backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 18 comment(s) - last by ToeJam13.. on Mar 28 at 3:55 PM

Computer generated image of the new Tokyo Tower
Investors are hoping the new tower will be complete by 2010

Six Japanese broadcasting networks will work together to pay for a radio and television transmitter tower that will be the tallest tower in the world.  The tower will stand tall, reaching nearly 600 meters, which will make it taller than the 553-meter tall CN Tower in Toronto, Canada.  The New Tokyo Tower will be built in an old railway yard, with the company that owns the land also ready to pay for part of the construction of the tower. 

The broadcasters are using Tokyo Tower as a transmitter for both analog and digital terrestrial broadcasting. But Japan plans to switch broadcasting waves completely from analog to digital, which will offer high-quality audio visual transmission and two-way communications by July 2011.

The deal to finalize the plans for the second Tokyo Tower should be passed by the end of the month.  Construction is estimated to cost about $420 million.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
That's not tall...
By jmunjr on 3/27/2006 5:03:51 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, what's the big deal. Towers are MUCH easier to construct than buildings, and there are currently two buildings under construction with heights over 600m, one of which, the Burj Dubai, will have an approximate height of 705 meters - over 2300 feet! It's tallest occupied floor looks to be over 650 meters as well! This is now under construction! http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams /?2063133

For those who think this is such big deal it really isn't. Extremely tall buildings make very little sense economically unless land is extremely limited, and even then once you build over a certain height your "return" diminishes.. Anyone who has ever worked or lived over 1000ft above the ground floor can attest to the inconvenience of such.

Anyway it is doubtful you will ever see buildings of such magnitude in the USA because there is just way too much land available.




RE: That's not tall...
By zephyrprime on 3/27/2006 5:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's more a matter of EGO than land.


RE: That's not tall...
By jmunjr on 3/27/2006 7:55:49 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, absolutely true in this case(Burj Dubai), but in some cities "tall" is necessary, but anything over 1000ft becomes a problem I think.. It's just too much of a hassle to get in and out of a building..


RE: That's not tall...
By kaoken on 3/27/2006 8:20:23 PM , Rating: 2
Are you guys missing the point of the tower? To turn analog to digital. It's tall because they want to communitcate with satilites. It's might be about ego, who knows, it's up to the people that builds this. But from the looks of it, they are just telecommunication companies not the JAPANESE government, jeeze.


RE: That's not tall...
By Zoomer on 3/27/2006 11:12:32 PM , Rating: 2
It's tall because they want to communitcate with satilites.

Maybe we should hang a some fiber optic cable down from the sats so we can communicate with them more easily!


RE: That's not tall...
By masher2 (blog) on 3/28/2006 11:50:22 AM , Rating: 2
Its height is not to communicate with satellites, but rather to communicate with the ground. The higher the tower, the further away the apparent horizon, and the better line of sight to terrrestial receivers.


RE: That's not tall...
By margin0 on 3/28/2006 2:07:38 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, and the better to reach over high-rise buildings, of which there are quite a few in Tokyo.
I thought this article was a good summary, and what's wrong with the picture? :)
Only quibble is that digital TV quality is already very good. HDTV plus CD quality sound, available here in Tokyo for a couple of years now and in most of the country by the end of this year.


RE: That's not tall...
By ToeJam13 on 3/28/2006 3:55:18 PM , Rating: 2
This tower is most likely being built in part due to the move to digital terrestrial transmissions. It is NOT being built as a broadcast tower for satellite microwave communications. You use ground based dishes to do that.

Older analog broadcasts can handle massive amounts of interference before you are unable to hear or see the transmission. Watch any television show on a distant UHF station that has snow, ghosting, color corruption or just weird lines & wiggles in the picture. The picture and sound quality may be horrible due to all of the static, but you can still recognize it.

Digital broadcasts work under a completely different set of rules. Since we are now dealing with blocks of data that must be received in order to decode, digital broadcasts tend to exhibit an "all or nothing" kind of behavior. The good thing is that digital broadcasts are naturally immune to very slight amounts of interference. When combined with error correction techniques, digital broadcasts are capable of handling even moderate amounts of interference. Beyond that, you encounter drop-out. No picture, no sound. Nothing.

One of the biggest killers of digital television broadcasts is what is known as "multipath interference". This is where radio waves bounce off of solid objects like buildings, trees or the sides of hills & valleys. If your transmission source is higher up, you get a better line of sight above all of those interfering objects.

Tall towers can also be used with high speed wireless networking. Rather than running copper or fiber optic cables, you can use focused microwave spot beams that can transfer gobs of data for very little cost. All you need is a line of sight. The taller the transmitter, the farther you can go since you get above the curvature of the Earth.


RE: That's not tall...
By masher2 (blog) on 3/28/2006 12:03:33 PM , Rating: 2
> anything over 1000ft becomes a problem I think.. It's just too much of a hassle to get in and out of a building.. "

With old elevator technology, sure. Toshiba is making elevators today that run at over 3000 ft/minute, with faster speeds on the horizon.


Cool thing to do?
By latino666 on 3/27/2006 11:09:24 AM , Rating: 2
Is bashing Dailytech every time they post an article the supposed cool thing to do now?




RE: Cool thing to do?
By Wonga on 3/27/2006 12:25:41 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently so. Personally I thought the picture was alright.

Maybe these critics should launch their own news website and show the rest of the world how it should be done - oh hang on, they'd need to do more than complaining, so I guess that won't happen.


RE: Cool thing to do?
By TomZ on 3/27/2006 3:02:50 PM , Rating: 2
I think the old saying applies, "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen."

I assume and also hope the DailyTech folks don't take any of the criticism on these comments too seriously. The site is pretty good overall, just a few small rough edges and opportunities for improvement.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/27/2006 9:18:13 PM , Rating: 3
We read all the comments. Most are pretty helpful even if they are pretty critical. There's not "How to start a news website from scratch handbook" so we do the best we can.

Kristopher


Still 0wn3d by North Dakota
By Chuckles on 3/27/2006 7:12:32 AM , Rating: 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talle st_building

If completed, it would take the world's tallest free standing structure. As opposed to KVLY tower, which is guyed, and a couple of oil rigs, which are tethered.




RE: Still 0wn3d by North Dakota
By Griswold on 3/27/2006 8:21:24 AM , Rating: 1
Useless link.


RE: Still 0wn3d by North Dakota
By masher2 (blog) on 3/27/2006 10:01:58 AM , Rating: 2
All DT forum links are 'useless'. Remove the space the forum s/w inserts and it works.


By jamesbond007 on 3/27/2006 3:40:06 PM , Rating: 2
Living in ND made my eyes jump out at the heading of this thread. =P

Maybe this link will work for the rest of you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVLY- TV_mast


Picture?
By AppaYipYip on 3/27/2006 7:21:21 AM , Rating: 2
Hey thanks for the tiny picture, next time I suggest using one thats maybe 60x60 pixels.




"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




7 Comments







botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki