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.

White Spaces!....



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 5th 13, 03:10 PM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Jim Lesurf[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,326
Default White Spaces!....

In article ,
wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:15:10 +0100 "Stephen"
wrote:
Thanks for that. Most of the space between Band III (230 MHz) and Band
IV (470 MHz) is described as FIXED MOBILE. What does that mean?


The fixed base station side of mobile comms?


amounts to half of the entire frequency spectrum below Band IV, and
with the increasing pressure from mobile phone & broadband for the
frequencies above, it would be a very useful resource, and have great
commercial value.


TBH a couple of hundred megahertz here or there is nothing these days
when digital comms is heading to point where hundreds of Mhz if not GHZ
data bandwidths are being considered.


We may need to be careful, though, to avoid using terms like 'bandwidth'
for two quite different things as it can lead to confusion. "Data
bandwidth" may be very different to the "Spectral bandwidth" for a given
system.

Similarly, using the unit 'Hz' for data rates can muddle thinking. More
appropriate to use units like bits or bytes per time. Not 'Hz'.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Ads
  #12  
Old April 5th 13, 03:41 PM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,245
Default White Spaces!....

On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:15:10 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:36:35 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 16:36:55 +0100, Richard Evans
wrote:

On 03/04/2013 13:02, tony sayer wrote:

Looks like more of the UHF broadcast band might be compromised;!...

http://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/d...20Spaces%20Tri
al%20-%20technical%20findings-with%20higher%20res%20pics.pdf

I've only briefly skimmed through that document, but it could be a bit
of a worry, as there would always be the potential fro things to go
wrong, and allow interference to peoples TV reception.

A lot of work has been done to characterise the interference
potential, and Ofcom have drawn up provisional plans for management of
a suitable database.
The problem with white-space devices is that they are third in line
for access to spectrum after TV and PMSE, and are subject to
switch-off if/when a large public event happens that requires several
TV channels for radio mics etc. Granted, this will not happen very
often in the rural areas where it is being promoted.
The biggest concern of course is that as the TV spectrum shrinks
before the inevitable expansion of mobile broadband, the amount of
white space available will also reduce. I don't see that WS devices
will have permanent access to this part of the spectrum.

What actually happens between 230 MHz and 470 MHz (the top of Band III to
the bottom of Band IV)? How much use is actually made of the frequencies
between 300 MHz and 399 MHz for example? If they want to use the present
UHF
TV channels for mobile broadband, then why can't we have 30 new TV
channels
here?


http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...UKFAT_2013.pdf


Thanks for that. Most of the space between Band III (230 MHz) and Band IV
(470 MHz) is described as FIXED MOBILE. What does that mean?

There are small sections with a meaningful description, but the vast
majority of this spectrum is just labelled FIXED MOBILE. Who uses it for
what, when & how often? Is it a historical military allocation that is
rarely used? Perhaps it is time to reconsider this allocation, because it
amounts to half of the entire frequency spectrum below Band IV, and with the
increasing pressure from mobile phone & broadband for the frequencies above,
it would be a very useful resource, and have great commercial value.


What's in there?
Mobile radio - everything from taxis to the emergency services.
Aviation, military, Fylingdales radar, and many other things.

As for putting TV there, first it would need agreement across Europe
at the next world conference. That's most unlikely since other
countries are ahead of us in moving to satellite and cable. e.g. in
Germany only 10% now use terrestrial TV.

It would need an entirely new network of transmitters and aerials,
since existing equipment won't work in that band. Similarly new
receiving aerials. And a new generation of set-top boxes.

You can forget it.
  #13  
Old April 5th 13, 04:11 PM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
hwh[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 62
Default White Spaces!....

On 4/5/13 3:36 AM, Stephen wrote:
What actually happens between 230 MHz and 470 MHz


A lot of military use. A spot for emergency services. Amateur radio. 450
MHz mobile phone band. And so on.

gr, hwh

  #14  
Old April 6th 13, 12:48 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Stephen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 115
Default White Spaces!....


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:15:10 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:36:35 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:


wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 16:36:55 +0100, Richard Evans
wrote:

On 03/04/2013 13:02, tony sayer wrote:

Looks like more of the UHF broadcast band might be compromised;!...

http://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/d...20Spaces%20Tri
al%20-%20technical%20findings-with%20higher%20res%20pics.pdf

I've only briefly skimmed through that document, but it could be a bit
of a worry, as there would always be the potential fro things to go
wrong, and allow interference to peoples TV reception.

A lot of work has been done to characterise the interference
potential, and Ofcom have drawn up provisional plans for management of
a suitable database.
The problem with white-space devices is that they are third in line
for access to spectrum after TV and PMSE, and are subject to
switch-off if/when a large public event happens that requires several
TV channels for radio mics etc. Granted, this will not happen very
often in the rural areas where it is being promoted.
The biggest concern of course is that as the TV spectrum shrinks
before the inevitable expansion of mobile broadband, the amount of
white space available will also reduce. I don't see that WS devices
will have permanent access to this part of the spectrum.

