerial suggested.


I'll ask some more questions of them tomorrow as I have no idea what
aerials they have but some clarification of the above is welcomed.


The Nottingham relay has a directional transmitting aerial. It points (if I
remember correctly) in a South easterly direction. If your friend is to
its Northwest, although it may be close by but it will provide very little
signal. I don't think wolfbane understands directional transmitting
aerials, but its a great many years (20+) since I did this sort of thing
for a living.


They are between the transmitter and the city of Nottingham ie to the
SE. Nottingham is I believe no longer a relay since it went digital,
it was a relay for Waltham when analogue.

Do set-top aerials help when too near a transmitter?

--
AnthonyL
  #12  
Old May 29th 17, 12:27 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
AnthonyL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 152
Default Reception problem confusion

On Mon, 29 May 2017 03:34:01 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 28/05/2017 21:46, Andy Burns wrote:
charles wrote:

AnthonyL wrote:

I've just checked on Wolfbane which reports clear line of sight to the
Nottingham transmitter indicating that it is 1 mile away.

I don't think wolfbane understands directional transmitting
aerials


Also wolfbane seems to over-egg the requirement for e.g. "amplified
extra high gain" when an un-amplified log-periodic is fine here.


Wolfbane is ****e


Please give a dumb d-i-yer a bit more guidance than that.



--
AnthonyL
  #13  
Old May 29th 17, 04:41 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Andy Burns[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Reception problem confusion

AnthonyL wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:

Wolfbane is ****e


Please give a dumb d-i-yer a bit more guidance than that.


Try the JavaJive site ... using postcode for the receiving location and
likeliest for the transmitter

http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/AudioVisualTV/TerrestrialTV/TerrestrialCalculator.shtml

  #14  
Old May 29th 17, 06:47 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 394
Default Reception problem confusion

On Mon, 29 May 2017 09:41:40 +0100, charles wrote:

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
On 28/05/2017 21:36, charles wrote:



The Nottingham relay has a directional transmitting aerial. It points
(if I remember correctly) in a South easterly direction. If your
friend is to its Northwest, although it may be close by but it will
provide very little signal.



Ta da !


http://www.markyboy.net/nottingham.pdf


gosh - I haven't seen one of those for many, many years. And, it seems
that I did remember correctly.


Looks Like a F/B ratio of ~14dB or so for CH's 31/34 (~13dB on CH21)

--
Johnny B Good
  #15  
Old May 29th 17, 08:45 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,720
Default Reception problem confusion

On 29/05/2017 08:09, Mark Carver wrote:
On 28/05/2017 21:36, charles wrote:


The Nottingham relay has a directional transmitting aerial. It points
(if I
remember correctly) in a South easterly direction. If your friend is to
its Northwest, although it may be close by but it will provide very
little
signal.



Ta da !

http://www.markyboy.net/nottingham.pdf

That attic of yours is a wonder Mr Carver. You must leave it to the
British Library.

Bill
  #16  
Old May 29th 17, 08:49 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,720
Default Reception problem confusion

On 29/05/2017 13:27, AnthonyL wrote:

Wolfbane is ****e


Please give a dumb d-i-yer a bit more guidance than that.

Wolfbane is total ****e.

Bill

  #17  
Old May 29th 17, 11:38 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul Ratcliffe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,430
Default Reception problem confusion

On Mon, 29 May 2017 03:34:01 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Wolfbane is ****e


meatloaf /
  #18  
Old May 29th 17, 11:47 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul Ratcliffe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,430
Default Reception problem confusion

On Mon, 29 May 2017 08:09:46 +0100, Mark Carver
wrote:

Ta da !


OMG... Windows 3.1
  #19  
Old May 30th 17, 06:50 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Woody[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,676
Default Reception problem confusion


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 29/05/2017 13:27, AnthonyL wrote:

Wolfbane is ****e


Please give a dumb d-i-yer a bit more guidance than that.

Wolfbane is total ****e.


I would not dispute your comments Bill, especially its considerable
pessimism over signal levels versus aerial needs. Mac's pages are
vastly better but - and its a big but - its a bit technical for Joe
Public. It suits the likes of us but to JP the table that Wolfbane
produces is relatively understood and essentially all it needs is a
map reference or postcode.


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


  #20  
Old May 30th 17, 07:11 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Mark Carver[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 293
Default Reception problem confusion

On 30/05/2017 00:47, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 08:09:46 +0100, Mark Carver
wrote:

Ta da !


OMG... Windows 3.1


It's a scan of a 1996 ITC/NTL document listing the HRPs for the (then)
proposed C5 analogue network. NTL had proposed to use the existing
cardioid at Nottingham that worked on 21,24,27, and 31 for C5 on 34.



--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.