The five multiplex (Cambs & Beds).

The following freeview channels: Five (5), QVC (16), Virgin1 (20), Bid TV
(23), Fiver (30) and 5 USA (31) are all flaky with squares most of the time
and frequent "blue screen of death".

In the status menu, the signal quality bargraph goes up and down like a
yo-yo - including up to 100% and all the other channels are OK so its
reasonable to assume the aerial isn't too bad, so can anyone tell me what's
going on?

TIA.

In article , ian field gangprobing
scribeth thus
The following freeview channels: Five (5), QVC (16), Virgin1 (20), Bid TV
(23), Fiver (30) and 5 USA (31) are all flaky with squares most of the time
and frequent "blue screen of death".

In the status menu, the signal quality bargraph goes up and down like a
yo-yo - including up to 100% and all the other channels are OK so its
reasonable to assume the aerial isn't too bad, so can anyone tell me what's
going on?

TIA.



There was aerial work there the other week?.

Might be something to do with it?..

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/sandyheath/dso/index.php
--
Tony Sayer

Trees?
Brian

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


"ian field" wrote in message
...
The following freeview channels: Five (5), QVC (16), Virgin1 (20), Bid TV
(23), Fiver (30) and 5 USA (31) are all flaky with squares most of the
time and frequent "blue screen of death".

In the status menu, the signal quality bargraph goes up and down like a
yo-yo - including up to 100% and all the other channels are OK so its
reasonable to assume the aerial isn't too bad, so can anyone tell me
what's going on?

TIA.

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
om...
Trees?

Not a one in sight, and even if there was why wouldn't they affect the other
multiplexes?

Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar, but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

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!
"ian field" wrote in message
...

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
om...
Trees?

Not a one in sight, and even if there was why wouldn't they affect the
other multiplexes?

In article , Brian Gaff
scribeth thus
Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar,

Very few of them left now and the ones that are, are on a hilltop site..

but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

What after it took them ages to get Hannington fixed

Brian


--
Tony Sayer

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian Gaff
scribeth thus
Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar,

Very few of them left now and the ones that are, are on a hilltop site..

but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

What after it took them ages to get Hannington fixed


It seems to vary somewhat with the weather, today the signal quality
bargraph is showing a solid 100%, on other days it fluctuates wildly.

There's a six output booster distributing to various rooms with 8.6dB gain
and a 2 output booster with 16.8dB has been added in front of that with the
result, the bargraph spends less time on the bottom and a noticeable
reduction of squares and "blue screen of death", I was wondering if I could
get away with adding another 16.8dB booster - the claimed noise per booster
is 3dB.

In article , ian field gangprobing
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian Gaff
scribeth thus
Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar,

Very few of them left now and the ones that are, are on a hilltop site..

but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

What after it took them ages to get Hannington fixed


It seems to vary somewhat with the weather, today the signal quality
bargraph is showing a solid 100%, on other days it fluctuates wildly.

There's a six output booster distributing to various rooms with 8.6dB gain
and a 2 output booster with 16.8dB has been added in front of that with the
result, the bargraph spends less time on the bottom and a noticeable
reduction of squares and "blue screen of death", I was wondering if I could
get away with adding another 16.8dB booster - the claimed noise per booster
is 3dB.



Seems to me that a bit more aerial gain might cope better . Can you say
where are you and where the aerial is?..
--
Tony Sayer

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , ian field gangprobing
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian Gaff
scribeth thus
Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar,

Very few of them left now and the ones that are, are on a hilltop site..

but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had
so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

What after it took them ages to get Hannington fixed


It seems to vary somewhat with the weather, today the signal quality
bargraph is showing a solid 100%, on other days it fluctuates wildly.

There's a six output booster distributing to various rooms with 8.6dB gain
and a 2 output booster with 16.8dB has been added in front of that with
the
result, the bargraph spends less time on the bottom and a noticeable
reduction of squares and "blue screen of death", I was wondering if I
could
get away with adding another 16.8dB booster - the claimed noise per
booster
is 3dB.



Seems to me that a bit more aerial gain might cope better . Can you say
where are you and where the aerial is?..
--

The aerial is on the roof and the rigger damaged the roof causing serious
leaks last time, as long as the aerial looks to be OK I'd prefer not to send
any more expensive cowboys up there!!!

In article , ian field gangprobing.
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , ian field gangprobing
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian Gaff
scribeth thus
Well, it could just be an accident of the size compared to the actual
frequency. Other than trees, I guess it could be desensitisation by some
nearby transmitter of a taxi firm or similar,

Very few of them left now and the ones that are, are on a hilltop site..

but you could suggest this
also would affect them all. It also seems strange if its a transmitting
aerial problem for the same commonality reason. That only leaves a dodgy
transmitter for that multiplex, which, I'd have thought would have had
so
many people complaining it would be fixed pdq.

What after it took them ages to get Hannington fixed


It seems to vary somewhat with the weather, today the signal quality
bargraph is showing a solid 100%, on other days it fluctuates wildly.

There's a six output booster distributing to various rooms with 8.6dB gain
and a 2 output booster with 16.8dB has been added in front of that with
the
result, the bargraph spends less time on the bottom and a noticeable
reduction of squares and "blue screen of death", I was wondering if I
could
get away with adding another 16.8dB booster - the claimed noise per
booster
is 3dB.



Seems to me that a bit more aerial gain might cope better . Can you say
where are you and where the aerial is?..
--

The aerial is on the roof and the rigger damaged the roof causing serious
leaks last time, as long as the aerial looks to be OK I'd prefer not to send
any more expensive cowboys up there!!!



Well thats seems to indicate all isn't as well as what it ought be up
there either!. Any idea or have you a pix of what's actually up there?..

And any approximation of where you are relative to Sandy?..
--
Tony Sayer