I Was Wrong!

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> See what I mean Aztech? The astounding ability to deny. Even the
> theoretical difference in power levels between COFDM and 8-VSB have been
> discounted by every country including such as China, Russia and
> Australia

except America

In the USA it works just like theory says it should.

Recently my most distant station has been very weak,
because of a thermal inversion (accompanying fog) that results
in the signal not being "bent" in the same direction as the
earth's curvature. The analog station is unwatchable ... and
in fact just looking at it I can't tell if there is any
serious multipath, but using a signal averaging scope I can
tell, and as usual it is a perfect signal. The digital
signal is working OK for such a situation ... there are
occasional minor glitches but nothing anywhere near
unwatchable.

And what is the S/N? it's been varying from 15 to 17 dB,
that's what. At the same bitrate COFDM needs 19 dB even for
a perfect signal (which this is), so it would not work AT ALL.

And oh yes ... don't tell me to get a better preamp ...
mine has a 0.6 dB NF.

So much for your idea that the ATSC system does not provide
a useful service in power situations were COFDM does not.

Doug McDonald

Doug McDonald

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
> > Birmingham, let us know.
>
> You can pick up the same signal in Birmingham its just that it is
> broadcast from Malvern or such.

That is *not* the same signal. It is a repeat of the same signal, which
is very different.

--
Jeff Rife | "Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But
| then you get to the end and a gorilla starts
| throwing barrels at you."
| -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:

> "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
> Birmingham, let us know.
>
Notice the use of "big" in big deal. Deals have to be big here to.

Bob Miller

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"ivan" <ivan'H'older@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
<
> That wasn't really my point, which was that any one of those newly acquired
> analogue TV's VCR's DVD recorders can very simply be upgraded to 'full'
> Digital compatibility with just a single universal lead, at 'anytime' the
> owner chooses to go digital.

Lol, well indeed, and I could pull all the weeds out my garden, but when is this
going to happen?

Despite the miraculous success of Freeview analogue kit will continue to out
sell digital equipment right into the switch-off time period, I suppose they can
hope for sales of 90m DVB units in December 2007 alone

There would have to be some kind of big bang to suddenly transform the current
predicament of the majority of viewers still relying on analogue signals, in
addition to converted 'digital homes' still reliant on them for secondary sets.
Not to mention all that new analogue kit being added every day, potentially
convertible or not.

Many other countries will be converted before us, in the US and most European
countries there is an extensive cable installed base in 80-90% of homes, whilst
the UK is primarily dependent on terrestrial signals. In Berlin the use of
terrestrial PAL was so sparse it was cheaper to cut off the signal and give away
DVB-t boxes, try doing that at Crystal Palace!

In reality this is nothing different to the transitions of yesteryear, i.e.
listless and protracted.


Az.

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:etyFd.6442$Ii4.4339@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> ivan wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes Bob, but sometimes the bigger they are.....
>>
> I can finish that. One of the spams I received this morning has the answer.
>
> Bigger includes
>
> 1080i over 720P
>
> MegaWatts of power over any discussion of a modern SFN network.

You have to look at our digital relative to analogue powers. I mean 1000kW
analogue PAL isn't exactly an inconsequently ERP, yet digital will go out at 8kW
from the same site on a directly adjacent channel.

If COFDM required more power in non-SFN uses then our network with signals x125
weaker than analogue would fall apart, yet it doesn't, at those levels any
variety digital modulation should fall apart.


Az.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> That's not far from the model that forms the backbone of the network, there are
> various high power big sticks in each population centre, it's certainly closer
> to a small collection of powerful sites than cell style SFN. There are 80 main
> sites that cover the majority of the UK, in terms of Freeview this is in excess
> of 78% of the country

In the US style, this would be done with less than 10 sites. That's the
point I'm making about 8VSB in the US. It requires much higher power
because it has to serve much larger areas. If there were 8 "auxilliary
transmitters" for each "main transmitter", the US could easily make do
with 200kW as the absolute max for any digital TV transmitter.

