I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with teleswitching are being warned.
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
Who was supposed to be installing the network for the meters to 'talk' to?
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with teleswitching are being warned.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
Who was supposed to be installing the network for the meters to 'talk' to?O2/Telefonica for south and midlands, Arqiva for oopnorth.
On 23/04/2025 13:42, JMB99 wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
Who was supposed to be installing the network for the meters to 'talk'
to?
North of the M62, Arqiva
Loads of internet rabbit holes to vanish down, start here <https://forum.ovoenergy.com/smart-meters-136/rts-switch-off-and-smart- meters-15760?tid=15760&fid=136>
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
My car radio does long wave.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
On Wed 23/04/2025 14:13, Mark Carver wrote:
On 23/04/2025 13:42, JMB99 wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
Who was supposed to be installing the network for the meters to 'talk'
to?
North of the M62, Arqiva
Loads of internet rabbit holes to vanish down, start here
<https://forum.ovoenergy.com/smart-meters-136/rts-switch-off-and-smart-
meters-15760?tid=15760&fid=136>
Not quite Mark.
Arqiva do Lancs and Yorks so they go some distance south of the M62.
Arqiva handle their area AFAIK from Emley Moor and that is well south of
the M62!
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >> >> >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
I've not tried but I'll have a listen pomorrow and let you know. I
expect the Eddystone 830, with a longwire aerial, will pick it up all
right but it might be asking a bit too much to expect the car radio to >receive anything distant on a whip aerial.
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:42:14 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:
The OVO folk on the OVO forum seem to still be saying the signal will
cease on June 30th this year.
Still trying to get OVO to come and install a new meter, at least they
have stopped sending me letters claiming there was a new meter waiting
for me.
They said somewhere that might ask to use the home's WiFi.
Excellent, so they will be able to cut you off if you don't pay the
bill but not switch you back on again :-)
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
North of the M62, Arqiva
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >> >> >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
There is just a sniff of a carrier under heavy QRM with the Eddystone
830 and a NNE-SSW longwire aerial. I doubt if the van radio would
receive anything where it is parked in the drive close to two houses. I >could try it on high ground some other time.
On 23/04/2025 21:10, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
We are roughly midway between Burghead and Westerglen so lots of nulls,
which move around.
Before we got Radio 4 on VHF FM, I sometimes (for important broadcasts)
had to listen to Radio 4 either using a synchronous detector or
sometimes as USB or LSB.
In article <1rb9k8e.c1w8mq1701k5dN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid>,
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >>> >> >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
I've not tried but I'll have a listen pomorrow and let you know. I
expect the Eddystone 830, with a longwire aerial, will pick it up all
right but it might be asking a bit too much to expect the car radio to >>receive anything distant on a whip aerial.
Fine here in the car in Cambridge!
On the Audi windscreen aerial..
Both R4 longwave and Caroline but thats carried on our local small scale
DAB MUX..
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with >teleswitching are being warned.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with teleswitching are being warned.
On 23/04/2025 12:36, Max Demian wrote:
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
I've noticed a slight delay between R4 LW and FM, too small to tell
which is before which (both conventional analogue receivers). Presumably
this is due to transmission to the transmitters rather than the radio waves.
On 23/04/2025 21:10, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >>> check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Don't you have RDS?
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:37:06 +0100, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
I've noticed a slight delay between R4 LW and FM, too small to tell
which is before which (both conventional analogue receivers). Presumably
this is due to transmission to the transmitters rather than the radio waves.
Yes, I understood LW was the only true time standard. I assume FM
requires a degree of processing.
"Liz Tuddenham" <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:1rb9hcq.1uz0865dwzxn6N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid...
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to
check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Daft question... Do car radios use a built-in antenna for MW and LW reception, or do they use the roof-mounted aerial that is used for VHF?
ask because my VHF/FM (ie not DAB*) radio reception in my car is appalling, especially on < 100 MHz (so R2, R3 and R4), in many areas in the Driffield area. The odd thing is that LW (eg R4 LW) and MW (eg R5) is also pretty well non-existent. I suspect a poor contact or a kink in the cable, but when I remove the radio and operate it while it is hanging out of the dashboard, reception is fine.
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 22:23:45 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:
In article <1rb9k8e.c1w8mq1701k5dN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid>,
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with >>>> >> >> teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >>>> >> >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
I've not tried but I'll have a listen pomorrow and let you know. I >>>expect the Eddystone 830, with a longwire aerial, will pick it up all >>>right but it might be asking a bit too much to expect the car radio to >>>receive anything distant on a whip aerial.
Fine here in the car in Cambridge!
On the Audi windscreen aerial..
Both R4 longwave and Caroline but thats carried on our local small scale >>DAB MUX..
What bitrate do you get for Caroline? Ours here is very low so I don't >listen.
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but
I can't find any information on that.
NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
"Liz Tuddenham" <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:1rb9hcq.1uz0865dwzxn6N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid...
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >>>>> check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Daft question... Do car radios use a built-in antenna for MW and LW
reception, or do they use the roof-mounted aerial that is used for VHF?
All those I have come across use the same aerial for both. It is
connected by special low-capacitance coaxial cable with the inner
conductor runing in a tube and crimped in zig-zag formation to keep it
away from the walls. On long wave, the co-ax and the aerial form part
of the capacitance tuning the input stage, so a pre-set trimming
capacitor is often located near the aerial socket to adjust for
variation between different makes of aerial.
I
ask because my VHF/FM (ie not DAB*) radio reception in my car is appalling, >> especially on < 100 MHz (so R2, R3 and R4), in many areas in the Driffield >> area. The odd thing is that LW (eg R4 LW) and MW (eg R5) is also pretty well >> non-existent. I suspect a poor contact or a kink in the cable, but when I
remove the radio and operate it while it is hanging out of the dashboard,
reception is fine.
Is something behind the radio pressing against the aerial plug and
making it loose contact? Kinking that particular type of co-ax could
also cause quite large changes to reception.
Try easing the radio back in slowly while it is playing and see if there
is a click and a sudden drop in volume as something is bent or touches another something.
The current gold standard for time without a direct wired link to the
UTC network is via the GPS satellites.
On 24/04/2025 12:35, John Williamson wrote:
The current gold standard for time without a direct wired link to the
UTC network is via the GPS satellites.
What about Standard Frequency Stations?
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but
I can't find any information on that.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:[...]
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:10:56 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:39:19 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:53, Mark Carver wrote:My car radio does long wave.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
Like most people, I would have difficulty finding a Long Wave radio to >> >check it had gone. Many would not know where to find Long Wave.
I use it all the time: no re-tuning and very few dead spots.
Can you also get Caroline on 648 kHz or are you too far out of range?
There is just a sniff of a carrier under heavy QRM with the Eddystone
830 and a NNE-SSW longwire aerial.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:37:06 +0100, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:36, Max Demian wrote:
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
I've noticed a slight delay between R4 LW and FM, too small to tell
which is before which (both conventional analogue receivers). Presumably >>> this is due to transmission to the transmitters rather than the radio waves.
Yes, I understood LW was the only true time standard. I assume FM
requires a degree of processing.
Actually GPS time is the most accurate that any normal user can obtain.
With the correct receiver it is accurate to a few tens of nanoseconds. And yes it does take account of the time of flight of the radio signal.
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with >teleswitching are being warned.
I have just watched a piece on Reporting Scotland:
On 01/05/2025 19:22, Scott wrote:
I have just watched a piece on Reporting Scotland:
Some of the reporting has been hysterical, suggesting that people will
lose their electricity supply completely.
If it is only for a short period, can't they just do estimated bills? Calculate the proportion of the bill that was normally off-peak and use
that?
I have been waiting since November for my meter to be changed to a
'smart' meter but it has a good old fashioned mechanical clock to switch
to off-peak.
On 02/05/2025 09:25, JMB99 wrote:
On 01/05/2025 19:22, Scott wrote:
I have just watched a piece on Reporting Scotland:
Some of the reporting has been hysterical, suggesting that people will
lose their electricity supply completely.
If it is only for a short period, can't they just do estimated bills?
Calculate the proportion of the bill that was normally off-peak and use
that?
I have been waiting since November for my meter to be changed to a
'smart' meter but it has a good old fashioned mechanical clock to switch
to off-peak.
I thought that the problem was that the meter may get permanently
"stuck" in one Economy 7 mode or the other, so either all your
electricity may get charged at the cheaper overnight rate or else all or
it may get charged at the daytime rate, with the added problem that in
the latter case, there will be no power to storage heaters which only
receive power when the meter is in overnight mode.
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the
RTS signal without Radio 4?
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the
RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power
meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier
and the time signal exists, no modulation.
On Sat 03/05/2025 10:10, Marco Moock wrote:
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the
RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power
meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier
and the time signal exists, no modulation.
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much less
Tx power than that needed for AM speech.
Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst still
available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However there is a
US company that do solid state equivalents and could be used if the
relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
On Sat, 3 May 2025 12:11:09 +0100, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 10:10, Marco Moock wrote:
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the
RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power
meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier
and the time signal exists, no modulation.
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much less
Tx power than that needed for AM speech.
Would it be possible then to switch off Droitwich and Burghead and
rely on Westerglen to provide coverage at far lower power?
The main excuse for closing
Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst still
available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However there is a
US company that do solid state equivalents and could be used if the
relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
What about taking the TX from Westerglen to Droitwich?
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
What is the cost for Rhodium equipment if it is already in place?
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much
less Tx power than that needed for AM speech. The main excuse for
closing Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst
still available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However
there is a US company that do solid state equivalents and could be
used if the relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
On 03.05.2025 12:11 Uhr Woody wrote:
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much
less Tx power than that needed for AM speech. The main excuse for
closing Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst
still available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However
there is a US company that do solid state equivalents and could be
used if the relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
Many sites with solid-state TX on LW closed down in the last years,
they could have bought the equipment there.
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 14:05, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 12:11:09 +0100, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 10:10, Marco Moock wrote:
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the >>>>>> RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power
meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier >>>>> and the time signal exists, no modulation.
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much less >>>> Tx power than that needed for AM speech.
Would it be possible then to switch off Droitwich and Burghead and
rely on Westerglen to provide coverage at far lower power?
The main excuse for closing
Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst still
available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However there is a >>>> US company that do solid state equivalents and could be used if the
relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
What about taking the TX from Westerglen to Droitwich?
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a >>>> box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
What is the cost for Rhodium equipment if it is already in place?
Still needs to be maintained.....
A rubidium frequency standard starts at about £2000.
On 03/05/2025 12:11, Woody wrote:
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
 That's as may be, but the original reason for the Rhodium standards at these transmitters was to allow them to be used as a secondary
reference, linked directly to the one in the NPL.
They were directly traceable back to the NPL standards, which GPS transmissions are not. It caused a lot of headscratching round the UK
when they changed from 200 kHz to 198 to comply with international
channel frequencies. Everyone had to recalibrate their timing equipment.
On Sat 03/05/2025 18:44, John Williamson wrote:
On 03/05/2025 12:11, Woody wrote:
That's as may be, but the original reason for the Rhodium standards
at these transmitters was to allow them to be used as a secondary
reference, linked directly to the one in the NPL.
They were directly traceable back to the NPL standards, which GPS
transmissions are not. It caused a lot of headscratching round the UK
when they changed from 200 kHz to 198 to comply with international
channel frequencies. Everyone had to recalibrate their timing equipment.
For the record UK DTTV and DAB is all GPS synced as the time difference
from source is tiny compared with any terrestrial equivalent.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 15:06:02 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 14:05, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 12:11:09 +0100, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 10:10, Marco Moock wrote:
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the >>>>>>>> RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power >>>>>>> meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier >>>>>>> and the time signal exists, no modulation.
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much less >>>>>> Tx power than that needed for AM speech.
Would it be possible then to switch off Droitwich and Burghead and
rely on Westerglen to provide coverage at far lower power?
The main excuse for closing
Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst still
available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However there is a >>>>>> US company that do solid state equivalents and could be used if the >>>>>> relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
What about taking the TX from Westerglen to Droitwich?
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to >>>>>> keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays >>>>>> using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a >>>>>> box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of >>>>>> the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
What is the cost for Rhodium equipment if it is already in place?
Still needs to be maintained.....
A rubidium frequency standard starts at about £2000.
To purchase or per annum? I assume Arqiva owns this equipment already.
Anyway, would the electricity industry not be meeting the cost?
To purchase. I’ve bought a number over the years. But GPS disciplined >frequency standards have largely taken over.
On 03/05/2025 20:30, Woody wrote:
On Sat 03/05/2025 18:44, John Williamson wrote:
On 03/05/2025 12:11, Woody wrote:
That's as may be, but the original reason for the Rhodium standards
at these transmitters was to allow them to be used as a secondary
reference, linked directly to the one in the NPL.
