anyone know what this is about?
 

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/photo.jpg

anyone know what this is about?
 

Bill Wright wrote:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/photo.jpg

Channel 61/62 clearance

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/industry/...hire_tv_region

anyone know what this is about?
 

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to make room for LTE.

anyone know what this is about?
 

Andy Burns wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/photo.jpg

Channel 61/62 clearance

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/industry/...hire_tv_region



I was surprised to see it on Emley Moor, which isn't affected. Why
didn't they list the small areas that would be affected? Seems very
lazy. If you keep warning people about something that doesn't happen
they start to ignore your warnings, which might be valid.

Bill

anyone know what this is about?
 

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
"Graham." wrote:

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to
make room for LTE.

.....which means in English?
--
Davey.

anyone know what this is about?
 

Well moving the existing frequency to a lower one I'd assume, did nobody
show you the Q code? I understand its origins were in CW as it was less
letters to send than move frequency.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
"Graham." wrote:

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to
make room for LTE.

....which means in English?
--
Davey.

anyone know what this is about?
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Well moving the existing frequency to a lower one I'd assume, did nobody
show you the Q code? I understand its origins were in CW as it was less
letters to send than move frequency.


QSL!


Y.

anyone know what this is about?
 

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 05:34:47 -0000
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Well moving the existing frequency to a lower one I'd assume, did
nobody show you the Q code? I understand its origins were in CW as
it was less letters to send than move frequency.

Brian


Whatever.
--
Davey.

anyone know what this is about?
 

On 27/03/2013 23:33, Davey wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
"Graham." wrote:

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to
make room for LTE.

....which means in English?

For the rest of us
QSY = Shall I change to transmission on another frequency?
A. Change to transmission on another frequency (or on ... kHz (or MHz)).

From wiki Q Codes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_code

Richard

anyone know what this is about?
 

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:54:04 +0000
Dickie mint wrote:

On 27/03/2013 23:33, Davey wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
"Graham." wrote:

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to
make room for LTE.

....which means in English?

For the rest of us
QSY = Shall I change to transmission on another frequency?
A. Change to transmission on another frequency (or on ... kHz (or
MHz)).

From wiki Q Codes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_code

Richard

Thank you.
--
Davey.

anyone know what this is about?
 

Dickie mint wrote:
On 27/03/2013 23:33, Davey wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
"Graham." wrote:

I saw it on WH this morning and just assumed it was the QSY LF to
make room for LTE.

....which means in English?

For the rest of us
QSY = Shall I change to transmission on another frequency?
A. Change to transmission on another frequency (or on ... kHz (or MHz)).

From wiki Q Codes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_code

Richard
"Knock it down one, breaker."

Bill

anyone know what this is about?
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Andy Burns wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/photo.jpg

Channel 61/62 clearance

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/industry/...hire_tv_region
I was surprised to see it on Emley Moor, which isn't affected.
Why didn't they list the small areas that would be affected?
Seems very lazy. If you keep warning people about something
that doesn't happen they start to ignore your warnings, which
might be valid.

Bill


Remember Emley has a lot of relays some of which are changing
although Emley itself is not - plus sub-main sites like Keighley
(which is changing) and its relays also. They are being done on
the same day as Winter Hill and its relays. Unfortunately the
cost of fitting kit at every affected site for caption insertion
and the means to switch it on/off or change it would be
prohibitive - it is easier to stick it on Emley and everyone sees
it, affected or not.

As WH is changing one of its channels, every relay has to have
at least one Rx channel changed, and some of the Tx's as well. Tx
power budgets have also been recalculated and some sites are
having power changes done at the same time - but worry ye not
some are only by 0.1dB at the Tx output (don't ask - I don't
understand why either!)

Don't think this will be the last of it either. I see today that
after this clearance (for the sake of 4G - ggrrr!!!!) the next
move will be to clear the 700MHz band so that additional muxes
can be put in place for national and/or local TV. Why HMG did not
make the decision to go SFN nationwide in the first place beats
me.

As someone suggested last week, how long now before the decision
is made to give everyone a sat system and turn terrestrial TV off
so that the mobile phone SP's can have the lot?


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

anyone know what this is about?
 

Woody wrote:

Remember Emley has a lot of relays some of which are changing
although Emley itself is not - plus sub-main sites like Keighley
(which is changing) and its relays also. They are being done on
the same day as Winter Hill and its relays. Unfortunately the
cost of fitting kit at every affected site for caption insertion
and the means to switch it on/off or change it would be
prohibitive - it is easier to stick it on Emley and everyone sees
it, affected or not.

Ah yes, easier. The way everything has to be done nowadays. But would it
have been significantly less easy for the message to list in brief the
affected areas?

Bill

anyone know what this is about?
 

Bill Wright wrote:

Woody wrote:

it is easier to stick it on Emley and everyone sees it,
affected or not.

