Will Analogue signal hold broadband?

Gunther_Gloop

(I'm sure this has been discussued somewhere, but damned if I can find it)...

Has any decision been made as to what the analogue broadcasting wavelength (UHF/VHF?) will be used for after the digital switchover?

Would it be any use as a broadband provider? If so, what potential speeds? I assume each house would need to be fitted with some kind of broadcaster to send back the upload signal if this was possible.

Apart from local TV/Radio (will these be allowed under licence? Would anyone want to receive them?) what use will possibly be made of this 'resource'? Or is the idea to never use them again for some reason?

PogMoThoin

Comreg are going to waste it by auctioning it out to the highest bidders among the mobile providers to use/misuse as they please. Then they'll clap themselves on the back and say they've done a great job, and let the market sort itself out. This will end up with a huge divide between rural and urban areas, like you already see, with 4 different providers in one area and none in another when they pick and choose where they use the spectrum.

Gunther_Gloop

Thanks.

What a shower of wasters. Nothing ever changes does it?

PogMoThoin

FWIW, mobile is not and will never be broadband. Mobile would be great if people didn't use it as a fixed broadband substitute.

What this country needs is a net neutral fibre network owned by the people that any provider can deliver on. Forget Eircom, they're in tatters, the ESB are already perfect for the job as they already connect to every single house in the country. We need to start discussing and planning this now. A few billion would do it. How much did those banks cost again?

Gunther_Gloop

The ESB used to be a great and economical service until the regulator, under EU guidelines, started driving prices up "so competition could come in which will drive the prices down", we were told. Ya right.

I agree they would be perfect for a proper fibre rollout, but the politicians have all but confirmed they will be breaking up the ESB rather than strengthening it.

...Possibly the new ESB would 'own' the electric & fibre optic network, with others bidding for provider rights -as is the case at the moment to a lesser extent, but if that ever happens a) customers will be gouged and b) it will never happen across the whole country anyway.

PogMoThoin

They are breaking up the ESB so as not to make the same mistake that was made with Eircom, ie. making it 2 bodies, keeping the network and making the ESB just a company that provides power. It's the right move

Gunther_Gloop

The right move is to put the ESB back the way it used to be -run for the people of Ireland, not for profit.

PogMoThoin

Gunther_Gloop wrote: »

The right move is to put the ESB back the way it used to be -run for the people of Ireland, not for profit.

The way it was, overpaid public servants, no thanks. Prices will only come down when there's competition, not a fixed market. Best job is to split the ESB, keep the network and then let the power provider fight it out with the two other suppliers. Keeping and separating the network is the important bit, a mistake that cannot be made again.

blackius

I had the opportunity to use 4g in the states last week and I can tell you that it knocks the socks off the basic very fast upc here and certainly was a lot lot lot faster than my own dsl broadband.


Also o2 are currently testing 4 g in central london (and bt in cornwall ) and it's getting 90mb download speeds handy according to a report I saw on bbc news on thursday.

So really it's not true that it's not broadband,it fceking fastastic!

I'd agree though,I'll believe rollout in Ireland when I see it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15717913

watty

HSPA 3G is great too if there are no other users.

I'd guess you were using 20Mhz channels and hardly any users.

Comreg envisions 5MHz channels, so barely any better than HSPA.

The 90Mbits/s is for ONE user only streaming and a 20MHz channel close to mast.

In 5MHz you get 22MBps. 3G/HSPA is 21Mbps peak speed. You typically get 1Mbps to 3Mbps.

With a "really used" and realistic coverage LTE in 20MHz channels the per user speed is 5Mbps to 18Mbp, typical. But can easily be < 2Mbps.

Unlike broadband, the average Mobile speeds are meaningless as < 2% of people get the really good speeds and over 1/4 of people get slow speeds.

The Digital Dividend spectrum is 120MHz. That's about 11 x 5MHz channels as the system is duplex and needs a guard band.
You need 3 channels minimum for a Cellular system. Comreg wants at least 3 operators.

So you will have a single 5MHz channel (peak 21Mbps) to share with all the other users on your mast sector.

It might even be poorer than existing 3G. Certainly provides zero broadband.

