Talk:Winter Hill transmitting station

tallest manned mast in the country

It is the tallest manned mast in the country

• Is that still true? I would have thought that Emley Moor is the only "manned" masts now and not even sure about that. All the NGW sites are unmanned and presume Arquiva is the same except for Emley Moor. --jmb 11:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

and after a period of BBC ownership

• Surely Winter Hill has always been a ITA/IBA/NTL/Arqiva tower / mast? --jmb 11:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Eight external platforms encircle the mast along its height, these can be accessed from the inside of the mast, and are used to maintain the supporting wires, and the ILR transmitters.

• Should that not read ILR antennas. I don't think the transmitters are on the platforms! --jmb 12:18, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes that should, the transmitter is a piece of equipment housed in a building at the base of the mast. I've changed it over. Chillysnow 23:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Winter Hill transmitter

Winter Hill transmitter

• Following on from the previous comment, should this page actually be titled something like "Winter Hill Mast"? As already stated, the term "transmitter" actually describes a piece of equipment, usually housed in a building close to the base of the mast. The transmitter is then attached to feeder cables that run up the mast to the antennas at the top. So describing the "mast" as a "transmitter" is not correct. Chillysnow 23:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The mast is also a 'piece of equipment'. The article is really about the whole installation. I think "Winter Hill transmitting station", which is what these places were traditionally called, would be a better option. Harumphy 10:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Good point, I agree Chillysnow 12:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree, Winter Hill Transmitting Station would be better (of course some sad person will go around removing the capital letters!)
    • I've moved it. If nobody complains, I'll move some more. Harumphy 19:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Whilst it may be strictly speaking more accurate to use the term "Winter Hill Transmitting Station" I very much doubt that anyone would enter that as a search criteria when looking for info on Winter Hill (or any other transmitter). Therefore I have to say I think it is a bad move. JustinSmith
      • I would have thought many (most?) people would enter "Winter Hill" and then follow the link across from that page, I did that myself yesterday. --jmb 08:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Why would anyone search on "<placename> <transmitter>", given that it isn't a transmitter at all? This misuse of the term (i.e. called a transmitting station a transmitter) is a quirk unique to Wikipedia and ought to be corrected, not entrenched. I think it started with poor translations of articles originally written in German. Harumphy 10:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I don`t really consider all of this to be a big deal but I`m in the business myself (site www.aerialsandtv.com) and I have only ever once seen transmitters referred to as "transmitting stations". Even the BBC website (on its reception advice page) refers to them as transmitters. Furthermore we have a stats package on our site (and can see what search terms are requested) and I can`t remember ever seeing anyone request "XXXXXXX transmitting station".I would have thought this last point is the most relevant. JustinSmith
        • I agree that the some of the public (and maybe even the majority) may well refer to it as a "transmitter" but that is still inescapably the wrong terminology and these are supposed to be technically accurate articles. What makes it less of an issue of course is the fact that the Wiki search facility still finds the right article within the first results page. Furthermore, the redirect is in place, so anyone typing "Winter Hill transmitter" and hitting go will immediately go to the correct article, without having to see search results first. Chillysnow 23:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Dates

Is it me or is this article missing the construction and completion dates for this mast?

Original(?) tower

Construction of the building and 445 ft tower began June 1955

Last piece of tower bolted in position 17 Dec 1955

First test transmissions 13 Feb 1956

Start of service 3 May 1956

These all from The Devil Casts His Net, I will see if I can find any dates for the present day mast. --jmb 16:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

The BBC Band III transmitter went into service on the ITA site after the Pilkington Report (June 1962). --jmb 16:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Start of service (Granada) on 3 May 1956 confirmed from The Times, Friday, Apr 20, 1956; pg. 6; Issue 53510; col G --jmb 16:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Planned opening of service for BBC2 17 Oct 1966 - The Times, Wednesday, Mar 24, 1965; pg. 12; Issue 56278; col G --jmb 16:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

ITV in colour "expected by the end of 1969" - The Times, Wednesday, Feb 26, 1969; pg. 5; Issue 57495; col A --jmb 17:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Reference to Emley Moor being highest structure in Europe when started service in 1966. If the new Winter Hill mast was similar date them did BBC2 open from a temporary structure? The Times, Friday, Mar 21, 1969; pg. 1; Issue 57515; col A --jmb 17:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Announcement that BBC1 and ITV start in colour in London 15 Nov 1969. ITA say that equipment at Winter Hill on schedule "but linking equipment might be delayed" - The Times, Friday, May 16, 1969; pg. 2; Issue 57561; col A --jmb 17:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

BBC2 analogue transmissions ceased at 00:27Z, 4 November 2009 --User:DavidFRAS (from work)

Construction

The article says that the mast has a theoretical coverage of 50 miles circumference - that would be a radius of around 7.5 miles which is nothing for a huge structure like this - a small CB radio with only 4 watts of power could go that distance. Surely it means a theoretical transmitting radius of 50 miles? --Andyh192 22:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I think he means radius, not circumference. In any case the figure is 'theoretical' and that depends on a whole boatload of assumptions. As such it's pointless, so I'll prune it. --Harumphy (talk) 09:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Units

I see someone has been around removing most imperial units from heights etc. Why can't we have both imperial and metric, this seems to be accepted on many other pages. --jmb 01:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Red Lights

OK I shouldn't really do this, but has the Winter Hill mast recently (i.e. in October 2006 ish) had new ultra-bright red lights installed? I'm from Greater Manchester but can see a huge mast with red lights on my horizon - it's only just appeared and I believe it is this mast. Oh... it isn't the Beetham Tower, Manchester btw! Can anyone prove/disprove? Jhamez84 00:46, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes lots of people have reported this on Digital Spy. I'll have a look sometime... if we can see them from Wrexham than they're definately brighter! Marbles333 20:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I just won a bet! Though it shows that this mast can be seen clearly from at least as far away as Shaw and Crompton. Jhamez84 21:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have a reliable citation for the date of these light upgrades - I was sure there was a piece on the Bolton News, but can't find it. Paypwip (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

from wigan

you can see the mast from wigan and many places. as the big red lights are viewable from a far distance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.120.148 (talk) 14:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)