I am so frustrated. When in the world is Tucson going to be added. There are markets now like Chico, CA which are WAY down the DMA rankings compared to Tucson, and THEY are getting HD locals and not Tucson? Come on!
1/28/2009 4:47pm Uplink Activity Report - 85 changes
- Thread starter DigiSAT Uplink Report
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 85
- Views 12K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
Some times it has to do with whether the stations make it easy for Dish or make it difficult for them. If some Tucson station is asking for more money than Chico...
I think I screwed up, and was wondering if you guys could help.
I "moved" from Dothan, Alabama 36301 to Montgomery 36108 last night in anticipation of getting Montgomery locals in HD when it goes live. Dish made the switch last night in about 10 minutes, but when I try to view the Montgomery channels, I get the screen that is trying to connect, then a message saying Dish knows there is a problem with the channels and not to call....I just want to make sure I didn't do something wrong on my end. BTW Montgomrery is about 95 miles away.
I "moved" from Dothan, Alabama 36301 to Montgomery 36108 last night in anticipation of getting Montgomery locals in HD when it goes live. Dish made the switch last night in about 10 minutes, but when I try to view the Montgomery channels, I get the screen that is trying to connect, then a message saying Dish knows there is a problem with the channels and not to call....I just want to make sure I didn't do something wrong on my end. BTW Montgomrery is about 95 miles away.
Well, it is becoming a big todo about NOTHING.Well, I did raise my voice a few times regarding the 'marketing' name of forum/threads/posts. Perhaps you missed them, but JohnH&Digi each time pushing me back.
Plus I don't see it's written in stones.
Besides there is no way for you or anyone else to monitor all of the ConUS and Spot beams, no matter how much work they do.
Are you referring to the Montgomery SD local channels? If so, I think you may be outside of the spot beam that carries the Montgomery SD locals. That corner of AL is the only corner lacking good coverage from that spot. I think the 110W spot that covers that area is spot beam 7. As for HD, at first glance, it appears Dothan may just barely be in the beam that will likely carry the Montgomery HD locals. There are also quite a number of overlapping beams on Ciel 2 so it is also possible they will put Mongomery on a beam that doesn't cover Dothan, and you may have to "move" elsewhere for HD.
Last edited:
Well darn....how soon after you "move" can you "move" again? I may have to consider Panama City Fla. Where can I go to see the spotbeams?
Agreed. The system tables tell us what is likely to be happening to the uplink. Look at how much we see headed to Ciel-2 without the satellite even being active. Also much easier to read for the uninitiated
What would be cool, though, is a regular reading of activity on channels in they system listed as "not available" such as "uplinked" locals and all those TMP HD channels. Something automated.
Changing one's service address so as to receive other locals.
But DirecTV has had HD locals for over a year here! It can't be THAT different, can it?
Why not call your local stations and ask what the holdup is? Sometimes they tell you.
I Agree with Digi
Amen to that....not that I don't give Smith an A for adding information to these forums, but his reports are way too complicated for the average viewer.
Amen to that....not that I don't give Smith an A for adding information to these forums, but his reports are way too complicated for the average viewer.
Well, then I guess it's left pretend to know the sacred info and post it under pretentious title. I prefer to be honest in such cases.
I'm with P. Smith on this nomenclature business. Calling something we see in the data downlink an "uplink report" is seriously misleading. Yes, we all know it originated at an uplink center. But until I asked, I (silly me) assumed somebody nearby a real physical Dish uplink center was viewing a sidelobe coming off a real physical Dish uplink antenna.
Can we add an FAQ sticky with P. Smith's caveats (i.e. based on system tables and may not actually reflect uplinked channels), keep it called an "uplink" report and be done with it?
Digiblur and the uplink gang can put it in any form they like with any header they like and I will be happy. I don't think some understand the manhours involved in doing this work.
I find it ironic that you are unhappy about the accuracy of the thread title but you continuously post messages with such poor grammar and sentence construction that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to understand the message you are trying to convey.
I can tell you there are TONS of man hours involved to get to the spot where JohnH and I are at today. The comparison code, automation tasks, multiple tables (TIDs, local channel areas, etc), etc...is a tremendous amount of code. Then not to mention the maintenance on it from time to time and new ideas that pop in my head.
One of these days I'll post a video and/or screenshots of the uplink tool in action, explaining what happens. Sort of an inside tour of the uplink tool. That's if enough people are interested in that type of thing.
And a big kudos to JohnH for the helping hand as I wouldn't be at the level where we are at today without his help!
Digi, I would find it very interesting to see a video of what is happening.
A big thanks to you and JohnH for all the information that you guys give us.
Shawn
A big thanks to you and JohnH for all the information that you guys give us.
Shawn