Gunther_Gloop

PogMoThoin wrote: »

The way it was, overpaid public servants, no thanks. Prices will only come down when there's competition, not a fixed market. Best job is to split the ESB, keep the network and then let the power provider fight it out with the two other suppliers. Keeping and separating the network is the important bit, a mistake that cannot be made again.

Prices were the cheapest (or thereabouts) in Europe before they unfixed it. Now they're the dearest, or thereabouts.

icdg

Take the ESB argument to Politics, please.

The Cush

Gunther_Gloop wrote: »

Has any decision been made as to what the analogue broadcasting wavelength (UHF/VHF?) will be used for after the digital switchover?

790-862 MHz (UHF Chs 61-69) Mobile broadband aka The Digital Dividend, .

Start here - http://www.comreg.ie/publications/update_on_the_availability_of_ireland_s__digital_dividend__and_the_900_mhz_band_liberalisation_consultation_process.583.103673.p.html

See here also - http://www.comreg.ie/radio_spectrum/gsm_band_liberalisation__and_800_mhz_spectrum.713.html

Sponge Bob

It would be a complete doddle to free up channels 49-60 as well and provide a complete block starting at 704mhz to 790mhz where we could use US standard LTE ( mobile) gear.

But this is Ireland so they would rather leave it empty and unused instead.

watty

It will be needed eventually for HDTV.

US LTE gear won't give broadband either and the cell size due to low frequency gets big, which means very low user density = Occasional on the go traffic in short bursts.

If 790 MHz to 960Mhz was used for real Fixed Broadband, I agree, it would be worth adding. But it won't.

In fact a Mobile roll out on 790MHz to 862MHz is of so little value for Internet, that it would be better reserved on all of Europe for Fixed Use or TV.

lawhec

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It would be a complete doddle to free up channels 49-60 as well and provide a complete block starting at 704mhz to 790mhz where we could use US standard LTE ( mobile) gear.

But this is Ireland so they would rather leave it empty and unused instead.

Actually, no, it wouldn't. It would first require co-operation with UK authorities at least and even then, coverage in border areas and also probably along the east coast would be severely restricted as broadcast has priority at these frequencies (not to mention the possibility of wiping out Freeview reception to numerous viewers in the Republic). Secondly, current Saorview transmitters operating on these frequencies would need to be moved to alternatives lower down the UHF band or even to VHF, would would involve network replanning and international frequency coordination which at a bare minimum would take a number of months and likely to take at least several years for high powered transmissions. Third, it doesn't make much sense for Rep. Ireland to adopt a non-European spec which for roaming on to would only be of use to those from the Americas at least initially. Mobile phone frequencies between ITU Regions 1 & 2 have been different due to legacy regulatory issues, once the 800MHz band is cleared from broadcasting European countries will then have two sub-1GHz GSM family mobile phone bands, the same as North America right now, who don't have a 900MHz cellular phone band, therefore the 700MHz band was desirable for 4G use. The UK at one time had an odd idea of a 600MHz digital dividend post-DSO but unlike the 800MHz band they really hadn't much of a clue about what it would be used for - it has now been replanned for more DVB-T2 multiplexes (1 national SFN and 2 national MFNs using three frequencies each).

The EU has been talking themselves about a 700MHz digital dividend in the future, but it's only talk at the moment. I don't expected anything to happen until near the end of this decade at the earliest.

My opinion is when LTE services are launched here, 800MHz band services aren't going to see anything more than 5MHz pairs being used simply because of the pressure of spectrum space. If 10MHz-20MHz pairs are to be practical, it's going to be at higher frequencies, say 2.6GHz and maybe 1.8GHz where smaller areas of practical coverage are much better in helping provide MBB with >10Mbps speeds. Trials like those taking place in London and Cornwall will provide useful feedback, but mass use of the technology and its limits will only be known once it is a prevalent at 2G is now.

Just slightly off topic, do Vodafone, O2 or Meteor have, or plan to use UMTS in the 900MHz band? O2 have done so in the UK (and up north here) with some interesting results.

The Cush

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It would be a complete doddle to free up channels 49-60 as well and provide a complete block starting at 704mhz to 790mhz where we could use US standard LTE ( mobile) gear.