> They get away with 8kW for the same coverage area served by a 1000kW analogue
> channel then you tell me COFDM uses too much power!

It does when you try to get signal even a tiny bit farther. The quality
falls off faster than the square of the distance, so a "big stick" would
require 500kW (or more) to cover the same area that 5-10 "little sticks"
cover with 8-20kW each.

> Err... putting things on different frequencies by definition isn't a Single
> Frequency Network. We don't have a SFN by any stretch, if we had a SFN then
> identical multiplexes carrying the same data would be emitted on the same
> frequencies across the country from a cell-phone type network.

I assume your receivers are "intelligent" and know which frequencies are
assigned to which channel in each location. Because if this, they can hunt
for the best signal on one channel among the multiple frequencies. This
gives similar results to an SFN, because SFN isn't a purely additive
system.

> > As for "many times 20kW"...our local PBS uses 75kW at 549.25MHz to serve
> > an area of nearly 10,000 square miles. This is with a 2290kW analog
> > station on an adjacent channel.
>
> So the analogue transmission is x30 stronger than the digital eqvilient.

Again, signals fall off faster than the square of the distance. Because
of this, the US has less difference between the power levels because of
the "all or nothing" nature of digital vs. the "well, it's snowy, but it's
a picture" nature of analog.

--
Jeff Rife | Coach: What's the story, Norm?
|
| Norm: Thirsty guy walks into a bar. You
| finish it.

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
<
> Not much in it :-

http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
> <
> > Not much in it :-
>
> http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp

Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
stations and see how far the signal gets. You'll see that you'd need
100kW at least to cover the same area. 8VSB at 100kW in the US
covers 60 miles or more with no problem.

The point being to all this is that there have been *no* "big stick"
COFDM tests because it just doesn't work well for that sort of design.
It works well for the "lots of little sticks" design. Unfortunately,
this is impossible in the US, so COFDM has zero chance of being used
seriously for TV.

--
Jeff Rife | "As usual, a knife-wielding maniac
| has shown us the way."
|
| -- Bart Simpson

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
news:HtDFd.712464$lR6.110769@news.easynews.com...
> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
> <
>> Not much in it :-
>
> http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp

This is quite interesting :-
http/www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0886190.html

Emley Moor would be about #11 at 1083ft, which doesn't quite fit into the model
of small SFN towers as seen in other countries.


Az.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
>
>>As for "many times 20kW"...our local PBS uses 75kW at 549.25MHz to serve
>>an area of nearly 10,000 square miles. This is with a 2290kW analog
>>station on an adjacent channel.
>
>
> So the analogue transmission is x30 stronger than the digital eqvilient. In the
> UK analogue transissions are x125 stronger than digital for the same coverage
> areas, if COFDM required more power then the network would have fallen apart
> before it started.
>
>
I'm afraid he doesn't want to hear it Aztec. But there it is COFDM using
1/4th the power of 8-VSB for the same coverage.
> <
>
>>Stations in the 1000kW range serve 20,000 square miles. This would allow a
>>transmitter in London to serve Southampton and Dover.
>
>
> Not much in it :-
> http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/brookmanspark/brookmans-park-map.asp
>
Great site! Thanks.

