DS Forums

 
 

Manchester - Local Freeview Multiplex - Information Thread


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-11-2011, 13:04
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,256

Very short break in transmission around 12:55 - just tried a rescan and the new channels are up.

Channel M Mux now has:

200 Channel M
201 Movies4Men
202 Movies4Men+1
203 Movies4Men2
204 Movies4Men2+1
205 Men&Movies

Pictures on all channels are very jumpy on my tesco/dion box.
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 01-11-2011, 13:08
a516
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 5,204
Job done. I wonder how many Men in Manchester will watch all of these channels on Freeview!!!
a516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 13:13
Ray Cathode
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Guildford / Crystal Palace
Posts: 13,114
I was also expecting the antenna to be moved further up the Winter Hill mast. That would help compensate for the mode change plus the Ofcon allowed beam width increase. The old one cannot be more than 50m AGL. By the sound of it (worse reception), the antenna is still on the old aperture.
Ray Cathode is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 13:23
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,256
Re the signal strength, the only observation I can give is that the strength received by my pc card appears to be unchanged. It is the mode change that has dropped the quality below a decodeable level.

If they widen the beam, but keep the transmitter power the same, would I be right to expect a reduction in signal strength? Basic physics tells me that should be the case.

Re "job done" - there's no EPG yet for the new channels, or even now+next info.

Pictures are stable on my humax fox hd t2, so any breakups are due to my poor distribution cabling around the house, not the transmitted data.
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 13:24
a516
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 5,204
DMOL's website has recently been updated with the changes, too!
a516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 13:36
Ray Cathode
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Guildford / Crystal Palace
Posts: 13,114
Increasing the height of the antenna would compensate for the mode change and improve signal strength especially in fringe areas. I would expect a power increase as well now that The Wrekin is no longer co-channel. In the offer document, 4 logs replaced 3 logs on the mast.
Ray Cathode is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 14:13
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,256

So curiosity won over, and I temporarily moved a pc to where there is a better aerial feed.

Here's the current pidscan:
PID found: 0 (0x0000) [SECTION: Program Association Table (PAT)]
PID found: 16 (0x0010) [SECTION: Network Information Table (NIT) - actual network]
PID found: 17 (0x0011) [SECTION: Service Description Table (SDT) - other transport stream]
PID found: 18 (0x0012) [SECTION: Event Information Table (EIT) - other transport stream, schedule]
PID found: 20 (0x0014) [SECTION: Time Date Table (TDT)]
PID found: 32 (0x0020) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 33 (0x0021) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 34 (0x0022) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 35 (0x0023) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 38 (0x0026) [unknown]
PID found: 257 (0x0101) [SECTION: Program Map Table (PMT)]
PID found: 265 (0x0109) [SECTION: Program Map Table (PMT)]
PID found: 266 (0x010a) [SECTION: Program Map Table (PMT)]
PID found: 271 (0x010f) [SECTION: Program Map Table (PMT)]
PID found: 272 (0x0110) [SECTION: Program Map Table (PMT)]
PID found: 2305 (0x0901) [unknown]
PID found: 2307 (0x0903) [unknown]
PID found: 2308 (0x0904) [unknown]
PID found: 2312 (0x0908) [unknown]
PID found: 2326 (0x0916) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 2327 (0x0917) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 2328 (0x0918) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 2329 (0x0919) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 2334 (0x091e) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 2335 (0x091f) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 2337 (0x0921) [PS/PES: ITU-T Rec. H.262 | ISO/IEC 13818-2 or ISO/IEC 11172-2 video stream]
PID found: 2338 (0x0922) [PS/PES: ISO/IEC 13818-3 or ISO/IEC 11172-3 audio stream]
PID found: 8190 (0x1ffe) [unknown]
PID found: 8191 (0x1fff) [stuffing]
and some bandwidth snapshots:

32 (channel M) 3070kbit/s
34 (Men&Movies) 2045kbit/s
2326 (Movies4Men) 3071 kbit/s
2328 (Movies4Men2) 2550 kbit/s
2334 (Movies4Men+1) 2566 kbit/s
2337 (Movies4Men2+1) 2550 kbit/s
8191 (spare) 433 kbit/s
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 14:57
kjhskj75
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 749
However I find that signal quality has dropped so far I cannot see any channels either with my IDTV or Topfield PVR.