But this is Ireland so they would rather leave it empty and unused instead.

Still used for broadcasting just like the rest of Europe. No Europe-wide plans to release this spectrum for other uses before the middle of the decade, 2020-25 most likely Europe-wide. Finland and other countries bordering Russia will probably make it available sooner due to the difficulties with releasing spectrum in the Digital Dividend 1 band in the region. Telecoms companies have indicated they are interested in the spectrum on a harmonised Europe basis, economies of scale etc.

Comreg to review and consult on it in the middle of next year.

The Cush

lawhec wrote: »

Just slightly off topic, do Vodafone, O2 or Meteor have, or plan to use UMTS in the 900MHz band? O2 have done so in the UK (and up north here) with some interesting results.

Unlike the UK where they have been gifted the liberalised spectrum the Irish Vodafone and O2 licences have expired, operating on interim GSM licences until the end of Jan 2013. Auction of liberalised spectrum next year with no guarantee as to how much spectrum if any they can win or where it'll be located.

Read all about it here - http://www.comreg.ie/radio_spectrum/gsm_band_liberalisation__and_800_mhz_spectrum.713.html

Kristopherus

If a broadband signal can be sent around a domestic residence via homeplugs, could this model be adapted by the ESB nationally, and would it be a cheaper option than some crackpot idea eminating from Comreg to introduce infrastructure costing billions & billions to roll out???

Gerry Wicklow

AFAIk the capacitance of electric cables rules this out of long distances. The signals would have to be fibred to each substation and would be totally useless for rural homes. i am open to correction on the technicalities of this. I seem to remember experiments being done here and in Uk during 1990's-2000's. Street lighting also caused interference.

watty

The homeplug system is actually technically illegal* and doesn't work with only ONE PSU or Lamp in the house generating the same interference.

You'd need to feed each substation via fibre or microwave and with the number of people sharing a substation the peak time speed would fall to about 1Mbps or less. Just one faulty street light, legal mobile radio user or "noisy" PSU in a house would knock out reception in an entire area. On long rural runs you'd get dialup speeds.

Also full speed Power Line networking "wipes" out vast amounts of radio spectrum.

A low speed power line networking may be feasible for Electricity, Gas, Water meters but speed needed is only 0.0003Mbps and only at that in occasional bursts. For 100 people on a Substation, smart metering needs only a peak speed of about 0.003Mbps. For Broadband the substation needs about 400Mbps, about 1 million times faster.


(* They prove CE interference compliance without data running, (or even with one plug!) and have failed to get a special just for them dispensation to create more interference so that if tested properly they would be legal). The GHz "home mains" networking even interfere with VHF as well as MW & SW. The cheaper older ones destroy MW & SW reception, even to adjacent house. The "meter" or fusebox is no appreciable filtering. They are in reality Radio Transmitters-illegal. They work nearly as well with one on a isolated UPS or generator!)

Sponge Bob

lawhec wrote: »

Actually, no, it wouldn't. It would first require co-operation with UK authorities at least and even then, coverage in border areas and also probably along the east coast would be severely restricted as broadcast has priority at these frequencies (not to mention the possibility of wiping out Freeview reception to numerous viewers in the Republic). Secondly, current Saorview transmitters operating on these frequencies would need to be moved to alternatives lower down the UHF band or even to VHF, would would involve network replanning and international frequency coordination which at a bare minimum would take a number of months and likely to take at least several years for high powered transmissions.

Yes I already said that around here to ALL of the above. It won't affect Brougher and Divis, it would affect Limavady meaning that the Inishowen and NE Donegal cannot have 700mhz BB.

Only 2 of the 6 main transmitters ( not incl Isle of man) that are receivable in the south use 700mhz. Of course UK TV is the primary user in these bands but you hardly reckon a 700mhz LTE base station in Wicklow will cause problems in Wales ???

Nor would it affect Preseli or Blaenplwf in the south east. Still leaves us with room for 3 muxes and all. Might be issues in Dublin with Llandona but that means less of the 700mhz band is usable in Dublin, that is all.

Third, it doesn't make much sense for Rep. Ireland to adopt a non-European spec which for roaming on to would only be of use to those from the Americas at least initially.

