Anyone out there know of a product that can give me additional CATV lines without the cabling? Existing facility that will be a headache for retrofit. thanks.

Nope.....

I say, nope.

My dad (the cable man) says: Nope, and get the drill and start pulling wire!

Ian A.

To deliver an entire cable system, no. One channel at a time, yes. Meaning there would be a tuner of some sort where there is cable, and the selected channel would be wirelessly transmitted to the receiving set, and IR commands sent to the tuner device.

As Classicsat said here is one option, x10 has a wireless sender for one channel or input at a time.
see :
http://www.x10.com/promotions/wireless_video_sender_vk82a.html

This X-10 things looks promising, but what about looking at it from another angle, is there such a thing as CATV over IP? Personally I dont even have cable at home, this is for an extended care facility, if I can save them a few bucks it can go into more critical repairs.

Yes and no, You can stream a channel over a network, wired or wireless using a tuner card and a media center at the TV. several people sell media centers. The local phone co. (AT&T) delivers cable thru the phone lines here. comes in on a phone pair and each set has a box like a cable box that selects the channel. The signal is sent to the neighborhood by way of fiber and the last 4000 by twisted pair. Picture looks good but there are limitations. BTW those still receiving TV by way of an antenna, get yourself a digital TV or a converter box. most stations are broadcasting several digital signals (more than one) and the picture will knock your socks off! Robert

There is something called an "amplitude modulated link" or AML which is used by cable companies to distribute cable TV signals to remote locations. But I don't think this is applicable to what you are looking for.

The bandwidth of CATV is so high that it's wildly impractical to transfer it over air with any sort of consumer level radio transmitter- best you can really do are solutions that pick one channel and transmit it.

I have a really cool device called SlingBox on my TV- it hooks up to your cable box/DVR (or uses its own internal analog tuner) and puts it on the internet. You can go anywhere in the world, pop open your laptop, and watch what's on your TV at home. It's compatible with wifi, and allows remote control of the cable box/dvr/tv through a virtual remote control and IR modulator. (When my [spoiled rotten] kids are crying that their show's over and they want me to put on another show from the DVR, I can be a lazy-ass and sit at my computer, pull up Slingbox and remotely control my DVR to put their show on.)

So, in short, this would still not let you wirelessly stream CATV to a new location. But if you had a computer in that location, you could watch TV on it through your home's wifi network.

What exactly are you trying to do? Bring cable TV to where it isn't, or add additional channels to an existing cable installation?

Is this system going to use existing TV's, or will it be digital only? Does each location have to be individually addressable? Does each location need to be able to watch different channels?

Questions, questions, questions.

Larry C

Not to sound like a smart a$$, but it is referred to as "cable" TV for a reason. Get out the drill and the fish tape!

I once rigged up a camera system at a local golf course entrance that transmitted the color camera's signal perfectly to the club house about 1/3 mile away. You can get transmitter /receivers thru ADI. As far as multiple channels, I no longer do cctv work so I don't keep up but I bet it is quite possible they have equip for that now. After all I can open up multiple pages on my laptop wireless, tune them all into youtube, run several different video's at the same time and see them all onscreen at the same time if I press the f-9 key. There is some noticeable slowing down of the streaming once you get to three video's at the same time, but then again I am not using the most powerful laptop or desktops in the product line either.

Streaming video is nowhere near the bandwidth of NTSC TV or even as high as the compressed channel you have with non HD DTV. HDTV is pretty much as big a hog as NTSC.

I think that the person may be getting mixed up with wireless connections for PC's?

thanks for the replies, I guess the problem is the bandwidth. I assumed there would be some wireless connectivity solution since it exists for CCTV video signals and ethernet. CATV outlets exist in the rooms but usually at a inconvenient spot, so I was just looking at options for additional outlets.

I agree with you on your original question. I am sure that plenty of people wonder why we have basically said "NO, it can't be done" without much detail. It's pretty safe to assume that just about everything is available wireless these days, so why not cable TV? "If the cable TV or satellite company receives their signal over the air, why can't it be retransmitted over the air"? "I can watch TV on my cell phone now"! It really is a perfectly logical question to ask.

The difference is that the service providers are receiving a regulated and dedicated signal via satellite downlinks. The signals that they receive come through multiple satellites in multiple positions in the sky. The service providers combine and shape these signals into ones that can be placed into logical numerical formats for end-users. They pay a monthly fee to receive these signals, just like we do with cable or satellite service. If they don't pay, they get cut off, just like we do. If they have a digital device that they can send the signal (and a bill) to, they will give you all that you are willing to pay for.

