| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-low-brow.html -- Cheers Peter |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert
wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-low-brow.html The spokesman said:... "The nine channels are BBC One, BBC Two, ITV1, Channel 4, Channel 5, Sky Sports News, ITV3, The Music Factory (TMF) and Film 4. Someone should tell the spokeman that TMF is now VIVA. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Well I can only agree with the prisoner. Has anyone watched this new
Prisoner? I saw/well heard/ a clip. No thanks I thought. Bring back cardboard sets and good fun TV. Most of the shows seem to be produced to aid hyper ventilation or bboredom these days. Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "Petert" wrote in message ... One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-low-brow.html -- Cheers Peter |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
He probably also thinks Teachers TV is all about booze.
Seems an odd selection. Is there any reason why hmp don't just give them all the freeview stuff and have done with it? Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "Peter Duncanson" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-low-brow.html The spokesman said:... "The nine channels are BBC One, BBC Two, ITV1, Channel 4, Channel 5, Sky Sports News, ITV3, The Music Factory (TMF) and Film 4. Someone should tell the spokeman that TMF is now VIVA. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
In article , Petert
scribeth thus One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-TV-channels- are-too-low-brow.html Let the sod rot after what he was sent there for:((... -- Tony Sayer |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Petert wrote:
One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-low-brow.html Interesting to note that even the Torygraph will reprint items from other publications without attribution. Channels will be made available at the discretion of the governor. It would seem likely that once the kit is installed, changing channels will be a simple process, one that even a prison officer could do. -- rgds LAurence ....Obviously, crime pays, or there'd be no crime. --G. Gordon Liddy ---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Brian G" wrote in message ... He probably also thinks Teachers TV is all about booze. Seems an odd selection. Is there any reason why hmp don't just give them all the freeview stuff and have done with it? Brian Many prisoners used to, then HMP did a dodgy contract with a company to provide limited cable. Many prisoners have complained about the loss of freeview The authorities must have learnt from the Chinese about controlling broadcasting, and it's a lesson in proper contract corruption, in that most of the best criminals do it with a pen. Steve Terry -- Get a free Three 3pay Sim with £2 bonus after £10 top up http://freeagent.three.co.uk/stand/view/id/5276 |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On May 12, 5:22*pm, Petert wrote:
One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-complains-TV-... -- Cheers Peter Oh how I wish I could tell you all the story behind this. It's almost incredible. Bill |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Racist Pikey Gob****e" wrote in message ... On May 12, 5:22 pm, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-complains-TV-... -- Cheers Peter Oh how I wish I could tell you all the story behind this. It's almost incredible. I sense another made-up 'Bill Wright Bull**** Story' (TM) coming up, but he wants one of you cretins to beg for it first. In reality of course, if Bill's ever set foot in a prison, it'll have been as an inmate. He probably lost his chance of parole after breaking the telly. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"jamie powell" wrote in message ... "Racist Pikey Gob****e" wrote in message ... On May 12, 5:22 pm, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-complains-TV-... -- Cheers Peter Oh how I wish I could tell you all the story behind this. It's almost incredible. I sense another made-up 'Bill Wright Bull**** Story' (TM) coming up, but he wants one of you cretins to beg for it first. In reality of course, if Bill's ever set foot in a prison, it'll have been as an inmate. He probably lost his chance of parole after breaking the telly. yes, he likes those old smoke blowers..........fffffuuufffffffffff.......oooohhh hhhhhhhh nice. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Thu, 13 May 2010 03:29:25 +0100, "jamie powell"
wrote: I sense another made-up 'Bill Wright Bull**** Story' (TM) coming up, but he wants one of you cretins to beg for it first. In reality of course, if Bill's ever set foot in a prison, it'll have been as an inmate. He probably lost his chance of parole after breaking the telly. I'd forgotten to kiullfile you on this PC - thanks for reminding me what an arsewipe you are -- Cheers Peter (Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group) |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Oh how I wish I could tell you all the story behind this. It's almost
incredible. The question is, which would have been cheaper to provide, a Freeview box per cell or whatever is being used to carefully provide just a select set of channels? Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital anyway otherwise in a couple of years time there will be no TV capable of receiving them. Or, there has to be another box in each cell not unlike say, oh, a Freeview STB. Paul DS. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:43:20 +0100, "Paul D.Smith"
wrote: Oh how I wish I could tell you all the story behind this. It's almost incredible. The question is, which would have been cheaper to provide, a Freeview box per cell or whatever is being used to carefully provide just a select set of channels? Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital anyway otherwise in a couple of years time there will be no TV capable of receiving them. Or, there has to be another box in each cell not unlike say, oh, a Freeview STB. Paul DS. Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. It would give the prison authorities the ability to control exactly what is delivered to the cells - possibly for security or discipline reasons - someone will doubtless be aqlong to correct any of the above should it be necessary :-) -- Cheers Peter (Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group) |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
