![]() |
| 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. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#91
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , Dave Farrance
scribeth thus tony sayer wrote: In article , Dave Farrance scribeth thus "Bill Wright" wrote: "Dave Farrance" wrote in message Think of an interaction in the fields of aerials with funny phasing as being a partial reflection back at those aerials. But it isn't. Come on, Bill. I'm trying to give you a good answer without getting too techy. EM theory is complex. When you have very short-range interactions (less than one wavelength), you need a computer to model what's going on, and simple descriptions do tend to be analogous at best. I promise you that as I said in my original comment that the effect is to raise the impedance of the aerial. Perhaps "alter" might be a better way of putting that?.. In the context of what now remains quoted in the above post (which admittedly is due to my own trimming), then yes. Match point;!... -- Tony Sayer |
|
#92
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dave Farrance" wrote in message ... I did try to pick my words to keep them in a strict context. Hence the above words: "what you might think by similarity" [to a receiving aerial]. The original context being an aerial construction with built in beam-tilting -- which might be a counter-intuitive and apparently inefficient construction when you first see it. See what I'm getting at now? Beam tilt by phasing is fair enough. But in theory it would be better to orient the aerials so that their max forward gain looks towards to target, surely? I can see why this isn't done in practice: it's easier to make the array to a standard pattern and then phase electrically. And the point about near fields of less than a wavelength isn't really relevant as far as I can see because the polar response of two or more phased aerials extends to infinity. I could understand this if it could be shown that each of the two (or more) aerials was automatically absorbing energy from the other(s). Fair enough, that would affect the characteristics of the aerials including the cable matching. But this is by no means automatic. The two aerials could have no measurable coupling whatsoever yet could, from the point of view of a receive site some distance away, be functioning as a 'phased' array. In other words, two distant receiving sites could have very different field strength as a result of the interaction between the fields of the two aerials, but the two aerials would not be 'aware' of each other. They could be on opposite sides of a hill. I'm simply reiterating, of course, the theoretical case that I mentioned, where the two aerials do not share free space in the near field. In the special case of an aerial with a series of close phased dipoles I can perfectly understand your point. Bill |
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 28 Jan, 12:34, Brian McIlwrath wrote:
Mizter T wrote: : I'm somewhat out of date on this, but what's the latest talk/rumours : with regards to Channel 4 and Channel 5 and their various offshoot : channels going Free To Air? Channel 4's contract with Sky for encryption runs until Autumn 2008 sometime. However they will need a transponder on Astra 2D to move to. Confusingly, while all other C4 channels are uplinked by Arquiva, C4-HD is uplinked by Sky itself on a BSkyB leased transponder. Channel 5 "suppports Freesat" but "needs to be encrypted due to programmme rights issues"....make of that what you can! : a rumour about this. Is there space on Astra 2D for more channels, or : could another satellite provide the required tighter footprint? Yes they will need to move to Astra 2D. No!! There is not space on that satellite without some encrypted channels using it to agree to move elsewhere (which would be Sky helping Freesat!) A somewhat belated thank you for providing that info. If SES was to price Astra 2D transponders at a premium (maybe they already do), then I suppose this could mean that if C4 (and C5) were willing to pay the extra for the tighter footprint then other channels might get moved off Astra 2D to other Astra satellites. Then again, maybe BSkyB would be willing to pay a premium to retain the Astra 2D transponders for their channels as a way to block C4/C5 coming to FreeSat. However if that was to happen I'd think that the EU Commission's competition people would surely take an interest in it, with a view to stopping any such anti-competitive behaviour. I take it that Astra 2D is the only satellite that can provide the tighter footprint focusing on the British Isles. Are there any future (Astra or other) satellites planned with this facility - even if for only some of their transponders? A possible stupid question - C4 HD is evidently an encrypted service, but is it available Free To View (i.e. with a FTV Sky card but without a Sky subscription), or is it currently part of the Sky subscription package? Obviously the number of people who have a Sky HD digibox yet who don't have a Sky subscription must be minuscule - but would they be able to receive C4 HD? Additionally, I note the somewhat bizarre comment from C5 saying they support FreeSat but they need to use encryption! Will the FreeSat specification require FreeSat boxes to support CAMs, or will this merely be down to the individual box manufacturer? I can't see why the FreeSat specification would make any such requirement, given the emphasis of FreeSat is on Free rather than Pay (i.e. subscription)! Also, I note from a past discussion here that a single transmitted channel can apparently be encrypted using two entirely different encryption systems - but would this work with Videoguard (BSkyB's encryption system from NDS) - i.e. could Channel 5 be encrypted with both Videoguard and another encryption system, or would C5 have to transmit the channel twice for each system? The somewhat absurd scenario I have in my head is that of C5 being transmitted for FreeSat with (non-Videoguard) encryption, with viewers required to purchase an appropriate CAM for their FreeSat box. Then again, perhaps EU competition law eventually mean NDS is forced to provide Videoguard CAMs for other satellite decoders, meaning Videoguard encrypted C5 (and other channels) could be viewed on a FreeSat box with a Sky FTV card and appropriate CAM. Though of course NDS and BSkyB would put up a massive fight to prevent that from happening! |