They were directly traceable back to the NPL standards, which GPS
transmissions are not. It caused a lot of headscratching round the UK
when they changed from 200 kHz to 198 to comply with international
channel frequencies. Everyone had to recalibrate their timing equipment. >>>
For the record UK DTTV and DAB is all GPS synced as the time difference
from source is tiny compared with any terrestrial equivalent.
That is not why they locked the transmitter frequency to a local
standard, hard linked to NPL. It was easily traceable, just as the metre
long stick at NPL used to be traceable to the original (Now both are
defined as a defined number of wavelengths of a particular colour of
light, which in turn is linked to an atomic behaviour.) and someone
could stand up in front of a judge and swear to its accuracy, give or
take easily calculated tolerances. Don't forget, in the days the
references were installed, most people thought the ultimate time
reference for day to day use was the grid locked electric clock in their >kitchen. Plus or minus five seconds per day was a *very* accurate watch,
and many people had a ritual of checking and correcting theirs by the
pips every day. My current smart watch checks a time server over the web
when it can be bothered, and reset itself automatically when we went
over to BST.
The GPS clock might be more consistent and accurate, but can you *prove*
its accuracy on your receiver? I'd trust GPS time for anything down to a >hundred nanoseconds or so, but I'd hate to have to explain why and
exactly how it does the job to a judge under cross examination.
On Sat 03/05/2025 18:44, John Williamson wrote:
On 03/05/2025 12:11, Woody wrote:
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
That's as may be, but the original reason for the Rhodium standards at
these transmitters was to allow them to be used as a secondary
reference, linked directly to the one in the NPL.
They were directly traceable back to the NPL standards, which GPS
transmissions are not. It caused a lot of headscratching round the UK
when they changed from 200 kHz to 198 to comply with international
channel frequencies. Everyone had to recalibrate their timing equipment.
For the record UK DTTV and DAB is all GPS synced as the time difference
from source is tiny compared with any terrestrial equivalent.
On Sat 03/05/2025 10:10, Marco Moock wrote:
On 01.05.2025 19:22 Uhr Scott wrote:
How would a phased switch-off work? Is it possible to broadcast the
RTS signal without Radio 4?
Should be, as the AM modulation itself is irrelevant for the power
meters. TDF did that in Allouis with the 162 kHz TX. Only the carrier
and the time signal exists, no modulation.
What is more, data such as the time signal will work at much much less
Tx power than that needed for AM speech. The main excuse for closing >Droitwich is that the valves that they need for AM whilst still
available are going in the direction of hen's teeth. However there is a
US company that do solid state equivalents and could be used if the
relevant parties would contribute to the cost. Ha!
From memory all three transmitters use Rhodium frequency standards to
keep stability: you can get significantly better stability nowadays
using GPS at tiny cost. I have one here that is not much bigger than a
box of Swans (matches for the uninitiated!) which can use up to 24 of
the 36 GPS signals simultaneously and costs a little over £100.
In article <m7nateF74adU1@mid.individual.net>, John Williamson ><johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> scribeth thus
On 03/05/2025 20:30, Woody wrote:And they being what they are would probably not understand it anyway!..
On Sat 03/05/2025 18:44, John Williamson wrote:
On 03/05/2025 12:11, Woody wrote:
That's as may be, but the original reason for the Rhodium standards
at these transmitters was to allow them to be used as a secondary
reference, linked directly to the one in the NPL.
They were directly traceable back to the NPL standards, which GPS
transmissions are not. It caused a lot of headscratching round the UK
when they changed from 200 kHz to 198 to comply with international
channel frequencies. Everyone had to recalibrate their timing equipment. >>>>
For the record UK DTTV and DAB is all GPS synced as the time difference
from source is tiny compared with any terrestrial equivalent.
That is not why they locked the transmitter frequency to a local
standard, hard linked to NPL. It was easily traceable, just as the metre >>long stick at NPL used to be traceable to the original (Now both are >>defined as a defined number of wavelengths of a particular colour of
light, which in turn is linked to an atomic behaviour.) and someone
could stand up in front of a judge and swear to its accuracy, give or
take easily calculated tolerances. Don't forget, in the days the
references were installed, most people thought the ultimate time
reference for day to day use was the grid locked electric clock in their >>kitchen. Plus or minus five seconds per day was a *very* accurate watch, >>and many people had a ritual of checking and correcting theirs by the
pips every day. My current smart watch checks a time server over the web >>when it can be bothered, and reset itself automatically when we went
over to BST.
The GPS clock might be more consistent and accurate, but can you *prove* >>its accuracy on your receiver? I'd trust GPS time for anything down to a >>hundred nanoseconds or so, but I'd hate to have to explain why and
exactly how it does the job to a judge under cross examination.
LF will still be around for many in the world its still a viable
medium imagine covering such as Russia
and Africa, Australia even with DAB!.
LF DRM maybe?..
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but
I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
Op 25-4-2025 om 10:37 schreef Paul Ratcliffe:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but
I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
In The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone signals 300-3400 Hz.
You already used it for broadcast signals in the 70s?
Op 25-4-2025 om 10:37 schreef Paul Ratcliffe:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but
I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
In The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone signals 300-3400 Hz.
You already used it for broadcast signals in the 70s?
In The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone signals 300-3400 Hz.
Op 6-5-2025 om 10:28 schreef Mark Carver:
On 06/05/2025 00:28, Rink wrote:Thank you, Mark !
Op 25-4-2025 om 10:37 schreef Paul Ratcliffe:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John WilliamsonIn The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but >>>>> I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
signals 300-3400 Hz.
You already used it for broadcast signals in the 70s?
For broadcast distribution (primarily to distribute stereo programmes/
15 kHz audio bandwidth to the BBC's national network of FM transmitters)
Further reading
https://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html
Rink
On 06/05/2025 00:28, Rink wrote:
Op 25-4-2025 om 10:37 schreef Paul Ratcliffe:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but >>>> I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
In The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone
signals 300-3400 Hz.
You already used it for broadcast signals in the 70s?
For broadcast distribution (primarily to distribute stereo programmes/
15 kHz audio bandwidth to the BBC's national network of FM transmitters)
Further reading
https://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html
On Tue, 6 May 2025 19:26:02 +0200, Rink
<rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> wrote:
Op 6-5-2025 om 10:28 schreef Mark Carver:
On 06/05/2025 00:28, Rink wrote:Thank you, Mark !
Op 25-4-2025 om 10:37 schreef Paul Ratcliffe:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 12:35:10 +0100, John WilliamsonIn The Netherlands PCM was brand new in 1979 only for telephone
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
They may still be using an analogue link between BH amd Droitwicjh, but >>>>>> I can't find any information on that.
Jeez, it's been digital since the 70s with the original PCM link.
signals 300-3400 Hz.
You already used it for broadcast signals in the 70s?
For broadcast distribution (primarily to distribute stereo programmes/
15 kHz audio bandwidth to the BBC's national network of FM transmitters) >>>
Further reading
https://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html
Thank you too. If this was Ofcom would it be 100 pages long?
On 04.05.2025 14:24 Uhr tony sayer wrote:
LF will still be around for many in the world its still a viable
medium imagine covering such as Russia
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters. Many
sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country with LW,
but on low power.
Pictures from 0 >https://vk.com/public158109176?z=photo-158109176_457240479%2F5e1235f766ee7b219b
and Africa, Australia even with DAB!.
Never had LW except for Morocco and Algeria. 2 of the 3 sites in
Algeria are switched off, the other one with decreased power. Morocco
still on air with lower power.
As not many people know this technology, I doubt it would be used by
many people.
LF DRM maybe?..
Existed for testing purposes, e.g. in Germany in Zehlendorf.
Not many receivers existed, not many listeners, switched back to AM,
then off, and now the site is gone.
Well interesting to read that but these frequencies so the UK regulator
will tell us amount to Valuable spectrum!..
I suppose like with DAB its receivers out there but then again i think
that quite a few receiver chipsets can handle DRM if implemented?..
VK.com :
"Your browser is out of date"
I have the latest Firefox for Windows 7...
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters. Many
sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country with LW,
but on low power.
Pictures from Хонхор: https://vk.com/public158109176?z=photo-158109176_457240479%2F5e1235f766ee7b219b
and Africa, Australia even with DAB!.
Never had LW except for Morocco and Algeria. 2 of the 3 sites in
Algeria are switched off, the other one with decreased power.
Morocco
still on air with lower power.
Op 5-5-2025 om 17:53 schreef Marco Moock:
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters.
Many sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country
with LW, but on low power.
Mongolia
164 kHz = 250 kW
209 kHz = 3 tx's each 40 kW
227 kHz = 40 kW
yes all frequencies from the 70's !
<http://www.mwlist.org/mwlist_quick_and_easy.php?area=2&kHz=209>
Pictures from Хонхор: https://vk.com/public158109176?z=photo-158109176_457240479%2F5e1235f766ee7b219b
VK.com :
"Your browser is out of date"
I have the latest Firefox for Windows 7...
On 24/05/2025 22:25, Rink wrote:
VK.com :Version 115 ESR?
"Your browser is out of date"
I have the latest Firefox for Windows 7...
You need to update your OS, then. It works perfectly here on Iron and
Firefox version 138.0.4 under my outdated Windows 10.
Or you could switch to Linux. <Grin>
Op 24-5-2025 om 23:49 schreef John Williamson:
On 24/05/2025 22:25, Rink wrote:
VK.com :Version 115 ESR?
"Your browser is out of date"
I have the latest Firefox for Windows 7...
Yes, 115.22.0esr (so not the latest, which is 115.23.1esr)
You need to update your OS, then. It works perfectly here on Iron and
Firefox version 138.0.4 under my outdated Windows 10.
Or you could switch to Linux. <Grin>
Yes, I should switch to Linux, but I do not know which Linux and I've
never done it before.....
VK.com :
"Your browser is out of date"
On 27/05/2025 09:51, Rink wrote:
Op 24-5-2025 om 23:49 schreef John Williamson:Linux Mint is fairly close in feel to Windows and if you install WINE,
On 24/05/2025 22:25, Rink wrote:
VK.com :Version 115 ESR?
"Your browser is out of date"
I have the latest Firefox for Windows 7...
Yes, 115.22.0esr (so not the latest, which is 115.23.1esr)
You need to update your OS, then. It works perfectly here on Iron and
Firefox version 138.0.4 under my outdated Windows 10.
Or you could switch to Linux. <Grin>
Yes, I should switch to Linux, but I do not know which Linux and I've
never done it before.....
that lets you install most of your current Windows programs.
The killer for me is that I can't work out a way to back up my Android
phone diary under Linux without letting my data loose on the web.
[]
Since I haven't seen any posts answering the original question (there
might have been some that have expired before I was reading the thread):
I've just watched a YouTube clip that says the end of June (i. e. this month). It gave no further details, and the clip was just a recording of
a normal closedown (Sailing By, shipping forecast, anthem) to a picture
of a nice old communications receiver.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
Since I haven't seen any posts answering the original question (there
might have been some that have expired before I was reading the thread):
I've just watched a YouTube clip that says the end of June (i. e. this
month). It gave no further details, and the clip was just a recording of
a normal closedown (Sailing By, shipping forecast, anthem) to a picture
of a nice old communications receiver.
Don't believe what random people say on the internet.
The Radio Teleswitch Service 'will end' 'from 30 June 2025' but 'the RTS >service is phased out from 30 June 2025' which seems a bit less final: >https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know/
Obviously the RTS can't stay working without a LW signal. But the end of
the RTS doesn't mean the LW signal will also be shut down the same day.
I suppose technically RTS can continue with a carrier but no R4 voice on it. >Maybe there will be a voice message 'R4LW is shut down, please retune to FM' >or something in its place.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
Since I haven't seen any posts answering the original question (there
might have been some that have expired before I was reading the thread):
I've just watched a YouTube clip that says the end of June (i. e. this
month). It gave no further details, and the clip was just a recording of
a normal closedown (Sailing By, shipping forecast, anthem) to a picture
of a nice old communications receiver.
Don't believe what random people say on the internet.
The Radio Teleswitch Service 'will end' 'from 30 June 2025' but 'the RTS service is phased out from 30 June 2025' which seems a bit less final: https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know/
Obviously the RTS can't stay working without a LW signal. But the end of
the RTS doesn't mean the LW signal will also be shut down the same day.
I suppose technically RTS can continue with a carrier but no R4 voice on it. Maybe there will be a voice message 'R4LW is shut down, please retune to FM' or something in its place.
On 24/04/2025 14:51, Tweed wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:37:06 +0100, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 23/04/2025 12:36, Max Demian wrote:
I've dug out a three band radio for the shutdown. And people with
teleswitching are being warned.
I've noticed a slight delay between R4 LW and FM, too small to tell
which is before which (both conventional analogue receivers).
Presumably
this is due to transmission to the transmitters rather than the
radio waves.
Yes, I understood LW was the only true time standard. I assume FM
requires a degree of processing.
Actually GPS time is the most accurate that any normal user can obtain.
