What's With Free TV

[ke7trp]

Bear. It short, Its hams that run wireless 54G internet routers, The kind you might have at home, with high gain antennas.  They connect them all together in a Mesh, so all hams have a private wireless network. This will work on your phone, Laptop, computer, tablet, all over town. Its free and you can get high speed internet from the private net. 

They have free software for the blue linksys 54G router that can crank the power up to a watt or 2...

C

[Pete, WA2CWA]

http://www.hsmm-mesh.org/
Read the legal information regarding HSMM-MESH™
This isn't your ultimate "ball of string".

[Steve - K4HX]

One of the nodes in the mesh network has to connect to the internet for all users of the mesh to get internet access. The person running that node will likely be paying. Nothing is free.

Then there are the legal issue as Pete pointed out. The web site makes it pretty clear.


= = = = =

Additionally, there are certain things that HSMM-MESH™ is not:

 • it is NOT a replacement for your home internet connection ◦ being an Amateur Radio network, it can only carry traffic that is allowed under FCC Part 97 rules

 • several types of internet traffic violate these rules
 
 • also, it is NOT a replacement for your home internet connection

 • finally, it is N O T a replacement for your home internet connection

 • and by the way, it most certainly CANNOT be used in any way with your business network
 
I hope I have made myself clear. If the internet traffic contains data types that are already being used over ham radio such as Echolink or findu.com, that is perfectly acceptable.  I am not a lawyer so I will not attempt to enumerate all the types of data that are or are not permissible under Part 97.  It is your responsibility to comply with the terms of your license.  If you question the permissibility of your internet traffic, it is probably best to not use it. This is the kind of traffic that your home internet connection is better suited for. You probably have Part 15 WiFi access to the internet. Use that instead.
 
Section 97.113.a.5 states: No amateur station shall transmit communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services.
 
This is what Part 15 is for: your day-to-day non-ham internet activity. HSMM-MESH™ on the other hand is, as are all ham radio activites, a service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

[Tom WA3KLR]

With the change to digital, in town,   we get 4 channels fairly well with an outdoor antenna,  LOS to Mt. Sutro in San Fransisco (about 1600 Ft above surrounding terrain).  

The switch to DTV has been a giant step backward ...   very very poor reception on average,  vs analog.  Believe that the Broadcasters and the public were sold a bill of goods.

Vic,

I plugged your zip code (xxxxx-xxxx) into the FCC DTV reception program.  I have found it to be fairly accurate here.  It shows 20 strong rf channels for your location and 1 moderate channel.

Attached is a Word page on which I pasted a screen print of the FCC results.

You can click on each station listed (on the website) and see the coverage map which shows the analog and digital coverage.  The few I looked at did have somewhat lesser coverage than analog.  One PBS station had greater digital coverage than analog.  Most stations here have about the same or better digital coverage.  I’m surprised that your outdoor antenna reception is so much worse than predicted.  Is your HDTV an early model?

[Opcom]

I  think this might be the missing piece.

"Free TV" - I saw it in the drug store. It is a little red USB dongle thing. Bubble-card pack, says "Rabbit TV" on it, boasts hundreds of "channels"..

http://freecast.com/news-blog/2013/01/11/rabbit-tv-review-the-truth-about-rabbit-tv/

It supposedly knows or finds "all" the internet TV programs and bring order to chaos for the customer's selections, assuming it uses the free sites.

But what I seen on the internet for free TV sites watchable on PC are all right, but after you have taken 45 minutes of programming, It cuts you off and asks you to join. $$ ca-ching!! Not very expensive but another thing to pay for.

Perhaps the "Free TV dongle danglers" have a deal with some of the providers and it works all day long, and even includes commercials etc.. So it's just a little program and some code. Who knows what else it contains on the dongle by way of onerous user agreements.

Instead of paying for that dongle, It is possible in some cases to use a download helper and remove cookies and history between downloads and to get more programs that way. Too much work for the value, therefore the weak protection.

Or just be fair with them and watch 45 min. a day. Not a bad limit for TV anyway.

But then it is only TV so beyond downloading a few missing free episodes of the original star trek here..

