nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

RTE Announce FTA Saorsat service

slegs

RTE CFO speaking at Seanad committee announces that RTE will launch a Saorsat service with spot beam on Ireland of FTA PSB channels from Q2 2011. Presume Astra 28.2 but he didnt say.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

rlogue

I would expect if RTE are going to run Saorsat on a commercial basis then there must be some kind of way they could make money out of it and get a return on their investment in it.

Perhaps some kind of sale of the kit needed to receive it?

watty

No.

That isn't what RTE meant by a Commercial basis.

It's a on a Commercial basis in the sense that the alternatives would cost more to run. It's not about making money.

Macy0161

I do think some of ye are reading too much into the lack of information/ lack of confirmation. RTE are most likely playing it safe until they're 100% sure it's going to be a runner. Damned if people go ahead and source equipment and then it doesn't go ahead, damned if they keep schtum and it launches as planned and people have had to wait...

Mr. Rabbit

Macy0161 wrote: »

I do think some of ye are reading too much into the lack of information/ lack of confirmation. RTE are most likely playing it safe until they're 100% sure it's going to be a runner. Damned if people go ahead and source equipment and then it doesn't go ahead, damned if they keep schtum and it launches as planned and people have had to wait...

Then why did Brian say "if Saorsat goes ahead" ? Why did he not say "when it starts" or something to that effect ? Surely that casts some doubt on the project, and from someone who would be privy to the information ?

There no point in us speculating when we haven't a clue as to what's going on.

Peter Rhea

Mr. Rabbit wrote: »

Then why did Brian say "if Saorsat goes ahead" ?

Because he can't see the future? Unknown unknowns & all that?

watty

Because he works in RTE who famously don't tell staff anything...
I doubt he will be told anything about Saorsat till RTE or RTENL are publicly announcing the service definite start date. I don't think "Brian" has communicated anything not already Public knowledge if you know where to read.

Macy0161

Mr. Rabbit wrote: »

Then why did Brian say "if Saorsat goes ahead" ? Why did he not say "when it starts" or something to that effect ? Surely that casts some doubt on the project, and from someone who would be privy to the information ?

Because of what I said, he and anyone else in RTE won't confirm until it's 100% definite. If he'd said "when" and people had taken it as a green light to get gear, and it didn't go ahead, what reaction would he get? More importantly for him, what would happen to his career when complaints started rolling in from people who brought, or publicised for sale, equipment based on what he had said?

zg3409

Regarding the commercial viability, RTENL should save money by launching this service. Terrestrial coverage is going to be less than initially planned. Many smaller transmitter sites will be closed down, giving a massive saving to RTE both in site rental costs and the cost of upgrading them to digital. Also besides the equipment having staff on call 24/7 for breakdowns, lightning strikes etc. By reducing the number of sites to a bare minimum their overall costs are way down. They had intended using lots more sites.

From the public point of view there will be uproar from all those in two channel land (VHF band II reception only) who only ever got RTE1 and 2 and never got TV3 etc.

These people will have no TV at all after October.

There is also lots of people using smaller sites that may or may not get Saorview

If Saorsat does not launch before October lots of people suddenly will have no option but to get RTE via Sky, and pay a minimum of 25*12=300 euro extra per year, plus a TV licence. People that live in 2 channel or no coverage land won't be happy, especially when many of these are the rural elderly.

RTE could save more money by not launching Saorsat and say tuff luck but politically and practically it's a win, win for RTENL. It would have been nice if was launched 6 months ago, but my LNB is ready and waiting....

As others have said they probably won't oficially launch until they have compatable approved receivers and LNBs and confirmed they will keep this service going for the next 20/30 years.

They may be in secret negotiations for special discounted Sky cards and are using Saorsat as a bargaining chip, but I doubt it. If they could get basic 4 channel Sky cards for a reasonable price it would be a win for Sky especially as they could encourage people to then upgrade over the phone. RTENL is in a good position now that they have proved Saorsat can work. I hope they don't do a deal with Sky. Saorsat is only pocket money when compared to overall RTENL costs and fills a genuine need.

Peter Rhea

zg3409 wrote: »

From the public point of view there will be uproar from all those in two channel land (VHF band II reception only) who only ever got RTE1 and 2 and never got TV3 etc.