With the correct receiver it is accurate to a few tens of nanoseconds.
And
yes it does take account of the time of flight of the radio signal.
How does the receiver know how far the radio signal has travelled?
On 24.05.2025 23:25 Uhr Rink wrote:
Op 5-5-2025 om 17:53 schreef Marco Moock:
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters.
Many sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country
with LW, but on low power.
Mongolia
164 kHz = 250 kW
Although not good audible on SDRs in Russia.
Op 25-5-2025 om 16:40 schreef Marco Moock:
On 24.05.2025 23:25 Uhr Rink wrote:
Op 5-5-2025 om 17:53 schreef Marco Moock:
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters.
Many sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country
with LW, but on low power.
Mongolia
164 kHz = 250 kW
Although not good audible on SDRs in Russia.
Which SDR's in Russia are you listening?
On 15.06.2025 15:33 Uhr Rink wrote:
Op 25-5-2025 om 16:40 schreef Marco Moock:
On 24.05.2025 23:25 Uhr Rink wrote:
Op 5-5-2025 om 17:53 schreef Marco Moock:
Russia (and other GUS countries) switched off all LW transmitters.
Many sites are already demolished. Mongolia is the only country
with LW, but on low power.
Mongolia
164 kHz = 250 kW
Although not good audible on SDRs in Russia.
Which SDR's in Russia are you listening?
http://rx.linkfanel.net/
http://khv.swl.su/
I can see a weak carrier at 209 and 164, 164 seems stronger, but is
entirely jammed by local noise.
There's evidence from some recent energy company statements, that RTS
will be 'regionally phased out' between June 30th and Sept 30th.
The RTS system was originally used by the old electricity boards. Some
were more adventurous than others. For instance the Scottish Boards did
far more dynamic switching (leaving heating on longer on extra cold
nights etc) Others (SEB and Seeboard for instance) didn't do anything
other than keep the RTS receiver's internal clock accurate.
Those legacy schemes have been adopted by the energy companies post >privatisation.
Therefore, my guess is post June 30th the RTS codes for Southern
England, may well be switched off, and the codes for Scottish systems
left on a bit longer.
The other interpretation for 'regionally phased out' is that Droitwich, >Westerglen, and Burghead carriers will be switched off separately over
the three month period. I don't think that will happen, but who really
knows !
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households
face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones.
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households
face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones. Is it correct that 88% of RTS
meters will shut down if the signal is lost? I assumed they would
remain on the tariff they were on when the signal was lost. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25141071.scotland-hardest-hit-big-bbc-radio-switch-off-crisis/
Also - An Energy UK spokesman said: "There will not be a mass switch
off of the RTS national signal on June 3. From this date, we will
begin a phase out of the RTS functionality for small groups of meters
at a time". I wonder if the BBC and Ofcom know about this and have a
plan to implement it. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25243055.health-emergency-warning-100-000-scots-face-energy-cuts/
I wonder if the
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 14:18, Scott wrote:A storm in a tea cup:
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households
face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones.
I find it incredible that a system like that could be designed in such a
poor fashion. The people responsible should be sacked.
I have a good old fashioned clockwork time switch and still waiting for
a 'smart' meter - SSE did some changes to the wiring last year to make
ready but OVO just give excuses why they cannot fit.
My storage heaters continue to work OK, I live on my own so just switch
the water heater on for bit during the offpeak time and that gives me
enough hot water for the day (and stays hot for several days).
The electricity companies should be instructed to fix by that date or
lock all affected customers onto offpeak rates 24/7 until fixed.
https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know
“There will not be a mass switch off of the RTS national signal on 30 June >2025. From this date, a phase out will begin of the RTS functionality for >small groups of meters at a time. Customers will be informed directly. “
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:30:28 -0000 (UTC), TweedWhat makes you think the transmitters are to be turned off on 30th June?
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:I must be missing something then. If the 'equipment that produces the
On 17/06/2025 14:18, Scott wrote:A storm in a tea cup:
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households >>>>> face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones.
I find it incredible that a system like that could be designed in such a >>>> poor fashion. The people responsible should be sacked.
I have a good old fashioned clockwork time switch and still waiting for >>>> a 'smart' meter - SSE did some changes to the wiring last year to make >>>> ready but OVO just give excuses why they cannot fit.
My storage heaters continue to work OK, I live on my own so just switch >>>> the water heater on for bit during the offpeak time and that gives me
enough hot water for the day (and stays hot for several days).
The electricity companies should be instructed to fix by that date or
lock all affected customers onto offpeak rates 24/7 until fixed.
https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know
?There will not be a mass switch off of the RTS national signal on 30 June >>> 2025. From this date, a phase out will begin of the RTS functionality for >>> small groups of meters at a time. Customers will be informed directly. ? >>>
radio signal' (ie, Radio 4 LW) is switched off on 30 June, how will
any RTS meters or groups of meters continue to function after that
date?
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:40:17 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:30:28 -0000 (UTC), TweedWhat makes you think the transmitters are to be turned off on 30th June?
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:I must be missing something then. If the 'equipment that produces the
On 17/06/2025 14:18, Scott wrote:A storm in a tea cup:
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households >>>>>>> face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as >>>>>>> some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and >>>>>>> have not transitioned to smart ones.
I find it incredible that a system like that could be designed in such a >>>>>> poor fashion. The people responsible should be sacked.
I have a good old fashioned clockwork time switch and still waiting for >>>>>> a 'smart' meter - SSE did some changes to the wiring last year to make >>>>>> ready but OVO just give excuses why they cannot fit.
My storage heaters continue to work OK, I live on my own so just switch >>>>>> the water heater on for bit during the offpeak time and that gives me >>>>>> enough hot water for the day (and stays hot for several days).
The electricity companies should be instructed to fix by that date or >>>>>> lock all affected customers onto offpeak rates 24/7 until fixed.
https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know
?There will not be a mass switch off of the RTS national signal on 30 June
2025. From this date, a phase out will begin of the RTS functionality for >>>>> small groups of meters at a time. Customers will be informed directly. ? >>>>>
radio signal' (ie, Radio 4 LW) is switched off on 30 June, how will
any RTS meters or groups of meters continue to function after that
date?
That's because I was not as up-to-date as I should be. I have now
discovered:
https://keeplongwave.co.uk/2025/06/16/radio-4-longwave-will-not-go-quiet-at-the-end-of-june-bbc-suggests/
"The BBC has suggested that its Radio 4 Longwave service will not be
shut down at the end of this month, as had been feared. Whilst the
Radio Teleswitching Service (RTS) broadcast alongside the channel on
198 kHz LW is being phased out over the summer, Radio 4 Longwave will
continue to broadcast until an ‘impact review’ is carried out. Until
recently, it had been assumed that both services would end together on
30th June, as had been reported in some online news articles".
I see this is 'suggested' but has it been confirmed by the BBC or
Arqiva?
The site has now vanished, but I do remember reading up about the RTS service. It originally was operated by a microVAX computer. Quite a while
ago there was a hope to terminate the service, but as the smart meter roll out has been slower than hoped (polite language) they had to upgrade the system with PCs. These are now probably life expired and I suspect finding anyone who knows where the source code is might be tricky. Having looked at the data format, there seems to be little in the way of security. I’m surprised there isn’t a thriving black market in boxes that transmit the appropriate code to give you a bit more off peak electricity.
I emailed the BBC this afternoon to ask if there was a known LW switch off >date. The response is
“There is currently no confirmed date for the closure of Long Wave.”
On 17/06/2025 16:21, Tweed wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:If they updated the system to use PCs, while the original hardware may
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:40:17 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:That's because I was not as up-to-date as I should be. I have now
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:30:28 -0000 (UTC), TweedWhat makes you think the transmitters are to be turned off on 30th June? >>>
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:I must be missing something then. If the 'equipment that produces the >>>>> radio signal' (ie, Radio 4 LW) is switched off on 30 June, how will
On 17/06/2025 14:18, Scott wrote:A storm in a tea cup:
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households >>>>>>>> face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as >>>>>>>> some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and >>>>>>>> have not transitioned to smart ones.
I find it incredible that a system like that could be designed in such a
poor fashion. The people responsible should be sacked.
I have a good old fashioned clockwork time switch and still waiting for >>>>>>> a 'smart' meter - SSE did some changes to the wiring last year to make >>>>>>> ready but OVO just give excuses why they cannot fit.
My storage heaters continue to work OK, I live on my own so just switch >>>>>>> the water heater on for bit during the offpeak time and that gives me >>>>>>> enough hot water for the day (and stays hot for several days).
The electricity companies should be instructed to fix by that date or >>>>>>> lock all affected customers onto offpeak rates 24/7 until fixed. >>>>>>>
https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/customers/the-radio-teleswitch-service-switch-off-what-you-need-to-know
?There will not be a mass switch off of the RTS national signal on 30 June
2025. From this date, a phase out will begin of the RTS functionality for
small groups of meters at a time. Customers will be informed directly. ? >>>>>>
any RTS meters or groups of meters continue to function after that
date?
discovered:
https://keeplongwave.co.uk/2025/06/16/radio-4-longwave-will-not-go-quiet-at-the-end-of-june-bbc-suggests/
"The BBC has suggested that its Radio 4 Longwave service will not be
shut down at the end of this month, as had been feared. Whilst the
Radio Teleswitching Service (RTS) broadcast alongside the channel on
198 kHz LW is being phased out over the summer, Radio 4 Longwave will
continue to broadcast until an ?impact review? is carried out. Until
recently, it had been assumed that both services would end together on
30th June, as had been reported in some online news articles".
I see this is 'suggested' but has it been confirmed by the BBC or
Arqiva?
The site has now vanished, but I do remember reading up about the RTS
service. It originally was operated by a microVAX computer. Quite a while
ago there was a hope to terminate the service, but as the smart meter roll >> out has been slower than hoped (polite language) they had to upgrade the
system with PCs. These are now probably life expired and I suspect finding >> anyone who knows where the source code is might be tricky. Having looked at >> the data format, there seems to be little in the way of security. I’m
surprised there isn’t a thriving black market in boxes that transmit the
appropriate code to give you a bit more off peak electricity.
be life expired, the computers can be quickly and easily.replaced with
modern equipment, unless there has been some very slapdash machine code
using undocumented features of the original CPUs. Even the latest
compatible CPUs can run 8086 machine code, given a little encouragement.
We can still read 8 inch floppies.
If you want to go back a step, there is at ;east one very accurate Micro
VAX emulator which can even run on my ancient Windows tablet, once the
data formats are translated and the data transferred to a modern drive.
The hard part is finding a working paper tape reader.
Modern 64 bit Windows is designed to be unable to run 16 bit programs,
but there are very robust and standards compliant emulators to run 16
bit text mode DOS or even early Windows programs. Interfaces can,
likewise, be replaced easily and cheaply.
I have, within easy reach, a 32bit Windows 10 system which can run a DOS
word processor, as well as early Windows 3.11 games, which are known to
use nasty workrounds to improve performance, without any glitches. If I
use a cheap adaptor, I could even use the original printers the WP was >designed to drive. I cam also set my current printer up to emulate these >printers. The only thing it can't do is use multi part self carbon
paper, as it is an inkjet.
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which offer
cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
sn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 19:22:28 +0100, John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which offer
cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Isn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
John Williamson wrote:
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Isn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
Not many SDR's over there.
Distance many hundreds of kilometers to the border of Mongolia.
And I found no signals from Mongolia....
On 17/06/2025 19:47, Scott wrote:
sn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity
distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
All very non-standard so increasing costs?
Apple seem to have cracked that, though, as their latest handsets offer
basic satellite contact for emergencies. Android can't do that yet...
Cheaper to expand mobile phone coverage to cover all populated areas -
or to provide free electricity to people in remote areas?
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households
face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones. Is it correct that 88% of RTS
meters will shut down if the signal is lost? I assumed they would
remain on the tariff they were on when the signal was lost.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25141071.scotland-hardest-hit-big-bbc-radio-switch-off-crisis/
Also - An Energy UK spokesman said: "There will not be a mass switch
off of the RTS national signal on June 3. From this date, we will
begin a phase out of the RTS functionality for small groups of meters
at a time". I wonder if the BBC and Ofcom know about this and have a
plan to implement it. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25243055.health-emergency-warning-100-000-scots-face-energy-cuts/
I wonder if the
Isn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
A VLF link can work over long distances even at low power, but is
limited to bits per minute, not bytes per second. Currently used for
remote weather stations.
A suitably programmed Smart meter could cope with an intermittent
connection up to a point.
pam.net> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 19:47, Scott wrote:
sn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be
done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity
distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
All very non-standard so increasing costs?
On 17/06/2025 20:31, Scott wrote:
pam.net> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 19:47, Scott wrote:
sn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be >>>> done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity
distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
All very non-standard so increasing costs?
What's the matter with timeswitches with clockwork/battery reserve?