I never investigated more after that and that's all I know about it free TV watching on the internet. Which is not very much!

I'm not paying $10 for the dongle product. They are $2.15 here:
http://www.dhgate.com/wholesale/usb+internet+radio+tv+dongle.html

Bought a "magic Jack" seemingly of similar quality and manufacture so as to help me take calls hands-free on the cellphone while driving. I regret that lousy performing thing which has such weak modulation it could not be heard on the car stereo over road noise with the VOL up all the way. so I do without calls, and without drugstore gimcracks.

TYVM
YMMV

[K6IC]

Tom!!   Thanks for taking the time,  and ...

sorry for the reply delay ...   was watching TV!

Well,  all things are complex.    First,  the FCC address is work.  It does have a considerably better view of Sutro,  and an old indoor antenna works acceptably there.

The official residence is in low hills -- only about 260 ft MSL -- and this location looks through (primarily)  the departures from Oakland International,  and about all General aviation traffic around the Bay.

The TV is an early one,  and believe that they are often deaf,  and much more succeptible to Multi-Path interference.

BUT,  still,  the difference between Analog AM Visual /FM Aural and DTV is SO striking at the home QTH.  For crying out LOUD,  the old analog signals were SO strong that you could almost get an RF burn from the 12" QIX Clip-Lead Antenna,  and  the DTV almost requires one to reorient the antenna for every station.   Also cloud cover does seem to affect signals.

The crank-up tower would be a better spot for the TV antenna,  but  this tower is usually down,  or at varying heights.  I should toss the TV,  antenna,  and coax,  and move the antenna location ...   but,  at home and in the center of nowhere,  the signals seem very,  very weak.

Have an early Converter box,  but that does not behave any differently at home.   The days of being able to place a TV in any room,  and chuck the clip lead antenna behind the TV and get 35 channels as if it was piped in are long gone,  and the cost of the switch to the Broadcaters and public is amazingly large ...   The multiple channels (at least in the case of PBS)  is a great benefit of DTV,  ease of reception is NOT.

 The remote QTH is hyper sensitive to diurnal variations -- hours around SR and SS  disrupt the several signals that do leak in here,  when  Analog was so,  so ....   SO much better.  Also,  at this non-LOS location there are many many heavy commercial aircraft on high approach to OAK and SFO at something like 11K ft MSL and about 9K for the two different airports which seem to have a huge impact on the usually weak DTV  signals.

And so on ...  time to either shut up or buy into Sat TV.

  Thanks!   Vic

[W2VW]

It is frustrating to have a perfectly good television reception situation disappear only to be replaced by something which appears to be flawed.

One thing to remember is the rules have changed. 8VSB (which is of course AM) can do some tricky things which were not seen with the older broadcast standard.

Sometimes it is more about what the antenna is pointing away from than what it is pointed to. A high gain antenna may not be called for when expected signals are quite strong. Problem is the lower gain antenna will have plenty of response to airplane flutter and terrestrial echoes.

I've seen a few cases where extremely strong undesired signals will ruin reception. Sometimes a simple attenuator will rectify the situation. A spectral shot is very useful with 8VSB. Troublesome channels will show up with peaks and valleys across the 6 mhz bandwidth verses what should look like wideband noise with a carrier on the low frequency end. Re-aiming the antenna can sometimes flatten the frequency response of the desired channel even though the amplitude will be relatively less.

As mentioned receivers have come a long way. Later sets also have much better hardware/software which makes echoes much less of a problem. I have had occasion to try many different converters and receivers. The performance varies quite a bit with older units usually losing by a wide margin. This includes professional grade demodulators.

In the home unterminated cable fed by signal splitters can also raise heck. They make great notch filters.

One more trick is to switch to vertical polarization. Many tv stations are now using at least some vert. pol. That will go a long way if you suffer from tons of aircraft flying in holding patterns.

