Astra 1N tests - latest chat

[Huevos]

I have to say the whole rights issue/spot beam saga is a joke.

That's if you believe it. Personally I'm an optimist that doesn't believe in conspiracy theories.

 

[BLUEPLATINUM]

Yes but.... ok i am the rights owners, i say to you your broadcasting my stuff in the opne, what are you doing to make sure it is only for teh audience you have paid me for the rights? what would you say with what you know about the spots and how the satilletes are used and including terristal coverage and cable coverage

But in that case they are only giving lip service to the whole issue. There are many "distribution channels" (official and unofficial) but only primary one is being taken account of.

 

[BLUEPLATINUM]

And that one thing guarantees the amount of spotbeams in use can only increase over the next few years.

The technology must be amazing - how can the shared frequency transmissions not flood each other at the satellite location ?

 

[Analoguesat]

The technology must be amazing - how can the shared frequency transmissions not flood each other at the satellite location ?

In this case I would guess its probably done on separate frequency uplinks - the onboard electronics then processes the signals and splits them across the transmit dishes.

If you think that a big satellite could be processing uplinks and retransmitting downlinks on 50 or more transponders across multiple transmission dishes all of which must be done in real time with no errors, the onboard technology is incredible.

Google Eutelsat skyplex for some more info about this sort of tech.

Things have moved on a bit since Astra 1A (RIP) was launched in 1988 with just 16 transponders on board!

 

[park_gate]

Has anyone got any theories as to why it is taking so long for the 1N Channel 4 HD transmission to go live on the Sky and Freesat EPGs ?

Yes.

They are probable waiting for 5 to get their channels going then announce
the lauch at the same time. Might even see some adds on the TV.

But it is only a theory.

Terry

 

[Huevos]

i am the rights owners, i say to you your broadcasting my stuff in the opne, what are you doing to make sure it is only for teh audience you have paid me for the rights?

When the material is purchased the contract would state how it will be broadcast. If an agreement can't be reached there would be no contract and no sale, and the rights-holder would get zero, and the broadcaster would just go off to another rights holder and buy their stuff, and we'd all happily watch "The Mentalist" instead of "CSI Miami". The only time the rights holder is going to have the upper hand is when there is scarcity, or a monopoly, such as Premier League football.

 

[welshman234]

7720 is now transmitting channel5 encrypted on my Sky boxHD. The box was in stanby when the kids turned it on today....

 

[welshman234]

In this case I would guess its probably done on separate frequency uplinks - the onboard electronics then processes the signals and splits them across the transmit dishes.

If you think that a big satellite could be processing uplinks and retransmitting downlinks on 50 or more transponders across multiple transmission dishes all of which must be done in real time with no errors, the onboard technology is incredible.

Google Eutelsat skyplex for some more info about this sort of tech.


Things have moved on a bit since Astra 1A (RIP) was launched in 1988 with just 16 transponders on board!

So if I read the literature correctly is it the case that frequency reuse depends on enough uplinks being available. For example I am a broadcaster say in Austria and an uplink to Astra 1N 28.2 is done and sent down to Austria. Simultaneously an uplink and downlink process occurs in the UK on the same frequency. Result?? Mr Schmidt in Austria gets his downlink but no UK tv and Mr Smith in UK cannot get Austrian tv. So for frequency reuse to work then there would have to lots of uplinking sites in Europe to prevent people like me receiving UK tv,is my interpretation right or wrong??

 

[Huevos]

In this case I would guess its probably done on separate frequency uplinks - the onboard electronics then processes the signals and splits them across the transmit dishes.

I think you are missing the point. Frequency re-use, multiple spot-beams etc. increase efficiency of downlink only. You would still need enough bandwidth at the uplink stage. So if you have 4 spot-beams on one frequency that does not does not require any increase to the downlink spectrum, but does require 4x the uplink spectrum. Add to that there are now satellites downlinking in Ka-band (especially for internet) making Ka-band uplinking frequencies ever more scarce.

Anyway, in the long run this means new uplinking bands would be needed, and at higher frequency, needing completely new hardware both on the ground and on the spacecraft, and ITU red-tape that implements those frequencies for this purpose.

 

[andrewcrawford]

When the material is purchased the contract would state how it will be broadcast. If an agreement can't be reached there would be no contract and no sale, and the rights-holder would get zero, and the broadcaster would just go off to another rights holder and buy their stuff, and we'd all happily watch "The Mentalist" instead of "CSI Miami". The only time the rights holder is going to have the upper hand is when there is scarcity, or a monopoly, such as Premier League football.

nope it doesnt work liek that, well your maybe right about the premier league, but take channel 5 for instance, they lost house because sky outbid them, but refuse to lose csi because it gets them high viewers ratings so they will try to do aything to keep it so the rights holder will want it locked down, channel 5 are fine jsut now because there encypted but once they go free to air the rights holder will want to know ther eproperty isnt been viewed everywherre, and if they didnt beleive channel5 where trying to lock it down as best as possible then they might say sorry we not sellign to you anymore

 

[Llew]

7720 is now transmitting channel5 encrypted on my Sky boxHD. The box was in stanby when the kids turned it on today....