The question is, which would have been cheaper to provide, a Freeview box
per cell or whatever is being used to carefully provide just a select set of channels? Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital anyway otherwise in a couple of years time there will be no TV capable of receiving them. Or, there has to be another box in each cell not unlike say, oh, a Freeview STB. Paul DS. Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. It would give the prison authorities the ability to control exactly what is delivered to the cells - possibly for security or discipline reasons - someone will doubtless be aqlong to correct any of the above should it be necessary :-) A reasonable comment but for costs sake, the prison will not want specialist hardware. This means regular TVs and very soon regular TVs will not be able to receive analogue so a sensible person would plan for having to use digital TV. Of course the words "reasonable" and "sensible" might not apply here since this is a publicly funded contract and probably negotiated by people who haven't a clue what they're buying. Paul DS |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Paul D.Smith" wrote in message ... The question is, which would have been cheaper to provide, a Freeview box per cell or whatever is being used to carefully provide just a select set of channels? Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital anyway otherwise in a couple of years time there will be no TV capable of receiving them. Or, there has to be another box in each cell not unlike say, oh, a Freeview STB. Paul DS. Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. It would give the prison authorities the ability to control exactly what is delivered to the cells - possibly for security or discipline reasons - someone will doubtless be aqlong to correct any of the above should it be necessary :-) A reasonable comment but for costs sake, the prison will not want specialist hardware. This means regular TVs and very soon regular TVs will not be able to receive analogue so a sensible person would plan for having to use digital TV. Surely all that would be required is digital receivers with the ability to 'securely' lockout undesired channels, as with parental control? Of course the words "reasonable" and "sensible" might not apply here since this is a publicly funded contract and probably negotiated by people who haven't a clue what they're buying. Paul DS |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Surely all that would be required is digital receivers with the ability to
'securely' lockout undesired channels, as with parental control? Remember that this system will probably be in place for donkeys years. You might be able to source all-similar sets that do this now, and in a consistent way, but in 10 years time you will have many different models and ways of configuring this as you've replaced borken and/or faulty sets with new ones. Far better to have a system with minimal smarts in the cells but based on standard technology if possible. Paul DS. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On 13 May, 10:50, "Paul D.Smith" wrote:
The question is, which would have been cheaper to provide, a Freeview box per cell or whatever is being used to carefully provide just a select set of channels? Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital anyway otherwise in a couple of years time there will be no TV capable of receiving them. *Or, there has to be another box in each cell not unlike say, oh, a Freeview STB. Paul DS. Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. It would give the prison authorities the ability to control exactly what is delivered to the cells - possibly for security or discipline reasons - someone will doubtless be aqlong to correct any of the above should it be necessary :-) A reasonable comment but for costs sake, the prison will not want specialist hardware. *This means regular TVs and very soon regular TVs will not be able to receive analogue so a sensible person would plan for having to use digital TV. "Very soon"? Doubt that. _Some_ TV manufacturers may remove the functionality quite soon, though it'll probably be in the chipsets for years to come, and many TVs will still expose that functionality. Given the complexity of DVB-T2 decoding (soon to be standard), the silicon real estate of analogue decoding is probably unnoticeable in comparison. Cheers, David. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Wed, 12 May 2010 20:02:27 +0100, "Brian G"
wrote: Well I can only agree with the prisoner. Has anyone watched this new Prisoner? I saw/well heard/ a clip. No thanks I thought. I missed the first episode because it looked from Digiguide that it was being repeated but the repeat turned out to be the original Patrick McGoohan series, also being repeated. I watched the second epsiode and was glad I'd missed the first. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Peter" wrote in message ... On Thu, 13 May 2010 03:29:25 +0100, "jamie powell" wrote: I sense another made-up 'Bill Wright Bull**** Story' (TM) coming up, but he wants one of you cretins to beg for it first. In reality of course, if Bill's ever set foot in a prison, it'll have been as an inmate. He probably lost his chance of parole after breaking the telly. I'd forgotten to kiullfile you on this PC - thanks for reminding me what an arsewipe you are You don't expect anyone to believe, even for an instant, that you forgot having your real personality exposed. Roger R |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Thu, 13 May 2010 21:16:26 +0100, "Roger R"
wrote: You don't expect anyone to believe, even for an instant, that you forgot having your real personality exposed. Roger R Do let me know when the above is available in English -- Cheers Peter |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Peter wrote:
wrote: Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. One institution I'm familiar with (not designated a prison, but with prison level of security) receives and decodes the digital muxes, then multicasts the chosen program streams over ethernet to the TVs. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert wrote:
