Comments by "Bond25" (@Bond2025) on "Ringway Manchester" channel.

  1. 19
  2. 13
  3. 11
  4. 11
  5. 9
  6. 9
  7. 9
  8. 8
  9. 7
  10. 6
  11. 5
  12. 4
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. It is a legal requirement for site operators to know what they have operating as they get called when there is a problem. Any loss of service causes a problem and interference is a legal issue. Everything is licenced and the operators and RA check regularly. They also do spot checks. In the days of pagers around 94 i was at a hilltop site in Wales when the RA turned up to do field strength tests. A VHF pager was splattering and when i let them in the building they found the 10Watts from the TX was going via a 400Watt RF amp in to their own aerial on the mast - around 137MHz. They had the site owner and company rep there within 45mins and took the amp away. Had they not complied, the equipment was going to be switched off and removed. The way the sites work is that you have a few wideband VHF and UHF aerials for general use. You can use your own or you can use a wideband RX one for VHF and another for UHF and TX through your own. There are circulators fitted, but it depends what room is left. The old PMR repeaters would use a common receive aerial at the top of the masts and TX on their own. That's because the common aerial would be a 68-88MHz, 160-180MHz for example, or 440-460MHz, so never cut for one frequency, but good enough in that location. That was only one part of the mast and buildings. There were relays, links, commercial stations and 70cm / 2m repeaters in some. Now they have TETRA and Cellular. Sites i went to were never alarmed either. It was just a case of being issued with keys. One site had about 8 padlocks all joined to each other and wrapped around a gate, you opened your own to get in! Sadly, pirates would install equipment on some of them with 10GHz links, steal electric and splatter and interfere.
    1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. This is the problem that the Storeton TV TX had when it first went online. Locals got no signal and it was a big story in the newspapers, but a bit further away it was full strength. It was the wrong type of antenna in use. Once changed to tilt the radiation pattern down correctly, it covered the required areas. It was an example of poor design and understanding of RF. People think RF comes straight out and all around. It doesn't, it can be steered and set at different angles depending what the installation is for. That's why phone masts tilt the radiation pattern down to give a more blanket coverage with a lower range. The same for broadcast stations, you don't want a fancy 6dB colinear with a 30-35degree takeoff , you want a simple aerial like a slim jim, J pole or mixed polarisation dipole that will cover the local area and not win a DX award. Sometimes people will get NO signal or a very low one due to multipath interference, two of the signal arriving at the same time effectively trying to cancel each other out! That can be rectified by moving the aerial, or in some cases fitting two aerials and a splitter and messing with them. I used to have two very long Group C/D aerials pointing at Winter Hill to get OnDigital when it first come out. I tried them phased side by side, then stacked for more gain one above the other etc. To get shut of multipath I spaced them side by side and then moved one aerial back about 2ft and it cured it. I also fitted a masthead preamp to overcome coax losses. There are lots of interesting things you can do with aerials.
    1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133.  @ToomasTelling  DABradio is finished in the UK, it failed because of - 1. Advertisers 2. Poor Audio Quality 3. Choice of different stations When it first appeared, the audio quality was brilliant as bitrates were high, some as high as 320kbps stereo on the BBC test stations. As time went on, it was all monetised and people looked at ways to get back their investment and make money. It went away from being a method of transmitting stations to one of selling advertising, making every channel play automated music with adverts and a bit of talking over the top. Many of my local DAB stations play the same music from the same feed, but change the announcements. Why just have 4 stations on a multiplex for example, when you would have 12 or 24 all running really low audio bitrates. That is why no one listens now. Who wants MONO audio at a bitrate and audio quality lower than a standard AM radio. In North West UK if you listen at home or in a car to stations on 88-108MHz FM Stereo, the audio quality is really good. Listen on DABradio and you get thin or tinny MONO with 16kbps to 64kbps and it is "quiet", plus there is no processing, no dynamic range, no compression etc, so unusable in cars. Most stations rely on streaming. DABradio was a "gap filler" while Streaming Services were improved and people started to use them more thanks to unlimited data on phones etc. I now just stream music in the car, I don't bother with DABradio and only use normal radio if there is no coverage on the phone! The choice of frequency up around 200MHz was odd too, if they had used 68-88MHz the coverage would have been vastly improved, especially for mobile use. Less transmitters and links would have been required. I use 4M amateur band (70MHz) and the coverage is really good compared to 2m and 70cm for example.
    1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1