Yup, all encrypted now on that TP.

 

[satesco]

How is stopping foreigners watching your national TV channels going to protect your cultural identity?

True, no one can stop someone to see a program if he has technical means to see that program or others.But in some countries there is a cultural politics to fight against foreing influence against its citizens.Although it is a poncif propagantistic, electoral,he has influence in countries that feel threatened by a foreign language and culture.The spark gap example is France, which feels threatened by the danger of the 60 Anglo-Saxon dominance over that he held until after World War II.For this reason there is a law that prohibits the use of english terms when there is a the equivalent in french.For example, instead of PC,the french say ordinator.They can not accept losing its position of power, at least culturally, as they had before the last war.
As you already know,although Europe came under the same umbrella of economic and political, but cultural and economic interests still separate the EU countries.Fortunately, economic interests will diminish or even dispel prejudices national and cultural of many countries that believe that by law can decide what to see its citizens.
In many European countries there is the bad habit of synchronize foreign films in their own language .
I do not want to capture a debate on this issue on a topic more technical and which has another theme.

 

[Huevos]

in some countries there is a cultural politics to fight against foreing influence against its citizens.

I'm British so my culture is:

• drinking tea
• eating fish and chips, bangers and mash, jellied eels, bubble & squeak, black pudding, spotted dick or a ploughman's
• wearing bowler hats and carrying an umbrella
• playing cricket, soccer, lawn tennis, golf and rugby
• listening to The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Elton John, George Michael and The Spice Girls
• sing Jerusalem, land of hope and glory, and god save the queen
• and making a bonfire and burning Guy Fawkes every 5th of November.

How would allowing a foreigner see any of those things weaken that cultural heritage?

 

[Dark-Sider]

Well, the broadcasting rights discussion is a difficult topic. The rights holders want money for every viewer that is able to receive the program. If your broadcast reaches only GB you pay less then if you broadcast all over europe. In case of paytv viewer numbers are easily counted (just count the subscribers). If you have more subscribers you would have to pay more for rights but also get more income because you sold more subscriptions. For FreeTV, which is financed thru tax and or ads the calculation is not that easy. The BBC only gets funds from UK nationals and thru advertisement. But those funds don't increase if you broadcast all over europe. Companies that advertise on freeTV mostly do this for the intended local market - a company trying to advertise a british product for the british market won't pay for russian viewers.

If it was that simple, payTV could easily be available across europe - but... Rights holders want to sell their stuff to other european markets, too. They can sell their stuff more easily if they forbid sky.uk to accept subscribers from france, so canal+ france has a monopoly for content distribution in france. Sicne the rights holder can guarantee canal+ that it gets the exclusive rights for france, they can take more money.

At the end it comes all down to licensing costs, not to protect your own culture. Every broadcasting company would be happy to broadcast across europe - if the price was right.

bye
Darky

 

[Shrubsole]

You forgot us saying "Gord blimey Mary Poppins" in a Dick Van Dike English accent.

 

[Lazarus]

I'm British so my culture is:

• drinking tea
• eating fish and chips, bangers and mash, jellied eels, bubble & squeak, black pudding, spotted dick or a ploughman's
• wearing bowler hats and carrying an umbrella
• playing cricket, soccer, lawn tennis, golf and rugby
• listening to The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Elton John, George Michael and The Spice Girls
• sing Jerusalem, land of hope and glory, and god save the queen
• and making a bonfire and burning Guy Fawkes every 5th of November.

How would allowing a foreigner see any of those things weaken that cultural heritage?

My dear fellow, you forgot one:

• Living in Spain

PS: Did you know, the French have no word for "Entrepreneur" ?

 

[strs65]

PS: Did you know, the French have no word for "Entrepreneur" ?

Because the word is French?

 

[Lazarus]

Because the word is French?

Errm, yes ................. that is rather the point: This was one of the classic "Bush-isms" of a few years ago

 

[strs65]

Ah, ok! Didn't know that...

 

[satesco]

How would allowing a foreigner see any of those things weaken that cultural heritage?

This time the discussion takes a very special twist,and in a certain way, much exaggerated.Don't get me wrong, I do not plead for such arguments and for this idea.But this idea is in the head of nationalist politicians who do not take into account the economic arguments that well described by @Dark-Sider.
It should open another topic for such a theme and after users reaction it become even juicy