Bob Miller
>
> Az.
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
> news:HtDFd.712464$lR6.110769@news.easynews.com...
>
>>"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
>>news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
>><
>>
>>>Not much in it :-
>>
>>http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp
>
>
> This is quite interesting :-
> http/www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0886190.html
>
> Emley Moor would be about #11 at 1083ft, which doesn't quite fit into the model
> of small SFN towers as seen in other countries.
>
>
> Az.
>
>
When we tested in Toronto our antenna was the uppermost tip of the CN
tower.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>That's not far from the model that forms the backbone of the network, there are
>>various high power big sticks in each population centre, it's certainly closer
>>to a small collection of powerful sites than cell style SFN. There are 80 main
>>sites that cover the majority of the UK, in terms of Freeview this is in excess
>>of 78% of the country
>
>
> In the US style, this would be done with less than 10 sites. That's the
> point I'm making about 8VSB in the US. It requires much higher power
> because it has to serve much larger areas. If there were 8 "auxilliary
> transmitters" for each "main transmitter", the US could easily make do
> with 200kW as the absolute max for any digital TV transmitter.
>
>
>>They get away with 8kW for the same coverage area served by a 1000kW analogue
>>channel then you tell me COFDM uses too much power!
>
>
> It does when you try to get signal even a tiny bit farther. The quality
> falls off faster than the square of the distance, so a "big stick" would
> require 500kW (or more) to cover the same area that 5-10 "little sticks"
> cover with 8-20kW each.
>
>
>>Err... putting things on different frequencies by definition isn't a Single
>>Frequency Network. We don't have a SFN by any stretch, if we had a SFN then
>>identical multiplexes carrying the same data would be emitted on the same
>>frequencies across the country from a cell-phone type network.
>
>
> I assume your receivers are "intelligent" and know which frequencies are
> assigned to which channel in each location. Because if this, they can hunt
> for the best signal on one channel among the multiple frequencies. This
> gives similar results to an SFN, because SFN isn't a purely additive
> system.
>
>
>>>As for "many times 20kW"...our local PBS uses 75kW at 549.25MHz to serve
>>>an area of nearly 10,000 square miles. This is with a 2290kW analog
>>>station on an adjacent channel.
>>
>>So the analogue transmission is x30 stronger than the digital eqvilient.
>
>
> Again, signals fall off faster than the square of the distance.

Good reason not to have big stick high power transmitters.

> Because of this, the US has less difference between the power levels because of
> the "all or nothing" nature of digital vs. the "well, it's snowy, but it's
> a picture" nature of analog.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
>>news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
>><
>>
>>>Not much in it :-
>>
>>http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp
>
>
> Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
> Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
> stations and see how far the signal gets. You'll see that you'd need
> 100kW at least to cover the same area. 8VSB at 100kW in the US
> covers 60 miles or more with no problem.

There you go!! The fact that they can use repeaters saves having to use
high powered single stick solotions. That is a benefit not a negative.
Now are they on channel repeaters, that is the question.

A big benefit of an SFN is that you can have low maintenance solid state
transmitters on low rental buildings that need little care and that if
they fail you don't lose the entire network like happens with some
regularity with single stick big transmitters. For example the Moscow
tower fire that still affect TV transmission there not to mention 9/11
or numerous collapses of super towers with loss of life in Texas etc.

We are able to rent rooftops for as little as $1000 a month and with a
good design any one or a number of transmitters could go off line with
little affect on reception in the coverage area.

