I only received KMGH-DT at a 59-60% strength for the Super Bowl. I got a High Definition Feed on 17-1. Quite a lot of dropouts.

no problem with video here on 17 but audio on comercials was off and on
i guess raising the antenna another 5 ft helped out 17's signal

Congrats to all (20?) of you who were able to watch the SB in HD. I'm sure you enjoyed the picture. I was never able to get a strong enough signal to lock in, so I went skiing instead. To he11 with KMGH and their crappy signal. If they can't get their act together I'll stop watching them altogether.

Besides the weather was warm and sunny in Vail today, with ~4 inches of new snow. Lets see, KMGH's crappy picture or a day of great skiing? That wasn't a tough decision to make...

It's the same story I've been reading the last two years. No tower now, no tower on the horizon, no teeth in Bush's FCC, and no KMGH. Pathetic. I'll go back to lurking.

A successful SB HD party here in Boulder with no sound problems (no thanks to KMGH). The 5.1 was OK, but HDNet does it better IMO. Really glad to hear that KMGH at least got their sound fixed. It's nice to see them acknowledge that some people DO watch the HD side.

As for the game, ABC did OK with the HD, but I like the CBS coverage better.

Winners and Losers:
The best part of the game: The Raidahs lost!
:D
The worst part of the game: No shots of Al Davis in the luxury box at the end of the game.
:(

Let's keep the count of the folks that watched on KMGH for future possible use (perhaps in letters to the FCC or at the LCG hearings or such).

Well, after being frustrated this morning about the sound issue I went up on the roof and tweaked my antenna. I was able to add a couple of points to my signal and it stayed at a 54-56 during the game. I had no dropouts.

I thought the ABC telecast was great and is what HDTV is all about. When KMGH switched to local ads they lost sound but when they switched back to the network the sound was there. :)

I thought they did better then CBS with the camera work, not as much zooming, but some of the graphics would cause a slight blurring of the picture when they came back live. Most camera shots during the game were widescreen HD but a few were not. It was very obvious when they used a non HD camera. It looks like they gave up on the HD during the post game.

I guess congratulations are in order to KMGH for a successful telecast and for getting the sound fixed in time.

I still think their attitude toward HD viewers stinks.

I hate their stretched widescreen on non HD programming, and don't understand their refusal to move their antenna to Republic so more folks can see them.

They could have had some great PR if normal folks ( those who don't have 6 ft antennas) could get their signal.

Lets hope we don't have to put up this low power joke of HDTV in Denver for a whole lot longer. :(

Originally posted by mhampton
no teeth in Bush's FCC

Not to go off on a tangent, but IIRC, Clinton's FCC wasn't pushing the DTV transition too hard, either. At least now we have a deadline for integrated ATSC tuners in sets, a cable standard so TVs can be cable-ready again, NBC committing to more than just Leno in HDTV, and KUSA actually broadcasting a digital signal in Denver (apparently after some of our letters arrived at the FCC).

No excuse for KMGH though. My sister-in-law (who is a Raiders fan) got to watch the game in standard def. I tried to explain to her why she could've watched the game in HDTV back in Calgary (where she lives) or pretty much anywhere else in the US but not here.

I guess I'm lucky. I found a Zenith 520 at Sountrack. I bought a RS U120XL antenna from Radio Shack put it together at 2:00 p.m., ran all the component cables to the Sony KP61 HS20. From my deck I can see all of downtown. I live in Ken-Caryl around Ken-Caryl and Simms. I laid the antenna on a table pointed at downtown, turned on the receiver, and found all the channels. What a great picture. I would switch back and forth to show the difference to my guests. What a major difference. Everyone was very impressed with the picture. About 3 or four times I would lose sound or the picture would freeze. I think it's the receiver. The Zenith doesn't have a numerical scale for signal power. From their power bar I would estimate 17-1 to be around 70-75 during the football game. I just checked all the other channels and they're between 85-90%.

I still don't think HDTV is worth the 699.00 I paid for the receiver. The Antenna was 45 bucks. I'm going to mount it on my roof to see if I can get all channels in the 90-95% on the power bar. Since I have a Dish setup, I'm going to try a 6000 once I have the antenna on the roof.

