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.
This transmitter has no current reported problems
The BBC and Digital UK report there are no faults or engineering work on the Sudbury (Suffolk, England) transmitter._______
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
|
|
Thursday, 2 August 2012
N
Nick6:25 PM
Woodbridge
Dave or JB,
I think one of you said the projection for channel 60 for me was not good. I do not understand why one channel should have a worse projection than the others from the same transmitter.
| link to this comment |
Nick's: mapN's Freeview map terrainN's terrain plot wavesN's frequency data N's Freeview Detailed Coverage
J
jb3811:28 PM
Nick: I cant recall ever having said that nor do I see Dave Lindsay having mentioned it either, as although Ch60 was indeed the subject of discussion I certainly don't see the word "projection" as such having been mentioned.
However on the subject of one channel being received at a very low strength compared to an adjacent channel booming in even although the ERP's of both transmitters are the same, this is just one of these things that can happen with multi-element radiator / multi-channel radiation sources even although they are all from the same mast, as no matter how precise the planning might have been RF signals do not by any means always conform to what's expected (or predicted) and can stray quite considerably from it, likewise there is always an element of pot luck involved should they all be received at roughly similar strengths to each other.
The only clue as to whether this situation may, or may not be applying cases where a signal is being received at a significantly lower level than another that's only one or two channels away, is for tests to be carried out at evenly spaced distances from the mast but on exactly the same angle from it, and if at one of these intermediate distances the channel that's weak at a distance is found to be slighter stronger than the one that was higher at the distance, then that points to a non conformity in the vertical radiation angle and which very little can be done about at the receiving end.
I only mention this for information purposes.
| link to this comment |
Friday, 3 August 2012
N
Nick11:18 AM
Woodbridge
Thanks JB,
I also recall something about the coms putting more stations on one channel than the BBC/ITV ones. Could this have something to do with it?
The trouble I am having seems to be that the signal quality on that channel varies considerably from day to day, 30 up to 90, whereas 58 is constant. Both have regular high signal strength.
| link to this comment |
Nick's: mapN's Freeview map terrainN's terrain plot wavesN's frequency data N's Freeview Detailed Coverage
J
jb389:31 PM
Nick: When anyone is experiencing large variations in the quality of a signal being received there aren't really that many measures that they can take that's liable to have much of an effect, basically because that the reason for the problem is in most cases totally out with their control.
However, about the only thing that can be tried and which "sometimes" can improve the situation is to carry out some tests by trying an aerial (Logs perfect for this) in a variety of different positions, and especially so in the horizontal plane rather than the vertical, albeit that the latter does also come into the equation, but usually after a horizontal spot has been found.
Carrying out this sort of test without having the advantage of a professional signal meter on the end of the aerial obviously complicates the issue, but if you don't mind going to a bit of bother you could use the Icecrypts RF modulated output and feed it via a length of coax into some old analogue TV positioned somewhere near to the spot that's being used for aerial tests, obviously tuning the TV to the modulators analogue output.
You then go into the Icecrypts "installation" menu, and in the drop down box seen click on "channel scan", then in the "scan mode" select "by channel" and using the < - > arrows to select Ch60, and if there is any signal there to pick up it should appear in the strength / quality bars, and with that being even although its under the strength that would resolve a picture, so do NOT scan the channel.
You then obviously leave the set up indoors running on that screen and use the TV positioned outside to monitor the results of moving the aerial around, this method if adhered to, capable of giving results nearly as accurate as that obtained when using a professional meter.
| link to this comment |
Saturday, 4 August 2012
N
Nick8:27 AM
Woodbridge
Thanks JB,
That is more or less what I have done, though mostly just turning the aerial slightly. It is on a long pole, and the site is relatively high. The only thing not tried is varying the height, downwards, which I would assume would make things worse.