That
battery has a minimum design life of 10 years with an expectation of 15.
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:Especially with the fiasco over the "type 1" (or similar phrase) ones,
On 18/06/2025 15:38, Tweed wrote:
That
battery has a minimum design life of 10 years with an expectation of 15.
The meters have to be calibrated around that interval so would just need
the battery changing calibration.
Which was the 'Energy Minister' responsible for the 'smart' meter
fiasco? I seem to remember it was someone from the House of Lords with
a connection to the manufacturers and possibly around the time of the
coalition with the Liberal loonies?
How long does the novelty of checking how much energy you have used
last? I had a spreadsheet at one time but soon lost interest.
Still needs someone to physically do so though. If they can read itPerhaps they will fit a 'smart' meter here one day but going around the
back of the house to occasionally take a reading is hardly a major problem. >>
Back to the original point for a moment. I got this from Arqiva (owner and operator of the LW transmitters)
“In the case of Radio 4 Longwave the BBC has not currently stated any date for the closure of its LW platform, I am therefore unable to assist I'm afraid, should we receive this information in future I am happy to keep you informed.â€
As to smart meters, there’s little point for the gas meter as there is no point to a time flexible tariff. But if you have invested in a smart electricity meter you might as well take the minor advantage of remote readings. Electricity smart meters do enable flexible time of day tariffs. These are advantageous to some (eg EV and heat pump owners). They are also useful to the grid operator for domestic solar panel owners. The operator gets a real time (to within half an hour) measure of solar generation and export as opposed to an educated guess. This will be increasingly important as more houses gain panels.
On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 14:30:45 +0100, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 20:31, Scott wrote:
pam.net> wrote:
On 17/06/2025 19:47, Scott wrote:
sn't the difficulty that there is no mobile phone reception is some
remote areas (there may be no FM radio either, I suppose)? Could it be >>>>> done by satellite, or what about pulses sent through the electricity >>>>> distribution system (like Wi-Fi boosters)?
All very non-standard so increasing costs?
What's the matter with timeswitches with clockwork/battery reserve?
Someone might stop winding it at a critical moment or remove the
battery?
I don't think that's the main advantage: I think it's not having to be
in when the man calls to read the meter (or not having to do the reading yourself and then send it in). Not just that - after all, if you're
lucky it _can_ be a meter accessible from outside (though plenty aren't)
- but for any sort of remote premises: not just second homes, but remote transmitters, lighthouses, emergency pumps, … not having to make a
special trip to wherever to let the man in (or read it yourself) e
... Quite a while
ago there was a hope to terminate the service, but as the smart meter roll out has been slower than hoped (polite language) they had to upgrade the system with PCs.
How long does the novelty of checking how much energy you have used
last? I had a spreadsheet at one time but soon lost interest.
I don't think that's the main advantage: I think it's not having to be
in when the man calls to read the meter (or not having to do the reading >yourself and then send it in).
My most recent electricity bill from EDF proudly announces that over 1 >million customers now have smart meters. This means about 4.5 million >customers don't have them.
It takes me no more than five whole minutes of my valuable time to nip
into the garage, photograph both meters with my phone, and then type
the numbers into my utility company's web page. It's no bother at all,
and I can't think of any reason why I'd ever want to change it.
It takes me no more than five whole minutes of my valuable time to nip
into the garage, photograph both meters with my phone, and then type
the numbers into my utility company's web page. It's no bother at all,
and I can't think of any reason why I'd ever want to change it.
It takes me no more than five whole minutes of my valuable time to nipEven in your case, the supplier would have to send a trusted staff
into the garage, photograph both meters with my phone, and then type
the numbers into my utility company's web page. It's no bother at all,
and I can't think of any reason why I'd ever want to change it.
member round from time to time to produce a verified meter reading and
check the seals.
On 2025/6/18 16:3:38, Tweed wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
How long does the novelty of checking how much energy you have used
last? I had a spreadsheet at one time but soon lost interest.
I don't think that's the main advantage: I think it's not having to be
in when the man calls to read the meter (or not having to do the reading yourself and then send it in). Not just that - after all, if you're
lucky it _can_ be a meter accessible from outside (though plenty aren't)
- but for any sort of remote premises: not just second homes, but remote transmitters, lighthouses, emergency pumps, … not having to make a
special trip to wherever to let the man in (or read it yourself) every month/quarter is quite significant.>>
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 18/06/2025 17:50, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/6/18 16:3:38, Tweed wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
How long does the novelty of checking how much energy you have used
last? I had a spreadsheet at one time but soon lost interest.
I don't think that's the main advantage: I think it's not having to be
in when the man calls to read the meter (or not having to do the reading >>> yourself and then send it in). Not just that - after all, if you're
lucky it _can_ be a meter accessible from outside (though plenty aren't) >>> - but for any sort of remote premises: not just second homes, but remote >>> transmitters, lighthouses, emergency pumps, … not having to make a
special trip to wherever to let the man in (or read it yourself) every
month/quarter is quite significant.>>
If smart meters had been advertised for that purpose, or saving the cost
of employing meter readers, I would have favoured their introduction,
but I object to the false idea that people could save money by changing
their usage, as the readings provided aren't useful: they just show the
total consumption, not per device.
Some tariffs offer free electricity at certain times, and others offer variable pricing depending on hourly market rates. This isn’t possible without a smart meter.
(I think EVs are a good thing too - but only when we have between ten
and twenty times the charging infrastructure we have now [and
legislation capping the costs].)
NS82LzE5IDE5OjM0OjUyLCBSb2RlcmljayBTdGV3YXJ0IHdyb3RlOg0KPiBPbiBU
aHUsIDE5IEp1biAyMDI1IDE3OjI3OjI3ICswMTAwLCAiSi4gUC4gR2lsbGl2ZXIiDQo+IDxH NkpQR0AyNTVzb2Z0LnVrPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+PiAoSSB0aGluayBFVnMgYXJlIGEgZ29v ZCB0aGluZyB0b28gLSBidXQgb25seSB3aGVuIHdlIGhhdmUgYmV0d2VlbiB0ZW4NCj4+IGFu ZCB0d2VudHkgdGltZXMgdGhlIGNoYXJnaW5nIGluZnJhc3RydWN0dXJlIHdlIGhhdmUgbm93 IFthbmQNCj4+IGxlZ2lzbGF0aW9uIGNhcHBpbmcgdGhlIGNvc3RzXS4pDQo+IA0KPiBNb3Jl IGxpa2UgYSBodW5kcmVkLg0KPiANCj4gRG8gdGhlIHN1bXMgKG9yICJkbyB0aGUgbWF0aCIg
On 2025/6/17 14:18:34, Scott wrote:
[]
According to today's [Glasgow] Herald, nearly 100,000 Scots households
face being left without heating and hot water in just two weeks as
some 113,535 Scots households still have old electricity meters and
have not transitioned to smart ones. Is it correct that 88% of RTS
meters will shut down if the signal is lost? I assumed they would
remain on the tariff they were on when the signal was lost.
Is it possible that some homes have heating and/or hot water hard-wired
into the low-cost tariff, without customer override, such that if the
signal that switches between the tariffs is turned off, those systems
will never switch to that tariff? (Or, that some journalist has made
that deduction?)
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25141071.scotland-hardest-hit-big-The only way it could be done "for small groups of meters at a time",
bbc-radio-switch-off-crisis/
Also - An Energy UK spokesman said: "There will not be a mass switch
off of the RTS national signal on June 3. From this date, we will
begin a phase out of the RTS functionality for small groups of meters
at a time". I wonder if the BBC and Ofcom know about this and have a
plan to implement it.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25243055.health-emergency-
warning-100-000-scots-face-energy-cuts/
I wonder if the
AFAICS, is to keep the signal going, and physically change the meters in those small groups. Which is what I suspect they mean. (Well, I suppose
you _could_ turn off the main signal and set up lots of small
transmitters, but that would be horrendously expensive, and so problem- prone!)
On 19/06/2025 12:56, Tweed wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 18/06/2025 17:50, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/6/18 16:3:38, Tweed wrote:
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
How long does the novelty of checking how much energy you have used >>>>>> last? I had a spreadsheet at one time but soon lost interest.
I don't think that's the main advantage: I think it's not having to be >>>> in when the man calls to read the meter (or not having to do the
reading
yourself and then send it in). Not just that - after all, if you're
lucky it _can_ be a meter accessible from outside (though plenty
aren't)
- but for any sort of remote premises: not just second homes, but
remote
transmitters, lighthouses, emergency pumps, … not having to make a
special trip to wherever to let the man in (or read it yourself) every >>>> month/quarter is quite significant.>>
If smart meters had been advertised for that purpose, or saving the cost >>> of employing meter readers, I would have favoured their introduction,
but I object to the false idea that people could save money by changing
their usage, as the readings provided aren't useful: they just show the
total consumption, not per device.
Some tariffs offer free electricity at certain times, and others offer
variable pricing depending on hourly market rates. This isn’t possible
without a smart meter.
Economy 7 doesn't need a smart meter, just a timeswitch. Anything more complicated would be too much of an imposition, for example an
electricity supplier wanting me to cook my meals when it suits them.
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are offering >variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except with
petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 20:08:57 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the >_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are offering >variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except with
petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
Also known as 'hybrids that don't need to be charged'. If I could
afford a new car it would probably be one of these. They use petrol so
can be filled in minutes just like an ordinary car, but use less of it
for the same mileage, and the lithium battery is a tiny fraction
(about 1%) of the size of the battery in an all electric car so it
doesn't contribute much extra weight, if any, and it can be mounted in
a less dangerous position. Seems like a good design idea to me.
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are offering variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except with
petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
On 19/06/2025 20:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are
offering variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except
with petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
Are battery cars any more efficient that hybrids if you include all the factors?
I think it is more a case of jealousy from the greeny puritans that
someone might have something more practical than their battery car.
I said to someone previously, just imagine if you told someone twenty
years ago that the government would be trying to force everyone to use vehicles that take hours to 'refuel' and that have a limited range - I
know it has improved but still very poor when compared with a petrol or diesel car and only the expensive models have improved significantly.
On 19/06/2025 20:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I said to someone previously, just imagine if you told someone twenty
years ago that the government would be trying to force everyone to use vehicles that take hours to 'refuel' and that have a limited range - I
know it has improved but still very poor when compared with a petrol or diesel car and only the expensive models have improved significantly.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[...]
NS82LzE5IDE5OjM0OjUyLCBSb2RlcmljayBTdGV3YXJ0IHdyb3RlOg0KPiBPbiBU
aHUsIDE5IEp1biAyMDI1IDE3OjI3OjI3ICswMTAwLCAiSi4gUC4gR2lsbGl2ZXIiDQo+IDxH
NkpQR0AyNTVzb2Z0LnVrPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+PiAoSSB0aGluayBFVnMgYXJlIGEgZ29v
ZCB0aGluZyB0b28gLSBidXQgb25seSB3aGVuIHdlIGhhdmUgYmV0d2VlbiB0ZW4NCj4+IGFu
ZCB0d2VudHkgdGltZXMgdGhlIGNoYXJnaW5nIGluZnJhc3RydWN0dXJlIHdlIGhhdmUgbm93
IFthbmQNCj4+IGxlZ2lzbGF0aW9uIGNhcHBpbmcgdGhlIGNvc3RzXS4pDQo+IA0KPiBNb3Jl
IGxpa2UgYSBodW5kcmVkLg0KPiANCj4gRG8gdGhlIHN1bXMgKG9yICJkbyB0aGUgbWF0aCIg
Could you post in ASCII please?
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 20:08:57 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are offering
variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except with
petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
Also known as 'hybrids that don't need to be charged'. If I could
afford a new car it would probably be one of these. They use petrol so
can be filled in minutes just like an ordinary car, but use less of it
for the same mileage, and the lithium battery is a tiny fraction
(about 1%) of the size of the battery in an all electric car so it
doesn't contribute much extra weight, if any, and it can be mounted in
a less dangerous position. Seems like a good design idea to me.
The big disadvantage of any hybrid vehicle is that the power unit which
is inactive at any particular moment becomes a 'passenger' that the
active power unit has to carry.
On 2025/6/19 17:11:24, Max Demian wrote:
Economy 7 doesn't need a smart meter, just a timeswitch. Anything moreYou may feel that way, but some - perhaps less well-off than you or I - households may be willing to tweak things a bit. For example, I know at
complicated would be too much of an imposition, for example an
electricity supplier wanting me to cook my meals when it suits them.
least one (not poor, but whatever) happy to run their washing machine on
a free/cheap Sunday. And I can imagine many willing to move, say, the
daily wash by an hour or two if it saves them money. (Or even, though
fewer people, just knowing they're helping the country/planet.)
Basically, I think "smart" meters are a Good Thing: my main concern is
their ability to cut you off remotely. ("Oh, but that needs a court
order" - yes, at the moment [and I suspect those aren't hard to get];
but it only needs a change in the law, probably by "statutory
instrument" like OfCOm are so fond of using; the meters have the
_technical_ ability.)