[KA3EKH]

The first generation ATSC receivers sucked, the original firmware was incapable of dealing with any multipath issues along with any issues in linear response across the channel. Keeping flat and linear response across the entire channel is a big deal with ATSC all transmitters have provisions for doing automatic real time corrections to try to keep the signal flat and that was for a while a big controversy in the TV world if you should keep your transmitter running in the auto pre correct mode where it continually changes the response of the exciter for best performance or just do an auto run set up every now and then for pre correction. Second generation ATSC decoders included firmware for multipath and improved ability for high levels of signal. Third and fourth generation devices have the ability to work with ATSC or Quam so they can be used for over the air or cable with the older sets not having the ability to build channel tables that include both but the newest sets I have seen can do a mixture of Quam cable and ATSC off air. So unlike radio or audio where you have people who insist that older is better the old first and second generation, and that includes all tube type HDTV are dogs compared to the newer sets. All that said I still would like to find one of those old high dollar zenith sixteen by nine vacuum tube table top sets just to have around.

[K6IC]

OK,  Thanks David and Ray and Tom,   for the added info.

The home QTH site is not great,  as there are trees that are not in the path to Sutro,  but do move,  and could create additional multipath issues,  and there are probably still about three directions from which the TV signals leak in.

There are no splitters,  as there seems to be almost nothing available to split.

Would buy a new DTV,  but there seems to be less information available regarding OTA performance than in years past,   and even if a given set even had the (program) Guide function.  AND,  when shopping for a set,  it has always been impossible to look at the set's manual or ever see THE remote to see if the Guide button is there.  OTA seems to be an after-thought,  or no thought at all.

So the above makes it a bit difficult to find a set that has a reasonable probalility of acutally working in my locations ...  should look around more on the Net to see if there are ratings for OTA performance and functionality...

At the remote QTH,  often pointing the antenna away from the direction of the transmitter does help,  but increases variability by a large amount.

I have wondered if DTV stations reduced power for night operation,  as propagation seems better during the day,  and had felt that UHF prop was generally poorer during the day ...   OR,  this may be more evidence that multipath signal levels and RX multipath performance is the largest factor is that location as well (?).

OK,  know that this topic runs counter to the purpose of this site,  THANKS Fred for bringing it up,  and to the site Owners for allowing this exchange.  There may be other places on the web where this conversation might take place,  but do not know of one with DTV Engineering folks as members that would allow or speak with end-users.  Thanks!,    Vic

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Sometimes a turnstile antenna, in this case a vertical/horizontal polarization, can aid in reducing multipath. Circular polarization might also be an option. If you shop for a particular model, most manufacturers have their specs and operating/setup manuals/guides available for review on their web sites. Being informed is always a good idea if you're in a buying mood.

[KA3EKH]

The Samsung SIR-351 a real good receiver and they are selling cheap on EBay just make certain to get the remote. I have a couple and they work great. Also Sony makes a strange DVD/HDTV box that works good only cannot think of the number off the top of my head. But I do have a couple of the 351 boxes and know they have a good signal level utility and a program guide. Things to stay away from are the US Digital ATSC boxes that Wal-Mart sold by the thousands and the other little welfare boxes that the government was giving out. Also avoid old commercial demods because a lot of them won’t work with the newer streams or PID assignments so they won’t help you. Just look for a used Samsung 351 and pair it with an old tube type computer monitor and for under a couple hundred bucks you can have a high quality all be it ugly HDTV system. The Samsung has a S-VGA output along with the component and composite outputs.

[K6IC]

Pete,

Thanks for the ideas on antennas,  may look at some of those approaches.

And,  Ray,  thanks for the pointers to a couple of RXes.  Will look on the bay.

Ultimately,  may just go to Sat TV... hate to be on the hook for two years,   and almost everyone I know spends more than $100/mo on Sat TV.  And with several locations,  it is more of a problem.

Thanks again,  Vic

[Tom WA3KLR]

I'm getting 26 r.f. channels now (Feb. 2014) with a total of 79 sub-channels.

A pdf of my Excel list is attached below:

[W4EWH]

The high def pictures are really beautiful.

It seems that my membership in the buggy whip society is about to pay off: I have a Sony "old" TV, which needs a converter to get HDTV signals.

