Jump to content


Photo

New Design Hills Band 4+ Yagis


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#26 alanh

alanh

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 12,650 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 05:19 PM

nbound,

All the transmitters on a single site will be within one group and all have the same polarisation. In other words each site will have either TEN, ABC, SBS, Seven, Nine and an unallocated channel for metro areas and for regionals ABC, SBS, TEN affilliate, Seven affiliate, Nine affiliate and an unallocated channel.

I hope that there will only be the following antennas available

As far as I am aware Australia is the only place to use consecutive channel allocation. This is not done in the UK.

For horizontal polarisation
One each Yagi-Uda antenna for each group of channels. Low gain
One each Yagi-Uda antenna for each group of channels High gain
One each phased array antenna or each group of channels High gain

For Vertical polarisation
One each phased antenna for each group of channels. Low gain
One each phased array antenna for each group of channels High gain
One each Yagi-Uda antenna or each group of channels High gain
The only area where there is some doubt are Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast Qld and Central Coast NSW. These areas are big enough to have their own unique feeds of commercial stations.

I hope that all other antennas are removed from the market. The example now is that antennas designed to receive channels below channel 6 are still being installed which is a rip off of consumers now. The manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers should remove all of these antennas from the market.



AlanH

Edited by alanh, 05 March 2012 - 05:24 PM.


#27 DrP

DrP

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 16,740 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 05:37 PM

In general the restack places the transmissions within the bands already used in any given area, ie as per the initial digital allocations viewers won't have to replace their antenna unless it has a defect of some description.

Until all analogue transmissions cease there is still a place for antennas designed to receive those frequencies. This point was mentioned many a time in the intial antenna 'debate' threads. Threads where a certain will known forum member misunderstood (as often happens) what was said by others and took it as 'personal attacks'.

#28 nbound

nbound

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 778 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 06:14 PM

nbound,

All the transmitters on a single site will be within one group and all have the same polarisation. In other words each site will have either TEN, ABC, SBS, Seven, Nine and an unallocated channel for metro areas and for regionals ABC, SBS, TEN affilliate, Seven affiliate, Nine affiliate and an unallocated channel.

Where did I ever say this was not the case?:huh: Though I'd Imagine the unallocated on Sydney's Main Transmitter (and any major capital) would be the communtiy station, unless it ends up being carried by a national broadcaster (though ive heard NITV is likely to be carried by SBS).


The only area where there is some doubt are Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast Qld and Central Coast NSW. These areas are big enough to have their own unique feeds of commercial stations.

Cobar in NSW carries both Southern NSW and RC&E stations also. Theres probably a few others like that around the place too. From what Ive read these will attempt to be given two consecutive groups, and Im assuming in the same polarisation.

#29 alanh

alanh

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 12,650 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 07:29 PM

nbound,
What if community TV was given a stream on the SBS transmitter along with NITV. The only locations for community TV is mainland state capitals. Then there is a nationwide unallocated 6th channel in all areas. SBS currently simulcasts SBS HD and SBS1, SBS2 is a separate program stream with SBS3 and SBS4 are SBS1 simulcasts. It is quite feasible to insert the community TV signal into SBS's multiplexer at that city's transmitter. This is much cheaper than replacing their existing transmitters with a RF channel 10 transmitter. This will increase the coverage area of community TV to the whole licence area.

As far as Cobar goes, there are currently no digital commercial transmitters in town. The CBN10 (Prime Southern) transmitter is in competition with the QQQ7 transmitter owned by Southern Cross which is radiating 7 network programs. The Southern Remote licence area covers Cobar. They will get 7 Central south, Imparja southern and CDT (Ten network). Imparja says they are putting a transmitter in town so I would expect the other commercials to do the same. I expect that CBN10 to be shutdown because it is outside its licence area and that the other two southern NSW licence area are not present in Cobar.

AlanH

#30 DrP

DrP

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 16,740 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 07:54 PM

SBS HD is not necessarily a simulcast of SBS SD. SBS3 and SBS4 are not simulcasts of SBS1, they are simple service redirections or PID remapping and consume approx 15 kbit/sec each. It is not feasible to insert another program into SBS' ~19Mbit/sec mux. SBS is already pushing the depths of quality as it is. Adding another service would make it largely unwatchable (content aside!).

Community broadcasters already achieve good coverage with their existing digital service.

SBS' services are stat muxed. Inserting another service "at that city's transmitter" is far from a simple matter.