You forget that many devices are 'quad' band ...will work on all frequencies. The same will happen with 4G.

My opinion is when LTE services are launched here, 800MHz band services aren't going to see anything more than 5MHz pairs being used simply because of the pressure of spectrum space.

Guaranteed already by Comreg.

Just slightly off topic, do Vodafone, O2 or Meteor have, or plan to use UMTS in the 900MHz band? O2 have done so in the UK (and up north here) with some interesting results.

Thought O2 did already in Donegal, maybe co ordination rather than enthusiasm.

lawhec

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Yes I already said that around here to ALL of the above. It won't affect Brougher and Divis, it would affect Limavady meaning that the Inishowen and NE Donegal cannot have 700mhz BB.

Only 2 of the 6 main transmitters ( not incl Isle of man) that are receivable in the south use 700mhz. Of course UK TV is the primary user in these bands but you hardly reckon a 700mhz LTE base station in Wicklow will cause problems in Wales ???

Nor would it affect Preseli or Blaenplwf in the south east. Still leaves us with room for 3 muxes and all. Might be issues in Dublin with Llandona but that means less of the 700mhz band is usable in Dublin, that is all.

You're forgetting a number of relay stations near the border areas (say 10 miles los) that are broadcasting Group C/D - Ederney, Lisbellaw, Castlederg, Claudy, Camlough, and Leitrim. You could also probably include Newcastle but the town tends to be well shielded in southern directions. There's also a possibility of affecting other relays using C/D frequencies as well e.g. Plumbridge as it's not uncommon to receive southern GSM services in the area.

A 700MHz base station could very well travel the Irish Sea into Wales - I know from visiting a relative who lives in Whitehead, Co. Antrim that reception of Manx Telecom GSM is possible inside the house (though it can't register due to timing limits). Taking cross-channel interference into account, relays in the IoM, Scotland and Wales that are Group C/D could be vulnerable to interference. Not forgetting Winter Hill.

With regards to handsets, even today it is only the higher-end smart phones that have either quad-band or even quint-band UMTS abilities, my current phone (ZTE Blade/Orange San Francisco) is 900/2100MHz UMTS only as was my previous phone while the one before that was 850/2100MHz. While quad-band GSM phones are now ubiquitous, it still took some time for it to be so. LTE radio chipsets will take a while to have a significant multiband capability covering from 700 to 2600MHz (it may require covering six different bands).

700MHz LTE is a non-runner in Ireland unless it's adopted Europe wide. It may be better to use spare frequencies allocated for Ireland for use for licenced small-scale white-noise wifi (as opposed to the unlicenced type proposed) as should they require shifting in frequency in the future, it should be much more easily done than high-powered broadcast transmissions, and can be worked within strict limits.

Sponge Bob

No such thing as 700mhz wifi, it is LTE gear or nuthin.

lawhec

Sponge Bob wrote: »

No such thing as 700mhz wifi, it is LTE gear or nuthin.

I was on more about proposals of using "white space spectrum" for community broadband or wi-fi use, which is designed in mind to use empty UHF (and possibly VHF) allocations in a given area.

watty

"White Space" is Fantasy. It's a niche.

While we could do 700MHz LTE, there is no Advantage to it. Even the 800MHz LTE is near pointless. The 2300 is better. Also 1800 is underutilised. LTE is also getting 2500 .. 2600MHz etc.

lawhec

watty wrote: »

"White Space" is Fantasy. It's a niche.

While we could do 700MHz LTE, there is no Advantage to it. Even the 800MHz LTE is near pointless. The 2300 is better. Also 1800 is underutilised. LTE is also getting 2500 .. 2600MHz etc.

I would agree that "White Space" devices as they are originally proposed are unfeasable as there's no guarantee that they will not cause interference if they are unlicenced, but I reckon there could be some scope on a licenced basis especially using it on allocated but unused digital TV frequencies in rural areas with small amounts of power.