On 2025/6/20 8:19:40, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:I don't think that was me! My post that Thunderbird shows as before
[...]
NS82LzE5IDE5OjM0OjUyLCBSb2RlcmljayBTdGV3YXJ0IHdyb3RlOg0KPiBPbiBU
aHUsIDE5IEp1biAyMDI1IDE3OjI3OjI3ICswMTAwLCAiSi4gUC4gR2lsbGl2ZXIiDQo+IDxH >>> NkpQR0AyNTVzb2Z0LnVrPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+PiAoSSB0aGluayBFVnMgYXJlIGEgZ29v >>> ZCB0aGluZyB0b28gLSBidXQgb25seSB3aGVuIHdlIGhhdmUgYmV0d2VlbiB0ZW4NCj4+IGFu >>> ZCB0d2VudHkgdGltZXMgdGhlIGNoYXJnaW5nIGluZnJhc3RydWN0dXJlIHdlIGhhdmUgbm93 >>> IFthbmQNCj4+IGxlZ2lzbGF0aW9uIGNhcHBpbmcgdGhlIGNvc3RzXS4pDQo+IA0KPiBNb3Jl >>> IGxpa2UgYSBodW5kcmVkLg0KPiANCj4gRG8gdGhlIHN1bXMgKG9yICJkbyB0aGUgbWF0aCIg
Could you post in ASCII please?
yours - which I posted 2025/6/19, 20:8:57 - contains only plain text.
On 2025/6/20 9:17:56, Mark Carver wrote:
[]
Statement from HM Government on the switch off
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-steps-in-to-protect-
consumers-with-old-energy-meters
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
"The RTS uses the same infrastructure as the BBC’s longwave radio signal
to tell older electricity meters when to switch between peak and off-
peak rates. The infrastructure underpinning the signal is reaching the
end of its life, meaning the equipment that sends the radio signal can
no longer be adequately maintained. "
It's not clear there whether they mean the data-specific parts; if they
mean the radio transmitters, we've already discussed that here -
dismissing the "only X valves left in the world" aspect, as solid-state transmitters for LF are widely available. If it _is_ the data part of
the system, then (a) it shouldn't be impossible to maintain it (b)
mentioning the BBC LW part is (if it _is_ the data part that's the
problem) misleading.
On 20/06/2025 09:47, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/6/20 9:17:56, Mark Carver wrote:
[]
Statement from HM Government on the switch off
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-steps-in-to-protect-
consumers-with-old-energy-meters
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
"The RTS uses the same infrastructure as the BBC’s longwave radio signal
to tell older electricity meters when to switch between peak and off-
peak rates. The infrastructure underpinning the signal is reaching the
end of its life, meaning the equipment that sends the radio signal can
no longer be adequately maintained. "
It's not clear there whether they mean the data-specific parts; if they
mean the radio transmitters, we've already discussed that here -
dismissing the "only X valves left in the world" aspect, as solid-state
transmitters for LF are widely available. If it _is_ the data part of
the system, then (a) it shouldn't be impossible to maintain it (b)
mentioning the BBC LW part is (if it _is_ the data part that's the
problem) misleading.
It's the power amps (i.e. the valves) that are shagged out at Droitwich.
It's a pair operating at 200 kW each, so if one does conk out, the other
will keep going, with of course only a drop of 3dB in radiated output
(about 1%) of the size of the battery in an all electric car so it
I think you're letting your prejudice (with which I agree, to some
extent!) run away with you - I don't think it's as low as 1%.
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 20:08:57 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers, nearly all of whom are offering
variants including hybrids that _cannot be charged_ (except with
petrol). I think there should be _no_ tax breaks for such hybrids.
Also known as 'hybrids that don't need to be charged'. If I could
afford a new car it would probably be one of these. They use petrol so
can be filled in minutes just like an ordinary car, but use less of it
for the same mileage, and the lithium battery is a tiny fraction
(about 1%) of the size of the battery in an all electric car so it
doesn't contribute much extra weight, if any, and it can be mounted in
a less dangerous position. Seems like a good design idea to me.
The big disadvantage of any hybrid vehicle is that the power unit which
is inactive at any particular moment becomes a 'passenger' that the
active power unit has to carry.
Some chargers are very fast. A friend used one in a National Trust car
park in Wiltshire, 300 kW charger (I'm not sure what that actually
means) but whatever it stuffed 36 kWh into his car in 4 minutes (adding
a range of 135 miles), but it cost, 90p/unit. He barely had time to
finish his cuppa.
If I were to drive 300 miles to Cornwall and back, of course I'd be
forced to use public chargers,
Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com> wrote:
[...]
If I were to drive 300 miles to Cornwall and back, of course I'd be
forced to use public chargers,
My spies in Cornwall tell me there is a public charger there but its
location is a closely guarded secret.
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 14:21:44 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
wrote:
Some chargers are very fast. A friend used one in a National Trust car
park in Wiltshire, 300 kW charger (I'm not sure what that actually
means) but whatever it stuffed 36 kWh into his car in 4 minutes (adding
a range of 135 miles), but it cost, 90p/unit. He barely had time to
finish his cuppa.
What it actually means is that a 300kW charger can provide 300kWh in
an hour. If it really supplied 36kWh in 4 minutes, that equates to
540kW, more than half a megawatt!
Was anybody else charging their car at the same time? 540kW seems an
enormous power level to expect from *each charger*, more likely to be
shared between them if several are used at once. So your car won't
charge so quickly if there are lots of customers.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/6/20 9:17:56, Mark Carver wrote:
[]
Statement from HM Government on the switch off
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-steps-in-to-protect-
consumers-with-old-energy-meters
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
"The RTS uses the same infrastructure as the BBC’s longwave radio signal >> to tell older electricity meters when to switch between peak and
off-peak rates. The infrastructure underpinning the signal is reaching
the end of its life, meaning the equipment that sends the radio signal
can no longer be adequately maintained. "
It's not clear there whether they mean the data-specific parts; if they
mean the radio transmitters, we've already discussed that here -
dismissing the "only X valves left in the world" aspect, as solid-state
transmitters for LF are widely available. If it _is_ the data part of
the system, then (a) it shouldn't be impossible to maintain it (b)
mentioning the BBC LW part is (if it _is_ the data part that's the
problem) misleading.
It’s a ministerial announcement, not a technical paper.
Even if you dismiss the argument about valves, the rest of the transmitter and antenna system need maintenance and occasional capital replacements. If the BBC feel they no longer wish to continue with LW transmissions in the short to medium term then Arqiva aren’t going to put much effort/funding into the equipment.
On 2025/6/20 12:15:41, MikeS wrote:
On 20/06/2025 11:21, JMB99 wrote:
On 19/06/2025 20:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Just imagine if you told somebody in 20 years time that there were
I said to someone previously, just imagine if you told someone twenty
years ago that the government would be trying to force everyone to use
vehicles that take hours to 'refuel' and that have a limited range - I
know it has improved but still very poor when compared with a petrol
or diesel car and only the expensive models have improved significantly. >>>
people who objected violently to efforts to reduce the rate of global
warming.
I dislike people who use the phrase, but I think that's what's sometimes >called a "straw man" argument.
Just because someone is against electric vehicles, doesn't mean they
object (violently or otherwise) to efforts to reduce the rate of global >warming. Even if they don't come up with an alternative suggestion,
still doesn't mean they're against attempting to reduce GR. In fact they
may be cross because EVs are presented as such a solution, when
something else might be more effective.
Personally, I like the idea of EVs - I just don't think we're anywhere
near properly set-up for them. And I'd like to see other infrastructure
- a lot more motorail (I don't think we have _any_ left now, apart from >Eurotunnel), and some overhead cables, at least for HGVs (this is
working well in parts of Germany).
Although I support EVs on the whole, I am nervous about (1) working conditions for mining lithium; (2) reliance on Chinese imports: and
(3) human rights in China.
On 20/06/2025 20:27, Scott wrote:
Although I support EVs on the whole, I am nervous about (1) workingAustralia currently produces more lithium (86,000 tonnes per year)than
conditions for mining lithium; (2) reliance on Chinese imports: and
(3) human rights in China.
any other country. There have been no complaints about the working
conditions there in the press. Chile is second (56,390 tonnes) and China
is third with 33,000 tonnes.
China produces about 80% of all batteries, while Tesla produce a large >proportion of the 10% produced in the USA in their Gigafactory, while
Germany is third in line, producing 6.5% of the World's supply.
By careful shopping, you can avoid Chinese lithium and batteries in your
car completely. It's not really possible to avoid them in your phones
and laptops yet.
The main environmental and working condition problems with lithium
ternary batteries are with the other metals used (Cobalt, nickel and >manganese), which are often sourced using child labour in war zones, but >lithium iron phosphate batteries only use those three materials, all of
which are extensively mined all over the world. The downside is that
they have a slightly lower specific capacity, so you can't travel as far
or talk as long per kilogramme or cubic inch of battery.
Just imagine if you told somebody in 20 years time that there were
people who objected violently to efforts to reduce the rate of global warming.
On 20/06/2025 16:50, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 14:21:44 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
wrote:
Some chargers are very fast. A friend used one in a National Trust car
park in Wiltshire, 300 kW charger (I'm not sure what that actually
means) but whatever it stuffed 36 kWh into his car in 4 minutes (adding
a range of 135 miles), but it cost, 90p/unit. He barely had time to
finish his cuppa.
What it actually means is that a 300kW charger can provide 300kWh in
an hour. If it really supplied 36kWh in 4 minutes, that equates to
540kW, more than half a megawatt!
Was anybody else charging their car at the same time? 540kW seems an
enormous power level to expect from *each charger*, more likely to be
shared between them if several are used at once. So your car won't
charge so quickly if there are lots of customers.
Possibly not. He sent me a screenshot of his car's management app, it
does indeed show 36 kWh being added in for four minutes, and 135 miles
being added in range.
It takes my 7 kW charger about 5 hours to add 36 kW (and the maths for
that stack up), so 36 kWh added in 4 mins, is 9 kWh/min, 9 x 60 = 540 kW !
Although I support EVs on the whole, I am nervous about (1) working >conditions for mining lithium; (2) reliance on Chinese imports: and
(3) human rights in China.
Ignoring the global warming arguments for a moment, eliminating exhaust emissions is a worthy goal. If you live or work away from a busy road it might not be an issue for you, but it affects very many. Even modern engine emissions clean up technologies do not produce a totally harmless exhaust.
On 20/06/2025 12:15, MikeS wrote:
Just imagine if you told somebody in 20 years time that there
were people who objected violently to efforts to reduce the rate
of global warming.
They would probably ask 'what global warming?'
In article <1038e1q$dmrt$1@dont-email.me>,
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
Engine design has been steadily improving over the years but I
suspect improvements stopped when it was decide to stop petrol
engine production in a few years time.
I read last weak that Audi have changed their minds and have decided
to continue with internal combustion engines.
Makes me wonder how much more it might have improved if development continued.
We can hope we might find out.
Bob.
Engine design has been steadily improving over the years but I
suspect improvements stopped when it was decide to stop petrol
engine production in a few years time.
Makes me wonder how much more it might have improved if development continued.
To quote Tom Lehrer:
It's so simple -
so very simple -
- that only -
- a child can do it!
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 20:27:38 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
Although I support EVs on the whole, I am nervous about (1) working
conditions for mining lithium; (2) reliance on Chinese imports: and
(3) human rights in China.
Another important consideration would be whether there is enough
lithium in existence in the entire world for all the electric vehicles
we would need. I've seen some estimates that suggest that there isn't.
I agree that in principle, electric motors do seem to be a cleaner
neater way of propelling vehicles. However, in practice we have more
than a hundred years worth of automotive technology with a global
supporting infrastructure that just works.
Rod.
Ignoring the global warming arguments for a moment, eliminating exhaust >emissions is a worthy goal. If you live or work away from a busy road it >might not be an issue for you, but it affects very many. Even modern engine >emissions clean up technologies do not produce a totally harmless exhaust.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-23147007
Here is an aerial view of Leicester taken from a plane fitted with NOx >detectors. The pollution hotspots strongly correlate with the major roads.
Motorail is hopelessly inefficient. You only have to look at the ChannelWhat, it's more efficient to (say) have 100 cars drive individually
Tunnel shuttle operation.
from, say, London to Newcastle than put them on a train?
On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 14:13:58 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
Motorail is hopelessly inefficient. You only have to look at the Channel >>> Tunnel shuttle operation.What, it's more efficient to (say) have 100 cars drive individually
from, say, London to Newcastle than put them on a train?
When you consider the extra time taken to drive between the nearest
motorail terminals and the places you actually want to go to, not to
mention the extra cost of a train journey for up to five people, it
would be cheaper and in most cases quicker just to make the whole
journey by car. You'd struggle to persuade the average motorist that something like motorail was "more efficient" (whatever that means).
