End of the line for analouge deflectors ?

Mike 1972

With the licences given to deflectors due to expire in a few weeks and increaced legal penelties for any which decide to continue regardless its suprising how little press coverage/campaigning there has been on behalf of the operators.

Has everybody accepted its the end of the road or are some of them planning to continue quietly or hoping for a last minute reprive/extention ?

Darth Maul

Hopefully the will all be turned off in at the end of the year,
going by the ones operating in my area of NW donegal wich rebroadcast uk terrestrial channels.

- They are poorly maintained and suffer hugely from down time and poor picture quality,
- Their signal bleeds over official RTE transmitters ( causing poor signal there)
- There is now no need for the thanks to freesat which gives much better picture quality and channel options.
- They have been going around collecting money for years but no real maintence has been done on them.
- Installer charging the elderly through the nose for super duper aerials that do nothing as the problems are at the transmission sites. (these are usally the same people that are supposed to be maintaing them).
- Sick of getting called out to jobs when there is nothing that can be done to remedy the problem as its not an aerial issue, advising them to get freesat for the uk stations only to pass the following week to see that someelse has flogged them a whole new aerial, masthead amp, splitter etc, that would of cost as much as a freesat install.



I for one would be glad to see the back of them

Mike 1972

Darth Maul wrote: »

Their signal bleeds over official RTE transmitters ( causing poor signal there)

If this is actually the case they are operating outside the terms of their licence and should be closed fortwith.

Im a bit sceptical though. Can you clarify (in a technical sense) exactly what you mean by "bleeds over"

Mayo Exile

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Has everybody accepted its the end of the road or are some of them planning to continue quietly or hoping for a last minute reprive/extention ?

Probably keep going since the schedule for the launch of DTT is still unknown.

The Cush

Mayo Exile wrote: »

Probably keep going since the schedule for the launch of DTT is still unknown.

If they are to continue legally a new regulation will be required within the next 5 weeks.
From the current regulations

Duration and Renewal of Licences

6. (1) A Licence that has been granted or renewed shall (unless it has been or is revoked) remain in force for the period of one year from the date on which it is expressed to come into operation and, unless renewed, shall then expire.

(2) A Licence may be renewed from time to time by the Commission.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of this Regulation a Licence shall not be renewed on the third anniversary after the first grant of the Licence and shall then expire.

(4) On application by or on behalf of a Licensee to the Commission before the expiration of his or her Liccence, the Commisison may, by notice in writing given to the Licensee or sent to the Licensee at the address of the Licensee specified in the Licence or notified to the Commission by the Licensee in accordance with the Licence, renew the Licence for a specified period from the day following the expiration of the last previous period during which it was in force. The granting or renewal of a Licence shall not be construed as warranting that the Licence shall be renewed at any time in the future.

(5) For the avoidance of doubt, no Licence shall be granted pursuant to these Regulations after 31st December 2009.

(6) A holder of a Licence granted under the Wireless Telegraphy (UHF Television Programme Retransmission) Regulations, 2003, may apply to renew that Licence under these Regulations.

Mike 1972

Of course even if they do somehow stay on air into next year the next question will be what happens to them at analouge switchoff (on the drastic assumption that this happens on schedule).

The fact that there has been very little publicity regarding the 31/12/2009 deadline suggests though that many of them may be about to call it a day given that many of the original operators are now getting on a bit, that many groups are experiencing increacing difficuly collecting subs and that Sky/Freesat/FTA is rendering analouge deflectors somewhat obsolete anyway.

Of course with Boxer gone and onevision looking increacingly unlikely to launch maybe there room for a "digital deflector" concept ?

If some of the existing groups stay on in the absence of a licence will COMREG take action, will the MMDS companies start issuing injunctions (and threats therof) or will anyone be bothered ?

Darth Maul

Mike 1972 wrote: »

If this is actually the case they are operating outside the terms of their licence and should be closed fortwith.

Im a bit sceptical though. Can you clarify (in a technical sense) exactly what you mean by "bleeds over"

Well they are not staying to there allocated uhf channels and are causing co-channel interference on other transmissions. This was proved as the reception in the area from the Main RTEnl transmitters and the nearby RTENL relay vastly improved during a long outage of the deflector. I lodged a compalint about this and as of yet nothing has been done.
In areas close to the deflector array, it is virtually impossible to recieve a decent reception from any other source.

denat

New regulations governing retransmission of UHF signals were published on 20 November - statutory instrument 445 of 2009. If I can find a link I'll post it.

Mike 1972

SI 445 /2009 mentioned on Iris Oifigiuil but no further details yet. {ADDS: May possibly be just for the Southcoast 12 GHz gizmo ????)