One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! And here is another one he may like to comment on. ;) http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial1.jpg |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Fri, 14 May 2010 20:15:09 +0000, J G Miller wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! And here is another one he may like to comment on. ;) http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial1.jpg And a close up of the bracket. http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial3.jpg These are not my photographs but came across them on another well known web site. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"J G Miller" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! And here is another one he may like to comment on. ;) http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial1.jpg Clearly there are some issues here, but why did you chose this installation? I mean, in the great scheme of things, is it so bad? -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On May 14, 9:17*pm, J G Miller wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010 20:15:09 +0000, J G Miller wrote: On Wed, 12 May 2010 17:22:32 +0100, Petert wrote: One for Bill - to comment on & to possibly work on! And here is another one he may like to comment on. *;) http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial1.jpg And a close up of the bracket. http://www.welsh3000s.co.UK/images/aerial3.jpg Sigh... Sometimes I feel so dismal about my trade. The odd thing is, when you talk to the guys who do things like that they are often not cowboys, in the sense of not being people who do a deliberately bad job for the sake of economy and speed. They are almost conscientious, in that they really feel that they do a half- decent job. The problem seems to be that they have never had any training, and have simply fallen into bad habits, doing the job the way they have always done it. They lack the intelligence to look at other people's work and learn from it. Bill |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Friday, May 14th, 2010 at 23:34:22h +0100, Graham. wrote:
Clearly there are some issues here, but why did you chose this installation? Only because it is topical and undergoing current discussion. The resident who is took the photographs is complaining that the installation is making creaking noise which is keeping him awake at night. http://www.digitalspy.co.UK/forums/showthread.php?t=1261058 I mean, in the great scheme of things, is it so bad? It is bad if it is keeping him awake and liable to come crashing down. And having three antennas, decreasing in size down the pole, all pointed at the same transmitter, and positioned too close together just does not make sense even to a non-professional observer. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On May 14, 11:48*pm, J G Miller wrote:
On Friday, May 14th, 2010 at 23:34:22h +0100, Graham. wrote: Clearly there are some issues here, but why did you chose this installation? Only because it is topical and undergoing current discussion. The resident who is took the photographs is complaining that the installation is making creaking noise which is keeping him awake at night. Rubbing on the platic gutter I suppose. http://www.digitalspy.co.UK/forums/showthread.php?t=1261058 I mean, in the great scheme of things, is it so bad? No, but as I implied in an earlier post it is representitive of so much of the work that's done. And having three antennas, decreasing in size down the pole, all pointed at the same transmitter, and positioned too close together just does not make sense even to a non-professional observer. The lower two aerials could be 'squatters'. We often get these on the masts of our communal system aerials. We have to remove them for insurance reasons. The resident is usually very angry -- with us, not the cowboy installer. Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ew=slideshow#/ Comments welcome. Bill |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
The lower two aerials could be 'squatters'. We often get these on the masts of our communal system aerials. We have to remove them for insurance reasons. The resident is usually very angry -- with us, not the cowboy installer. Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ew=slideshow#/ Comments welcome. Bill Loving the loop left for the masthead amplifier on the cheap bracket shot. Obviously he couldn't talk the customer into having one! Some great "earthing" examples too! |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On May 15, 9:40*am, Mark Carver wrote:
wrote: Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...Day%202/recent... Comments welcome. I like the one with 4 feeds paralleled off the loft aerial. I was heartbroken to see an aerial I installed about 12 years ago for a friend, has suffered a similar bodged up fate by the new owners of the house. It's a heartbreak I suffer on frequent occasions. Here are some examples: I installed a large aerial for a communal system in January. It was in a very poor reception area so the aerial performance was critical. Driving past a few weeks later I saw that a vertical glass fibre colinear had been clamped to the mast, with the radiating element inbetween the directors of my aerial. So far I have not been called back. At another communal system in deepest Derbyshire I fitted a four element DAB aerial and an FM aerial. These were on the main aerial mast below the UHF aerial. They were important because indoor radio reception in that area is very poor indeed. Whilst on site to fix a faulty multiswitch I saw that the DAB aerial had been slackened off and swung through 180deg, in order to make room for a B & Q TV aerial. This had a white cable running across the flat roof to the lift motor room. When I enquired of the caretaker he became extremely shifty. It transpired that he had set up a cozy nest in there, complete with electric fire, easy chair, kettle, and TV set. On the wall near his TV set was an enclosure that contained two multiswitches, with a total of six spare outputs. There's a 1960s Swiss-style bungalow near here that has a gable end overlooking the main road. The resident wanted the aerial on that gable because it looked better from the front of his house. The roof overhang was about a metre, so big wall brackets were called for, but when the installer (not me) explained this to the customer he said he didn't like the idea of the big brackets, so could the aerial be fixed to the wooden fascia. This was