Full Freeview on the Sudbury (Suffolk, England) transmitter
 | Google Streetview |  | Google map |  | Bing map |  | Google Earth |  | 52.005,0.786 or 52°0'17"N 0°47'8"E |  | CO10 5NG |
The symbol shows the location of the Sudbury (Suffolk, England) transmitter which serves 440,000 homes. The bright green areas shown where the signal from this transmitter is strong, dark green areas are poorer signals. Those parts shown in yellow may have interference on the same frequency from other masts.
Are there any planned engineering works or unexpected transmitter faults on the Sudbury (Suffolk, England) mast?
Sudbury transmitter - Sudbury transmitter: Possible effect on TV reception week commencing 22/04/2024 Pixelation or flickering on some or all channels 
_______
Digital television services are broadcast on a multiplexes (or Mux) where many stations occupy a single broadcast frequency, as shown below.
64QAM 8K 3/4 27.1Mb/s DVB-T MPEG2
H/V: aerial position (horizontal or vertical)
The Sudbury (Suffolk, England) mast is a public service broadcasting (PSB) transmitter, it does not provide these commercial (COM) channels: .
If you want to watch these channels, your aerial must point to one of the 80 Full service Freeview transmitters. For more information see the will there ever be more services on the Freeview Light transmitters? page.
Which Freeview channels does the Sudbury transmitter broadcast?
If you have any kind of Freeview fault, follow this Freeview reset procedure first.Digital television services are broadcast on a multiplexes (or Mux) where many stations occupy a single broadcast frequency, as shown below.
64QAM 8K 3/4 27.1Mb/s DVB-T MPEG2
H/V: aerial position (horizontal or vertical)
The Sudbury (Suffolk, England) mast is a public service broadcasting (PSB) transmitter, it does not provide these commercial (COM) channels: .
If you want to watch these channels, your aerial must point to one of the 80 Full service Freeview transmitters. For more information see the will there ever be more services on the Freeview Light transmitters? page.
Which BBC and ITV regional news can I watch from the Sudbury transmitter?
BBC Look East (East) 0.8m homes 3.2%
from Norwich NR2 1BH, 77km north-northeast (24°)
to BBC East region - 27 masts.
70% of BBC East (East) and BBC East (West) is shared output
ITV Anglia News 0.8m homes 3.2%
from NORWICH NR1 3JG, 78km north-northeast (24°)
to ITV Anglia (East) region - 26 masts.
All of lunch, weekend and 80% evening news is shared with Anglia (West)
Are there any self-help relays?
| Felixstowe West | Transposer | 1000 homes +1000 or more homes due to expansion of affected area? | |
| Witham | Transposer | 14 km NE Chelmsford. | 118 homes |
How will the Sudbury (Suffolk, England) transmission frequencies change over time?
| 1984-97 | 1997-98 | 1998-2011 | 2011-13 | 1 Aug 2018 | |||||
| B E T | B E T | B E T | E T | K T | |||||
| C29 | SDN | ||||||||
| C31 | ArqA | ||||||||
| C35 | C5waves | C5waves | |||||||
| C37 | ArqB | ||||||||
| C41 | ITVwaves | ITVwaves | ITVwaves | D3+4 | D3+4 | ||||
| C44 | BBC2waves | BBC2waves | BBC2waves | BBCA | BBCA | ||||
| C47 | C4waves | C4waves | C4waves | BBCB | BBCB | ||||
| C51tv_off | BBC1waves | BBC1waves | BBC1waves | ||||||
| C56tv_off | ArqB | ||||||||
| C58tv_off | SDN | ||||||||
| C60tv_off | -ArqA |
tv_off Being removed from Freeview (for 5G use) after November 2020 / June 2022 - more
Table shows multiplexes names see this article;
green background for transmission frequencies
Notes: + and - denote 166kHz offset; aerial group are shown as A B C/D E K W T
waves denotes analogue; digital switchover was 6 Jul 11 and 20 Jul 11.