I was thinking of buying an HDTV, in Spring when the prices are low - but I just saw an ad for a new, improved "Ultra High" definition system, which will replace HDTV.

I can now pat myself on the  back - I don't ride the technology wave; I shop in the trough behind the wave!

Bill, W1AC

[W4EWH]

... fire up the 1952 Admiral 5 tube and listen to the all news station on 780, WBBM.   Octal tubes.

Ultimate trivia: help me to remember the "All American Five"!

50C5 Rectifier
35W4 Audio amplifier
?
?
?

Bill, W1AC

[Pete, WA2CWA]

The high def pictures are really beautiful.

It seems that my membership in the buggy whip society is about to pay off: I have a Sony "old" TV, which needs a converter to get HDTV signals.

I was thinking of buying an HDTV, in Spring when the prices are low - but I just saw an ad for a new, improved "Ultra High" definition system, which will replace HDTV.

I can now pat myself on the  back - I don't ride the technology wave; I shop in the trough behind the wave!

Bill, W1AC

It still has a long way to go.

"In August 2012, the Consumer Electronics Association introduced the term Ultra High Definition, partly defined as resolutions of "at least 3,840x2,160 pixels". The idea was to replace the term 4K. The CEA's name lasted less than a day, as Sony then announced it was going to call the technology "4K Ultra High Definition". This is the term now used by most other TV manufacturers."

With video on a TV, the difference between 4K/UHD and 1080p/HD resolution is really hard to see. I watched a 65" 4K TV and a 65" HDTV side by side with the same blu-ray player movie playing and I couldn't tell any difference other then looking down at the price tags.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

... fire up the 1952 Admiral 5 tube and listen to the all news station on 780, WBBM.   Octal tubes.

Ultimate trivia: help me to remember the "All American Five"!

50C5 Rectifier
35W4 Audio amplifier
?
?
?

Bill, W1AC

There were a number of "All American Five" versions:

True 5-tube transformerless version

The very first set of metal tubes produced included 6-volt heater tubes that could be used to make a transformer-powered 6-tube radio. RCA released their first set of these metal octal tubes for this design in 1939, using 12.6-volt 150 mA heaters instead. The original design used the following tubes:

    Converter: 12A8
    IF amplifier: 12K7
    Detector and first audio amplifier: 12Q7
    Audio power output: 50L6
    Rectifier: 35Z4.

This series had the grids brought out as top caps on the signal tubes, and the 35Z4 did not have a provision for a dial light.

Single ended tube variant

AC/DC designs for 110-117V usually used 150mA heater current; European designs used the "U"-series tubes with 100mA.

The tube array in the early days of single ended octal tubes was:

    Converter: 12SA7
    IF amplifier: 12SK7
    Detector and first audio amplifier: 12SQ7
    Audio power output: 50L6
    Rectifier: 35Z5

These sets were first marketed in late 1939. Canadian sets would sometimes use a 35L6 in place of the 50L6, as parts of Canada used 110 volts as a design standard. Because areas near Niagara Falls had 25 Hz power, some Canadian sets had slightly larger filter capacitors.

The "Loctal" variant

The tube line up of the Loctal tubes was:

    Converter: 14Q7
    IF amplifier: 14A7
    Detector and first audio amplifier: 14B6
    Audio power output: 50A5
    Rectifier: 35Y4 or 35Z3

Miniature tubes

After the Second World War the set was redesigned to use miniature 7-pin tubes and the line up became:

    Converter: 12BE6
    IF amplifier: 12BA6
    Detector and first audio amplifier: 12AV6 or 12AT6
    Audio power output: 50C5 or the less-common 50B5
    Rectifier: 35W4

The 50C5 (50B5 with different pin-out) was introduced in 1948, to address concerns that high peak voltage between adjacent pins would promote socket breakdown.[7]

In the postwar period, some makers built sets with a mixture of miniature and octal tubes.

"Power-Saver" version

Another low-power variation changed the tube heaters to run on 100 milliamperes rather than 150 milliamperes. These tubes took a little longer to warm up:

    Converter: 18FX6
    IF amplifier: 18FW6
    Detector and first audio amplifier: 18FY6
    Audio power output: 32ET5 or 34GD5
    Rectifier: 36AM3

[W4EWH]

EVERYBODY is talking about this new thing to get free TV and tell the cable/Sat company to fly a kite. ... Soo.....we have the local HD UHF stations. What are they offering?