(Other Muxes are 100%)
kjhskj75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 17:03
Muzer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
I would expect GMG to push for the changes in aerial height and/or power soonish, otherwise they'll be losing even more customers.
Muzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2011, 17:25
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,256
EPG info has appeared for 203/M4M2 and 205/M&M - no idea when though - could have been any time in the last 3 hours.

No sign of EPG data for the two +1 channels yet.

Can also confirm that the new EPG info is getting across to the BBCA mux EPG stream - tested by searching PID 0x12 for "Inglorious".

Last edited by Greebo : 01-11-2011 at 17:34. Reason: Added BBCA EPG info
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 19:48
Colin_London
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Essex
Posts: 3,858
Just retuned the hotel TV and getting all new Channels in Cheadle.
Colin_London is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 20:25
Paul237
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 4,964
Weird how only one city/transmitter gets these extra channels!
Paul237 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 20:34
Muzer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
I think it's probably more of a trial (or perhaps only one company managed to get the funding together) - only one other licence for a local mux has been awarded, and that's in Cardiff and they haven't launched anything.


It's probably all on hold now anyway until the Channel 6 stuff happens.
Muzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 20:35
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,256
That would be two cities: Salford & Manchester - and not really a big surprise as nowhere else has a running local mux. Cardiff's isn't running, and the weird extra ITV mux from Ridge Hill doesn't count. One of these days someone's going to spot all that wasted bandwidth on that extra ITV mux and try to make some money from it.
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 20:37
chrisy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beds (Sandy Heath TX)
Posts: 8,852
Weird how only one city/transmitter gets these extra channels!
It's because Ofcom licensed two local multiplexes and then changed their mind on how the licensing would work and which spectrum was being cleared. Later the government changed and the Channel 6 local plan took over, so no further local muxes can be auctioned until the C6 ones are allocated and licensed.

Channel M were very lucky. Right time, right place.
chrisy is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 20:41
Ray Cathode
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Guildford / Crystal Palace
Posts: 13,114
Weird how only one city/transmitter gets these extra channels!
Not really. Channel M was the most advanced local TV channel in the UK when it was invited to bid £1000 for the Manchester local licence. Since then GMG have closed the original news based station down and it has become just a playout centre. However unless it gets more aerial power, 6 channels is likely to be all it can generate.

Now the new government has decided to change the arrangements for local TV, its proposals would only give one channel to the local TV company across the UK with MuxCo (Arqiva) getting the rest. The possibility of 2 to 5 other channels have made a financial case for the new MuxCo company to be able to generate a quasi national service for what are likely to be shopping channels. Strangely in a snub to Channel M, Manchester will get another frequency for a local TV station.

A local licence was also previously granted to a Cardiff based company Cube Interactive under the same system as Channel M, which has not installed any transmitting equipment AFAIK. At least the new proposals should get the local muxes up and running even if no local TV company can manage to produce any programming.
Ray Cathode is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 21:35
Muzer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
I reckon Channel M will bid for the local licence in Manchester, then simply sell off all their local capacity as another commercial mux. Just my guess.
Muzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2011, 22:48
reslfj
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,820
I was also expecting the antenna to be moved further up the Winter Hill mast.... The old one cannot be more than 50m AGL. .
Both old and new antenna should be mounted at 140 m AGL (half height) and angeled 5 deg downward. The pictures on MB21 does not look right to me ??

The difference is not as much in the signal strenght at the beams centerline, but the new pattern is wider ~50 deg vs ~30 deg.
The 16-QAM CR=3/4 at 1 kW is not a robust signal. The same modulation/FEC was - pre DSO - transmittet at 10kW almost from the top of the mast. A CR=1/2 would have been a much better choice - IMHO.

Now, the licence was granted in a auction - and even though there was only one bidder and the minimum price was paid - it will not be easy for Ofcom to add new permanent features to the license without calling for a new auction.