Darth Maul wrote: »

Well they are not staying to there allocated uhf channels and are causing co-channel interference on other transmissions. This was proved as the reception in the area from the Main RTEnl transmitters and the nearby RTENL relay vastly improved during a long outage of the deflector. In areas close to the deflector array, it is virtually impossible to recieve a decent reception from any other source.

Not necessairly the deflector to blame. Maybe someone in the area has a dodgy masthead amp. As for being poorly maintained given the uncertainty over their future (last minute reprieves notwithstanding) perhaps it isint worth their while making the necessary investment

icdg

Not on the eISB yet at any rate - only up to 422 of 2009 as of today. I only had a cursory glance at DCMNR and Comreg website so they might be there somewhere.

Antenna

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Im a bit sceptical though. Can you clarify (in a technical sense) exactly what you mean by "bleeds over"

Probably a problem at the receiving end really.

Might be the case that a masthead or distribution amplifier with too high a gain (and causing cross-modulation) for the location is in use by the viewer or wrong type of diplexer.

In some instances combining aerials will cause problems, where this would happen the 'deflector' aerial should have a seperate downlead (i.e. not combined) and an "A-B" type switch for the viewer to switch between the deflector and RTE etc

Darth Maul

Just had a call from a friend to say that the Mullaghduff / Drumnacart deflector crowd were just at the door collecting (well at least it was someone claiming to be), they were looking from €20, he told them that he didn't use it as he had freesat. He didn't know that they were to close.
Very strange that they would be going around now in light of the current regulations and the december the 31st deadline.

Apogee

Mike 1972 wrote: »

If some of the existing groups stay on in the absence of a licence will COMREG take action, will the MMDS companies start issuing injunctions (and threats therof) or will anyone be bothered ?

The MMDS companies don't exactly have a blemish free record when it comes to fulfilling the conditions of their own licences.

scath

Given that the BAI have given Onevision weeks to sign the contract or else they'll move onto EasyTV, might the BAI be preparing after 31st December to order deflectors to shut off? See:http://www.dvb.org/about_dvb/dvb_worldwide/ireland/

Capt'n Midnight

Can we not just call them re-transmitters as they certainly aren't deflectors.

Many of the channels provided are free to air so it's not like they are providing an essential service.

And it's a nice scam if they are collecting just before they are due to be turned off.

The Cush

Darth Maul wrote: »

Very strange that they would be going around now in light of the current regulations and the december the 31st deadline.

As denat and Mike 1972 posted previously a new regulation S.I. No. 445 of 2009 has been issued and without seeing the text we can assume at least a one year extension has been granted.
The new S.I. should appear in the ComReg publications section when its made available.

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/statutory.html not there yet

Mike 1972

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Can we not just call them re-transmitters as they certainly aren't deflectors.

The term has been used in other countries to to denote a relay transmitter which rebroadcasts on the same frequency (usually with opposite polorisation) as it recieves.

Many (but not all) of the Irish UHF retransmission systems do indeed operate like this.

In some parts of the country the term "re-beaming" is more common.

ADDS: http://www.comreg.ie/publications/regulations_and_si.505.100024.0.0.p.html nothing here either. Is there any Irish government website which provides up to date details of legislation and statutory instruments.

danny004

They are poorly maintained and suffer hugely from down time and poor picture quality,
- Their signal bleeds over official RTE transmitters ( causing poor signal there)
- There is now no need for the thanks to freesat which gives much better picture quality and channel options.
- They have been going around collecting money for years but no real maintence has been done on them.
- Installer charging the elderly through the nose for super duper aerials that do nothing as the problems are at the transmission sites. (these are usally the same people that are supposed to be maintaing them).
- Sick of getting called out to jobs when there is nothing that can be done to remedy the problem as its not an aerial issue, advising them to get freesat for the uk stations only to pass the following week to see that someelse has flogged them a whole new aerial, masthead amp, splitter etc, that would of cost as much as a freesat install.

Have to say none of the above is the experience in carrigaline area ,in fact they do provide a valuable service to some of the older generation who are not exactly tech savy. My parents have this and they dont want to be playing with set top boxes etc they want rte 1 on channel 1 rte 2 on 2 etc etc and are quite happy with six stations. It always surprises me how many people in this forum seem to have a grudge against deflector systems because the technology for them is not advanced enough ,but not every one wants this. Of course we must remember a time when no cable provider would look at providing at service outside of major urban areas and necessity being the mother of invention spawned the birth of a new exciting era of television viewing in the sticks which was a lot cheaper than the official providers. When these systems of course will be turned off I will shed a little tear and wonder how long before we start talking about the good old days of television and the pirate deflector systems with a hint of nostalgic youth.

