Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:36:20 +0000 (GMT)
Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , Tweed
wrote:

When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was
much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall
there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be
and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume
the end of TV reception did not come to pass?

Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end
of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter
to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station
started up. I doubt I was the only person affected.

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems
by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people
when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant
journalists from noticing.

Jim


Maybe Bill could enlighten them.

--
Davey.

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 00:43:50 +0000
Bill Wright wrote:

On 27/10/2015 23:03, Davey wrote:


No, we are still running round fitting filters and taking other
measures. It doesn't make the headlines because each time it
happens it's just seen as a little regional problem. I would think
the cost borne to date by councils, housing associations,
hospitals, etc, must be in the millions.

Bill

So is it a real problem, or are you pre-empting problems that might
not really be there?

We are responding to problems. Councils and landlords do not pre-empt
because that implies pre-spend. However when we are on site for other
reasons we will add the basic filters just in case a 4G mast is built
nearby.

Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative
transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G
mast.

Sometimes we find that the 4G people have distributed leaflets, so
any reception problem of any kind whatsoever in the following months
is reported to us as 4G.

Bill




Ah, so it is happening, then.

As an aside, I knew a Bill Wright once when I worked in Canada, he was
a Millwright. So are you an Aerialwright?

Just wondering.

--
Davey.

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

The residents of Yorkshire and surrounding counties must fervently
hope that at least he's not an aerialwrong!

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:15:53 +0000, Davey
wrote:

As an aside, I knew a Bill Wright once when I worked in Canada, he was
a Millwright. So are you an Aerialwright?
--
================================================== ======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by
rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their
area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from
noticing.

Yes, my parents recently had a note through their door advising that
they might be affected and may have to get a filter. I told them not to
worry, if they start to get problems I'll turn up with an analyser to
see whether it really is 4G gunk, in any case the nearest mobile phone
site in their area is on top of a water tower, 180 degs off beam and a
mile away, and their highest DTT mux is UHF 47.



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

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On 28/10/2015 08:33, Mark Carver wrote:
On 28/10/2015 00:43, Bill Wright wrote:

Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative
transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast.

It's worth noting that Crystal Palace's highest allocated DTT Mux is Ch 35.

You know where I'm coming from here....... ;-)



Them in charge was scared of riots in Landan.

Bill

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by
rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their
area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from
noticing.
That's exactly right. And even when problems are pointed out to journos
they aren't interested.

Bill

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On 28/10/2015 12:01, Davey wrote:

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems
by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people
when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant
journalists from noticing.

Jim


Maybe Bill could enlighten them.

Ha!

Bill

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:01:06 +0000, Davey wrote:

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:36:20 +0000 (GMT)
Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , Tweed
wrote:

When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was
much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall
there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be
and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume
the end of TV reception did not come to pass?

Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end
of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter
to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station
started up. I doubt I was the only person affected.

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems
by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people
when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant
journalists from noticing.

Jim


Maybe Bill could enlighten them.

Bill may have many abilities, but could even he enlighten ignorant
journalists? He could tell them, but would they understand?

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems
by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when
their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant
journalists from noticing.

Yes, my parents recently had a note through their door advising that
they might be affected and may have to get a filter. I told them not to
worry, if they start to get problems I'll turn up with an analyser to
see whether it really is 4G gunk, in any case the nearest mobile phone
site in their area is on top of a water tower, 180 degs off beam and a
mile away, and their highest DTT mux is UHF 47.

In our case its within 20 deg of the same direction and only 400 metres
away.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Whatever happened to 4G interference?
 

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:

What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems
by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when
their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant
journalists from noticing.
That's exactly right. And even when problems are pointed out to journos
they aren't interested.

In a similar way, I sighed when reporters kept saying that the recent
report put ham and red meat into the same 'category' as smoking.

The reality was that the original scientific report put it into the
category "established to increase the risk of cancer".

Which is totally different to assuming "same chance of getting cancer".

So may well seriously mislead many people into thinking that eating ham or
red meat is "just as dangerous as smoking".

Never really sure in case like this if the journalists are simply lazy and
ignorant, or want to make what they say 'more dramatic' regardless of the
way it then misleads.

Coming back to: The whole problem with 4G is that no-one really knew how
many serious problems it would cause. So the telcos simply worked on that
basis that they could leave journalists in the dark and roll it out area by
area to minimise any fuss. As a result, almost impossible even now to tell
how many people are affected. Chances are many will simply assume some
other reason.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html