I don't use a log because I think at this distance its gain would not be sufficient. I realise logs work differently, but nevertheless would also assume that in groups B, and particularly C/D, few of the elements would act as 'directors' with the majority being unnecessary 'reflectors.' Stand to be corrected.
| link to this comment |
Nick's: mapN's Freeview map terrainN's terrain plot wavesN's frequency data N's Freeview Detailed Coverage
J
jb3812:42 PM
Nick: Reducing the height of an aerial does not necessarily make things worse and in many cases can improve them, dependant of course on whether or not the signal being received has elements of it being channelled or reflected from distant objects, I fully appreciate though that moving an aerial around in the horizontal plane isn't always a very easy task in the physical sense depending on facilities, but I can assure you that Logs (especially amplified types) are perfect for testing (and reception in general) no matter what distance is involved and in many cases can out perform larger pieces of metalwork of the so called "high gain" variety, mostly of course because of the latter having been installed in situations totally unsuitable for the characteristics of the aerial, and especially when dealing with digital reception where quality is of prime importance rather than strength, meaning things are far more critical than had applied with analogue reception.
And just to reiterate a statement I recall having been made to many in my time, insomuch that its a mistake to look at things in an even remotely black and white preconceived fashion when dealing with reception difficulties and with this being especially so in non line of sight areas, because RF signals do not really conform to any set fashion likewise its always found that no two situations are the same, this being why extensive testing of the nature mentioned is always required for purposes of assessing the situation.
The other point of course being of one not being too influenced by looking at aerial specifications, as an item that might well look grand on paper when used in real life situations will generally perform totally differently, as the original testing was done under strictly controlled conditions and which no longer apply, and I say this as a qualified engineer who has been intensively involved with transmitter, receiver and ancillary equipments for approximately 40 years or so, this also having been my exclusive hobby over the entire time much to the annoyance of my wife.
| link to this comment |
Sunday, 5 August 2012
G
Geoff12:01 AM
Witham
I live in Witham and cannot get any output from COM4 and COM5 (C58 and C60)which means no ITV3 or Dave.
Reception on COM6 (C56))is sketchy, with Film4 breaking up from time to time.
On the PSB muxes I'm getting around 90% signal strength and Very Good signal quality. With a signal booster, COM6 is showing around 50% strength and Poor quality, no signal from the other two. Without the booster, I get nothing from the three COM muxes.
My rooftop aerial is an old one from the analogue days, but should be in line of sight to Sudbury and seems to be correctly aligned and in good condition.
Is this likely to be a bandwidth problem? Were the old analogue aerials in this area Band B, in which case I would need to change to a wideband?
| link to this comment |
Geoff's: mapG's Freeview map terrainG's terrain plot wavesG's frequency data G's Freeview Detailed Coverage
M
Mark Fletcher2:13 AM
Halifax
Geoff,Witham.Yes from what you described you certainly do need to change your yellow tipped group B aerial,co-ax aerial cable and aerial co-ax plug for a brown tipped semi-wideband group E aerial,plus new copper-copper black coloured co-ax aerial cable and importantly new brass co-ax aerial plug.
If you reside in a poor reception area a new Yagi 18E aerial will suffice,or an X-Beam XB16E aerial for extra gain without the need for a signal booster will also be sufficient,more so if you reside in a very poor/marginal signal area within Sudbury.
| link to this comment |
Mark's: mapM's Freeview map terrainM's terrain plot wavesM's frequency data M's Freeview Detailed Coverage
Geoff: Further to Mark's message, see Sudbury Transmitter
| link to this comment |
N
Nick8:08 PM
Woodbridge
JB, thanks once again.
I am also wondering the following. For some reason the aerial is pulling in the ITV mux on c59 from Tac, at 90 degrees to Sudbury. This is the only Tac channel I am getting.
Could a signal on c59 disturb a signal on c60 minus?
Further looking at the sig strength AND quality on c60 shows at times that BOTH flash between zero and 90% over a matter of a second or two, but only on certain days.
| link to this comment |
Nick's: mapN's Freeview map terrainN's terrain plot wavesN's frequency data N's Freeview Detailed Coverage
Select more comments
Your comment please