RodJohn
On 2025/6/22 11:12:25, Bob Latham wrote:
But these days in all honesty, I don't know of any authority to
quiz that would return truth. IPCC, UN, WHO, BBC, met office,
main stream media, government etc. none have any credibility as
truth tellers.
Agreed on most of those, but I tend to trust the met. office, at
least for short range forecasting. If you're lumping them in with
everyone else who talks about global warming, then I still trust
them more than most you mention.
(Though I _tend_ to _trust_ the
BBC, though I find them _irritating_ often enough
Oh, I like the quietness, and I think the low-speed acceleration -
Like admitting one liked ABBA in the '70s?
On 2025/6/22 13:26:9, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 14:13:58 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
Motorail is hopelessly inefficient. You only have to look at the Channel >>> Tunnel shuttle operation.What, it's more efficient to (say) have 100 cars drive individually
from, say, London to Newcastle than put them on a train?
When you consider the extra time taken to drive between the nearest motorail terminals and the places you actually want to go to, not to
Since we've let the motorail system wither (and never really developed
it even in its heyday), that's a good point.
mention the extra cost of a train journey for up to five people, it
I never travelled by motorail, and haven't been on Eurostar except as a non-in-car passenger. Did they/do they really charge per person? I
always assumed you paid by the car.
would be cheaper and in most cases quicker just to make the whole
journey by car. You'd struggle to persuade the average motorist that something like motorail was "more efficient" (whatever that means).
You may well be right. I just feel there is a need for something more efficient (not sure what I mean by that - some combination of
fuel/energy, and personal time/effort) than lots of vehicles moving individually in the same direction, but giving more individual freedom
than just going by train (ability to move around when you get there,
luggage concerns]).
Not that the public transport system (train and bus) couldn't do with considerable improvement. It works moderately well within London, and
also some other places - Tyne and Wear for example. In other places it's
both expensive and rare.>
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers
electricity, anyway; the gas readings are sufficiently infrequent … butThat ellipsis character is the sort of thing that makes TB use base64
Engine design has been steadily improving over the years but I suspect improvements stopped when it was decide to stop petrol engine production
in a few years time.
Makes me wonder how much more it might have improved if development continued.
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
The _dishonesty_ over EVs is what irritates me - combined with the
_cynicism_ of some of the manufacturers
BYD (of Seal/Dolphin/Seagull fame) appear to think it's normal to pay journalists and influencers alike, to say (or not say) certain things
about their cars, and have sued 37 of them for not toeing the line.
Since we've let the motorail system wither
The MET office are very much a part of the climate scam
In article <1038q7e$ftgh$2@dont-email.me>,[]
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
Agreed on most of those, but I tend to trust the met. office, at
least for short range forecasting. If you're lumping them in with
everyone else who talks about global warming, then I still trust
them more than most you mention.
The MET office are very much a part of the climate scam, they're
still colouring weather maps black for heat drama and issuing absurd
heat warnings for a warm summer's day. University programmed
(captured by ideology like almost all institutions in the UK).
(Though I _tend_ to _trust_ the
BBC, though I find them _irritating_ often enough
Honestly, 20 years ago the one organisation I wanted to work for
above all others was the BBC. So much so, that my then Boss got me a
BBC mug for my coffee. But having watched their reporting on Brexit, elections, grooming gangs, climate, gender, Gaza, Israel and a lot
more beside, I long realised they were an absolute disgrace to
journalism and had no interest in the truth on any subject. Anything
that goes against their agenda is pushed aside for their propaganda.
Oh, I like the quietness, and I think the low-speed acceleration -
I can understand that.
Like admitting one liked ABBA in the '70s?
I did like ABBA back then and admitted it. :-)
Bob.
On 2025/6/22 14:2:34, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <1038q7e$ftgh$2@dont-email.me>,
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
The MET office are very much a part of the climate scam, they're
We differ on whether it's a scam, so it's probably best to bring
this discussion to an amicable close (-:
heat warnings for a warm summer's day. University programmed
I have no problem with TPTB finally admitting that heat can be
harmful to some people (whereas previously it was "grin and bear
it", or even "enjoy it, it's rare").
And things _are_ hotting up -
we passed 40° a few years ago, whereas we hadn't before (since
records began). Whether that's climate change or just random
variation I leave to others.
(Oh dear, that means Liz won't be able to read this post.)
(captured by ideology like almost all institutions in the UK).
I'm not into "ideologies", or that sort of thing.[]
(Though I _tend_ to _trust_ the BBC, though I find them
_irritating_ often enough
Honestly, 20 years ago the one organisation I wanted to work for
above all others was the BBC. So much so, that my then Boss got
me a BBC mug for my coffee. But having watched their reporting on
Brexit, elections, grooming gangs, climate, gender, Gaza, Israel
and a lot
I didn't say I _agreed_ with them. But we can all see which way you
lean!
more beside, I long realised they were an absolute disgrace to
journalism and had no interest in the truth on any subject.
Anything that goes against their agenda is pushed aside for their propaganda.
I went for an interview with them, around 1980 - but it was an
engineering job, not journalistic.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:40:17 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
I emailed the BBC this afternoon to ask if there was a known LW switch off >>> date. The response is
“There is currently no confirmed date for the closure of Long Wave.”
Thanks for sharing this. I wanted to look at the Droitwich transmitter
before it closed, so it seems there is no rush now.
It looks to me that the current RTS public facing campaign is design to
scare people who are resistant to having a smart meter installed. There’s all sorts of wibble about contacting your supplier. However, the utilities know exactly who has an RTS meter.
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:40:17 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
I emailed the BBC this afternoon to ask if there was a known LW switch off >> date. The response is
“There is currently no confirmed date for the closure of Long Wave.â€
Thanks for sharing this. I wanted to look at the Droitwich transmitter
before it closed, so it seems there is no rush now.
On 17/06/2025 18:58, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:40:17 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
I emailed the BBC this afternoon to ask if there was a known LW switch off >>> date. The response is
“There is currently no confirmed date for the closure of Long Wave.”
Thanks for sharing this. I wanted to look at the Droitwich transmitter
before it closed, so it seems there is no rush now.
It will still carry R5L and Talk Sport. The Beeb have said somewhere R5L
on AM will cease by the end of 2027. TalkSport have said nothing yet,
but I suspect they will cease a day after R5L does (or vice versa !)
However, I read recently the local MP and others have now managed to get
the masts listed ? (Not sure (if true) who's going to pay for the
mechanical maintenance in perpetuity ?)
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which offer
cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily >accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers.
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as
changing the receivers.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:14:59 +0100, John WilliamsonBut you still need to replace the receivers, and as others have said you >might as well fit a smart meter which can potentially have much more >functionality. So there is no financial or functional case for this.
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into >>>>> the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit. >>>>>
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers. >>>
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as
changing the receivers.
Why would they need to visit all the DAB transmitters? Could they not
modify the multiplex? I thought a DAB signal was able to carry extra
data anyway.
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
(and when will the FM be switched off?)
Putting aside the politics of Smart Metering, the data comms that system
uses can easily replace the functionality of RTS hundreds of times over !
On 30/06/2025 16:23, Mark Carver wrote:
Putting aside the politics of Smart Metering, the data comms that
system uses can easily replace the functionality of RTS hundreds of
times over !
Must be twenty years ago, before I retired, that we had to update some
of the meters on our sites. There was just a small plug-in card to
change which did the communication to somewhere via a mobile phone style
data service.
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:14:59 +0100, John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into >>>> the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit. >>>>
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers.
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as
changing the receivers.
Why would they need to visit all the DAB transmitters? Could they not
modify the multiplex? I thought a DAB signal was able to carry extra
data anyway.
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers.
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into
the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as
changing the receivers.
On 30/06/2025 15:32, Scott wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:14:59 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into >>>>> the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which
offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit. >>>>>
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters..
There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers. >>>
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as
changing the receivers.
Why would they need to visit all the DAB transmitters? Could they not
modify the multiplex? I thought a DAB signal was able to carry extra
data anyway.
FFS, this whole idea is pure fantasy. Has the heat got to you all !
The RTS receivers are being replaced by modern Smart Meters. Are you >suggesting it would be easier in some hair brained project to modify
300,000 RTS units to receive DAB or FM, and then devise some new way to
carry the data of those transmitter networks ?
Just think about what you're suggesting. April 1st was 3 months ago
Putting aside the politics of Smart Metering, the data comms that system
uses can easily replace the functionality of RTS hundreds of times over !
I'm sure you're right but isn't the problem that there are locations
with no mobile signal so replacing the RTS with a smart meter would
not provide a solution? Changing the licence conditions to force
mobile networks to provide 100% coverage would be hugely expensive.
Surely they will need to look at other options at some stage?
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/6/30 15:14:59, John Williamson wrote:
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost asI would agree; in the vast majority of cases, the main cost of doing
changing the receivers.
such a replacement is labour - the cost of getting the man and van to
each premises. I'd be surprised if an RTS-receiver meter (by whatever
means, LW or otherwise) costs less than a "Smart" meter, given the
relative numbers of each being made.
In the few cases where a smart meter can't be fitted (mainly coverage
reasons, I presume), then some sort of timeswitch (battery or clockwork
backed) - for which the technology already exists (though in some cases
ancient); OK, less versatile than switching via LW or whatever, but the
numbers must be sufficiently low that the effect on national grid load
would be negligible (and the customer could be given a generous tariff).
A smart meter has an integrated battery backed clock and can be programmed
to perform dual rate metering without the need for comms.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:23:19 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>You don’t need a data connection for a smart meter to act in dumb mode. >Providing it has been programmed at installation, it will be able to
wrote:
On 30/06/2025 15:32, Scott wrote:I'm sure you're right but isn't the problem that there are locations
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:14:59 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily >>>>> accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers. >>>>>
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters.. >>>>>> There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into >>>>>>> the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which >>>>>>> offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit. >>>>>>
LW is just 3 transmitters.
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as >>>>> changing the receivers.
Why would they need to visit all the DAB transmitters? Could they not
modify the multiplex? I thought a DAB signal was able to carry extra
data anyway.
FFS, this whole idea is pure fantasy. Has the heat got to you all !
The RTS receivers are being replaced by modern Smart Meters. Are you
suggesting it would be easier in some hair brained project to modify
300,000 RTS units to receive DAB or FM, and then devise some new way to
carry the data of those transmitter networks ?
Just think about what you're suggesting. April 1st was 3 months ago
Putting aside the politics of Smart Metering, the data comms that system >>> uses can easily replace the functionality of RTS hundreds of times over ! >>
with no mobile signal so replacing the RTS with a smart meter would
not provide a solution? Changing the licence conditions to force
mobile networks to provide 100% coverage would be hugely expensive.
Surely they will need to look at other options at some stage?
operate Economy 7. It has an internal, battery backed, clock. See also
meters with mechanical time switches.
On 30/06/2025 18:46, Scott wrote:
I'm sure you're right but isn't the problem that there are locations
with no mobile signal so replacing the RTS with a smart meter would
not provide a solution? Changing the licence conditions to force
mobile networks to provide 100% coverage would be hugely expensive.
Surely they will need to look at other options at some stage?
What proportion of homes now have broadband? There was a suggestion
that the 'smart' meter could communicate through the home's WiFi - a reduction could be made in electricity bill as compensation.
On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 06:56:19 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:23:19 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>You don’t need a data connection for a smart meter to act in dumb mode.
wrote:
On 30/06/2025 15:32, Scott wrote:I'm sure you're right but isn't the problem that there are locations
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:14:59 +0100, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 30/06/2025 14:57, Rink wrote:
Op 17-6-2025 om 20:22 schreef John Williamson:There are at most a few hundred DAB or FM transmitters, all in easily >>>>>> accessible places. There are currently many, many thousands of receivers.
On 17/06/2025 18:26, Scott wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?Only by replacing all the receivers, many of which are integrated into >>>>>>>> the meters. Might as well carry on installing smart meters, which >>>>>>>> offer cost savings for the suppliers.
Connecting the computers to the transmitters is the cheap and easy bit.
Adding to FM or DAB also needs to update all FM or DAB transmitters.. >>>>>>> There are many, many FM and DAB transmitters.
LW is just 3 transmitters.
Replacing the old meters with smart neters is about the same cost as >>>>>> changing the receivers.
Why would they need to visit all the DAB transmitters? Could they not >>>>> modify the multiplex? I thought a DAB signal was able to carry extra >>>>> data anyway.
FFS, this whole idea is pure fantasy. Has the heat got to you all !
The RTS receivers are being replaced by modern Smart Meters. Are you
suggesting it would be easier in some hair brained project to modify
300,000 RTS units to receive DAB or FM, and then devise some new way to >>>> carry the data of those transmitter networks ?