#31 nbound

nbound

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 778 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 08:43 PM

nbound,
What if community TV was given a stream on the SBS transmitter along with NITV. The only locations for community TV is mainland state capitals. Then there is a nationwide unallocated 6th channel in all areas. SBS currently simulcasts SBS HD and SBS1, SBS2 is a separate program stream with SBS3 and SBS4 are SBS1 simulcasts. It is quite feasible to insert the community TV signal into SBS's multiplexer at that city's transmitter. This is much cheaper than replacing their existing transmitters with a RF channel 10 transmitter. This will increase the coverage area of community TV to the whole licence area.

I did respond to this but the forum was down for a while and DrP beat me to it. Id also add that NITV is government owned also, making this a little bit less messy than forcing each community station to join SBS's multiplex.

As far as Cobar goes, there are currently no digital commercial transmitters in town. The CBN10 (Prime Southern) transmitter is in competition with the QQQ7 transmitter owned by Southern Cross which is radiating 7 network programs. The Southern Remote licence area covers Cobar. They will get 7 Central south, Imparja southern and CDT (Ten network). Imparja says they are putting a transmitter in town so I would expect the other commercials to do the same. I expect that CBN10 to be shutdown because it is outside its licence area and that the other two southern NSW licence area are not present in Cobar.

AlanH


Cobar (town) is Southern NSW license, Cobar surrounds is RC&E. There is no reason why Prime would move out, and no reason why WIN and SC10 cant move in (other than it probably isnt cost effective for them to compete with IMP/CDT). I would assume they would plan like any other dual license area transmitter and use separate bands. (Though it is feasible they could cram all 6 onto one).

#32 alanh

alanh

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 12,650 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 01:04 AM

nbound,
The Prime analog transmitter has been there for a long time and the others obviously didn't think it was worthwhile.

Southern Cross could easily complain about the competition from Prime because this is the remote licence area its not part of the southern NSW licence area. The programs are nearly identical. Except for advertising and local news SCCentral south will have transmitters in the following NSW remote towns;
Bourke, Brewarrina, Cobar, Lightning Ridge, Walgett, Wilcannia and a VAST coverage for homesteads and mines outside these towns. So the southern footprint,
http://www.acma.gov....ARD/pc=PC_90223 Remote licence area.

http://www.acma.gov....maps/la_169.pdf Southern NSW licence area shows none of the above towns are in that area.

The idea is to keep an unallocated channel on every transmitter site for future use.

AlanH

Edited by alanh, 06 March 2012 - 01:05 AM.


#33 nbound

nbound

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 778 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 01:04 PM

nbound,
The Prime analog transmitter has been there for a long time and the others obviously didn't think it was worthwhile.

Southern Cross could easily complain about the competition from Prime because this is the remote licence area its not part of the southern NSW licence area. The programs are nearly identical. Except for advertising and local news SCCentral south will have transmitters in the following NSW remote towns;
Bourke, Brewarrina, Cobar, Lightning Ridge, Walgett, Wilcannia and a VAST coverage for homesteads and mines outside these towns. So the southern footprint,
http://www.acma.gov....ARD/pc=PC_90223 Remote licence area.

http://www.acma.gov....maps/la_169.pdf Southern NSW licence area shows none of the above towns are in that area.

The idea is to keep an unallocated channel on every transmitter site for future use.

AlanH

These are not the only documents showing Cobar to be Sthn NSW, there are more, and if you really want I can dig them up too. I presume your sources above dont have the zoom or as it matches the town borders someone at ACMA has accidentally has overlaid the urban areas as the top image layer.

http://www.acma.gov....esc/la_169.html
http://maps.google.c...gm%2Fla_169.kmz
http://www.acma.gov...lphabetical.xls

Even check digital ready (place the marker within Cobar town).

Also see Nyngan on digitalready, planning to have all three Sthn NSW commercial stations despite being outside your claimed Sthn NSW borders.

Note: Some documents will say RC&E (usually RC&E specific ones though) also, this is because the license areas probably overlap at these points (which is why like Central Coast/Gold Coast, there are extra commercial stations serving these areas.)

Edited by nbound, 06 March 2012 - 01:05 PM.