These people will have no TV at all after October.

VHF band III? In all but one case now, this would imply reception from a main transmitter. Is UHF coverage from these sites that much worse?

zg3409

Peter Rhea wrote: »

VHF band III? In all but one case now, this would imply reception from a main transmitter. Is UHF coverage from these sites that much worse?

Sorry VHF Band III
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Band_III

It's not really that much worse but in fringe areas, especially mountainous counties like Wicklow, Donegal, Kerry etc quite a few people have no TV or Sky only. I know people that live in East Wicklow that never got RTE but got BBC from Wales fine. Granite hills are great for blocking TV signals. Parts of Wicklow have no FM radio coverage even.

Some people cannot even get Sky if they have hills or trees or tall buildings to their South.

http://www.saorview.ie/make-the-switch/coverage-checker/coverage-map/

Click on the show coverage button and look at all the white areas. You will see mountainous counties have loads of masts, yet loads of white patches too. All the white patches in the North also get coverage too. This is what Saorsat is all about.

Peter Rhea

zg3409 wrote: »

It's not really that much worse but in fringe areas, especially mountainous counties like Wicklow, Donegal, Kerry etc quite a few people have no TV or Sky only. I know people that live in East Wicklow that never got RTE .

They won't miss what they never had, then. In your other post, you seemed to be implying that people that currently have terrestrial coverage would lose it when the VHF analogue is switched off.

lawhec

zg3409 wrote: »

Click on the show coverage button and look at all the white areas. You will see mountainous counties have loads of masts, yet loads of white patches too. All the white patches in the North also get coverage too. This is what Saorsat is all about.

Where I now live, it's in a part of Omagh that is in the white "reception could be a challenge" coverage zone yet Saorview reception from Carin Hill is very good. Almost as good as Freeview from Brougher Mountain currently. The green and red coverage areas represent a minimum field strength, outside of this reception should be possible in many areas with a good high gain, roof mounted aerial with masthead amp if necessary.

zg3409

Peter Rhea wrote: »

They won't miss what they never had, then. In your other post, you seemed to be implying that people that currently have terrestrial coverage would lose it when the VHF analogue is switched off.

Yes I know people that have RTE1 & 2 at present on VHF band III. They attempted to get Saorview and failed. Many of the white areas on the map have VHF Band III coverage now. I suggested to them to retry for Saorview after October 2012 or Saorsat.

I have coverage prediction software on my laptop and I could go and prove that going from VHF Band III to UHF will reduce coverage. This is the reason they did not turn off VHF band III years ago.

They tested Saorview on VHFband III and all Saorview branded TV's scan VHF band III for a signal but find nothing. (unlike UK freeview boxes)

98% population coverage sounds great until you loose RTE at your home. The 2% represent 80,000 people. Many of these may have just RTE1 and 2 on VHF band III. Most probably have Sky already.

The UK switchover did not have the same issues as they turned off Band III long ago.

watty

Already though RTE1 & RTE2 on Digital is More coverage than Analogue RTE1. But it's not the same coverage (i.e. Carlingford village no Saorview).

The Elevation for Sky is about 22 degrees. Something has to be very close on South West to block it. Saorsat is about 29 degrees elevation so objects need to be closer or taller. It's much closer to South. More than SSW, compared to Sky/Freesat almost exactly SW.

None of the VHF areas will be seeing more power after ASO. Mt Lienster of all the main VHF areas has group change on Digital to current TG4/TV3 aerial group. Holywell hill and Claremont Cairn are the only other transmitters changing after ASO, channel change in group and increase in power, especially into N.I. Those two sites don't do Band III.

gerrymartin

http://www.onwave.ie/packages
I was under the impression this outfit would be the exclusive provider for saorsat including the provision of the receiving equipment.
They claim on the above link to be offering Irish tv channels as an extra on their Satellite broadband packages also.

Peter Rhea

zg3409 wrote: »

Yes I know people that have RTE1 & 2 at present on VHF band III. They attempted to get Saorview and failed ... going from VHF Band III to UHF will reduce coverage. This is the reason they did not turn off VHF band III years ago.

How hard did they try for Saorview reception? Did they ever try for UHF analogue from the same sites?