How do the old analogue and currrent digital signal levels compare?
| Analogue 1-4 | 250kW | |
| SDN, ARQA, ARQB, BBCA, D3+4, BBCB | (-4dB) 100kW | |
| Analogue 5 | (-7dB) 50kW | |
| Mux 2* | (-14.9dB) 8.1kW | |
| Mux B* | (-15.2dB) 7.5kW | |
| Mux 1* | (-15.5dB) 7kW | |
| Mux A* | (-17dB) 5kW | |
| Mux C* | (-22.2dB) 1.5kW | |
| Mux D* | (-23.6dB) 1.1kW |
Which companies have run the Channel 3 services in the Sudbury transmitter area
|
|
Sunday, 18 November 2012
J
jb386:46 PM
Tony: I think your suggestion of trying a test with the aerial facing Sandy is a good idea, although I would be most interested to know what the difference in levels are when the aerial is actually facing the Sandy transmitters, as on quite a number of aerials the difference is not quite so great as might be expected, therefore maybe you could carry out a quick signal check on a few mux channels immediately before proceeding with the task of swinging the aerial around, and then a similar test on the same muxes when completed, and which as far as accuracy is concerned should really be made not more than an hour or so from the previous test.
As far as aerials are concerned, I wouldn't be over influenced by what's seen on these aerial gain curve charts, and the reason I say this is, that although these charts are indeed handy for reference purposes it should always be kept in mind that what's seen indicated is the result of that obtained when the aerial is tested under perfect conditions over an area about the size of two football fields, and with the signal source being located at the other end of the field and usually from a single element radiator fed by a highly stable variable sweep oscillator that gives a constant output level over the entire band, not exactly similar to what happens in reality where the signals received are from six different distant transmitters and which in many cases are usually in non line-of-sight locations, meaning signals are frequently received at differing levels.
Its really up to yourself what you do and the aerial you mentioned would probably be OK, but with digital reception I would always look along the lines of using a Log 40 or similar in conjunction with a 15db (min) amplifier, as in many situations this can generally provide a more consistent level of signal that's less prone to glitching over what's obtained from larger and highly directional larger pieces of metalwork.
| link to this comment |
Monday, 19 November 2012
T
Tony6:44 PM
Saffron Walden
JB38: Thanks for your suggestions. I dont have any test equipment so the signal strength & quality readings are taken from the Panasonic Viera TV (recently purchased) sliding scales 1-10. I normally show strength 10 on all Sudbury channels. Quality of 2 and above I am able to view without problems. Pointed the aerial to Sandy midday Sunday picked up all OK. Sudburys C58 appeared stronger than Sandys C51 with power down slightly to 8 quality about 4. Switched on again at about 6 all back to quality 1 apart from C58. Swung the aerial back to Sudbury & retuned, signal strength 10, quality 1 (pixelated) on all apart from C58 quality 3 (OK) & C24 (Sandy) strength 8, quality 3 (OK). By about 9 pm the rest cleared up with quality of 3-6. I have noticed when things clear up C47 HD will normally show strength 10, quality 1 but picture is fine. Also the reason I am thinking of a new aerial is that the present one is a B group (yellow end cap) possibly an Antiference DX8 (looks the same but cant be sure as I havent hauled it down yet) with masthead amp.
| link to this comment |
Tony's: mapT's Freeview map terrainT's terrain plot wavesT's frequency data T's Freeview Detailed Coverage
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
J
jb3812:17 AM
Tony: Thanks for the update on the results of your test, and which on studying same rather indicates that atmospherics plays quite a part in your reception from both Sandy and Sudbury.
Regarding your present aerial, if its a Group B then as you will probably realise its not really the best for reception from either station, as Sandy's muxes span channels 21-52 and with Sudbury's from 41-60, and of course a Group B aerial is listed as covering 35-53, however within the ranges covered by these groups its always best to knock off a few channels from each end the range as tapering effects towards the extremities of coverage nearly always applies no matter what might be maintained, this of course making the span somewhat tighter.
My reason for having a reservation about the aerial you suggested, or indeed any other so called high gain types, is simply because of digital reception being much more critical regarding alignment, this being where the highly directional characteristics of high gain types can be a positive disadvantage as far as low quality glitching is concerned.
The reason for this is that in "any" aerial (excepting a Log periodic) there is only one active element, the one situated immediately in front of the reflector, and with the multitude of directors seen located in front of the active element being for purposes of "focussing" the signal onto the active element, now this is all very well in situations where near to line-of-sight might apply and with the minimum of reflected elements being part of the signal received, but in situations such as yours where signals are subject to fading indicates that these reflective elements are part of the signal being received and with this somewhat upsetting the operating principal of the aerial, because the focussing elements then become restrictors by partially blocking any signals received from a slightly different angle, this being why picture glitching is always more prevalent where high gain aerials have been used for digital reception.