#34 CWulf

CWulf

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 193 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 04:00 PM

It's pretty clear on Myswitch looking under the "Available channels for Cobar" link to "Technical Information for Cobar" what DST (and presumably ACMA) are planning for Cobar - a mix of Block A and B; IMP, QQQ, CDT and CBN but no Sthn NSW CTC or WIN digital services:

Edited by CWulf, 06 March 2012 - 04:01 PM.


#35 alanh

alanh

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 12,650 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 07:44 PM

CWulf
http://www.acma.gov....p_rce_may10.pdf
ABN6, SBS11, CDT32, QQQ28, IMP30. These allocations are prior to the digital restack. This is yet to be published by the ACMA.

The entries in the digital ready website is full of errors. For example the QQQ signal is owned by Southern Cross broadcasting not the Prime group. Why would you have a pair of transmitters with identical secondary 7 network programs?? I have asked the question of them.

AlanH

#36 beeblebrox

beeblebrox

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,558 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 08:02 PM

Gee if we don't have to have the argument with analh every year or so... 8 years on I would have thought we'd all got better things to do. Time and time again it has been shown that's his expertise if all theoretical and the real world doesn't exist in his spreadsheet.

I do agree with him there is no place of the below Ch6 crappy combos that still are supplied by all manufacturers including Hills, Matchmaster, Digitek, and every other manufacturers Lots less customers would have problems if they had at least the right or even almost right antenna for the job!!

#37 CWulf

CWulf

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 193 posts

Posted 06 March 2012 - 09:42 PM

Alan, you are really frustrating in your inability to admit you don't really know what is going on!

Duplicate 7s arent an error - the representation in MySwitch is because it's probably hard to automate in the too the unique scenario of common LCNs (will be interesting to see how that is resolved)! One set of net 7 programming is for QQQ/Southern Cross/Central 7 (note the SCA icon) and the other set, surprise surprise if for Prime/CBN.

You have quoted the RCEA DCP, find and quote the Sthn NSW DCP channels for Cobar then admit you are wrong.

Yes, it is illogical to duplicate Prime network 7 content and SCA net 7 content but that is what is happening in most licence area overlaps (Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast, Central Coast and ... Cobar!)

Beeblebrox - <shoulder shrug> maybe I live in hope of seeing a post from Alan where he admits he's not always right :(

#38 nbound

nbound

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 778 posts

Posted 07 March 2012 - 12:14 AM

Why would you have a pair of transmitters with identical secondary 7 network programs?? I have asked the question of them.

AlanH

The programme lineups wont be exactly the same; local(ish) news, national news (probably wont be sydney feed), informercials (and lack thereof), sport viewing times (and perhaps sport preferences AFL vs NRL?), and late night (>midnight) tv will probably all be somewhat different.

Edited by nbound, 07 March 2012 - 12:14 AM.


#39 DrP

DrP

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 16,740 posts

Posted 07 March 2012 - 05:48 AM

Quite true nbound. I recall that 7mate as carried by 7 QLD has varied considerably from 7mate as carried by 7 in the QLD metro area due to sport broadcast restrictions. The details can be seen in my freeview vs EIT thread. It's entirely conceivable that such variations would occur elsewhere.

#40 andrewlace

andrewlace

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 201 posts

Posted 11 March 2012 - 08:17 PM

In all politeness do not tell people what to install. Every customer who gets fm from their combination antenna must now install a band3 plus antenna? Sometimes people ignorantly demand a large antenna. You clearly do not work in the public sector where you give the customer what they want. It seems you also don't a lot of products that you have never tested.

dig2all,

I went to the Fracarro website not yours.

The following antennas fail AS 1417.1(Int)-2011;
Al6HD, Al18HD, Al23HD, Al30HD, Hills DL3, DL4, CA16GL, Fracarro 4E2, 4E3, 4DF (not Au ch6 but Au ch 2) Remove them from sale.There is now no locations which require any channel below channel 6 provided they have a digital receiver or set top box.

Fracarro 6E5 - 6E12, 11D5 - 11E12 single channel antennas are only suitable for monitoring individual transmitters,and the worst case large MATV systems which would be rare.


When I go to your website I wish to make the following comments which applies after the digital restack.

Your entire Log periodic range becomes redundant.

The broadband band 3 Yagi-Uda antennas are fine for group A, except for band 3 UHF combination which will not be required. Sigma combo is one of those.

The band 3 phased array you sell is not Fracarro, but Hills.

The Laceys catalogue shows the following Fracarro products which do not appear in the Fracarro international catalogue

10 GAMMA/R Au ch. 20-31 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10 DELTA Au ch. 24-36 11dB gain 20dB f/b ratio.

