Advice, please

double-height? Nice.-

We used to call them maisonettes, but the current buzz word seems to
be a duplex apartment.

John

On Apr 22, 7:00*pm, Mark Carver wrote:
John wrote:
No...the dishes would be on the roof, and I live on floors four and
five of the tower block!

If it had been floors 7 and 8, I'd have said your surname was really
Malkovich, and I'd have claimed my 5 pounds.

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

www.paras.org.uk

Mark,

I have only seen a part of that film, and hope to see it in full the
next time it is on. From the bits that I saw on TV, it looked a weird
movie!

John

On Apr 23, 2:33*am, "
wrote:
On Apr 22, 11:01*am, John wrote:

On 21 Apr, 22:03, "Graham." wrote:
I will be interested to hear Bill's thoughts on this.

Indeed.

Fibre is very new technology for our industry. On the face of it there
are many advantages, and I have no doubt that in a few years it will
be the standard technolgy for larger systems.

I was wondering that myself! As technologies converge further and the
poor old cable has to carry higher and higher data volumes, I wonder
if fibre optics are better placed to do that?

Eventually it will be
the standard technology for all systems. But right now, I don't know.
The available equipment (and test equipment) is virtually prototype,
and there is very little choice of manufacturer. From the customer's
point of view perhaps the market needs to mature a little. I think a
lot of installers are looking for well-off guinea pigs at the moment.
I'm watching the situation with great interest. This year's CAI show
will be full of fun.

There is always something new in every industry it seems each year.
Who would have thought of 3D TV in the home just a year or two back?

John

"John" wrote in message ...
On Apr 23, 2:33 am, "
wrote:
On Apr 22, 11:01 am, John wrote:

On 21 Apr, 22:03, "Graham." wrote:
I will be interested to hear Bill's thoughts on this.

Indeed.

Fibre is very new technology for our industry. On the face of it there
are many advantages, and I have no doubt that in a few years it will
be the standard technolgy for larger systems.

I was wondering that myself! As technologies converge further and the
poor old cable has to carry higher and higher data volumes, I wonder
if fibre optics are better placed to do that?

Eventually it will be
the standard technology for all systems. But right now, I don't know.
The available equipment (and test equipment) is virtually prototype,
and there is very little choice of manufacturer. From the customer's
point of view perhaps the market needs to mature a little. I think a
lot of installers are looking for well-off guinea pigs at the moment.
I'm watching the situation with great interest. This year's CAI show
will be full of fun.

There is always something new in every industry it seems each year.
Who would have thought of 3D TV in the home just a year or two back?

Well call me Nostradamus,
Because if you were to have asked me 20 years ago, I would have predicted
A fully developed 3D TV industry by now. And bases on the Moon :-)

Not sure about sat-nav and smart phones though.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

Your problem is that the system architecture depends on the number of
subscribers. You can't install a system for one, then add another
later, then another, etc.

I was wondering that too.

When I first looked into this one year ago, the technology from
GlobalInvacom was such that a simple system could feed up to 32 flats.
There was a more complex architecture for larger installations.

[Bill, if you are interested in some literature that I have from back
then, just drop me a line at with your e-mail
address and I shall forward it to you for you to inspect.]

However, things have moved on, and GlobalInvacom claim that with
recent advances they can now have systems with tens of thousands of
users!!

Also, the cost of adding individual
subscribers after the main installation has been completed will be
astronomical, compared to the cost per subscriber if the whole block
(or a good part of it) is done at once.

You are definitely right on that one! It would make better economic
sense to hook up everybody in one go. However, the system is for my
benefit, principally, though I am very happy if others later want to
get a connection, so long as they pay me the incremental cost.

However, on reflection, I need to think about whether a few other
people who might be very keen ought to be allowed to come in at the
start, to keep the cost down for them and for me to defray some of the
initial capital costs. Hmm...I guess it depends what the total cost
will be. I do not even have a ball park figure yet, but if it less
than a certain amount, my main aim will be to get the thing up and
running. If it costs much more than I am hoping then I shall probably
have to take on board others to spread the financial load.


You need to install a backbone capable of feeding all likely
subscribers, which will be a big investment up front, then charge per
connection.

Yes, unfortunately, City of Westminster Council has given me no
choice...I need to put in a system that can feed others, or the
Landlord fears that everybody might want their own individual
dish(es). I agree with them, however, in that it makes no sense to
have fifty plus dishes, when a couple will suffice.