As I see it, 800MHz use for LTE is for breadth, while >1GHz frequencies will be for depth. Telstra in Australia are currently rolling out an 1800MHz LTE network for data only at present and feedback on Whirlpool (Oz IT website) on the service appears positive, with speed tests reporting back at ADSL2+ speeds or better. Early days yet though. They've no room to move it into a lower frequency band yet though, 900MHz is full with GSM (and 3G in the case of Optus) while 850MHz is taken up by 3G from Telstra and Vodafone. They're planning on reallocating 700MHz for mobile telephony from a digital dividend, but it won't be usable until 2014 at the earliest.

Just from my own experience, O2 have 3G (HSDPA at least) on 2100MHz and 900MHz here in Omagh. The 900MHz coverage is deliberately restricted to help prevent interference to 2G services and as a result, has coverage only slightly better than 2100MHz, but in its main service area it's able to give 3G indoor coverage much better reliability.

The Cush

Replanning DTT Europe wide to release more spectrum for mobile services.

Richards views DTT redevelopment

Ofcom chief executive Ed Richards has said it would be possible to develop a radical single frequency network re-plan of Digital Terrestrial Television across Europe.

In a speech to the ECTA regulatory conference, Richards said such a move could be made possible through the introduction of substantially more efficient compression and broadcasting technologies including DVB-T2 and MPEG 4.

“As we begin to contemplate the possible co-existence of Digital Terrestrial Television and mobile services in the 600-700MHz bands, we need to think about the changes that lie not very far beyond this,” said Richards. “These will come about as much as a result of smaller, technologically driven developments as by international harmonisation agreements”.

Richards pointed towards plans by local TV and white space devices. to make more intensive use of interleaved spectrum. “We might even look to the end of second-generation transmission, and the shift to even more efficient third generation standards, including Multiple Input, Multiple Output (MIMO) antennae and High Efficiency Video Coding compression”.

He said that Ofcom would consider at what point in time any possible future rebalancing of the use of UHF spectrum bands IV and V could be implemented. The assessment would include the question of the 600MHz band now being cleared in the UK as part of the transition from analogue to Digital Terrestrial Television.

The 700MHz band, planned for a reharmonisation across Europe, would give the opportunity to replan DTT to free some 1 GHz of capacity, allowing for further development of mobile broadband.

http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2011/11/30/richards-views-dtt-redevelopment/

http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/technology/ofcom-boss-suggests-european-dtt-frequency/5035201.article

watty

I'd not touch what Ofcom smoke.

NewHillel

watty wrote: »

The homeplug system is actually technically illegal

Home Plugs may be the bête noire of the Ham Radio Community, with some justification, but they most certainly are not illegal. (Technically, or otherwise.)

I was doing some research on them recently, the following BBC Paper may be of interest.

watty

Actually, tested properly, they fail the EMC limits. So the CE mark is a lie.

The CE mark is now useless as it's not properly policed. A recent Laptop PSU with CE mark:

• No filtering at all.
• A fuse in series with bridge rectifier soldered into PCB holes for Filter and only 1 to 2mm away from a heatsink connected to LV (laptop) side.
• No fuse in Moulded UK style plug.

It's up to the individual Countries to police safety and EMI/EMC, and unless some examples go on fire or shock people nothing is done.

White Space is envisaged as "licence free" and one end permanently connected to Internet to access database. It's a horribly evil genie to let out of the bottle. It will disrupt TV reception for 10s of thousands of people who will have no idea who to complain to or what the cause is. It's dubious in extreme that it can deliver Rural Broadband. There are better cheaper ways to do that, and it should only be by licences equipment and authorised installer/service providers.

I've been to Comreg conference on the Digital Dividend and studied this. I've designed Wireless systems for Fixed Broadband and Mobile Data. A lot of stuff about "white space", 4g and LTE is uninformed nonsense and hype.

Headlines Speeds in limited trials is meaningless without knowing all the conditions. Anyhow you can't break Shannon's Law. So at reasonable distances, signal powers, amount of spectrum and numbers of users the quoted performances are gibberish. Just like was proved to be with Mobile Wimax and the hyped 100Mbps and 20km. Intel has abandoned Wimax. The largest user (Clearwire USA) is transitioning to LTE (for cost really & availability, not much performance difference) and this week Nokia Siemens Networks disposed of their WiMax.

