Problems with Sat TV due to weather.

Graculus wrote:

Trouble is, this kind of "weather" also affects digital terrestrial
broadcasts, too. Currently, it's analogue TV and FM all the way for me, as
Freeview signal has fallen to pretty mich nothing, and DAB error rate is
running at an impossible-to-listen-to 60+. All the waffle that they come out
with about digital being unaffected by weather is utter garbage. Once we're
all forced onto digital TV, will I get a TV licence refund for every day
like this when I'll be unable to receive any TV at all?

It'll be interesting to see. I think an unwanted analogue TV signal landing
on top of a wanted digital one, is more destructive than 'digital on
digital' ? Bill W will know from his experiences.

Of course after analogue switch off all our DTT transmissions will increase
in power, but it'll be the same in Europe, so back to square one ?

With analogue you can see the picture gradually getting worse during periods
such as this, with DTT there's a bit of pixelation then often black and silence.

There's some fun ahead me thinks.


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

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
tony sayer wrote:

In article . com,
Mark Carver writes

tony sayer wrote:

BBC lacking in Technical competence one again!..

Very much so, if you read this account of the broadcast:-

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=11441402&postcount=1589


Shameful


Would any of the experts in the NG care to give a simple-ish explanation of
exactly what it is which is affecting the signals, and why?
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

Roger Mills wrote:


Would any of the experts in the NG care to give a simple-ish explanation of
exactly what it is which is affecting the signals, and why?

In short anti-cyclonic weather leads to 'ducting' that can transport VHF and
UHF signals over great distances well beyond the horizon. These distant
signals then interfere with the reception of normal local services, often
corrupting them, and in some cases replacing them. Additionally the fog can
attenuate local 'line of sight' signals, exacerbating the effect.

Have a look at this Wiki page:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropospheric_ducting

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

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:

Shameful


Would any of the experts in the NG care to give a simple-ish explanation
of exactly what it is which is affecting the signals, and why?

Have a look at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/analo..._better4.shtml

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

"Richard Oliver" wrote in message
...
JPG wrote:
Dave Fawthrop wrote:
On the BBC1 1 o'clock news, the weather forecaster said that *Satellite* TV
programs would be affected due to an inversion. Not noticed anything
myself, but I generally watch analogue or Freeview.

Probably meant to say *terrestrial* TV. Satellite should be unaffected
by inversions.

Agreed.

Well living in a fringe area I certainly had reception problems particularly
with the QAM 64 Muxes. If the goverrnment is so keen on digital roll out they
should make all the Freeview channels FTA on satellite so that more people can
receive them easily. Of course that I put Murdoch's nose out of joint and they
are probably much to afraid of upsetting him.

--

Michael Chare

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
charles wrote:

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:

Shameful


Would any of the experts in the NG care to give a simple-ish
explanation of exactly what it is which is affecting the signals,
and why?

Have a look at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/analo..._better4.shtml


Thanks to those who replied with the wiki and BBC links. I now have a much
better understanding of the physics of the problem.

Interestingly, the BBC article says "However, digital reception is far less
prone to interference problems than analogue television." That certainly
doesn't accord with my experience nor - judging by the posts here - with
that of many other viewers. Whether or not this will be better when the DTT
wick is turned up after analogue switch-off remains to be seen.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

In article , Roger Mills
writes
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
charles wrote:

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:

Shameful


Would any of the experts in the NG care to give a simple-ish
explanation of exactly what it is which is affecting the signals,
and why?

Have a look at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/analo..._better4.shtml


Thanks to those who replied with the wiki and BBC links. I now have a much
better understanding of the physics of the problem.

Interestingly, the BBC article says "However, digital reception is far less
prone to interference problems than analogue television." That certainly
doesn't accord with my experience nor - judging by the posts here - with
that of many other viewers. Whether or not this will be better when the DTT
wick is turned up after analogue switch-off remains to be seen.

Its typical of the bull**** and spin that we can expect of the BBC these days.


Auntie isn't the "lady" she used to be;(..........
--
Tony Sayer

....snip...
Thanks to those who replied with the wiki and BBC links. I now have a much
better understanding of the physics of the problem.

Interestingly, the BBC article says "However, digital reception is far
less prone to interference problems than analogue television." That
certainly doesn't accord with my experience nor - judging by the posts
here - with that of many other viewers. Whether or not this will be better
when the DTT wick is turned up after analogue switch-off remains to be
seen.
--


I have this fading memory that years ago 405 line VHF BBC1 from London
reached as far as Jo'burg in South Africa.

Paul DS

In article ,
Paul D.Smith wrote:
...snip...
Thanks to those who replied with the wiki and BBC links. I now have a
much better understanding of the physics of the problem.

Interestingly, the BBC article says "However, digital reception is far
less prone to interference problems than analogue television." That
certainly doesn't accord with my experience nor - judging by the posts
here - with that of many other viewers. Whether or not this will be
better when the DTT wick is turned up after analogue switch-off
remains to be seen. --


I have this fading memory that years ago 405 line VHF BBC1 from London
reached as far as Jo'burg in South Africa.

Since there was no tv in South Africa at the time, and even when there was
it didn't use Band I, I wonder how anybody noticed.

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:
In article ,
Paul D.Smith wrote:

I have this fading memory that years ago 405 line VHF BBC1 from London
reached as far as Jo'burg in South Africa.

Since there was no tv in South Africa at the time, and even when there was
it didn't use Band I, I wonder how anybody noticed.

The story has been knocking about for years, it could well be an urban
myth, however perhaps the audio carrier was received ?

The Wiki page I quoted mentions reception of BBC 1 Holme Moss on Ch 2
in Perth Australia in 1979 however. Again no 405 TV service there.