I think, mostly, they are offering proof of P.T. Barnum's maxim that there's one born every minute!

Really, I saw this a month ago, and I laughed myself silly: it's aimed at twenty-somethings who grew up with cable TV and aren't aware that there is any other way to deliver TV signals!

Bill, W1AC

[N2DTS]

I would just get TV over the air, I put up an antenna years ago, but my wife likes all those stupid shows.
I like a few, but would not bother to watch if she did not have them on.

We want phone and internet, so the cable comes with it.

Interesting thing on NPR Friday about how the US pays 7 times as much for much slower internet then the rest of the world, where a gigabit is normal, for $25.00 a month.

Since most people get internet over cable, the speed is restricted due to the cable.
Verizon (fios) wants to only be in the wireless market, where the big money is, with little outlay.

Verizon wants to not be rated as a utility, and NOT have to provide service to everyone, and has given up expanding fios unless forced to do so in the states that care.
They made deals to provide service to most if not all people to get rate increases, then dropped expansion of fios like a hot potato, as it costs a lot of money to run fiber to every house, and to do the in house work.
$1500.00 per customer to start.

I think Verizon wants to sell off the entire network and just go wireless, they are likely just waiting for a buyer with the cash.

Another thing I heard is the recent court ruling about how its now legal to slow down/restrict/delay internet traffic from the another company. Say you have comcast and do not use their home security service, but use ADT, comcast can restrict the speed so its so slow as to be worthless.
Same with any other service, like U tube, etc.

The supreme court ruled that is now OK.
I do not think it was the liberal wing that voted for it.

Verizon and comcast donate enough money to the people in Washington that they get their own way with the FCC as well.
Another supreme court ruling says corporations are like people and can give as much as they want to whoever they want.
I would expect any over the air TV broadcasts to go away before long.
Comcast wants everyone to be a customer, and Verizon wants the rf spectrum for 4G.



 

[W2VW]

Dave,

I looked at the spectrum analyzer plot I did last summer and I can see the rf on Ch 49 but it is about 19 dB below what the TV will detect.

Not anymore. There's a Doherty 8-VSB transmitter in Waterford, N.J. with about a megawatt looking at you. Bam.

Edit:

I see you have it listed now : )  The old site was PW but was on the highest man made structure in New Jersey.

Fun to see what people receive. Thanks for taking the time to post that.

The guy who runs rabbitears.com is a ham and now works for the FCC.

[Tom WA3KLR]

Dave,

My Samsung HDTV reports a 29 dB S/N for 62-1 (rf channel 49), approximately a 21 - 30 dB increase since "the last summer" remark.  The best view of the horizon I have here is in that direction.

[W2VW]

Dave,

My Samsung HDTV reports a 29 dB S/N for 62-1 (rf channel 49), approximately a 33 dB increase since "the last summer" remark.  The best view of the horizon I have here is in that direction.

That will change again after the spectrum repacking. Most likely for the better.

[KA0HCP]

Ancient thread revived, but issue of transmitting Internet/Web over ham frequencies....

Ham radio may not be used for business/pecuniary interest

Music is not authorized

Rebroadcasting other services

Use of amateur frequencies when other FCC authorized services are appropriate

Access a service which you have a paid subscription

Example...Using this to
-Check availability and price of a book at Amazon...Not legal
-Watching a music video at YouTube...Not legal
-Watch CNN/Fox/NBC news...Not legal
-Download an update for latest Ham Radio Deluxe....not legal

This stuff isn't legal on HF, and it isn't legal at 900Mhz.

Really technical point in adapting commercial routers to ham bands....
-Are your settings made to transmit your Callsign, and not just plain IP addresses or Alias names?

[W2VW]

Bing Crosby's daughter shot J.R.

[WB3LEQ]

Anybody else on here familiar with "Filmon TV?
http://www.filmon.com/tv/live