All posts by Andy Ripley
Below are all of Andy Ripley's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
It's only 3 new HD channels really (time sharing), and on Freeview could frequency allocation be a problem? What guess it's not on Freeview Lite masts?
| link to this comment |
What of putting DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale) on these bands, similar to what has been tried on some of the SW bands? Very likely the propagation characteristics of these bands render them useless for data applications (lack of bandwidth), and any two-way system like 4G would be very difficult to implement - antennas are either large or very inefficient at these frequencies.
Even with FM broadcast, it's only 20MHz wide and that would not fit much in the way of data, and the propagation is still too much for it to be reused.
Possibly a bad idea then.
| link to this comment |
By 2050 large sections of LU will have closed, starved of funding as London will be a separate country from the rest of England, having been voted out in a referendum. What would have been the TfL budget will have provided Leeds, Birmingham, Bristol and Cardiff with new rapid transit systems.
| link to this comment |
Page 2
Wednesday 16 January 2013 4:55PM
I think the term we're looking for is desensing here. Whilst the signals are near to the wanted signals, they'll be within the pass band of any amplifier - indeed if there is any attempt to limit their bandwidth in any case. Just like some amplifiers are filtered against TETRA, those affected would have faced quite large costs to receive a relatively weak TV if they went down the filtering route, which would have been paid for by the 4G supplier. There's not much of guard band really and given that TV front ends go up to Ch 68, their receiver performance isn't in the communications receiver class. Seems they would simply shift those affected onto Freesat to avoid any excessive costs.