Response
Comments on the document entitled 'Review of Competition: Broadcast Transmission Services', dated 9th September 2003.
I have 23 years experience as a BBC and Crown Castle engineer working on transmission related investigations, operations, and projects, until 2001. I am a not a employee or member of any company. My interests are purely professional and personal, and are not in any way commercial.
I welcome the proposals, but wish to point out three facts which do not appear to have been considered:
1. Some of the Crown Castle and ntl masts are already fully loaded with antennas (or is it antennae?), and safety and/or space considerations would prevent the installation of anything that would significantly increase the mast loading at the heights likely to be required for broadcast services. I am not a structural or antenna engineer, but I expect that the main reason for this will be the increasing number of non-broadcast telecommunications antennae that are installed as the result of site sharing agreements with companies such as mobile 'phone companies. The market for mast-space was such that additional small telecoms towers were installed at a few sites. I am not entirely sure, but I expect that the sites referred to are mainly some of those with tall masts near large centres of population.
2. Where any new TV services share the same part of the UHF band as existingservices, antenna sharing may be technically possible.
3. It is not entirely true that the AM waveband cannot be transmitted from television masts. A very small number of TV towers or masts have long-wire AM antennae attached to them.
I hope the above information will be of some use. It should be verified by Crown Castle or ntl.
Chris Dale