All that said I am not sure that repeaters are being used in London.
Here are al list of the 80 transmitter sites. If you can point to where
it says they are using repeaters I would appreciate it.
>
> The point being to all this is that there have been *no* "big stick"
> COFDM tests because it just doesn't work well for that sort of design.
> It works well for the "lots of little sticks" design. Unfortunately,
> this is impossible in the US, so COFDM has zero chance of being used
> seriously for TV.
>
COFDM works fine with a big stick design. What are you talking about? It
is just that it is more efficeint to use an SFN with smaller
transmitters and COFDM can do that. The UK cannot do an SFN however. And
COFDM will be used "seriously" for TV in the US. It is possible in the
US also.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>>"Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
>>>Birmingham, let us know.
>>
>>You can pick up the same signal in Birmingham its just that it is
>>broadcast from Malvern or such.
>
>
> That is *not* the same signal. It is a repeat of the same signal, which
> is very different.
>
Is the signal that CBS sends to its 500 affiliates the same signal when
those stations broadcast it from their stations? Same in the UK. All
broadcast at the same time from each multiplex not repeated.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:qlzFd.6467$Ii4.1411@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Jeff Rife wrote:
>> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>
>>>The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider
>>>that some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.
>>>
>>>The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering
>>>London :-
>>>http/www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit.shtml
>>
>>
>> "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
>> Birmingham, let us know.
>
> You can pick up the same signal in Birmingham its just that it is
> broadcast from Malvern or such. The UK does not use SFNs BTW. The version
> of COFDM they chose does not support it.
>>
>> This is the size difference between the US and the UK. The transmitter
>> on
>> top of the Empire State Building is responsible for covering all of Long
>> Island, the tip of which is nearly 100 miles away from the ESB. That's
>> about the same difference as the distance from London to Birmingham.
>>
>> Likewise, the transmitters in downtown Washington, DC, are responsible
>> for covering parts of West Virginia over 90 miles away.
>>
>>
>>>Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.
>>
>>
>> It does, if you don't use multiple tiny transmitters and SFN. An SFN
>> network
>> won't work in the US because of the great areas of low population density
>> that have to be served. You can't put up towers every 30 miles in
>> Montana
>> and Wyoming, because each tower would only serve 1 or 2 households.
>>
> See what I mean Aztech? The astounding ability to deny. Even the
> theoretical difference in power levels between COFDM and 8-VSB have been
> discounted by every country including such as China, Russia and Australia
> but when you are in denial you say things like "tiny transmitters". In the
> real world the power differential is non-existent. At typical US and
> similar power levels, say a MegaWatt, COFDM and 8-VSB will have similar
> reception characteristics at the radio horizon with COFDM taking the cake
> because of multipath. I have offered the challenge that at ANY location
> that an 8-VSB advocate picks where they can receive 8-VSB I will be able
> to receive COFDM MOBILE. I will drive around the 8-VSB reception site.
> ANYWHERE!! No one showed up in Toronto or New York when we were
> operational there.
>
> The theoretical power advantage of 8-VSB would only show up where you are
> using low power transmitters like in the UK and what did the UK chose?
> COFDM. What works GREAT at low power in the UK? COFDM. Sirius and XMRadio
> didn't pick 8-VSB for their repeaters, they chose COFDM. Qualcomm wants to
> cover the entire US with a DTV broadcast. What did they chose? COFDM.
> Anyone that has the POWER of choice choses COFDM. The only population in
> the world that chose 8-VSB was the US broadcaster. Why? They didn't have a
> choice. They want, think, sleep and dream must carry and Congress
> threatened them verbally and specifically that if they voted for 8-VSB in
> January of 2001 they would be crucified with loss of multicast must carry
> and early return of spectrum and possible loss of all spectrum. LG's big
> parties for Congressman Tauzin and others paid off big time. Expect that
> the drug companies will now be picking your pockets even more that Tauzin
> is a $2 million a year lobbyist for the drug industry.
>
> An SFN with COFDM can have MegaWatt transmitters to if you want them. They
> can have any power level you want. In Montana it may make sense to have
> higher power transmitters and bigger cells. BTW the 8-VSB community is all
> excited about making 8-VSB work with SFN's. They only disparage COFDM for
> the things it can do that 8-VSB can not while they are feverishly trying
> to get 8-VSB up to doing the same things.
>
> Been that way from the beginning. Mobile, SFNs, on channel repeaters and
> receivers that could work with multipath.
>
> One out of four isn't bad after only 7 years of trying. They have a
> receiver that works with static multipath pretty good. Nothing like COFDM
> though.
>
> Now all they have to do is get SFN's, Mobile, on channel repeaters and
> dynamic multipath problems fixed. I give them about 35 years to accomplish
> that at the rate they are going.
>
> Now if we could only get one of those 5th gen receivers on the market or a
> Linx or something. Anything that works and I mean works for the industry
> not for a select few of self appointed early adopters who have done a
> great job of intimidating anyone who comes within their range away from
> OTA DTV with "there are no problems unless you are stupid or so poor you
> can't afford a $5000 DTV".