What actually happens between 230 MHz and 470 MHz (the top of Band III
to
the bottom of Band IV)? How much use is actually made of the frequencies
between 300 MHz and 399 MHz for example? If they want to use the present
UHF
TV channels for mobile broadband, then why can't we have 30 new TV
channels
here?

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...UKFAT_2013.pdf


Thanks for that. Most of the space between Band III (230 MHz) and Band IV
(470 MHz) is described as FIXED MOBILE. What does that mean?

There are small sections with a meaningful description, but the vast
majority of this spectrum is just labelled FIXED MOBILE. Who uses it for
what, when & how often? Is it a historical military allocation that is
rarely used? Perhaps it is time to reconsider this allocation, because it
amounts to half of the entire frequency spectrum below Band IV, and with
the
increasing pressure from mobile phone & broadband for the frequencies
above,
it would be a very useful resource, and have great commercial value.


What's in there?
Mobile radio - everything from taxis to the emergency services.
Aviation, military, Fylingdales radar, and many other things.

As for putting TV there, first it would need agreement across Europe
at the next world conference. That's most unlikely since other
countries are ahead of us in moving to satellite and cable. e.g. in
Germany only 10% now use terrestrial TV.

It would need an entirely new network of transmitters and aerials,
since existing equipment won't work in that band. Similarly new
receiving aerials. And a new generation of set-top boxes.


Although we have done this before. New transmitters and/or aerials for Sky
Digital (new dish aerials and new receiver boxes, 1998), DTT (new
transmitters & new receivers from 1998), DAB (new transmitters from 1995),
Colour TV (new transmitters, new domestic aerials, and new TVs from 1967),
ITV (new transmitters, new domestic aerials and new TVs from 1955), FM radio
(new transmitters, new roof aerials, new receivers also from about 1955). So
I think we could do it again.

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at 230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just because they can,
not because they need it.

Also the broadband networks that want to use Bands IV and V will need new
transmitters and aerials too, but it doesn't stand in their way.


  #15  
Old April 6th 13, 01:31 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Richard Evans[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default White Spaces!....

On 06/04/2013 00:48, Stephen wrote:

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at 230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just because they can,
not because they need it.


But bear in mind that the military would need to be able to operate
after a major national disaster, such as a war. And under those
circumstances the usual digital networks might not be operating, and
digital equipment may be difficult or impossible to obtain. Hence the
need for the military to be able to fall back on basic analogue
communication, and if they need certain types of spectrum for that, then
I think it should be kept available to them.

Richard E.
  #16  
Old April 6th 13, 08:23 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Woody[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,865
Default White Spaces!....

"Richard Evans" wrote in message
...
On 06/04/2013 00:48, Stephen wrote:

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at
230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by
new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just
because they can,
not because they need it.


But bear in mind that the military would need to be able to
operate after a major national disaster, such as a war. And
under those circumstances the usual digital networks might not
be operating, and digital equipment may be difficult or
impossible to obtain. Hence the need for the military to be
able to fall back on basic analogue communication, and if they
need certain types of spectrum for that, then I think it should
be kept available to them.

Richard E.




Yes except that 230-380MHz is largely military air - and even at
50KHz channelling that represents 3000 channels. Do they really
need that many?

Before RE says anything, yes there is a bit of military in the
400-425MHz band but large chunks of that plus everything 425-470
is allocated to amateur radio, PMR, telemetry, and paging and has
been for decades.



  #17  
Old April 6th 13, 09:07 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Ian Jackson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,968
Default White Spaces!....

In message , Richard Evans
writes
On 06/04/2013 00:48, Stephen wrote:

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at 230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just because they can,
not because they need it.


But bear in mind that the military would need to be able to operate
after a major national disaster, such as a war. And under those
circumstances the usual digital networks might not be operating, and
digital equipment may be difficult or impossible to obtain. Hence the
need for the military to be able to fall back on basic analogue
communication, and if they need certain types of spectrum for that,
then I think it should be kept available to them.

'Keeping the frequency clear just in case it might be needed some day'
is a rather strange concept. It's not as though that, by using
frequencies, the frequencies actually get 'used up'.

If there is any serious national emergency, and the military need
certain frequencies, any existing users under the control of the
government concerned will be kicked off - if necessary regardless of any
international agreements about their use. This has always been the case,
and presently happens (for example) with things like over-the-horizon
radar, where for many years various countries have been using certain
shortwave frequencies regardless of who are the rightful and
internationally assigned occupants.

The military reserving certain frequencies reminds me of the situation
in the amateur 2 meter band, where until something like the early 1980s,
there were six (?) forbidden spot frequencies (believed to be used by
military aircraft). In living memory, no amateurs had ever heard any
traffic on these frequencies, and occasionally the RSGB would ask the
authorities whether the embargo was really justified. The answer was
always "Yes". When the embargo was eventually lifted, I believe it
transpired that the last users had been Liberator bombers, in WW2.
--
Ian
  #18  
Old April 6th 13, 10:41 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
Jim Lesurf[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,326
Default White Spaces!....

In article , Woody
wrote:

Yes except that 230-380MHz is largely military air - and even at 50KHz
channelling that represents 3000 channels. Do they really need that
many?