I know there is a difference in coverage between band III & band IV/V but would you not also have pretty poor band III reception in the "no UHF" situation? I'm not just arguing for the sake of it btw, as I live in an area served by the last remaining of the smaller VHF txs, though not in such extreme terrain.

gerrymartin

http://www.onwave.ie/packages/tv
Here's a bit more

lawhec

watty wrote: »

None of the VHF areas will be seeing more power after ASO. Mt Lienster of all the main VHF areas has group change on Digital to current TG4/TV3 aerial group. Holywell hill and Claremont Cairn are the only other transmitters changing after ASO, channel change in group and increase in power, especially into N.I. Those two sites don't do Band III.

Truskmore is getting an ERP increase once analogue is switched off, IIRC from 63kW to 160kW.

I have coverage prediction software on my laptop and I could go and prove that going from VHF Band III to UHF will reduce coverage. This is the reason they did not turn off VHF band III years ago.

While that's true for analogue television on its own, the same doesn't necessarily hold true for going from VHF analogue to UHF digital. I'm not 100% on what the green & red areas on RTÉNL's interactive coverage map is meant to represent as a minimum coverage level, but I'll assume going by previous publications that it's 61dbvu into a 10 element aerial. Depending on the transmission characteristics of the multiplex set by the carrier modulation, forward error correction (and in a few cases the guard interval) the actual reception level to successfully receive can be significantly lower because of the digital cliff effect. The UK PSB DTT network is designed in mind to be running at -7db less than the equivalent analogue peak ERP but it's clear digital coverage at these powers is able to give significantly more coverage than analogue did at 5x the ERP.

zg3409

>How hard did they try for Saorview reception? Did they ever try for UHF analogue from >the same sites?

The person had a good go and got not a hint of a signal. Granite mountains can drop the signal to nothing. They rang RTENL and they said which site to aim for.

If saorsat does not happen they can try for a really good setup and a professional test. Failing that Sky but many people cannot afford/justify paying that much. The person would probably give up on RTE vs paying for Sky.

Regarding onwave as far as I know that offer is just BBC via satellite and RTE via an aerial. If they are installing the single wire internet box then they cannot even use the Internet dish for receiving Saorsat for reasons explained many pages back.

gerrymartin

Regarding onwave as far as I know that offer is just BBC via satellite and RTE via an aerial. If they are installing the single wire internet box then they cannot even use the Internet dish for receiving Saorsat for reasons explained many pages back.[/QUOTE]

Nope all via satellite albeit with an extra offset lnb for "Freesat"
Installs are twin feed for rx/tx

zg3409

>all via satellite

How do they get RTE via sat for free?

Also some of those channels are not even on Sky. They must receive Saorview with an aerial for it to work today.

Here is a list of all stations they offer:

http://www.onwave.ie/packages/tv_all

gerrymartin

zg3409 wrote: »

>all via satellite

How do they get RTE via sat for free?

I don't know, I have heard that it's going to happen,but i suppose we will have to wait and see.

zg3409

If onwave are actually installing this at the moment then they must use an aerial for RTE. In the future if Saorsat launches, then they can use the dish for everything.

The size of dish is complete overkill if no internet is needed.

gerrymartin

No Magic involved. They are not offering the Irish channels yet, but what I am saying is I have heard they will be, as well as being the main provider of "Saorsat" in the not too distant future. I have no idea how that arrangement is being setup between the two parties involved or what it will entail,so I cannot speculate,so to repeat myself, we will have to wait and see

By the way I have no involment in either RTE or Onwave.

Hotblack Desiato

zg3409 wrote: »

I have coverage prediction software on my laptop and I could go and prove that going from VHF Band III to UHF will reduce coverage. This is the reason they did not turn off VHF band III years ago.

The UK switchover did not have the same issues as they turned off Band III long ago.

Cue historical aside :

The UK had a standards change at the same time as the move from VHF to UHF. In other words, if you wanted 625 lines B/W instead of 405, or if you wanted colour, you had to get a UHF aerial. Also BBC2 was only on 625 UHF from the start. They wanted the ability to provide four networks, and already had two in VHF so couldn't do it there, and given the standards change they had to continue to provide VHF 405 coverage for some years. (For about a year 1984-85 they had six national networks on the go, 625-UHF BBC1, BBC2, ITV, CH4 and 405-VHF BBC1, ITV.) It's one thing to ask people to get a new aerial, but it was another thing in the 60s-70s to obsolete existing TVs overnight with no possibility of a cheap STB to convert standards. TVs were very expensive then.

