Is wireless DBS possible ?

[UpOnTheMountain]

Is it technically possible to do the following :

1. Setup dish

2. Wire the lnb s to central location in attic/basement/crawlspace/closet (or even an outdoor "black box")

3.  add in a special transciever box at wiring location

4. add in a special transciever box a reciver location

5. wire seoncd transciever box at reciever to receiver

The "special transciever boxes" would have to be able to do the following :

1. Transmit and receive a wireless "radio" signal

2. encode signal to include commands to change voltage, polarity etc ..

3. Transmit and recieve the DBS signal with commands

(possibly using something like tcp/ip for packet transmission)

All of the above in such a way as to allow psuedo wireless DBS connectivity.

Some benefits might include :

1. being able to move the receiver to another tv in the house.

2. being able to move furniture in a room without having to worry about re-wiring the sat connection

3. being able to connect to hard to connect-to locations

4. connections in apartments and other locations where you are not allowed to "change" the premise

5. being able to move the dish to various locations if need arises with minimal re-wire issues

So ... Forget about the cost (kinda) .. but is it technically possible ?

tia

Keith

 :D

[homergreg]

Anything's possible, but profitable? There would be quite a bit of engineering behind replicating the signals to and from the LNB for control, let alone all the other work involved. So while it definately can be done, is it worth it? Why not just put a Terk Leapfrog transmitter on the output of your receiver and a receiver on your television? It would do most of what you want, but not be nearly as complicated. And you can do it for under $50 on ebay today!

[gcutler]

Just like CB radio, anything that transmits would need some sort of FCC liscense and that could be a big issue (would it cause interference with anything in the area), how tight or wide of a transmit beam would be acceptable and not determental (to most people)??? Just like the UHF remotes, 50 feet and there are at least 2 houses I could affect/conflict with, 100 feet an I'm up to 4 or 5, 150 feet and I can probably hit 8 houses.

[Mike123abc]

It might be technically possible, but I do not think it is legally possible. You have to transmit an entire LNB's worth of data wirelessly. This is 500MHZ(legacy) to 1000MHZ (DishPro) worth of signal. No way the FCC would clear that much spectrum or allow you to transmit locally that much. You are are talking nearly 1/15 of the entire spectrum that is used in the US.

It is much easier to connect the recievers to the LNBs at a central location then just transmit one television channel at a time.

[Jacob S]

What about with 200 ft how many houses could you affect then in your area? I ask that because of the new dishpro uhf remotes for the 522 on the second tuner will be able to go up to 200 ft.

I agree on the leapfrog. This is much cheaper and simpler to do. You could put all the receivers in one room and then transmit the video and audio wirelessly to each room and even be able to change the channels through the walls as well. Just take that receiver to what secondary room you want to watch the channels in. You could still watch the channels off of that same receiver in the room that it is in.

I wonder if this could be used with the multi-tuner receivers since they are going to broadcast on a UHF channel to the second tv in other rooms. If it would not work on the second tuner then you could use it on the first tuner to a different room with the leapfrog and the second tuner with the UHF remote in the same room you have the receiver in.

[gcutler]

Originally posted by Jacob S
What about with 200 ft how many houses could you affect then in your area? I ask that because of the new dishpro uhf remotes for the 522 on the second tuner will be able to go up to 200 ft.

Lets just say with those specs I would make sure NOT to set it to RemoteID #1 :D And I know that there are at least 4 houses in the radius that have Dish. I've actually taken the UHF remote antennas off my 4900 and 508 since I have no need for out of room access (and use universal IR remotes anyway). So I assume I'm not adding to any problems or as succeptable to any problems related to UHF remotes (assume taking off UHF remote antenna does alot to block its accepting a neighbor's remote if ID the same)

[Jacob S]

Actually I just thought of something. I dont think it would be an issue for the other houses because of a couple of reasons. One, there would not be many of those houses with UHF receivers. Two, even if they did this is dishpro UHF where it must use a different frequency since you could only use the dishpro UHF remote and not the UHF remotes that exist now to change the channels in other rooms.

[Nick]

My two receivers are centrally located in a rack & I transmit wirelessly to (currently) five TVs. Control is via Ir/UHF return. Simple. Been doing it for three years. Works great.

[UpOnTheMountain]

Ok ... still ignoring the costs (even though they would be relatively steep) ...

And still ignoring the alternative "wireless broadcast" of post-receiver output ... (even though it is the most sensible approach) ...

I'm a little confused on the bandwidth concern. How would the digital broadcast of the signal from the dish to the receiver be large enough to be of concern. It would just be up to ... say 6 channels and minimal config information. (similar to running 12 leapfrogs assuming higher def and full stereo info)

So ... how would the bandwidth requirement be an issue?

[Mike123abc]

It is a concern because the dish to the reciever is 500-1000 MHZ. The dish does not know what the reciever wants, so it cannot pick out a transponder, it sends the entire satellite down the cable. The reciever picks out the signal it wants from the satellite. The reciever picks out a 24MHZ section (a transponder) and then decodes all the bit stream out of it (about 33Mbit/sec), then decodes the individual channel out of it (about 3.5mbit/sec).

[Jacob S]

UpOnTheMountain, are you asking why it could not transmit what the receiver wants wirelessly from the dish to the receiver? I am wondering the same. Someone else had mentioned that this would be a problem with using too much bandwidth in that range but why couldnt it be converted into a different frequency to send to the receiver in which would not result in this problem? My lack of knowledge in this area is really starting to show but I am here to learn. Is there a website that has information as to what can and cannot be done and why when it comes to satellites?

[homergreg]

You would need a tuned circuit to demodulate the channel you were watching, that would also involve some kind of electronics that would know what channel the receiver is tuned to so the circuit knows what frequency to demodulate. Then the box would have to remodulate that signal to the signal to be transmitted at a specific licensed frequency. This would cut down the bandwidth of transmitting all frequencies. Then a receiver tuned to the set frequency would demodulate the transmitted signal, and turn around and remodulate the signal to the original frequency, using the same electronics that monitors what the satellite receiver is tuned to. This remodulated signal with the right frequency would then be put on coax destined to the satellite receiver.

If anybody actually comes up with something like this and somehow makes money, I want 25%! I think the Rube Goldberg estate would also get a royalty.

:lol:

[Jacob S]

They would probably use this for things other than satellite and then when the price came down, then perhaps they would use it for satellite then. By that time we would probably not be using satellite dishes but whip antennas instead maybe even inside the house if not internal.