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 28 Jan, 12:34, Brian McIlwrath wrote: Mizter T wrote: Channel 5 "suppports Freesat" but "needs to be encrypted due to programmme rights issues"....make of that what you can! : a rumour about this. Is there space on Astra 2D for more channels, or : could another satellite provide the required tighter footprint? Well I don't know about the rest of Europe, but friends of mine living in Southern Spain receive all BBC and ITV programmes perfectly using a 2 metre dish. The only channels they have difficulty with are CH4 and CH5. Don't laugh at this:- CH4 and CH5 are only receivable in the morning. Every day the signal fades away around 2pm local time and (only in winter) returns at about 11pm local time. Sounds incredible, but I've seen it with my own eyes. (Something to do with the way the Satellite moves off its axis, I'm told)! As far as I know, there will be no CAMs necessary or any encryption used on Freesat (emphasis on the FREE). If encryption was to be used, the box manufacturers would have to pay for de-crypters contained in their boxes. This idea would not be in keeping with the BBC's concept of Freesat. Chris. |
|
#95
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 10 Feb, 19:41, "Chris" wrote:
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 28 Jan, 12:34, Brian McIlwrath wrote: Mizter T wrote: Channel 5 "suppports Freesat" but "needs to be encrypted due to programmme rights issues"....make of that what you can! : a rumour about this. Is there space on Astra 2D for more channels, or : could another satellite provide the required tighter footprint? Well I don't know about the rest of Europe, but friends of mine living in Southern Spain receive all BBC and ITV programmes perfectly using a 2 metre dish. The only channels they have difficulty with are CH4 and CH5. Don't laugh at this:- CH4 and CH5 are only receivable in the morning. Every day the signal fades away around 2pm local time and (only in winter) returns at about 11pm local time. Sounds incredible, but I've seen it with my own eyes. (Something to do with the way the Satellite moves off its axis, I'm told)! Yes, I've heard about this phenomenon before. As far as I know, there will be no CAMs necessary or any encryption used on Freesat (emphasis on the FREE). If encryption was to be used, the box manufacturers would have to pay for de-crypters contained in their boxes. This idea would not be in keeping with the BBC's concept of Freesat. Chris. I'm well aware that FreeSat won't require decryption or CAMs or anything like that. My question was merely whether manufacturers would have to include support for a CAM in order to gain FreeSat approval - in retrospect that was a stupid question (though I did then go on to make that point myself!), not least because as you point out it would raise the cost of the box. Plus of course what the FreeSat alliance wants to do is the same as what Freeview did - get lots of free-to-air STBs installed in viewers homes that don't feature any capability to support encryption (as is the case with the majority of Freeview STBs), so as to counter the whole concept of subscription television as far as possible. FreeSat's fundamental problem would appear to be the fact that only one satellite - Astra 2D - offers the capability to transmit on a tighter footprint that is focussed on the British Isles, and that satellite currently has no extra capacity. If C4 and C5 are to transmit on satellite in the clear (i.e. no encryption) then they will almost certainly want this tighter footprint offered by Astra 2D. Of course, as your post makes clear, Astra 2D's actual footprint is somewhat wider than the British Isles, especially when one uses a larger dish. However, certainly when one compares it to the other Astra satellites' footprints, it has a much tighter focus. |
|
#96
|
|||
|
|||
|
charles wrote:
MJ Ray wrote: "m.t6" wrote: [...] I doubt the broadcasters will be interested in providing a service for 500 people, when they can tell them to get Freesat or Sky instead. The analogue relay sites near me seem to double as mobile phone sites (T-Mobile at Kewstoke, Orange at Hutton). Don't most of them? but the rental for that facility won't pay to upgrade the sites for DTTV. Maybe not for DTT, but it probably means they need to keep running for a number of years yet, so at least some of the cost is unavoidable. Also, there would be quite a loud call to restart broadcasting West TV from South Wales and I'm not sure how that would be dealt with - the relays seem a political choice and I think we have line-of-sight to the Welsh transmitter. -- MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Free Sat FAQ: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/astefaq Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop maker, Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Tiny Plasma's | Jason | UK home cinema | 9 | August 16th 05 12:40 PM |
| Tiny plasmas | [email protected] | UK digital tv | 35 | March 30th 05 01:15 AM |
| Why Such Tiny Speakers in HT ? | Magnusfarce | Home theater (general) | 41 | November 30th 04 04:19 PM |
| Plasma TVs from Tiny | R45six | UK home cinema | 3 | October 30th 04 10:07 AM |