Even so it took many years to get the UHF coverage up to where the VHF coverage had been, they constructed hundreds of UHF relays during the 70s and 80s.

Here we had 625 lines B/W on VHF from 1962 so there was no point in changing bands just to go to colour. Given we had only one native TV channel at the time, we could accommodate 405 and 625 RTE all on VHF, and the closure of 405 released space for RTE2 when it came along. We closed down 405 several years before the UK did, but then we'd also had 625 RTE for years before they got 625 BBC1 and ITV. 405 in Ireland was really only a sop to accommodate people on East coast and near the border who'd bought 405 TVs for UK overspill.

AFAIK we didn't use UHF here until RTE2, I'm not entirely sure we needed to at that time either, we probably could have managed with VHF only, but going to three and four networks forced a move to UHF. Perhaps RTE should've moved entirely to UHF at that time too, so everyone could have one aerial to receive all services (and TV3 should've been forced to use all the available Tx sites!)

I notice that VHF tends to use fewer main transmitters than UHF, but they seem to be of a higher power, so whether VHF is more 'efficient' is an open question. You'd still have areas in hilly country that need fill-in anyway. It seems to me that the overall nationwide Saorview transmitter power per channel/mux is going to be quite a bit less than it is now for analogue, this will produce substantial energy savings. One mux (effectively 1 channel transmitted, instead of 4 now) can accommodate all the existing services and some additions. Even the move to a 2nd mux still means only two UHF channels have to be used, not four. Fewer sites will mean savings also. The existing holes in analogue coverage are filled in by Sky at substantial monthly subscriber cost. The holes in Saorview coverage can be filled in by Saorsat at zero monthly cost to viewers. Saorview/Saorsat is a win/win for broadcasters, RTENL and for viewers as far as I can see. I really don't know why it's being knocked (apart from this being the usual Irish custom!)

[Deleted User]

Correct, it was 1978 before UHF was rolled out in Ireland. Three Rock was one of the first, if not the first.

UHF didn't really become an issue for existing viewers until TnaG came along in 1996. At that time I was living in Listowel and virtually nobody had UHF aerials. The local relay in Listowel was VHF (channels F and I) and those outside the town used either Maghera or Mullaghanish. About two years later, RTÉ 1 and Network 2 were duplicated on UHF from Listowel but unlike most other areas where the VHF was shut down very quickly, it wasn't until about 2005/2006 that Listowel's VHF relay was closed.

VHF from the main transmitters is at a lower power than UHF. A 500kW UHF TX still doesn't have the same range as a 200kW VHF transmitter. Where I lived, VHF from Mullaghanish was fine except for some ghosting, whereas the UHF from Maghera or Mullaghanish was snowy but watchable. The same setup works fine for Saorview from either transmitter (as well as Knockanore and Knockmoyle if the aerial polarity was changed).

Hotblack Desiato

Thanks for the correction on UHF vs VHF analogue transmitter powers. DTT power should be quite a bit less than either, though, while providing a similar coverage area (not quite the same areas though) and while it's arguable that an excellent analogue signal was better than an SD DTT signal, many people couldn't get an excellent analogue signal but will get an effectively perfect DTT signal, plus additional services, EPG, digital text, better sound, etc... it's really up to the broadcasters to take full advantage of what the technology can do.

(cue another historical aside) I grew up in south-west Dublin on high ground, in the late 50s or early 60s my dad had a huge VHF aerial installed on a high pole to get BBC NI and UTV. At some point in the early 70s, 405 B/W got boring even though it was free, so we got a colour TV (and me) and we got cable. Around 1978 the Band I yoke was falling apart and the neighbours were complaining about the noise of it in the wind! My dad got it taken down and a UHF yagi (although at age 7 I didn't know what it was, but I remember what it looked like) put in, when we plugged out the cable and plugged it in it gave amazing analogue pictures of RTE1 and the RTE2 test card (top half colour bars, bottom half a red field with text in white -

RTE 2
THREE ROCK

Oh the excitement

It was handy to have a good RTE aerial in those days as the cable was fairly unreliable.

lawhec

ninja900 wrote: »

AFAIK we didn't use UHF here until RTE2, I'm not entirely sure we needed to at that time either, we probably could have managed with VHF only, but going to three and four networks forced a move to UHF. Perhaps RTE should've moved entirely to UHF at that time too, so everyone could have one aerial to receive all services (and TV3 should've been forced to use all the available Tx sites!)