done, with a warning that if it caused creaking noises or otherwise mishehaved it was on his own head (not literally, we hope). Anyway, the installer told me this tale and I noticed the aerial when I drove past. It didn't look very secure. Then, a couple of years later, a bloke rung me up and said he wanted to buy a TV aerial and an FM aerial, and some cable. I don't really like this sort of thing (we aren't retailers) but in the end I sold him a four element FM aerial and an 18 element TV aerial. The next time I drove past the bungalow the two aerials were clamped to the mast of the original TV aerial. The whole thing looked vary precarious.However, a few weeks later I noticed that the FM aerial had gone; probably having been moved into the loft. Some Polish tenants put an 85cm dish half way up the mast of my new communal TV aerial, so they could get Polsat. This became as issue when the cable tapped on another tenant's window. At a local residential hospital I found that the poor DTT reception on 120 TV sets was caused in part by two extra downleads having been taped into the aerial cable, with no splitter. These ran to two patient waiting areas. Works Dept were responsible. Bill |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Fri, 14 May 2010 21:12:33 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote: Peter wrote: wrote: Presumably, and to be future proof, the available channels are digital Not necessarily, the headend in, say, the governors office would recieve the digital TV channels, but the distribution to the cells doesn't need to be digital. One institution I'm familiar with (not designated a prison, but with prison level of security) Eton? -- Cheers Peter |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Mark Carver" wrote in message ... wrote: Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ew=slideshow#/ Comments welcome. I like the one with 4 feeds paralleled off the loft aerial. I was heartbroken to see an aerial I installed about 12 years ago for a friend, has suffered a similar bodged up fate by the new owners of the house. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. It irritates me every time I go there, but we don't know them well enough to mention it yet! |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Sat, 15 May 2010 18:00:44 +0100, "Doctor D"
wrote: This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. I take it that the extractor fan isn't working? -- Cheers Peter |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On Saturday, May 15th, 2010 at 18:00:44h +0100, Doctor D wrote:
directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) Will those local interference problems still be significant now that transmissions are digital only? Abergavenny -- ch42 ch45 ch49 Pennorth -- ch23 ch26 ch29 |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"Petert" wrote in message ... On Sat, 15 May 2010 18:00:44 +0100, "Doctor D" wrote: This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. I take it that the extractor fan isn't working? -- Cheers Peter It certainly used to. It's a very old square Expelair and quite likely no longer works. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
On May 15, 6:00*pm, "Doctor D" wrote:
"Mark Carver" wrote in message ... wrote: Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...Day%202/recent.... Comments welcome. I like the one with 4 feeds paralleled off the loft aerial. I was heartbroken to see an aerial I installed about 12 years ago for a friend, has suffered a similar bodged up fate by the new owners of the house. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. In this manner? http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/roguesgallery/033.shtml Bill |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
" wrote in message ... On May 15, 6:00 pm, "Doctor D" wrote: "Mark Carver" wrote in message ... wrote: Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...Day%202/recent... Comments welcome. I like the one with 4 feeds paralleled off the loft aerial. I was heartbroken to see an aerial I installed about 12 years ago for a friend, has suffered a similar bodged up fate by the new owners of the house. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. In this manner? http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/roguesgallery/033.shtml Bill At least they used white coax. -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
Anyway, take a look at http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ew=slideshow#/ Comments welcome. I like the one with 4 feeds paralleled off the loft aerial. I was heartbroken to see an aerial I installed about 12 years ago for a friend, has suffered a similar bodged up fate by the new owners of the house. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. It irritates me every time I go there, but we don't know them well enough to mention it yet! Someone I know was an early adopter of DAB and spent a lot on a tuner and roof aerial, the first one in his street. It's still unique today in the whole area, because it's the only one that is horizontally polarised! -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
"J G Miller" wrote in message ... On Saturday, May 15th, 2010 at 18:00:44h +0100, Doctor D wrote: directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) Will those local interference problems still be significant now that transmissions are digital only? Abergavenny -- ch42 ch45 ch49 Pennorth -- ch23 ch26 ch29 No, that problem is solved. Never got to the bottom of the cause though. |
One for Bill - to comment on & to work on!
This has happened next door to my parents. Years ago, for the previous owners I installed a group B aerial with masthead amplifier on a very short mast on a well spaced T&K (as it's very windy there) pointing straight down the valley to Abergavenny. The newish owner has removed the masthead amplifier (I believe the PSU was taken when the old owners moved out) taped up the join, directed the aerial at Pennorth (group A, stronger signal but local interference problems) and bashed another cable into the connector which runs across the roof and into the kitchen through the extractor fan. In this manner? http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/roguesgallery/033.shtml Bill Yep, virtually identical. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:10 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com