David Looser wrote:

Of course if you are only looking for local coverage you could run several
networks in the available spectrum. But the argument was that VHF gave
better national coverage than UHF. If that is the aim then, I suggest, you'd
need both Bands 1 and 3 to give truly national coverage of just one network.
Its probable that it would be possible to add a second network that only
covered the main population centres, as Analogue Channel 5 did on UHF.

I don't know how well UK sets worked in the 1960's, but US TV sets were
not capable of receiving adjcent channels at one time, so they were not
used. For example, channel 2 was used in New York City, while the nearest
channel 3 station was in Philadelphia, 90 miles away and too far to be
received without a large antenna.

I think the next one up was 5 in NYC and 6 in Philly.

When the US started UHF TV in the mid 1960's (all 1965 models had to
have VHF/UHF tuners), they spaced the channels far apart, Philadelphia
for example had three, 17,29 and 48.

Geoff.

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