The Cush

Senna wrote: »

The analogue deflector with gives my mums house her signal is about to be turned off so i'm looking at getting her a freesat (free view, free sky whatever its called). She's fairly elderly so the normal sky channel navigation will be very hard for her to use.

The above was posted over in the satellite forum, it appears the operators are shutting it down in advance of the 31st Dec deadline.

snaps

Interesting thought....A DTT deflector system!

izzygill

Darth Maul wrote: »

Just had a call from a friend to say that the Mullaghduff / Drumnacart deflector crowd were just at the door collecting (well at least it was someone claiming to be), they were looking from €20, he told them that he didn't use it as he had freesat. He didn't know that they were to close.
Very strange that they would be going around now in light of the current regulations and the december the 31st deadline.

reason for collecting is that royalties still have to be paid to IMRO for this year.

Mike 1972

http://www.attorneygeneral.ie/esi/2009/esi_num.html

Still no update on the legislation.

I wish the Irish government could put all its legislation (current, historic and proposed) on a single website and update it daily rather than have it duplicated across several sites some of which havent been updated in years.

How can they expect citizens of a country to obey the law when they wont even tell them what the law actually is :rolleyes:

fat-tony

The Irish Statute Book http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/home.html
has all the legislation published in the state up to the last calendar year and is fully searchable.
Current year (2009) legislation and SIs are published in various websites including the AG's website that you linked to.
The SI 445/2009 mentioned earlier in the thread is available as a paper copy for €3.05 from the Government Publications Office. I'm sure it will be added to the downloadable pdf list shortly;)

Mike 1972

If thats supposed to be an attempt at addressing my last point its failed rather miserably however further discussion on the topic probably belongs on one of the legal boards VVV......

fat-tony

You were complaining that there was no single website source of legislation available to citizens. I pointed out the single website;)
As for emerging law, it's available on the AG's website and is as recent as October.
The SI 445 was only published Friday last week and is available as a paper publication should you need it urgently.

The Cush

S.I. No. 445 of 2009 now available for download from http://www.attorneygeneral.ie/esi/2009/esi_num.html.

Deflector licences have been extended for a further 3 years (with annual renewal) until the end of 2012.

Duration and Renewal of Licences
6. (1) A Licence that has been granted or renewed shall (unless it has been or is revoked) remain in force for the period of one year from the date on which it is expressed to come into operation and, unless renewed, shall then expire completely.

(2) A Licence shall not be renewed by the Commission on the third anniversary after the first grant of the licence but shall then expire completely.

(3) On application by or on behalf of a Licensee to the Commission before the expiration of his or her Licence, the Commission may, renew the Licence for a specified period from the day following the date of expiration of the previous period during which the Licence was in force. The granting or renewal of a licence shall not be construed as warranting that the Licence shall be renewed at any time in the future, and no Licence shall be renewed beyond the third anniversary of the date upon which it was first granted.

(4) No Licence granted pursuant to these Regulations shall remain valid after 31 December 2012.

(5) A holder of a Licence granted under the Wireless Telegraphy (UHF Television Programme Retransmission) Regulations, 2006 may apply to renew that Licence under these Regulations.

icdg

fat-tony wrote: »

You were complaining that there was no single website source of legislation available to citizens. I pointed out the single website;)
As for emerging law, it's available on the AG's website and is as recent as October.
The SI 445 was only published Friday last week and is available as a paper publication should you need it urgently.

Okay, enough is enough! Talk about statute law publication, restatement, and consolidation over on Legal Discussion if you like. Next person to do so on this board gets a week ban.

Back on topic...as the previous poster pointed the SI's up on the eISB now and 31st December 2012's the new deadline date. Too long IMO, they are now leaving them until DSO rather than the start of DTT.

Deflectors should never have been licenced of course. IMO it gave people a pat on the back for breaking the law. Their licencing was of course a condition of Tom Guildea's support for the 1997-2002 coalition and we have been stuck with it since.

Mike 1972

Deflectors should never have been licenced of course. IMO it gave people a pat on the back for breaking the law.

By that logic we should never have got Independent radio/TV either

Oh and its "Gildea"

gerrymartin

Mike 1972 wrote: »

By that logic we should never have got Independent radio/TV either

Oh and its "Gildea"

Still being Mr.Pedantic across the forums.lol Good man Mike you never miss a trick:)

danny004

The License was granted because of a commitment given by John Bruton whilst in opposition at a community TV meeting in carrigaline which was broadcast on the deflector systems local channel ,six months later the fianna fail /Labour governement collapsed and the rainbow coalition was in power. Alan Dukes was then held to John Brutons commitment and had to start drafting legislation. I agree that we should not tolerate breaking the law but these licenses were as a result of rural people demanding a multi channel service that was not available to them under current law so common sense and people power won through one of the few instances in the last 20 years where this has happened.