Imagine is up a creek without a paddle as their Base Infrastructure was Motorola and they sold their WiMax to ...
Nokia Siemens Networks.
Also the Imagine system is Mobile Wimax, not Fixed Wimax. The 3.6GHz Imagine has a licence for is not suitable for a Mobile/Nomadic/Indoor system. In fact the licence was for FIXED wireless to replace ADSL where not available and at Contention no worse than 48:1. But Comreg says what Imagine did was OK. It isn't. The Imagine directors must be sorry that they bought IBB and the Irish Clearwire operation. Also even more sorry they listened to Intel's WiMax hype. The reason that without regulation that companies go for inferior Mobile / Nomadic technology rather than superior real broadband performance Fixed wireless is rollout cost. Post a modem or sell it in Carphone Warehouse rather than an expensive area by area install team. But Mobile/Nomadic doesn't add Broadband Infrastructure and Fixed Wireless (regulated properly) does add Real broadband.

This is an example among many as to why I have no confidence about Comreg and 800MHz Digital Dividend, 900MHz & 1800MHz GSM re-use and so-called White Space. Comreg refuses to regulate for good solutions. They maximise Spectrum Revenue and leave everything up to the Commercial company who isn't interested in Broadband, but purely being profitable in as short a time as possible. It's an area where commercial competition with "light touch regulation" simply results in a shoddy service.


A Mobile /Nomadic/Indoor system is about 8 to 16 more wasteful of capacity than Fixed Wireless. At 3.6GHz the problems are worse. 1800MHz is far better.
With a /Nomadic/Indoor system you can't accurately control contention or have "always on" or ensure a connection always happens. Cap is used as coarse control of Contention and thus congestion.

I could fill about 10 pages with stuff Comreg and Dept of Comms has messed up on. Will it be better merging with BCI (who are worse)? No.

NewHillel

For the casual reader who comes accross this thread...

1. HomePlugs are used to conect equipment (PC, Set-top box, whatever) to the Internet. They 'communicate' using the electrical (mains) wiring in a building.

2. They are in widespread use, and general experience is that they work pretty well.

3. They are NOT illegal to buy, or to use.

4. They are popular for connecting devices that require high speed broadband, such as is required for Video on Demand, to the broadband connection in a premises.

5. They are expected to become more prevalent and it is likely that the next generation of Multimedia equipment (think of 'Smart' TV's) will have HomePlug built in.

6. They do generate radio interference, and hence are not suitable in all circumstances. (Such as where you use an indoor aerial for TV, or radio, in a weak reception area.)

7. Because they generate interference, they can (and indeed do) interfere with some Radio Amateur (aka HAM Radio) Shacks.

@Watty
You make valid points, but they have absolutely nothing to do with the legality of these devices. They are legal, end of.

watty wrote: »

Actually, tested properly, they fail the EMC limits. So the CE mark is a lie.

NewHillel wrote: »

Home Plugs may be the bête noire of the Ham Radio Community, with some justification, but they most certainly are not illegal. (Technically, or otherwise.)

I was doing some research on them recently, the following BBC Paper may be of interest.

watty wrote: »

The homeplug system is actually technically illegal* and doesn't work with only ONE PSU or Lamp in the house generating the same interference.

.

watty

You are simply wrong. The makers test them in unrealistic setup. If they are tested carrying data then they break the limits by up to 20dB. It's not just SW & Ham stuff. Actually many avoid the "ham" portions. If the regulators were doing their jobs these would be banned 100% everywhere.

Of course it's not illegal to buy one. However if a complaint is made and upheld the user is obliged to replace or repair it. In the UK BT for the BTvision VOD/IPTV service replaces with 5.8GHz WiFi or Cat5e when a complaint occurs. BT's own DSL network people advised against these as they interfere in some cases with DSL.

It's a case that most Regulators are on the side of International Business, not the Consumer. I have MANY documented cases of Comreg and Ofcom lobbying for the Big companies and not implementing their own regulations.

Do you know how little Comreg has fined or "punished" anyone even when they did decide the rules broken?