On a log periodic aerial all elements are active, and with this being why they have a much more even response across the entire band, plus they are not near so critical as far as slight fluctuations in the angle that the signal is being received on, the inevitable slight lack of gain that these aerials have being more than adequately compensated for by using them in conjunction of a booster.
By the way Panasonic Viera's have top tuners, this being why you can manage to view a picture when the quality is so low.
If you manage to have a look at your mast head amp I would be interested to know what gain rating is seen printed on its internal label.
| link to this comment |
J
jb3812:30 AM
Tony: I realise that my reply might already be a bit lengthy, but as you have a Viera I would like you to try a test by going into the tuning menu / manual tune and entering Ch44 but do not press search, as the strength / quality that the channel is being received at will be indicated, then whilst still on that screen pull the aerial plug out of the set and connect a single piece of insulated wire (about 3 feet or so bared at one end) into the aerial socket and see if anything is indicated strength wise.
You could also try changing the channel to 27 and similarly checking the strength bar.
| link to this comment |
T
Tony2:08 PM
Saffron Walden
JB38: Both are running at strength 10, quality 1. The wire test shows an intermittent strength of 1 to 3 on both channels.
| link to this comment |
Tony's: mapT's Freeview map terrainT's terrain plot wavesT's frequency data T's Freeview Detailed Coverage
J
jb385:26 PM
Tony: Thanks for the update re: test requested, as I just really wanted to completely eliminate from my mind the "very" remote possibility (at your distance from the TX anyway) of your signal actually being slightly too strong, as the symptoms experienced when in this sort of situation can in many cases be similar to yours, high strength accompanied with very low quality.
On the other hand though, should you have managed to obtain a picture of sorts with a wire then the situation described could well have been applicable.
| link to this comment |
T
Tony6:44 PM
Saffron Walden
JB38: Thanks for all your help, I think I will try the Log 40 approach, any particular make you would recommend?
| link to this comment |
Tony's: mapT's Freeview map terrainT's terrain plot wavesT's frequency data T's Freeview Detailed Coverage
N
Nick6:57 PM
OK, will give up on the mux on ch 60 from Sudbury.
Please can someone explain the business of channel whatever 'minus?' Does this mean that there are twice as many channels available as thought as each one has a 'minus?'
| link to this comment |
J
jb389:30 PM
Tony: Well, speaking as person (albeit a long standing RF engineering one) who gets involved in troubleshooting missions when wearing my domestic hat, so to speak, I always use logs in conjunction with amplification, because although areas do exist where signals are so poor that virtually nothing will help, this of course being where Freesat comes into its own!, however in other problematic DTT reception situations that do not come into the aforementioned category I have always had a high percentage of success with the Log Periodic / amplifier combinations rather than anything else, and as such use nothing else nowadays.
Of course I fully admit that its not just always a case of an aerial change over, as in some situations repositioning of the aerial is required, and this could be to either side of its present position but NOT necessarily meaning upwards, as the "higher the better" only really applies in cases where a transmitter aerial is involved, unless of course its seen that there is an obvious obstruction to an aerials signal path located nearby (50/100 feet) and increasing the aerial height would clear it.
Link for aerial supplier.
A.T.V (Aerials And Television) TV Aerial, DAB Aerial, FM Aerial.
/onlineaerials.html#Log40
Just purely for reference purposes, this is an example of an excellent SLX brand variable booster, and although I do realise that you already have a mast head amplifier it depends on what its gain is rated at, as should it be under 15db or so then I would not consider that as being sufficient for your requirements.
0-20db Variable booster. Argos item number: 534 / 4235 (£11.99)
Buy Plug-In 1 Way TV Aerial Signal Booster at Argos.co.uk - Your Online Shop for TV aerial boosters.
| link to this comment |
Sunday, 2 December 2012
T
Tony3:07 PM
JB: Thanks for all your time & energies. I have replaced he old aerial with a Log 40, and the old Logitech 8 way amp & Logitech masthead amp (rating unknown- nothing marked on it) with a Proception proamp 28 and 7-22db masthead amp set to lowest setting + new cable from proamp to the aerial. Signal strength 8-10 & quality 10 on all channels with no back signal from Sandy. After some investigation it appears that the old Logitech 8 way was failing and just happened to coincide with retunes & works at the transmitter. Brilliant aerial & not expensive. Once again thanks.
| link to this comment |
Select more comments
Your comment please