I stand to be corrected here, but I believe that RTÉ1 was launched on UHF (E40) at Carin Hill several months before RTÉ2 went live. I'm not entirely sure if Three Rock was fired up before RTÉ2 went live as well, but it was opened in the same year (1978). Carin Hill came on line because the general midlands area was on the fringe of several VHF transmitter service areas and that at the time there was a lack of available VHF frequencies especially with a planned second network.

Within the context of the time, a two-channel PSB TV service would have been seen as perfectly adequate, considering similar networks that existed across Western Europe at the time. In the late 70's only the UK and I think Italy had private, commercial terrestrial television alongside a public broadcaster. Germany and France had three PSB networks only, the Netherlands only had two networks, as did Spain. Considering the Irish terrain and the lack of immediate need for any more TV networks (RTÉ struggled a lot during the 80's filling schedules for RTÉ2), it made sense to stay with VHF as a transmission backbone with UHF where needed. A complete conversion to UHF would have been costly without any immediate benefit, and that a significant roll out of relay stations would have been required to fill in coverage gaps. It wasn't until TnaG came along in the mid-90's that many small relay stations where UHF coverage from main transmitters was inadequate sprung up.

ninja900 wrote: »

I notice that VHF tends to use fewer main transmitters than UHF, but they seem to be of a higher power, so whether VHF is more 'efficient' is an open question. You'd still have areas in hilly country that need fill-in anyway. It seems to me that the overall nationwide Saorview transmitter power per channel/mux is going to be quite a bit less than it is now for analogue, this will produce substantial energy savings. One mux (effectively 1 channel transmitted, instead of 4 now) can accommodate all the existing services and some additions. Even the move to a 2nd mux still means only two UHF channels have to be used, not four. Fewer sites will mean savings also. The existing holes in analogue coverage are filled in by Sky at substantial monthly subscriber cost. The holes in Saorview coverage can be filled in by Saorsat at zero monthly cost to viewers. Saorview/Saorsat is a win/win for broadcasters, RTENL and for viewers as far as I can see. I really don't know why it's being knocked (apart from this being the usual Irish custom!)

VHF and UHF bands have different technical characteristics that can be exploited. In countries where DVB-T(2) has been adopted, the general trend has been to move away from VHF altogether and concentrate on UHF only; there are a few exceptions, Sweden and Finland have started using VHF Band III for HD broadcasts, Italy also uses Band III, Germany has been using it to a limited extent but is now phasing it out where it can (if it already hasn't) while Australia still makes extensive use of Band III for DTT. No country is using DVB-T(2) in Band I.

One big advantage in VHF is the better ability to go around the curvature of the earth, hills, mountains and man-made objects compared to UHF, however on Band III it has less available bandwidth, is slightly more susceptible to mad-man noise and indoor reception can be a little trickier to get right.

Hotblack Desiato

Probably more appropriate for the old farts Broadcasting History forum, so I posted my reply there

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76223786&postcount=1

Hotblack Desiato

lawhec wrote: »

One big advantage in VHF is the better ability to go around the curvature of the earth, hills, mountains and man-made objects compared to UHF, however on Band III it has less available bandwidth, is slightly more susceptible to mad-man noise and indoor reception can be a little trickier to get right.

It's an advantage only up to the point that an interfering transmission can cause trouble, analogue Band I was a particular problem on occasion in summertime with west of Ireland viewers being treated to Spanish programming! I wonder would DTT cause such problems if it were used on VHF - most likely it would just be regarded as noise, and therefore ignored, if the local transmission is strong enough - but in heavy trophospheric ducting could a far distant DTT transmission obliterate a local one?

All of this is less of an issue on UHF analogue than VHF, I suppose we'll see how it works out on DTT. The generally lower transmission powers should help in that regard.