The point of this is not to get a "dig" in at Homeplug or other networking over mains, but an illustration of how Ofcom, Comreg and others refuse to implement their own rules. Thus if legalised "White space" will be a disaster.

lawhec

In the case of homeplug network systems, to the best of my knowledge ring circuits are liable to causing far more interference than radial circuits. Ring circuits are the norm for wiring in the UK, whereas radial circuits are more common in the Republic. When used on radial circuits, if the wiring is taken as a twisted pair or trio it should be balanced and magnetic interference should not be a problem - this is not the case on ring circuits which have the effect of providing longer continuous wires (hence better response to emitting at LF/MF/HF frequencies) as well as forming an induction loop - even still there's been reports of radio reception being wiped out in the UK up to 500 metres away.

More recent standards are planned to have the bandwidth of homeplug systems go into VHF Bands II and III. If people's FM radio reception gets hit from interference, it might not just be radio amateurs that'll kick up a fuss.

watty

Actually the reverse is almost true! AVO wired their valve tester bases in loops or rings to reduce pickup, emission and oscillation.

I don't think it makes ANY difference. The Radials are not balanced and not twisted pair, the meter / fuse box is not isolation and the loop of cable for light switch is a nice aerial.

The newer "GHz" versions use up to 200MHz (harmonics higher) and interfere with FM and DAB. The Aeronautical folk are also worried. (110MHz to 137MHz AM).
The future arrived about 2 or 3 years ago


If these units are tested with live data running they can't pass any EMC tests.

Also if other equipment is "just inside" the limit (phone chargers LED lamps, PC & Laptop PSU CFL etc), then the speed drops to nearly nothing, It's amazing how well their own PSUs are filtered No wonder they "pass" when tested singly or without data.

With a regular WiFi/Ethernet switch/Router running data makes no difference. So no-one ever does. They only test PSU/Electronics EMI. But the Homeplugs and similar are really transmitters. Using the same test isn't valid. That's how they get a CE mark. No Data running.

They will connect even if one end is on a disconnected UPS with extension cord or on a generator. They are only using the wiring to "assist" the connection.

It's proof that the Regulators are useless.

Radio Amateurs are actually the least affected! They use outdoor aerials and also track down interference. People do use MW -AM and SW - AM as well as VHF-FM. Your right to receive transmissions from abroad is protected by EBU, EU and Geneva Conventions. Governments that block or allow such transmission to be blocked are called Despotic Regimes.

NewHillel

watty wrote: »

You are simply wrong.

Sometimes happens, I'm only human.

Where exactly?

watty

Me too.

At least we are not a pair of Chatbots.

Gerry Wicklow

This weeks BBC "Click" programme includes a segment on the "digital dividend" and "white space" if anyone is interested.

watty

A piece of poorly researched stuff too.

BBC Science and Technology stuff appears to be written by Arts Majors these days.

The so called "White space" Licence free system idea of FCC and Ofcom is a disaster and will ruin Digital TV viewing for thousands who will never know who to complain to or what is causing the problem.

They plan that at least one end of a so called "White space" link should be permanently connected to Internet to access database.

But what about local topology, people using masts etc?

Or simply disabling the database sw?

Adding 100W P.A.

Imagine 8MHz bandwidth CBs or high power WiFi IN the TV band. That's what so called "White Space" Radio is. Removal of the Protection for Licensed Broadcasters.


What it can't do is deliver broadband for more than a few people. It's basically an unprotected outdoor WiFi with 1/8th the capacity of WiFi. A toy for yuppies and geeks to wreck people's TV reception as EVERY White space radio is on the Channel of TV reception somewhere.

There are real off the shelf solutions that use LICENSED bands to deliver Broadband by Fixed Wireless. Typically one mast can support 500 users with real Broadband as if you had genuine 8Mbps DSL running never slower than 7.4Mbps at peak time. Far cheaper per user than White Space radio can be with its low capacity and risk of interference.

