Originally Posted by Colin_London:
“I don't know why you conclude that 'finding a home for R4 LW' equates to DRM30. I think it much more likely that by the time R4 comes off LW the BBC will have moved at least some of their stations to DAB+ freeing up space for a 'LW' opt out if required....Whilst it pains radio enthusiasts to admit it, the direction of travel is all towards [4G] IP delivery....”
I'm not concluding anything. I'm throwing out for discussion one idea as to why Aunty is keeping a MW network going while all around are ceasing what is left of their networks. If you can propose a better reason for this intriguing behaviour of the Beeb, then please share it.
At the end of the Beeb's national mux rollout there will still be significant areas of the UK that are officially "uncovered" on DAB/+. Most of my action radius in the Highlands and Islands comes to mind, as does the interior of Wales. An SFN using DRM30 could be the answer here, and with frequency refarming could afford the Beeb up to 4 speech quality channels for the likes of Parliament, Daily Service and assorted sports commentaries.
Power levels from the main sites on DRM30 would only have to be a small fraction of what is now in use for AM, say a couple of kW from a site that previously radiated 100kW per audio service, resulting in a significant and perhaps game-changing OPEX saving. Remember that the reason DRM (as it was then) was developed was to make MW and LW relevant in the digital age, not to replace any existing high-quality DAB or WBFM services.
DRM30/+ is not a "new platform" and in fact has been in service to a limited extent around the world for a decade now, certainly on shortwave. As mentioned in posts above, DRM functionality is now baked into more modern digital radio chipsets, so by and large add a ferrite antenna and suitably screened front-end and you're good to go.
As for 4G being the panacea for all service delivery woes, it always amuses me that those proposing this notion are not those who actually work in the industry. I'm a radio nutter in my spare time, and wander the world designing, building and optimising 3G and 4G networks for a living. 4G is not the saviour, as the bandwidths, throughput and numbers of users that can be accommodated on a mobile network simply do not scale to anything like that required for a broadcast network.
Mostly this is the fault of the transmission infrastructure between the sites and the 'core network' as, out in the boonies where you propose 4G will help the most, the idea of self-healing transmission rings is a fantasy. Rather, the reality is long daisy-chains of sites where the first in the chain has to support all of the downstream bandwidth, usually over a microwave link to the core instead of fibre. Not only is this a single point of failure but also it leads to the transmission guys hard-limiting the capacity to each site to a small fraction of what the 3G and 4G air interfaces are able to support.
I could give about two dozen further reasons from experience why mobile networks do not/won't ever scale to broadcast grade but this is an 'AM deathwatch' thread and I'm conscious it would bore most folk.