Lars
reslfj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2011, 23:05
a516
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 5,204
Both old and new antenna should be mounted at 140 m AGL (half height) and angeled 5 deg downward. The pictures on MB21 does not look right to me ??

The difference is not as much in the signal strenght at the beams centerline, but the new pattern is wider ~50 deg vs ~30 deg.
The 16-QAM CR=3/4 at 1 kW is not a robust signal. The same modulation/FEC was - pre DSO - transmittet at 10kW almost from the top of the mast. A CR=1/2 would have been a much better choice - IMHO.

Now, the licence was granted in a auction - and even though there was only one bidder and the minimum price was paid - it will not be easy for Ofcom to add new permanent features to the license without calling for a new auction.

Lars
Perhaps with the pounds they get for carrying Movies4Men they can up the power or move the aerial higher!!?
a516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 00:07
reslfj
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,820
Perhaps with the pounds they get for carrying Movies4Men they can up the power or move the aerial higher!!?
The problem is competition law - you cannot offer something of little value - sell it to you friend - and then add value - not even with extra pay. It's all about fairness.

It is not allowed in UK laws, not in EU laws and - I thing - not even in WTO agreements.

Lars

PS! Some Ofcom info about the channel 57 license at WH.
reslfj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 00:25
Muzer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
There's no question, they simply have to put the mux back to how it was if they're ever going to have a sustainable number of viewers.


However, perhaps this is all part of their plan. GMG could get whom it may concern to improve the mux's aerial height/transmission power and re-auction it, then Dolphin (Movies4Men owners, if they're interested of course) or someone else (Arqiva quite possibly) would win it. GMG would then rent capacity on the mux until the channel 6 auctions, in which they will bid for the local channel, and I expect, being a relatively well-established channel and all, that if they get their act together and throw a bit of money at it, they could quite easily win the channel 6 auctions. What do you think, does any of this make any sense, financial or otherwise?
Muzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 13:24
marria01
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Manchester
Posts: 348
does any of this make any sense, financial or otherwise?
In a word, no. Arqiva could've bid on the original auction, they didn't.

I live just outside the coverage area, and I still receive it. The pre-viterbi error rate has increased, but the forward error correction sorts that out nicely.
marria01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 14:49
Muzer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
But if coverage is improved, they could decide it's worth it.


Still, I doubt what I said will actually happen - it's just one out of many things GMG could do if they want Channel 6.
Muzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 19:16
marria01
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Manchester
Posts: 348
The problem is competition law - you cannot offer something of little value - sell it to you friend - and then add value - not even with extra pay. It's all about fairness.

It is not allowed in UK laws, not in EU laws and - I thing - not even in WTO agreements.

Lars

PS! Some Ofcom info about the channel 57 license at WH.
I believe the licence is only limited by the interference template, the current DPSA template for channel 57 from Winter Hill shows very little in the way of restrictions around 135 degrees. I'm sure they could gain approval for an increase in ERP as long as they combine it with a suitable amount of beam tilt. 1kW is pretty miserly.
marria01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 20:37
reslfj
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,820
I believe the licence is only limited by the interference template, the current DPSA template for channel 57 from Winter Hill shows very little in the way of restrictions around 135 degrees. I'm sure they could gain approval for an increase in ERP as long as they combine it with a suitable amount of beam tilt. 1kW is pretty miserly.
It has nothing to do with technical conditions - this is competition law.

But for the technical details - try read the Ofcom paper I linked to.

With 4-QAM CR 1/2 or CR 2/3 the signal will be rather robust. It was after all made available and sold in order to replace just one analogue channel (Channel M).

With DVB-T2 - maybe using the NI RTÉ/TG4 mux 16-QAM CR 1/2 parameters - the signal will be both very robust and have a 15 Mbps capacity, Using DVB-T2 will clearly be within the original ch57 auction/license conditions.

I would think they could 'borrow' channel 56 for maybe 12-18 months for DVB-T/DVB-T2 simulcast using the same TX antenna. Grenada has had DVB-T2 for 2 years now and by mid 2013 DVB-T2 receivers will surely be very common in Manchester.

Lars
reslfj is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:16.