Aim to make a profit, because otherwise you will make a
loss.

8-))

If I aim for breakeven, I shall certainly make a loss!

You are right, and my accountancy background has given me enough skill
to be able to administer the finances of it, but the thought of having
to do tax returns fills me with woe. 8-((

Cheers.

John



Bill

I have no experience of the use of optical transmission in the MATV and
domestic end of the market. However, for many years it has been standard
practice in the large cable TV networks, increasingly obviating the need
for long cascades of RF repeater amplifiers.

That is what I was told, so hopefully the added cost of fibre optics
is somewhat reduced by not needing as much amplification due to the
very low levels of loss.

One thing I can say is that most optical equipment is very expensive,

Oh dear!

but of course, the performance and reliability has to be very high
indeed.

If it all goes ahead I am hoping that the system is as near perfect
for many years as is humanly possible.



One of the main problems with the present optical technology is the need
for absolutely cleanliness at the connectors. The approach is quite
different from coax. It's essentially impractical for installers to fit
connectors on the ends of bare fibres. This is overcome by splicing on
fibre tails (supplied with connector at one end) - a fairly skilled job,
and the splicer isn't cheap. In MATV installations, it may be more
practical to use a selection of standard lengths of fibre (even if the
excess has to be left carefully coiled up)

Somebody else in the thread mentioned this. I shall insist on
standard lengths if adding connectors is so tough.

Thanks for the input.

John

On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:04:12 -0700 (PDT), John
wrote:


Somebody else in the thread mentioned this. I shall insist on
standard lengths if adding connectors is so tough.

Thanks for the input.

John


Make sure that the lengths of fibre are properly measured befor
installation - you can then purchse ready terminated fibre lengths -
Greenwoods http://www.greenwoodscomms.com/pdfs/fibre-optics.pdf supply
patch cords up to 550 metres in length, terminated and they say will
work at 1300nM

I think they will supply any length, ready terminated. This will save
a lt of tears
--
Cheers

Peter

(Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group)

In article , Graham. wrote:
Fibre is very new technology for our industry. On the face of it there
are many advantages, and I have no doubt that in a few years it will
be the standard technolgy for larger systems.

I was wondering that myself! As technologies converge further and the
poor old cable has to carry higher and higher data volumes, I wonder
if fibre optics are better placed to do that?

Better for higher data volumes certainly, but I don't know the maximum run
length that can be used without repeaters. Perhaps somebody who knows can
enlighten us? I suspect it's nowhere near what can be achieved (albeit at
lower data rates) with ADSL, and thus will be dependent on electronics in
street-boxes, with all the reliability implications of that.

If you've got reasonably good ADSL, hang onto it because there's nothing
between you and the exchange but wire, so a great deal less to go wrong
than with any system that requires powered electronics in the street.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

On Apr 23, 3:37*pm, Petert wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:04:12 -0700 (PDT), John
wrote:

Somebody else in the thread mentioned this. *I shall insist on
standard lengths if adding connectors is so tough.

A major disadvantage of standard pre-terminated lengths is that the
plug on the end has to be passed through every aperture along the
route during installation. The manufacturers tell us that the thin
fibre means smaller holes in walls, but of course this is not the
case. I regard the 'preterminated' idea as an interim, and I look
forward to the day when the installer will fit terminations. If the
machine to do it costs £5,000, so what? It will help sort out the men
from the boys.

Bill

On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:11:38 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Apr 23, 3:37*pm, Petert wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:04:12 -0700 (PDT), John
wrote:

Somebody else in the thread mentioned this. *I shall insist on
standard lengths if adding connectors is so tough.

A major disadvantage of standard pre-terminated lengths is that the
plug on the end has to be passed through every aperture along the
route during installation. The manufacturers tell us that the thin
fibre means smaller holes in walls, but of course this is not the
case. I regard the 'preterminated' idea as an interim, and I look
forward to the day when the installer will fit terminations. If the
machine to do it costs £5,000, so what? It will help sort out the men
from the boys.

Agreed, although I siuspect (witthout having checked) the you could
probably purchase a cleaver and splice for less that that.

Additionaly, Hydra cables are now avaiable - with up tp 96 fibres - -
no bigger in diameter than a few fibres as the fibres inside to sheath
don't carry individual cladding.

--
Cheers

Peter

(Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group)