10 DELTA/R Au ch. 24-36 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10/3539/R Au ch. 28-42 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10/4046/R Au ch. 34-49 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10/4753/R Au ch. 40-57 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10/5461/R Au ch. 46-67 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

10/6269/R Au ch. 55-75 11dB gain 24dB f/b ratio.

The only ones on the Fracarro catalogue narrower than Au channel 20 - 75
E21 - E26 470 - 518 MHz Not used for TV in Australia
E26 - E34 518 - 582 MHz = AU 27 - 35
E34 - E46 582 - 678 MHz = AU 36 - 48
E46 - E69 678 - 862 MHz Will not be used for TV in Australia after the restack

are shown in the Fracarro international catalogue.

None of the above frequency ranges match individual UHF groups or even pairs of groups.

Their new range using circular elements are a worry here because Fracarro do not quote the vertical and horizontal beam width. These antennas may have trouble rejecting signals of the other polarisation on the same channels.

Masthead amplifiers
No amplifier should now amplify any frequency below 174 MHz, outside the range 526 - 820 MHz which will have to change the UHF top limit to 694 MHz when the the restack occurs.


"Tech Tip:

A Fracarro channel cut antenna provides substantial improvements in gain,

front to back ratio and beamwidth, providing results where other antennas fail."
http://www.laceys.tv...L_D1_lowres.pdf page 11


"the hills combination band 3/4 antennas you mention might seem mechanically interesting but their performance is awful - is this a reference antenna for anything?"
Lastly do not rubbish any competitor unless you can backup your claim. What characteristic of their performance is awful and what is the comparison reading?
As for reference antennas if you go to the CAI's website the LPAs were the worst performers. The UK has no band 3 TV and considering that 50 % of the Australian population require band 3 makes your claim largely irrelevant. An antenna is not a reference antenna unless the frequency range and polarisation matches the transmitter being used.
Fracarro is not the only manufacturer making wideband UHF antennas and none should be used here. This may become increasingly important as the broadcasters try and put more programs into the existing digital TV channels.
Alanh



#41 HillsTas

HillsTas

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 02:49 PM

WOW, a simple post on some new antennas we release and it turns into another argument.

Can I just say, without being involved AT ALL with this argument, that the Tru-Spec antennas have been released because:

1: These have no nuts bolts or rivets (except the mount bracket). all elements are press moulded.
2: No sharp edges - All the elements are rounded and the ends are rolled over.
3: Sealed Baluns - nothing gets in, nothing gets out!
4: Reflector lock - until you see one, you wont think this is a "feature", so get one and have a look.
5: Gain figures quoted are realistic figures! not MAX figures

I know there are people on here who just want to be cynical of Hills products, and that is their prerogative, but have a look at these antennas, as an ex installer, I can see some real benefits with the ease of setup and longevity these antennas have.
For those installers out there that are reading this, all I can say is get your hands on one and see for yourself. If you are in Tassie, I can arrange this if you want.
For those of you who are aligned with other brands, I ask that you try not to rubbish these antennas until you have the facts.

Cheers

Dave

#42 M'bozo

M'bozo

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 2,832 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 08:47 PM

WOW, a simple post on some new antennas

adelaidenow article.





You must have missed the LP4.

I've been testing this up here on Mt Moombil (Ch 30.33.36.38.39 ) and its got exactly the same performance as the LP45 on these channels .

Obviously this is as high as its going to work but its going to be fine for the B and C groups.


Not so, it would seem. Did some testing with a LP4 today.

Edited by M'bozo, 22 March 2012 - 08:50 PM.


#43 alanh

alanh

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 12,650 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 01:37 AM

M'bozo,
All the above tests say is that in the situation is this is the quality of the received signals. It does not compare these antennas to any others put in the same location receiving the same signals. If the tests are done at different times the signals can vary particularly those coming long distance. You do not know how other antennas will react.

I would also like to know if you have measured any of the other products on the Confederation of Antenna Industries (UK) tested list http://www.cai.org.u...&cid=6&catid=37

http://www.cai.org.u...hmarking-scheme describes the grading system. I notice it does not grade them from best to worst or vice versa.
Instead they are categorising as the other manufacturers do, indicating antennas are for prime or fringe areas.

The UK is currently planning their own digital restack which is different to ours. http://www.dtvforum....howtopic=102874

AlanH