If ITV had used band 1..

[colly0410]

I'm thinking ITV could have used channel  2 or 5 for London area, & channel 1 for the North of England. Channel 1 or 5 for central Scotland. Can't think of any band 1 ITV channel for Midlands though. Could West/South Wales have got away with a band 1 channel? Channel 5 for Northern Ireland? Perhaps new BBC stations could have used band 3? It must have been a nightmare planing channels back then. 

When I rented an apartment in Miami there were 3 stations on band 1 (low band) 2, 4 & 6, there was a snowy picture on ch 5 as well. There was a TX on South Island New Zealand using ch's 1 & 3.... I lay in bed when I can't sleep thinking of these things, & yes I know I'm potty; but I'm harmless - I think, lol....

[ppppenguin]

There's a big difference between UK and US band planning. In the UK the aim was nastional coverage as far as possible. In the US the coverage was directed at cities which is where the audience for the advertisers lived. Also in the US most cities are a long way aaprt so it was easier to re-use channels and have multiple channels in each city.

I don't know enough about AUS and NZ band planning to give a sensible opinion.

[Murphyv310]

Band 1 was pretty crowded without trying to interleave ITV in as well.
Co channel interference would have been dreadful.
When I lived in Irvine I could receive .....
Channel 1......BBC1 Northern Ireland.
Channel 2...... BBC1 Carrick Hills
Channel 3 ..... BBC1 Kirk 'O Shorts
Channel 4 .....BBC1 Girvan. (weak signal)
Channel 5 .... BBC1 Toward (weak signal)

Certainly for us it would have been impractical with Shotts carrying STV on say channel 5 then the other strong relays and NI would have been an issue.

[Synchrodyne]

Although one might imagine an alternative history in which the channel allocations for a two-programme national service was done with each having an equal allocation of Band I channels, the net result would have been that each might have had two, perhaps three main transmitters in that Band, with the rest being in Band III.  Whether that would have been any better is a debatable point.

 
In the US case, there were five low-band channels, but channels 4 and 5 were not contiguous, thus both could be used in a given area, increasing overall band utilization.
 
The New Zealand example to which you refer is I think the Te Aroha transmitter in the North Island, which radiated TV1 on channel NZ1 and TV2 on channel NZ3.  It was the only one of the seven main transmitters that had both TV1 and TV2 in Band I.  The others all had TV1 in Band I and TV2 in Band III.  The Te Aroha transmitter is atop the highest peak in the Kaimai range (around 950 metres).  From that position it is able to “illuminate” the greater part of the Waikato, including Hamilton city, and the eastern Bay of Plenty, including Tauranga city (of which Mt. Maunganui is a part).  As such it had what was probably the largest footprint of any of the NZ VHF analogue TV transmitters.  Much of its service area was likely bounded by simply natural running out of signal rather than by topographical obstructions, as often applied elsewhere.  Thus, it made sense to assign it a Band I channel for TV2, in order to equalize coverage at the edges.  It was vertically polarized.  In part that was because the major cities appeared to have first claim to horizontal polarization.  But it was logical in that in much of its catchment area, reception conditions were quite clean such that the very poor horizontal directivity associated with the customary 2- and 3-element vertical aerials was not a major drawback.  On the other hand, the topographies of say Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin made the better directionality obtained with horizontal aerial arrays highly desirable.
 
 
Cheers,
 
Steve

[colly0410]

Seems the BBC had nabbed nearly all the best band 1 sites by 1956 & it had just about covered the country by then. Maybe if ITV had started a few years earlier it could have had a few band 1 stations as well. Understand the BBC wasn't allowed on band 3 till mid 1960's, but Winter Hill ch 12 & Wenvoe ch 13 were already covered by band 1 TX's but were needed for regional/local news opt outs AFAIK. I don't suppose Belmont could have ever been a band 1 TX as band 1 was choco block full & ready to burst when it fired up in mid 60's..

[Murphyv310]

Hi.
The coverage on Band one from Kirk 'o Shotts was quite incredible. If you have ever been a trip up north on the A82 and had a portable TV you'd be surprised by where perfectly good reception went to. In days gone by I could get good signals in Glencoe and beyond Fort William. I carried round a Philips T-vette which has very good gain and even on its rod aerial reception was excellent. Conversely UHF was grim by the time you are up to Duck Bay at the bottom of Loch lomond it was very poor. Digital is odd as it can pop up in the most unexpected places.