Quite possibly. Partly because they may need a lot of parallel traffic at
times. Partly to dodge jamming and avoid spoofing.

That said, in a real conflict, they may use whatever bands suit them,
regardless of agreed plans. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
  #19  
Old April 6th 13, 11:21 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,245
Default White Spaces!....

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 00:48:57 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:15:10 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:36:35 +0100, "Stephen"
wrote:


wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 16:36:55 +0100, Richard Evans
wrote:

On 03/04/2013 13:02, tony sayer wrote:

Looks like more of the UHF broadcast band might be compromised;!...

http://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/d...20Spaces%20Tri
al%20-%20technical%20findings-with%20higher%20res%20pics.pdf

I've only briefly skimmed through that document, but it could be a bit
of a worry, as there would always be the potential fro things to go
wrong, and allow interference to peoples TV reception.

A lot of work has been done to characterise the interference
potential, and Ofcom have drawn up provisional plans for management of
a suitable database.
The problem with white-space devices is that they are third in line
for access to spectrum after TV and PMSE, and are subject to
switch-off if/when a large public event happens that requires several
TV channels for radio mics etc. Granted, this will not happen very
often in the rural areas where it is being promoted.
The biggest concern of course is that as the TV spectrum shrinks
before the inevitable expansion of mobile broadband, the amount of
white space available will also reduce. I don't see that WS devices
will have permanent access to this part of the spectrum.

What actually happens between 230 MHz and 470 MHz (the top of Band III
to
the bottom of Band IV)? How much use is actually made of the frequencies
between 300 MHz and 399 MHz for example? If they want to use the present
UHF
TV channels for mobile broadband, then why can't we have 30 new TV
channels
here?

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...UKFAT_2013.pdf

Thanks for that. Most of the space between Band III (230 MHz) and Band IV
(470 MHz) is described as FIXED MOBILE. What does that mean?

There are small sections with a meaningful description, but the vast
majority of this spectrum is just labelled FIXED MOBILE. Who uses it for
what, when & how often? Is it a historical military allocation that is
rarely used? Perhaps it is time to reconsider this allocation, because it
amounts to half of the entire frequency spectrum below Band IV, and with
the
increasing pressure from mobile phone & broadband for the frequencies
above,
it would be a very useful resource, and have great commercial value.


What's in there?
Mobile radio - everything from taxis to the emergency services.
Aviation, military, Fylingdales radar, and many other things.

As for putting TV there, first it would need agreement across Europe
at the next world conference. That's most unlikely since other
countries are ahead of us in moving to satellite and cable. e.g. in
Germany only 10% now use terrestrial TV.

It would need an entirely new network of transmitters and aerials,
since existing equipment won't work in that band. Similarly new
receiving aerials. And a new generation of set-top boxes.


Although we have done this before. New transmitters and/or aerials for Sky
Digital (new dish aerials and new receiver boxes, 1998), DTT (new
transmitters & new receivers from 1998), DAB (new transmitters from 1995),
Colour TV (new transmitters, new domestic aerials, and new TVs from 1967),
ITV (new transmitters, new domestic aerials and new TVs from 1955), FM radio
(new transmitters, new roof aerials, new receivers also from about 1955). So
I think we could do it again.

You need to look at who might pay for the new transmitter networks. As
I've said before, the broadcasters will be relieved to no longer pay
for the existing transmitters when DTT comes to an end. Transmission
by satellite and broadband is so much cheaper. The very last thing
they will do is pay for construction of an entirely new terrestrial
network.

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at 230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just because they can,
not because they need it.

There is far more than military in that band. And no country has any
interest in putting broadcasting in there. End of.

Also the broadband networks that want to use Bands IV and V will need new
transmitters and aerials too, but it doesn't stand in their way.

Paid for by phone subscribers.

I'll leave this discussion now as it really is pointless.
  #20  
Old April 6th 13, 11:24 AM posted to uk.tech.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.digital-tv
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,245
Default White Spaces!....

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 08:23:50 +0100, "Woody"
wrote:

"Richard Evans" wrote in message
...
On 06/04/2013 00:48, Stephen wrote:

Perhaps the international conference needs to look again at
230 - 470 MHz.
It's usefulness to the military may well have been eclipsed by
new
technology, and they may be hanging on to 90% of it just
because they can,
not because they need it.


But bear in mind that the military would need to be able to
operate after a major national disaster, such as a war. And
under those circumstances the usual digital networks might not
be operating, and digital equipment may be difficult or
impossible to obtain. Hence the need for the military to be
able to fall back on basic analogue communication, and if they
need certain types of spectrum for that, then I think it should
be kept available to them.

Richard E.




Yes except that 230-380MHz is largely military air - and even at
50KHz channelling that represents 3000 channels. Do they really
need that many?

Before RE says anything, yes there is a bit of military in the
400-425MHz band but large chunks of that plus everything 425-470
is allocated to amateur radio, PMR, telemetry, and paging and has
been for decades.

Do remember that amateurs are in there in the UK on a secondary basis
by grace and favour of MoD. If they decide to sell off that bit of
their spectrum it's unlikely that the new user will be able to
accommodate you.

 




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 05:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.