<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Checking Your Predicted Digital TV Reception: Made Simple</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:41:40 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/comment-page-1/#comment-4596</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:17:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digitaluktv.com/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/#comment-4596</guid>
		<description>It wouldn&#039;t be 100% accurate for someone to say for certain about future untested conditions, but an aerial installer with a bit of local knowledge should be able to make a very educated and almost accurate guess (if that makes sense?).

The lowest power output of a given multiplex is 2.5kw at the moment and will be increased to 35kw come 2009: this doesn&#039;t in effect give you 14 times more signal at your location - but; if for instance your weakest signal is now being received at a power level of 30 dBµV, and the recommended signal level is 40-45 dBµV, then that sort of transmitter power increase should put you in the area of reliable reception. Even still if an exsisting &lt;strong&gt;contract&lt;/strong&gt; aerial was receiving a lowish power level of 30dBµV a change to a High Gain &#039;A&#039; aerial can harvest around 4-7dB extra, extra height can sometimes give you 1dB per foot gained, and a low noise pre-amplier (mast head) could give you that kick over the edge for reliability. Obviously without getting too technical those are the basic factor&#039;s, aswell as flatness and noise.

It would be wise to get a &lt;strong&gt;local&lt;/strong&gt; aerial installer round to conduct a test survey. You never know, it could throw up a surprise. The postcode reception predictor is conservative most of the time, and myself working in the trade have on many occassions received reliable reception using the correct equipment where people have assumed it isn&#039;t yet possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It wouldn&#8217;t be 100% accurate for someone to say for certain about future untested conditions, but an aerial installer with a bit of local knowledge should be able to make a very educated and almost accurate guess (if that makes sense?).</p>
<p>The lowest power output of a given multiplex is 2.5kw at the moment and will be increased to 35kw come 2009: this doesn&#8217;t in effect give you 14 times more signal at your location &#8211; but; if for instance your weakest signal is now being received at a power level of 30 dBµV, and the recommended signal level is 40-45 dBµV, then that sort of transmitter power increase should put you in the area of reliable reception. Even still if an exsisting <strong>contract</strong> aerial was receiving a lowish power level of 30dBµV a change to a High Gain &#8216;A&#8217; aerial can harvest around 4-7dB extra, extra height can sometimes give you 1dB per foot gained, and a low noise pre-amplier (mast head) could give you that kick over the edge for reliability. Obviously without getting too technical those are the basic factor&#8217;s, aswell as flatness and noise.</p>
<p>It would be wise to get a <strong>local</strong> aerial installer round to conduct a test survey. You never know, it could throw up a surprise. The postcode reception predictor is conservative most of the time, and myself working in the trade have on many occassions received reliable reception using the correct equipment where people have assumed it isn&#8217;t yet possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Pull</title>
		<link>http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/comment-page-1/#comment-4594</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Pull</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:35:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digitaluktv.com/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/#comment-4594</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your reply to mine of 14 Feb. At present, as I understand it, Stockland Hill transmits Freeview with a power of 5000W or 2500W, depending on mux. Power will rise to about 35000W at the end of our switchover period. Could someone with appropriate expertise and equipment carry out the test you suggest now, and extrapolate to post-05/09?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your reply to mine of 14 Feb. At present, as I understand it, Stockland Hill transmits Freeview with a power of 5000W or 2500W, depending on mux. Power will rise to about 35000W at the end of our switchover period. Could someone with appropriate expertise and equipment carry out the test you suggest now, and extrapolate to post-05/09?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/comment-page-1/#comment-4524</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digitaluktv.com/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/#comment-4524</guid>
		<description>Ian,

There is only one answer that can be 100% reliable in this situation. You would need to get a local aerial installer round to test the signal at your location, with a small test aerial rig.. A site survey.

No online prediction service could give 100% accuracy compared to a physical signal test.

I Hope that helps you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ian,</p>
<p>There is only one answer that can be 100% reliable in this situation. You would need to get a local aerial installer round to test the signal at your location, with a small test aerial rig.. A site survey.</p>
<p>No online prediction service could give 100% accuracy compared to a physical signal test.</p>
<p>I Hope that helps you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Pull</title>
		<link>http://www.digitaluktv.com/news/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/comment-page-1/#comment-4523</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Pull</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:01:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digitaluktv.com/check-predicted-digital-tv-reception/#comment-4523</guid>
		<description>I have tried several sources trying to get an answer to this; perhaps you can do better. I am at DT3 6PT (Weymouth). I would like to receive full Freeview, and this would have to come from our main transmitter (Stockland Hill not Rowridge). But St. Hill does not develop full power (a big increase compared with the present service) until the end of our switchover period (30/05/09). It would obviously need a high gain Group A aerial, and I won`t proceed with this in the absence of reliable information on my chances. How can I obtain this sufficiently in advance of 01/06/09 to implement an alternative, if necessary?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have tried several sources trying to get an answer to this; perhaps you can do better. I am at DT3 6PT (Weymouth). I would like to receive full Freeview, and this would have to come from our main transmitter (Stockland Hill not Rowridge). But St. Hill does not develop full power (a big increase compared with the present service) until the end of our switchover period (30/05/09). It would obviously need a high gain Group A aerial, and I won`t proceed with this in the absence of reliable information on my chances. How can I obtain this sufficiently in advance of 01/06/09 to implement an alternative, if necessary?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
