1950's: BBC vs Ampex

[ppppenguin]

Originally Posted by NewVista

While Ampex solves the problem in a few months at no public expense.

Ampex also started on VT work in 1952 according to that paper. Even the very telented team of Ginsberg, Dolby et al didn't crack the problem in a few months.

Back in 1952 there was no clearcut route to recording video on magnetic tape, it was very much a research problem. Quadruplex machines worked, but were VERY expensive. This cost may have been acceptable to US networks with their timezone problems but was a deterrent to European broadcasters. Had some form of linear recording worked, it would likely have been quite a bit less expensive to build though the tape costs would have been high. I suspect this was the reason why the BBC pursued VERA until 1958.

It would be hard to find the total R&D costs for either Quadruplex or VERA. From what I know of the BBC Research labs the amount of expenditure would have been pretty small. A barely measureable fraction of the BBC's total budget.

If you want a different comparison, look at standards conversion. BBC Research and Designs departments produced the world's first all electronic standards converters between 525/60 and 625/50. They did it in time for the 1968 Mexico olympics where it was urgently needed. I don't know if there was any work at all in the US on this subject.

[W3XWT]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

If you want a different comparison, look at standards conversion. BBC Research and Designs departments produced the world's first all electronic standards converters between 525/60 and 625/50. They did it in time for the 1968 Mexico olympics where it was urgently needed. I don't know if there was any work at all in the US on this subject.

OK, that being the case, how were standards conversion accomplished before 1968? Especially for the first Telstar 2-Way exchange when 405 and 819 line video were still around?

[ppppenguin]

Haven't got the exact date to hand but prior to c1963 all conversion was optical. In other words a camera pointed at a monitor. Not very satisfactory but the best that could be done at the time. Even worse if you try to do it in colour. The only other method wasn't real time. It was to telerecord on film, then telecine on the output standard. Not really an improvement on optical conversion.

c1963 the BBC developed the world's first linestore converter. This used analogue methods to store a whole line of video. It was used primarily for 625>405 conversion. In principle this method could be used for any pair of standards that share the same field rate. This design was the basis of the analogue fieldstore converter that was first deployed in 1968.

Hence in answer to your question, the early US<>Europe satellie links used optical conversion.

[NewVista]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

...electronic standards converters .. for the 1968 Mexico olympics where it was urgently needed. .

Well, not urgently enough for marketplace incentive to produce an electronic standards convertor.
Collectivism to the "rescue":
Enter BBC - funded by $6b/yr licensing tax.
What do they do with all that money? Create Public Sector jobs.
What do they do at these jobs? Keep working on a failed VTR project for 2 more years after Broadcast-Quality VTR available.

[ppppenguin]

Originally Posted by NewVista

Collectivism to the "rescue":
Enter BBC - funded by $6b/yr licensing tax.
What do they do with all that money? Create Public Sector jobs.
What do they do at these jobs? Keep working on a failed VTR project for 2 more years after Broadcast-Quality VTR available.

Ah, you must be referring to the British Broadcasting Communists, an organisation that is little known this side of the pond. I reckon that $230 per household per year (about 60 cents per day) is pretty good value for 4 national TV channels, about 7 national radio channels, a bunch of local radio stations and what was the pioneering and probably most extensive online offering of any broadcaster anywhere. None of it interrupted by commercials either. (Please note BBC World TV is a commerical operation that carries advertising)

I don't know about current figures but through the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s the BBC had a reputation for being able to produce programmes at a lower cost than its commercial rival in the UK.

When will a US broadcaster stage a music festival that rivals the Proms? When will a US broadcaster run a mainstream radio channel that comes close to BBC Radio 4? Neither of these would be commercially viable but both add hugely to the quality of life over here.

Originally Posted by NewVista

...while BBC maintained Money-burn for 6 years

Burning, in the sense of keeping a candle dimly alight. I doubt if figures are readily available but BBC engineering research probably used less than 1% of the BBC's budget and VERA was some small fraction of that. To get some idea of the work done by BBC Research have a look at some of the reports http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/publications/rdreports.shtml As with all research, some of it will have led up blind alleys while other work will turn out to be very useful. No real way to tell in advance.

[NewVista]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

.. $230 per household per year ..

This is a Regressive Tax that hits the Working Class the hardest (those least interested in BBC programming)

Meanwhile BBC refuses to reveal top salaries - though some are suspected of pulling $3,000,000/yr

Hope those making $3,000,000 pay their $230 License (which goes right back in their pocket )

This is why we have to keep fighting to eliminate remaining Govt subsidies to PBS

[NewVista]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

Ampex also started on VT work in 1952 according to that paper.

But they ceased project soon after to focus on money making products only to pick up again very near 1956

...while BBC maintained Money-burn for 6 years