Maybe Samsung has something just as good:

http/www.hoovers.com/free/news/detail.xhtml?ArticleID=NR200501113600.15_059b0002eec50b17



>
> A decent receiver is all we need to get the digital transition moving.
> What gives? I can't get anyone on the phone to give me an answer. I am
> starting to think in conspiratorial terms again. Why and who doesn't want
> to see the digital OTA transition successful? Cable and satellite are two,
> retailers who are making money selling satellite maybe, the CEA, I don't
> know why.
>
> Bob Miller

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c50fcd251a02db9989a8e@news.nabs.net...
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
>> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
>> <
>> > Not much in it :-
>>
>> http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp
>
> Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
> Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
> stations and see how far the signal gets. You'll see that you'd need
> 100kW at least to cover the same area. 8VSB at 100kW in the US
> covers 60 miles or more with no problem.

Hrm, so they're able to reach Greater London and surrounding counties at 20kW
and this proves COFDM requires too much power? You say the minimum digital
equivalent in the US would be 100kW, funnily enough this is 1/10 of analogue
power from this site and was said to be the minimal power required to reach
parity back when digital was introduced, yet they're able to do this with 20kW



<
> The point being to all this is that there have been *no* "big stick"
> COFDM tests because it just doesn't work well for that sort of design.
> It works well for the "lots of little sticks" design.

So why does the UK operate a MFN big-stick network, with only a few dozen main
sites used for Freeview? We certainly don't have SFN's. I wouldn't really call a
1083ft transmitter pushing out 1000kW a 'little stick'.


Az.

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c50fcd251a02db9989a8e@news.nabs.net...
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
>> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
>> <
>> > Not much in it :-
>>
>> http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp
>
> Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
> Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
> stations and see how far the signal gets.

Considering DTT isn't on relay stations that pretty easy.


Az.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
> > Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
> > stations and see how far the signal gets.
>
> Considering DTT isn't on relay stations that pretty easy.

Then, what was that map showing? If it wasn't digital, why did you link
to it?

--
Jeff Rife | "Oooh, I love children...
| they taste like chicken."
|
| -- Heddy Newman, "Herman's Head"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
> "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c50fcd251a02db9989a8e@news.nabs.net...
>
>>Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>
>>>"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
>>>news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
>>><
>>>
>>>>Not much in it :-
>>>
>>>http/tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-palace-maps.asp
>>
>>Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
>>Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
>>stations and see how far the signal gets. You'll see that you'd need
>>100kW at least to cover the same area. 8VSB at 100kW in the US
>>covers 60 miles or more with no problem.
>
>
> Hrm, so they're able to reach Greater London and surrounding counties at 20kW
> and this proves COFDM requires too much power? You say the minimum digital
> equivalent in the US would be 100kW, funnily enough this is 1/10 of analogue
> power from this site and was said to be the minimal power required to reach
> parity back when digital was introduced, yet they're able to do this with 20kW
>
>
>
> <
>
>>The point being to all this is that there have been *no* "big stick"
>>COFDM tests because it just doesn't work well for that sort of design.
>>It works well for the "lots of little sticks" design.
>
>
> So why does the UK operate a MFN big-stick network, with only a few dozen main
> sites used for Freeview? We certainly don't have SFN's. I wouldn't really call a
> 1083ft transmitter pushing out 1000kW a 'little stick'.

He only understands "big stick" when it is in the context of "big
power". The UK big stick big power is analog, doesn't count. Must be big
stick big power with COFDM. Big stick with little power that works with
COFDM simply doesn't compute. They don't want to hear it so they don't.

Bob Miller
>
>
> Az.
>
>

 

[aztech]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c51b6fcae052052989a90@news.nabs.net...
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> > Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
>> > Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
>> > stations and see how far the signal gets.
>>
>> Considering DTT isn't on relay stations that pretty easy.
>
> Then, what was that map showing? If it wasn't digital, why did you link
> to it?

Because the digital muxes replicate analogue coverage from the main sites.


Az.