LTE and 4G in 5MHz channels lightly loaded only give same capacity as 3G/HSPA+ Mobile, about 15 simultaneous users at about 1Mbps to 2Mbps*. When speed on 3G /HSPA+ drops to 0.1Mbps the better efficiency of OFDMA (LTE) vs CDMA (3G/HSPA+) means LTE will give 0.2Mbps. Whoopee. (*Assuming 3 equally loaded sectors on mast, i.e. 3 x 5MHz channels in use)

So called 100Mbps LTE is 20MHz channels and only one user streaming and close to mast. In normal usage 20MHz LTE allows 4Mbps where you would have had 1Mbps. Or 1/3rd as many masts for same capacity. LTE will not be done with full coverage but only in major population centres as an kind of expensive "WiFi". LTE is also expensive if you are getting more as it can't be subsidized by voice and SMS as 3G/HSPA+ is.

The only way for universal Broadband is Universal Fibre, FTTH in Urban and FTTC in suburban and Rural with up to 1km copper pair, 5km coax or 20km Fixed Wireless Broadband from the cabinet for a minimum 20Mbps speed. (1Gbps on FTTH available).

People need to stop pushing the fantasy that "the market" or "users" or whatever using Satellite, Mobile or White Space Radio can ever "magic" Rural Broadband. It's not possible.

Ofcom are not driven by Engineering or Consumer needs but by generating revenue and encouraging Business. They lobbied FOR the Mobile companies against the Consumer in Europe over Roaming Voice and Data. They refuse to protect Radio spectrum from PLT/Homeplug etc even though it's now proved to be illegal if tested with data running (by 20dB. All current CE tests on them done with no data running or on a single unit).

So we don't need White Space Radio and it doesn't really work in the sense that it opens the door to a huge flood of licence free gear on TV channels. It's the single stupidest idea in the history of Broadcasting.

Gerry Wicklow

Ah yes but one of the "experts" was getting up to 8megs on his private experiment as a single user. Very impressive :rolleyes:

watty

I note the Smiley,

My fixed wireless link is more than 6 years old. Protected Licensed Spectrum, so anyone interfering will be removed and it won't interfere with anything.
about 7.6Mbps down, 0.9Mbps up 25ms on a 8Mbps package. I'm 14km from a mast that can support 500 users.

On a "private" UHF link with yagi at each end I can easily get 36Mbps in 8MHz channel. If I use higher gain (= much bigger) aerials I think it can be pushed to 72Mbps.

There is Shannon's Law. A relationship between channel noise, data rate and power. It's not breakable. Practical Commercial systems are operating as close to the boundary as is feasible.

A portable system is worst as it has an omnidirectional low gain aerial and a lot of local noise as it's at ground level and not 2m above a roof. Can be up to x16 poorer than fixed wireless.

The problem with "White space" radio is the classic A B and C stations known since the 1930s. A database is not an accurate solution to if location C (who wants to communicate with location is going to interfere with A on the same channel. Someone between B & C could be using A for TV and be totally wiped out. The database is never going to be accurate enough.

Also the temptation will be for people add a power amp at both ends (even if illegal) instead of huge aerials (cheaper but more co-channel over wider beam) or disable database access if the database periodically tells them the local channels are all used up. Because there are the OTHER so called "White space" users in same area. The 8MHz channels get used up pretty quick.


via http://www.techtir.ie/comms/signal-loss-limits

The whole scheme is a recipe for disrupted TV viewing and irate purchasers of so called "White Space" Radio who find all the channels are used up already...

These are basically UHF WiFi with 1/8th approximately of bandwidth per node and less likelihood of a free channel.

If it was limited to about 1kbps or less (bottom left of graph), likely nothing would ever see it. The faster you try to go the more you create co-channel interference (top right of graph).

Antenna

watty wrote: »

On a "private" UHF link with yagi at each end I can easily get 36Mbps in 8MHz channel. If I use higher gain (= much bigger) aerials I think it can be pushed to 72Mbps.

Is that 8MHz channel within the current UHF TV Spectrum?

watty

It makes no difference, other than to long distance propagation beyond optical horizon if it's at 450MHz, 800MHz or 921MHz.
Obviously the same gain of aerials are half the size at 900MHz vs 450MHz.

And yes, with Comreg test licence I have tested data links at 750MHz to 860MHz on a "white space" basis. About 3 years ago with 2MHz, 6MHz and 8MHz channels. The tests where actually for a different licensed band, but US "800MHz" equipment was available off the shelf for initial tests. Later tests were on UHF outside Current TV band.