When you get into basic analog cable channels, they have no way to regulate how you distribute them. These are those channels that you can pick up with a roof top antenna or rabbit ears on your TV. Have you heard about the new regulation going into effect next February? Yep, even that free service is being discontinued and all off-air channels are going digital. The government is offering free coupons so that regular folks can purchase converter boxes to receive these signals, but it's just a sign of the times. Eventually, now that you are required to have a digital receiver (converter box), they will be able to address you directly and perhaps start charging you for access to TV signals received off the air. Not to be "gloom and doom", but think about it.

The fees we pay the service providers, aside from delivering service to our homes, also pays them for the added convenience of being able to select "channel 7" instead of tuning to 874.105MHz for video and 90.113 for audio and combining them ourselves to watch "Desperate Housewives". (This example was entirely figurative, for example only).

Each cable or satellite TV account is assumed to be for a single user. If it were possible to rebroadcast their shaped and formatted signal, you could possibly have a cul-de-sac or apartment building paying for one account with all of the neighbors sharing the account using wireless receivers.

These service providers aren't stupid. They have beaten us to the punch so that we can't steal cable. I think that the TV signal issue has more to do with issues like the TV writer's union being on strike right now. They want to be paid for their broadcast over Internet or multi-path distribution channels, yet it's nearly impossible to track. This argument could go on forever.

With wireless Internet access, it's a completely different technology with much less regulation on a per-account basis. As it sits now, wireless Internet access restriction is up to the customer to regulate. Wireless computer networks are a different bird since the communication is bi-directional. If you have a wireless network that you allow others to access, then you also risk the freeloaders getting into your computer(s) or worse yet, running a kiddie porn site on your Internet account. Guess who's door the FBI will knock upon when this activity is tracked back to your IP address? I hate to think of all of the mayors, teachers, preachers and plain old folks who ended up making the mistake of having an unsecure wireless computer network.

Sorry for the side rant. I just wanted to emphasize that wireless isn't really ever wireless and the reasons why.

The reason broadcast stations are going digital is not to charge you for watching TV but for bandwidth. The currrent analog signal goes back to the 1930's. We are still using the same broadcast format. By switching to digital it allows the stations to broadcast more than one channel. They are assigned a "channel" or a piece of bandwidth. They can divide this how they want. Some have 1 HDTV channel and 2 regular channels, or 3 or more regular channels. The more channels they use in there assigned bandwidth, the lower the resolution on each channel. It also allows adjacent channels to be used. With analog, all channels had to be separated by a blank channel who's use was 100 miles away. Not a problem with digital. Another advantage of digital signal, no ghost, snow, or buckshot interference. With 0 &1's you ether have a good picture or none. I metro areas, rabbit ears many times will give you good enough signal for a perfect picture. All sets made in the last year & half have a digital tuner in them, the ones older receiving over the air broadcast will need a converter. I have a $50 USB tuner for my laptop and with a 18 piece of wire, I can receive 20+ digital stations. Local stations broadcast a channel with 24 hr news and another channel (same station) 24 hr weather radar. Most all stations are broadcasting now on unused UHF stations. If you tune an analog set here to Ch 31 you get nothing but snow, but with a digital tuner equipped set you will receive 1 HDTV and 3 regular channels on Ch 31. If you receive over the air broadcast, get a digital set, the quality of the picture will really surprise you. Robert

There has been heavy promotion of digital broadcast TV here in Britain. Shutdown of existing analog (625/PAL) transmissions is scheduled to take place region by region, starting later this year and ending in 2012:

http://www.dtg.org.uk/consumer/switchover_map.html

Six digital multiplexes are being used for DTT in each area.
This page gives an idea of the number of stations broadcast on each UHF channel digital multiplex:

http://www.dtg.org.uk/retailer/dtt_channels.html

And this how the channels have been slotted in around the existing analog channels for most transmitter sites. Tacolneston is my local transmitter, about 25 miles away:

http://www.dtg.org.uk/retailer/tx_ea.html

Some digital multiplexes are running on reduced power until analog is finally closed down, however, which means that coverage is still not perfect for people a little way from the transmitter. For example, I can receive five of the mutliplexes well enough for good pictures all the time, but multiplex A can be a little weak, enough to give occasional blocking and freezing under certain conditions.

I could hike the antenna up a little more to improve the signal strength for it, but there's only one station on that mutiplex that I would want anyway, and then only very occasionally, so I haven't bothered.