On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 16:24:52h +0000, Ron wrote:

Maybe inferior American water takes long to boil anyway compared with
'proper' Bwitish water

Depending on the municipality, the water in the US could have an awful
lot less chlorine (possibly none) than that supplied by one of the big
English water companies.

J G Miller wrote:

Depending on the municipality, the water in the US could have an awful
lot less chlorine (possibly none) than that supplied by one of the big
English water companies.

Not to mention that commie plot FLOURIDATION.

P O E! P O E! P O E!

:-) (does it really need one?)

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM
My high blood pressure medicine reduces my midichlorian count. :-(

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 16:19:04h +0000, Geoffrey S. Mendelson asked:

J G Miller wrote:

Carrying a PRI relay of BBC World Service is far cheaper than paying
for NPR programming, so many smaller public radio stations prefer this
option for obvious reasons.

Didn't the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation help pay for it?

I could be wrong but I do not think that they specifically put any
money into BBC World Service on PRI affiliates. The partnership
between BBC World Service and PRI arose partly out of a joint news
program from Boston and WGBH "The World", and in response to
the BBC stopping their HF service to North America.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is active in funding a lot
of public radio and TV programming via the CPB for PBS programs
and directly with NPR, and with American Public Media (whose programs
are heard on both NPR affliates and PRI affliates).

In message , Bill Wright
writes
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
David Looser wrote:
The original plan, drawn up in the early '60s, was to re-engineer
Bands 1 and 3 for 625-line operation once the 405-line service was
switched off; but it never happened. I guess that the powers that be
thought that the spectrum could be more usefully used for other purposes.
More likely they thought that getting the free TV from France was
too
much competition. UHF only TV's could not receive it. Geoff.

Do many people on the south coast actually bother with French
transmissions? I didn't see many south-facing aerials when I ventured
into that neck of the woods.

I'm pretty sure that 'normal' UK sets could never really receive French
signals.

On 405-lines, we could certainly get the French positive mod 819-line,
14MHz wide signals - but these were displayed as two stretched, tall
images, side-by-side. And, of course, there was no sound, as the sound
(AM) was 11.15MHz HF or LF (depending on the channel number). Under
conditions of strong sporadic-E propagation, Band 1 French signals were
receivable in the UK at considerable distances and, in fringe areas,
could totally swamp the wanted signal.

On 625-line PAL, UK-standard sets can't really make anything at all of
the French positive mod, AM sound 625-line signals (SECAM if colour).
--
Ian

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:48:28 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

I don't think anybody ever passed a law that said interference could
only make the signal go upwards. In both video polarities there are
black and white fishes. The white ones dominate visually.

d

So why were we told that one of the great advantages of 625 was that the
interference would be black?

Probably a marketing person.

d

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"hwh" wrote in message
...
On 2/6/12 1:16 PM, David Looser wrote:

The original plan, drawn up in the early '60s, was to re-engineer
Bands 1 and 3 for 625-line operation once the 405-line service was
switched off; but it never happened. I guess that the powers that be
thought that the spectrum could be more usefully used for other
purposes.

Of course it could, but harmonizing spectrum with the continent might
have been beneficial as well.

Well it might, but in practice there don't seem to have been many
problems caused by not harmonising spectrum use with the the continent.
To be honest I think the government made the right decision, the limited
VHF spectrum available in Bands 1 & 3 would only just have been enough
for one extra 625-line TV channel.

Channel 5 could have had full national coverage with out all the messing
about we endured later. And, in some places there would have been space
for a local channel.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 11:50:27h -0500, Arny Krueger wrote:

Maybe you might want check out the meaning of the word consortium.

Yeah I was just plain wrong to say it was not a consortium --
I should have checked the "finer" details first.

In the case of PBS (television):

1) it is collectively owned by the affiliate stations

2) it produces no programs of its own, but these are supplied by
major stations (eg WETA, WGBH, WNET, KQED) for network viewing by
affliates who have paid the appropriate fee for the program

In the case of NPR (radio):

1) it is a corporation in its own right but stations pay to join as affiliates,
and each member station receives one vote at the annual NPR board meetings

2) NPR produces network programming to which individual stations
can subscribe

"charles" wrote in message

Channel 5 could have had full national coverage with out all the messing
about we endured later. And, in some places there would have been space
for a local channel.

Are you telling me that anyone would have missed Channel 5 had we not had
it? I agree that they way it was introduced was a politically-inspired mess,
but the best option would have simply been never to have had it at all. The
other uses to which the VHF spectrum released by the end of the 405-line
service have been of far greater value to the public than Channel 5 could
have ever been. As for local TV, have you seen it in those countries that
have it?

David.

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"charles" wrote in message

Channel 5 could have had full national coverage with out all the
messing about we endured later. And, in some places there would have
been space for a local channel.

Are you telling me that anyone would have missed Channel 5 had we not had
it? I agree that they way it was introduced was a politically-inspired
mess, but the best option would have simply been never to have had it at
all. The other uses to which the VHF spectrum released by the end of the
405-line service have been of far greater value to the public than
Channel 5 could have ever been. As for local TV, have you seen it in
those countries that have it?

I never said I wanted either.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"charles" wrote in message

Channel 5 could have had full national coverage with out all the messing
about we endured later. And, in some places there would have been space
for a local channel.

Are you telling me that anyone would have missed Channel 5 had we not had
it? I agree that they way it was introduced was a politically-inspired
mess, but the best option would have simply been never to have had it at
all. The other uses to which the VHF spectrum released by the end of the
405-line service have been of far greater value to the public than Channel
5 could have ever been. As for local TV, have you seen it in those
countries that have it?

I saw SixTV in Oxford which was dire by the end.

OK it started out well, with a very interesting wildlife series shot mainly
around Oxford, introduced by a very chirpy and enthusiastic presenter who
actually had a PhD in zoology so she knew what she was talking about, and a
motoring programme in which owners of classic cars demonstrated their cars.

However there were also endless repeats of cookery programmes and a local
news programme which was read by someone who looked like a rabbit caught in
the headlights :-)

What was amazing was how amateurish many of the programmes were, both with
the wooden presenters and the poor technical standards with horrendous
bright yellow blown highlights on most of the studio shots.