When I see some services and feeds uplinked on Ku, I wonder why anyone uplinks on Ku when it's supposedly so crummy for affiliate distribution. Apparently, it's not such a crummy way to distribute programming despite rain fade issues. NBC has been on Ku as far back as the early 80's. Why are there still NBC feeds on Ku if it's so problematic? If it's not such a crummy transmission medium then why aren't there more services on Ku than C? Getting services from Ku would significantly cut costs for us.
Why not Ku? - revisited
- Thread starter ZetaMale
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 6
- Views 995
Who is "us?"
Most services on KU are meant for broadcasters.
They don't give a hoot about hobbyists.
In fact, the more we protest the more they might be inclined to throw the "scramble" switch.
It has been said that affiliates complain about rain fade over Ku and that's why uplinkers don't do it. And yet some do and some have been doing it for decades. I'm not suggesting that we demand Ku services but I wonder about the logic as to why they don't use Ku more than they do. Like I've already stated, if it's such a crummy way to distribute content, then why is anyone still doing it? If they did move all services, especially with this 5G stuff about to come online, moving to Ku could be beneficial to uplinkers. They may go to internet based distribution though. Of course, it would help if satellite technology advanced enough to where they could quadruple transponder power output. Actually, I'd like to see more OTA streams.
Because it's real hard to carry a 15ft C-band dish on a news uplink truck or van, sitting somewhere covering a news item.
Similar threads
- Locked