Just think about what you're suggesting. April 1st was 3 months ago
Putting aside the politics of Smart Metering, the data comms that system >>>> uses can easily replace the functionality of RTS hundreds of times over ! >>>
with no mobile signal so replacing the RTS with a smart meter would
not provide a solution? Changing the licence conditions to force
mobile networks to provide 100% coverage would be hugely expensive.
Surely they will need to look at other options at some stage?
Providing it has been programmed at installation, it will be able to
operate Economy 7. It has an internal, battery backed, clock. See also
meters with mechanical time switches.
Including changing the time?
On 30/06/2025 19:11, JMB99 wrote:
What proportion of homes now have broadband? There was a suggestion
that the 'smart' meter could communicate through the home's WiFi - a
reduction could be made in electricity bill as compensation.
Would you want to give your energy supplier your Wi-Fi password?
You don't need to, you can set up an account for the smart meter
with its own password, or use a guest account for it which doesn't
need a password, or you can tell the router that the smart meter
is a trusted device based on its MAC number.
In article <mchtanF1t95U1@mid.individual.net>,
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
You don't need to, you can set up an account for the smart meter
with its own password, or use a guest account for it which doesn't
need a password, or you can tell the router that the smart meter
is a trusted device based on its MAC number.
My router could do the guest account that doesn't need a password and
indeed I could give it WAN only access so not on the house LAN, all
good.
But no password based on mac address, are you sure?
I thought mac filtering could block a specific mac addresses or you
can allow a set of mac address through but they still then need user credentials don't they?
Bob.
They need some form of credentials, but only for the guest account.
The guest account does not need a password and is not normally
encrypted. If you block all except the meter's MAC number, that
stops passers by using your wifi.
On 01/07/2025 11:39, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/06/2025 19:11, JMB99 wrote:You don't need to, you can set up an account for the smart meter with
What proportion of homes now have broadband? There was a suggestion
that the 'smart' meter could communicate through the home's WiFi - a
reduction could be made in electricity bill as compensation.
Would you want to give your energy supplier your Wi-Fi password?
its own password, or use a guest account for it which doesn't need a password, or you can tell the router that the smart meter is a trusted
device based on its MAC number.
Would you want to give your energy supplier your Wi-Fi password?
I suspect RTS was a solution looking for a problem.
On 01/07/2025 11:58, John Williamson wrote:
On 01/07/2025 11:39, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/06/2025 19:11, JMB99 wrote:You don't need to, you can set up an account for the smart meter with
What proportion of homes now have broadband? There was a suggestion
that the 'smart' meter could communicate through the home's WiFi - a
reduction could be made in electricity bill as compensation.
Would you want to give your energy supplier your Wi-Fi password?
its own password, or use a guest account for it which doesn't need a
password, or you can tell the router that the smart meter is a trusted
device based on its MAC number.
Beyond the ability of most users, who just copy the SSID and password
from the label on the underside of the router.
John Williamson wrote:
Max Demian wrote:Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier broadband service ...
Beyond the ability of most users, who just copy the SSID and password
from the label on the underside of the router.
As the smart meter needs to be installed by a qualified person, all of
it can be done by the installer, if suitably trained.
Max Demian wrote:Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier broadband service ...
Beyond the ability of most users, who just copy the SSID and password
from the label on the underside of the router.
As the smart meter needs to be installed by a qualified person, all of
it can be done by the installer, if suitably trained.
Andy Burns wrote:No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC communication types helps?
Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier
broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use indefinitely, then?
John Williamson wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC communication types helps?
Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier
broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 01/07/2025 18:36, Andy Burns wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Max Demian wrote:Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier
Beyond the ability of most users, who just copy the SSID and password >>>>> from the label on the underside of the router.
As the smart meter needs to be installed by a qualified person, all of >>>> it can be done by the installer, if suitably trained.
broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
What problem does RTS solve that a smart meter without comms doesn’t?
The cellphone landscape is changing. Vodafone have two IoT products
that use 4G specifications but not the 4G protocols we are all used
to using. These run at slow rates, ideal for meters, and have a much
bigger range than conventional 4G.
If there is a wired BB connection to the premises,it can cover areas
where there is no cellphone signal.
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 01/07/2025 19:38, Andy Burns wrote:
John Williamson wrote:If there is a wired BB connection to the premises,it can cover areas
Andy Burns wrote:No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC
Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier >>>>> broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
communication types helps?
where there is no cellphone signal.
The cellphone landscape is changing. Vodafone have two IoT products that
use 4G specifications but not the 4G protocols we are all used to using. >These run at slow rates, ideal for meters, and have a much bigger range
than conventional 4G. That, together with many more not spots being filled
in and the 3 Vodafone merger will probably leave many more smart meters in >range. Vodafone are taking over from O2 for smart meter comms in the south. >I’m not sure what is happening with the north contract. This will probably >remove the possible need for WiFi connections in the medium term.
On 01/07/2025 19:38, Andy Burns wrote:
John Williamson wrote:If there is a wired BB connection to the premises,it can cover areas
Andy Burns wrote:No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC
Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier >>>> broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
communication types helps?
where there is no cellphone signal.
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
What problem does RTS solve that a smart meter without comms doesn’t?
i thought that smart meters could use any mobile service they could
find?..
No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC communication types helps?
If you read the full specification, RTS can be used to not only switch between tariffs at variable times, but also control bulk loads if
desired and the correct switch is installed on the premises. It can even
let supplier "A" set different times to supplier "B" or "C" on a random basis.
One idea (or does it exist?) I've heard of, which makes sense, is for a
fibre broadband ONT to have a zigbee transceiver in it purely for smart metering.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/7/1 18:57:23, Tweed wrote:
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
[]
On-demand (or on-lack-of-demand) switching, as opposed to switching at aI'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
What problem does RTS solve that a smart meter without comms doesn’t?
fixed time. In other words, switching on major loads when the grid has
spare capacity, rather than at fixed times only.
In _practice_, I very much doubt that the number of premises where a
smart meter can't receive comm.s - i. e., would operate as just a dumb
timeswitch - represent a significant factor when it comes to grid loading. >>
Have any significant numbers of consumers ever had a variable timed off
peak tariff controlled by RTS? My last house had a RTS receiver and Economy 7. It switched at the same time on the dot.
On 01/07/2025 18:36, Andy Burns wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Max Demian wrote:Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier
Beyond the ability of most users, who just copy the SSID and password
from the label on the underside of the router.
As the smart meter needs to be installed by a qualified person, all of
it can be done by the installer, if suitably trained.
broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use indefinitely, then?
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 11:57:45 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
wrote:
[snip]
Apparently legacy Scottish Hydro Board (aka Northern Scotland)
installations have very dynamic RTS switching. Even keeping the heating
on longer on extra cold nights.
This is also the area where the bulk (100k) RTS switches are still in
use, and of course the same area where the Arqiva radio network is
particularly useless !
I saw a click bait article from a Shetland Is local paper that suggested
there is NO Arqiva Smart Meter network there, and thousands of RTS
installations
Does this suggest the 'phased transition' could involve retaining
Burghead, possibly running on reduced power?
Apparently legacy Scottish Hydro Board (aka Northern Scotland)
installations have very dynamic RTS switching. Even keeping the heating
on longer on extra cold nights.
This is also the area where the bulk (100k) RTS switches are still in
use, and of course the same area where the Arqiva radio network is >particularly useless !
I saw a click bait article from a Shetland Is local paper that suggested >there is NO Arqiva Smart Meter network there, and thousands of RTS >installations
Then you
will have Mrs Miggins who turns off the power to the ONT at bedtime and
when away on holiday.
There are various issues oop north.
No, I don't think so. I'm sure the use of 'phased' in this context has nothing to do with the three LW sites and any switch offs/power
reductions, but Burghead may well account for a proportionally higher
number of RTS systems
Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com> wrote:
On 02/07/2025 07:11, Tweed wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:Apparently legacy Scottish Hydro Board (aka Northern Scotland)
On 2025/7/1 18:57:23, Tweed wrote:
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
[]
On-demand (or on-lack-of-demand) switching, as opposed to switching at a >>>> fixed time. In other words, switching on major loads when the grid has >>>> spare capacity, rather than at fixed times only.I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
What problem does RTS solve that a smart meter without comms doesn’t? >>>>>
In _practice_, I very much doubt that the number of premises where a
smart meter can't receive comm.s - i. e., would operate as just a dumb >>>> timeswitch - represent a significant factor when it comes to grid loading. >>>>
Have any significant numbers of consumers ever had a variable timed off
peak tariff controlled by RTS? My last house had a RTS receiver and Economy >>> 7. It switched at the same time on the dot.
installations have very dynamic RTS switching. Even keeping the heating
on longer on extra cold nights.
This is also the area where the bulk (100k) RTS switches are still in
use, and of course the same area where the Arqiva radio network is
particularly useless !
I saw a click bait article from a Shetland Is local paper that suggested
there is NO Arqiva Smart Meter network there, and thousands of RTS
installations
There are various issues oop north. I have a smart meter on the north
system that is causing head scratching. As we know, the gas meter uses a >local radio link to send its data via the electricity meter’s comms hub. >Thing is, my gas meter reports readings but my electricity meter does not. >The technician has been out twice fiddling with his laptop. Next stage is
to replace the electricity meter. Part of the problem with the system is
that there’s many stages of indirection between the customer’s energy >supplier and the chap who turns up. Sub-sub-sub contractor and an Indian
help desk in the middle. It wouldn’t surprise me if many of the supposed >comms issues have nothing to do with RF. Of course, Capita are in the
middle of this spider’s web.
tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
In article <1041btu$30us2$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> scribeth thus
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
On 01/07/2025 19:38, Andy Burns wrote:
John Williamson wrote:If there is a wired BB connection to the premises,it can cover areas
Andy Burns wrote:No, but I don't see that using wifi instead of one of the official DCC >>>>> communication types helps?
Then in a few months time, the household switches to a cheaper/crappier >>>>>>> broadband service ...
I'm guessing you would prefer to keep RTS amd R4 Long wave in use
indefinitely, then?
where there is no cellphone signal.
The cellphone landscape is changing. Vodafone have two IoT products that >>> use 4G specifications but not the 4G protocols we are all used to using. >>> These run at slow rates, ideal for meters, and have a much bigger range
than conventional 4G. That, together with many more not spots being filled >>> in and the 3 Vodafone merger will probably leave many more smart meters in >>> range. Vodafone are taking over from O2 for smart meter comms in the south. >>> I’m not sure what is happening with the north contract. This will probably
remove the possible need for WiFi connections in the medium term.
Is that anything to do with this new 800 or 900 MHz LoRa or whatever its
called Internet of things network?
Also i thought that smart meters could use any mobile service they could
find?..
See here https://iot.vodafone.com/solutions/lpwa-technologies
No, smart meters currently use o2’s 2G network in the south area.
I can’t find any information as to whether Vodafone’s comms will be limited
to the south area currently under the o2 contract, or will it be
nationwide.
The 450 MHz north area system isn’t that effective.
On 02/07/2025 14:01, Mark Carver wrote:
No, I don't think so. I'm sure the use of 'phased' in this context has
nothing to do with the three LW sites and any switch offs/power
reductions, but Burghead may well account for a proportionally higher
number of RTS systems
I suspect that RTS use might be already lower in the North of Scotland >because of the poor coverage of Long Wave.
tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
Surely a system like that will need something like a multi site cellular
setup as the TX power from the meter will be very low and won't get that
far in the terrain like Scotland?..
Yes i do know it has flat'ish bits but even so,,
and meters are usually well screened in under stair cupboards etc
Lots of stone built properties are one issue. The other is that the north area comms modules don’t appear to have the provision for an external antenna, unlike the cellular ones in the south. Nor can they act in a mesh network with nearby meters that do have a signal, again unlike the south.
Yes, it does appear to be far more limited than I thought it would be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burghead_Transmitting_Station#/media/ File:Moray_UK_location_map.svg
I suppose the RTS coverage may a bit better if lower signal strength
can be used.
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:35, Tweed wrote:No use for active switching of off peak heater loads, which Mark tells us
Then you
will have Mrs Miggins who turns off the power to the ONT at bedtime and
when away on holiday.
So the data for the bill is delayed by a couple of weeks, hardly going
to bankrupt the electricity supplier.
is a thing in parts of Scotland. Anything that involves something under the control of Joe Public is going to add a support load to the supplier.
On 02/07/2025 14:01, Mark Carver wrote:
No, I don't think so. I'm sure the use of 'phased' in this context has
nothing to do with the three LW sites and any switch offs/power
reductions, but Burghead may well account for a proportionally higher
number of RTS systems
I suspect that RTS use might be already lower in the North of Scotland because of the poor coverage of Long Wave.
On 03/07/2025 20:14, Scott wrote:
Yes, it does appear to be far more limited than I thought it would be:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burghead_Transmitting_Station#/media/
File:Moray_UK_location_map.svg
I suppose the RTS coverage may a bit better if lower signal strength
can be used.