Ah yes, easier. The way everything has to be done nowadays. But would it
have been significantly less easy for the message to list in brief the
affected areas?

The more detailed info from digitaluk says the MHEGs should only have
been on Keighley and its relays, not Emley itself

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/86012/Special_edition_Clearance_notice_Winter_Hill_Keigh ley_and_The_Wrekin_FINAL.PDF

anyone know what this is about?
 

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
o.uk...
Bill Wright wrote:

Woody wrote:

it is easier to stick it on Emley and everyone sees it,
affected or not.

Ah yes, easier. The way everything has to be done nowadays.
But would it
have been significantly less easy for the message to list in
brief the
affected areas?

The more detailed info from digitaluk says the MHEGs should
only have been on Keighley and its relays, not Emley itself

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/86012/Special_edition_Clearance_notice_Winter_Hill_Keigh ley_and_The_Wrekin_FINAL.PDF




But that was exactly my point. If Keighley was to radiate the
text box it would need caption generators for all six muxes at
the site with the necessary means of communication to be able to
control them and amend the text and those means of communication
may not exist as such. Installing such comms links all adds to
cost - and remember that clearance is being paid for by OfCom.
Insert the captions from a main station - where the robust comms
links do exist - is significantly easier and cheaper.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

anyone know what this is about?
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Woody wrote:

Remember Emley has a lot of relays some of which are changing
although Emley itself is not - plus sub-main sites like
Keighley (which is changing) and its relays also. They are
being done on the same day as Winter Hill and its relays.
Unfortunately the cost of fitting kit at every affected site
for caption insertion and the means to switch it on/off or
change it would be prohibitive - it is easier to stick it on
Emley and everyone sees it, affected or not.

Ah yes, easier. The way everything has to be done nowadays. But
would it have been significantly less easy for the message to
list in brief the affected areas?




I would agree with your point entirely but for two factors: (a)
it is very easy for those of us in the business to see it but you
would be surprised how few people know which transmitter they are
using (not to mention those on communal feeds,) so telling them
which areas are being affected would have little meaning to most
of them and (b) even in any given area there will be people who
get their signals from unaffected transmitters and who will thus
be - shall we say - confused when it doesn't happen to them. Much
easier to tell everyone and let them work it out for themselves.
--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

anyone know what this is about?
 

Woody wrote:

But that was exactly my point. If Keighley was to radiate the
text box it would need caption generators for all six muxes at
the site with the necessary means of communication to be able to
control them and amend the text and those means of communication
may not exist as such. Installing such comms links all adds to
cost - and remember that clearance is being paid for by OfCom.
Insert the captions from a main station - where the robust comms
links do exist - is significantly easier and cheaper.

No, it is possible that the MHEG caption is only triggered off and
displayed if a set of defined criteria match, primarily the received UHF
frequency.
That's exactly what was done when half a dozen or so Caldbeck relays
moved muxes last year.
The MHEG caption was added at the BBC and D3/4 Muxing centres, on the outgoing
Caldbeck transport streams, but was only visible on the affected relays.

Of course it relies on the receivers being fully compliant, so
as to:-

a: Not to appear regardless of transmitter,
b: To pop up only on the appropriate transmitters !

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

www.paras.org.uk

anyone know what this is about?
 

Woody wrote:



But that was exactly my point. If Keighley was to radiate the
text box it would need caption generators for all six muxes at
the site with the necessary means of communication to be able to
control them and amend the text and those means of communication
may not exist as such. Installing such comms links all adds to
cost - and remember that clearance is being paid for by OfCom.
Insert the captions from a main station - where the robust comms
links do exist - is significantly easier and cheaper.

But include a list of the affected areas.

Bill

anyone know what this is about?
 

Woody wrote:


I would agree with your point entirely but for two factors: (a)
it is very easy for those of us in the business to see it but you
would be surprised how few people know which transmitter they are
using (not to mention those on communal feeds,) so telling them
which areas are being affected would have little meaning to most
of them and (b) even in any given area there will be people who
get their signals from unaffected transmitters and who will thus
be - shall we say - confused when it doesn't happen to them. Much
easier to tell everyone and let them work it out for themselves.

If they'd said 'some viewers in the Keighley area' it would have been
better.

Bill

anyone know what this is about?
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Woody wrote:


I would agree with your point entirely but for two factors:
(a) it is very easy for those of us in the business to see it
but you would be surprised how few people know which
transmitter they are using (not to mention those on communal
feeds,) so telling them which areas are being affected would
have little meaning to most of them and (b) even in any given
area there will be people who get their signals from
unaffected transmitters and who will thus be - shall we say -
confused when it doesn't happen to them. Much easier to tell
everyone and let them work it out for themselves.

If they'd said 'some viewers in the Keighley area' it would
have been better.

Bill


+1

anyone know what this is about?
 

In message , Martin
writes
Did you mention the plebs being confused?
Those at the end of Downing Street?
--
Clive