You often read people from down South who think Long Wave has universal >coverage. Might have had in the past when everyone had long wire
antenna and much less electrical interference'
Years ago we were sent a frequency standard to use at work that used >Droitwich (probably when still 200 KHz) but it was useless and we
returned it.
We had one like that but gave it away, changed it for one of Leo Bodnars
GPS units excellent performer can set any output frequency you like:)..
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 Mark Carver wrote:
On 20/06/2025 09:47, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/6/20 9:17:56, Mark Carver wrote:
[]
Statement from HM Government on the switch off
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
"The RTS uses the same infrastructure as the BBC’s longwave radio signal >>> to tell older electricity meters when to switch between peak and off-
peak rates. The infrastructure underpinning the signal is reaching the
end of its life, meaning the equipment that sends the radio signal can
no longer be adequately maintained. "
It's not clear there whether they mean the data-specific parts; if they
mean the radio transmitters, we've already discussed that here -
dismissing the "only X valves left in the world" aspect, as solid-state
transmitters for LF are widely available. If it _is_ the data part of
the system, then (a) it shouldn't be impossible to maintain it (b)
mentioning the BBC LW part is (if it _is_ the data part that's the
problem) misleading.
It's the power amps (i.e. the valves) that are shagged out at Droitwich.
It's a pair operating at 200 kW each, so if one does conk out, the other
will keep going, with of course only a drop of 3dB in radiated output
Do the LW transmitters still operate at full power? I thought the
trend was to reduce output at AM transmitters to cut costs (and also
because there is less foreign interference).
Op 20-6-2025 om 17:40 schreef Scott:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 Mark Carver wrote:
On 20/06/2025 09:47, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/6/20 9:17:56, Mark Carver wrote:
[]
Statement from HM Government on the switch off
<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-steps-in-to-protect- consumers-with-old-energy-meters>
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase >>>> out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating >>>> and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
"The RTS uses the same infrastructure as the BBC’s longwave radio
signal
to tell older electricity meters when to switch between peak and off-
peak rates. The infrastructure underpinning the signal is reaching the >>>> end of its life, meaning the equipment that sends the radio signal can >>>> no longer be adequately maintained. "
It's not clear there whether they mean the data-specific parts; if they >>>> mean the radio transmitters, we've already discussed that here -
dismissing the "only X valves left in the world" aspect, as solid-state >>>> transmitters for LF are widely available. If it _is_ the data part of
the system, then (a) it shouldn't be impossible to maintain it (b)
mentioning the BBC LW part is (if it _is_ the data part that's the
problem) misleading.
It's the power amps (i.e. the valves) that are shagged out at Droitwich. >>>
It's a pair operating at 200 kW each, so if one does conk out, the other >>> will keep going, with of course only a drop of 3dB in radiated output
Do the LW transmitters still operate at full power? I thought the
trend was to reduce output at AM transmitters to cut costs (and also
because there is less foreign interference).
According to this site Droitwich is at 250 kW.
I thought it used to be 500 kW.
<http://www.mwlist.org/mwlist_quick_and_easy.php?area=1&kHz=198>
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for the
TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop using LW?
It would be interesting to know how many people are actually listening to Radio4 on LW these days.
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for the
TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop using LW?
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using
certain SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays
for the TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people
stop using LW?
It would be interesting to know how many people are actually
listening to Radio4 on LW these days.
I use it for listening on journeys in the van, the quality is
adequate in the circumstances, the signal never fades for more than
a few moments in underpasses and there is no need for re-tuning.
When I am camping, I use a small radio which has MW, SW and VHF.
It is a real nuisance to find a suitable station and I often can't
be bothered with it and give up.
Ok, I’ll rephrase my query - I wonder how many people listening to R4
LW can’t listen by any other means.
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for the
TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop using LW?
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 18:56:45 +0200, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for the
TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop using LW?
Does it make a big difference when the logarithmic effect is taken
into account? Given that most of the interference seems to come from electronic equipment, does doubling or halving the output make a big difference? Also, I understood - maybe less so for LW - that there is
now a lot less foreign interference to contend with.
On 14/07/2025 09:13, Scott wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 18:56:45 +0200, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain SDRs. >>>
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for the
TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop using LW?
Does it make a big difference when the logarithmic effect is taken
into account? Given that most of the interference seems to come from
electronic equipment, does doubling or halving the output make a big
difference? Also, I understood - maybe less so for LW - that there is
now a lot less foreign interference to contend with.
Where I live (a large village) the LW and MW bands are full of
electrical and electronic interference. Even the thumping great (albeit
3dB less) 198 signal is unlistenable (unless you’re a die hard anorak)
However, I think it takes a lot of interference to stop RTS decoding
from working (well enough).
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 18:56:45 +0200, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain
SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for
the TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop
using LW?
Does it make a big difference when the logarithmic effect is taken
into account? Given that most of the interference seems to come from electronic equipment, does doubling or halving the output make a big difference? Also, I understood - maybe less so for LW - that there is
now a lot less foreign interference to contend with.
On 14.07.2025 09:13 Uhr Scott wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 18:56:45 +0200, Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
On 13.07.2025 15:13 Uhr Mark Carver wrote:
Yes, someone had told me recently that Droitwich 198 reduced its
power from 500 to 250 kW about a year ago.
Thanks. It seems that the signal power is lower when using certain
SDRs.
Is the reason known for that?
Is it only the situation that the electricity industry now pays for
the TX power and not the BBC or do they want to make people stop
using LW?
Does it make a big difference when the logarithmic effect is taken
into account? Given that most of the interference seems to come from
electronic equipment, does doubling or halving the output make a big
difference? Also, I understood - maybe less so for LW - that there is
now a lot less foreign interference to contend with.
No other station is operating on 198 kHz anymore.
Apart from the two in Scotland of course. Would reducing the power of Droitwich affect the 'mush area' where the signal is received from
more than one transmitter? A beneficial effect I assume?
On 14.07.2025 09:13 Uhr Scott wrote:[]
difference? Also, I understood - maybe less so for LW - that there is
now a lot less foreign interference to contend with.
No other station is operating on 198 kHz anymore.
You don?t need a data connection for a smart meter to act in dumb mode. >>Providing it has been programmed at installation, it will be able to >>operate Economy 7. It has an internal, battery backed, clock. See also >>meters with mechanical time switches.
Including changing the time?
(Other people still alive - and isn't one of the Ronnies?
[I know the other one wasn't as they had Four Candles at his funeral.])
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
any oldie who struggles to adapt to the ways of the twenty first century
need only ask their grandchildren for help.
it stuffed 36 kWh into his car in 4 minutes (adding
a range of 135 miles), but it cost, 90p/unit.
If I were to drive 300 miles to Cornwall and back, of course I'd be
forced to use public chargers, but that would be for holidays etc, not routine, so the overall cost would still be much lower than ICE
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:26:14 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> >wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
No, and even if it could, how would it help when all the meters are tuned
to long wave?
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:41:48 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:26:14 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
No, and even if it could, how would it help when all the meters are tuned
to long wave?
Unsurprisingly, I did think of that. What I thought was in an area
with no mobile coverage, where a conventional smart meter cannot be
used, a different type of meter could be installed at a cost less than extending the mobile network. Then I asked the question!
On 2025/7/15 10:5:34, Scott wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:41:48 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
<abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:26:14 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> >>> wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
No, and even if it could, how would it help when all the meters are tuned >>> to long wave?
Unsurprisingly, I did think of that. What I thought was in an area
with no mobile coverage, where a conventional smart meter cannot be
used, a different type of meter could be installed at a cost less than
extending the mobile network. Then I asked the question!
I think Paul's meaning was that the cost of developing yet another type
of meter/receiver (and verifying that it worked in all necessary
locations) would maybe be more than just giving those few affected a
smart meter operating as just a dumb timeswitch, even if this meant
giving them an over-favourable tariff.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 12:03:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/7/15 10:5:34, Scott wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:41:48 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
<abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:26:14 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> >>>>> wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
No, and even if it could, how would it help when all the meters are tuned >>>>> to long wave?
Unsurprisingly, I did think of that. What I thought was in an area
with no mobile coverage, where a conventional smart meter cannot be
used, a different type of meter could be installed at a cost less than >>>> extending the mobile network. Then I asked the question!
I think Paul's meaning was that the cost of developing yet another type
of meter/receiver (and verifying that it worked in all necessary
locations) would maybe be more than just giving those few affected a
smart meter operating as just a dumb timeswitch, even if this meant
giving them an over-favourable tariff.
Does it have to be developed? Do any other countries use RDS or is
this uniquely British genius? My experience with mobile phone coverage
suggests it may be optimistic to say that only be a few will be
affected.
For those without coverage from the mobile network (south area) or the
Arqiva long range network (north area) a better solution would be allow connection via the user’s home WiFi network. Clearly security isn’t an issue as the mobile networks have solved that problem with wifi calling. It’s obviously better to not use WiFi as it involves Joe Public in the loop and that becomes a support burden, so the existing methods should be the default.
On 2025/7/15 12:35:37, Tweed wrote:
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 12:03:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/7/15 10:5:34, Scott wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:41:48 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
<abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:26:14 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:
Could RTS be added to FM or DAB?
No, and even if it could, how would it help when all the meters are tuned
to long wave?
Unsurprisingly, I did think of that. What I thought was in an area
with no mobile coverage, where a conventional smart meter cannot be
used, a different type of meter could be installed at a cost less than >>>>> extending the mobile network. Then I asked the question!
I think Paul's meaning was that the cost of developing yet another type >>>> of meter/receiver (and verifying that it worked in all necessary
locations) would maybe be more than just giving those few affected a
smart meter operating as just a dumb timeswitch, even if this meant
giving them an over-favourable tariff.
Does it have to be developed? Do any other countries use RDS or is
this uniquely British genius? My experience with mobile phone coverage
suggests it may be optimistic to say that only be a few will be
affected.
If by RDS you mean radio data system (the system that shows what FM
station you're tuned to, does traffic report switching, switches to
another transmitter when stronger, and [though little used here?] showes >programme type), then no, lots of other countries use it - and use more
of its facilities, I think.
The problem with a switch from RTS on LW to _any_ other remote-control
system is that you'd have to test it works for every premises expected.
(And there probably _would_ be at least _some_ development involved.)>>
The "only a few" takes into account the numbers - _allegedly_ quite
small - currently using the LW system; _some_ of those would be in range
of the mobile (or Arqiva) system, leaving a smaller number. _Arguably_, >giving those just a timeswitch (which it would probably be cheaper to
use a smartmeter in semi-dumb mode than a specific timeswitch, as
coverage may increase in time and that would avoid going round _again_
to fit smart meters) and a generous tariff.>
For those without coverage from the mobile network (south area) or theThis has some advantages, but would create yet another split/category:
Arqiva long range network (north area) a better solution would be allow
connection via the user’s home WiFi network. Clearly security isn’t an
issue as the mobile networks have solved that problem with wifi calling.
It’s obviously better to not use WiFi as it involves Joe Public in the loop >> and that becomes a support burden, so the existing methods should be the
default.
those who don't have home wifi. This is likely to be higher than might
be at first thought, as - I suspect, I have no knowledge - a significant >number of the premises currently being switched via LW are unattended
and/or remote sites, most of which _won't_ have wifi.Of course, I've
long thought that broadband should become a universal provision, but
even then (and that's a whole different debate anyway), what about the >premises that don't have any telecommunications connection at all. (I
was going to say "don't have a landline", but that gets confused with POTS.)
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 14:21:44 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com> wrote:
it stuffed 36 kWh into his car in 4 minutes (adding
a range of 135 miles), but it cost, 90p/unit.
So ú32.40 for 135 miles gives 24p/mile which doesn't seem like much of
a deal.
If I were to drive 300 miles to Cornwall and back, of course I'd be
forced to use public chargers, but that would be for holidays etc, not
routine, so the overall cost would still be much lower than ICE
But you'd have to find a charger in the place where you are going or
more likely end up wasting the best part of a day of your holiday getting
to one and back and waiting for it to do the business.
I doubt they'd like that, anytime the homeowner changes ISP, the
smartmeter loses its connection ... there was a reasonable suggestion
that FTTP ONTs could have a zigbee gateway,njust for meter networks ...
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
recharged (and planned a two hour lunch break around it) at Exeter M5 services.
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 09:47:18 +0100, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
Two irritating parts from that:
"Ministers have taken action to ensure industry delivers a better phase
out plan from 30 June, ensuring working families can continue to go
about their home lives as normal."
The use of the party political phrase "working families" is irritating
and condescending - and also could be misinterpreted (does it mean
retired folk, or single working people, are going to miss out?).
Yes, that f*ing annoys me too.
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 18:28:27 +0100, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com> wrote:
recharged (and planned a two hour lunch break around it) at Exeter M5
services.
Who has a two hour lunch break?
The horror of being stuck somewhere like that for so long...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 161:40:02 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,500 |