Ken

I hate to get into this whole debate, but I must throw in my 2c....

The signal from KMGH is just pathetic. I have between 79-100% signal on every other DT station within 100 miles except for them. I get zero on them, goose-egg, nothing. I have a nice directional UHF Yagi pointed in the right direction for them and I am no more than 15 airmiles from the station with good line of sight and high quality signal and amplification devices.

So, I too watched the superbowl in standard def.

All I can say is, KMGH blows and obviously dosent care about its viewing audience.

Pathetic.

JaMa

Originally posted by mhampton
Congrats to all (20?) of you who were able to watch the SB in HD. I'm sure you enjoyed the picture. I was never able to get a strong enough signal to lock in, so I went skiing instead. To he11 with KMGH and their crappy signal. If they can't get their act together I'll stop watching them altogether.

Besides the weather was warm and sunny in Vail today, with ~4 inches of new snow. Lets see, KMGH's crappy picture or a day of great skiing? That wasn't a tough decision to make...
Good decision....It's beyond me why KMGH can't see the forest thru the trees and move their damn antenna......

I feel for all of you who couldn't get the KMGH signal. The SB broadcast and the 5.1 sound was great. It was fun to have the crowd sounds in the rear speakers.

All of my guests were very impressed with the HD picture, especially when comparing with shots as ABC cut to a SD camera with terrible motion artifacts. We could tell when KMGH was doing their local thing because the sound went out and, of course, their picture is not HD, just their crummy stretched view. The movie commercials in HD were great!

We had a TV in the kitchen showing the SB from DirecTV and it was interesting to see how completely different the choice of camera shots were. Having two directors and one set of announcers who were not always talking about what we were seeing was a bit annoying.

All in all, a good experience, but not nearly as well done as CBS.

The movie commercials, especially with the 5.1 surround sound, were indeed awesome. Was the sound of those commercials much louder than the rest of the telecast or did KMGH 'tone it down' a bit? Also, does KMGH send out native 720p (seems like I have read that they do, I would have no way of knowing since I can't get their signal), and if so did any of you have a problem with the clock being cut off at the top due to overscan if you had to convert to 1080i? In the 'official' SB thread there are a lot of reports of the overscan cutting off part of the clock for many who have to convert to 1080i on their own stb gear. Just curious how some of you saw the issue.

No problem with the clock graphic. I have no idea about the 720p. My DTC-100 would upconvert it anyway to 1080i. Some of the commercials were very loud, but we lived with it. Quite a contrast to the NO sound on the local stuff they broadcast... almost like an automatic mute control... maybe a good idea there.

I had the problem with the Superbowl HDTV broadcast cutting off the clock. I suspect it was because my TV/receiver converted 720p to 1080i (did not realized it did this until I read about this today on other HDTV forums today). I have a MITS 65" TV attached to a Integra 6.2 receiver. I will have to go back and see if I can get 720p, or if I am stuck up converting to 1080i.

Even with this problem, not as sharp as CBS playoff HDTV, some pixaliations when switched from on-screen graphics to live play, and lip syncing of madden/Michaels, still much better than analog broadcast. Hopefully ABC can get these kinks worked out.

Todd

The pixellation when cutting from camera to camera and when the graphics were switching wasn't an ABC problem. It was most definitely a KMGH problem because they broadcast their HD stream at only 12.1 Mbps as opposed to the full 19 Mbps stream that the other stations broadcast at. 17-2 is taking up 4.5 Mbps of the rest of the bandwidth. And next year at this time, I suspect that 17-1 will be down to around 10 Mbps if KMGHG sucessfully launches their all-news subchannel. Pixellation city...

Originally posted by markdl
The pixellation when cutting from camera to camera and when the graphics were switching wasn't an ABC problem. It was most definitely a KMGH problem because they broadcast their HD stream at only 12.1 Mbps as opposed to the full 19 Mbps stream that the other stations broadcast at. 17-2 is taking up 4.5 Mbps of the rest of the bandwidth. And next year at this time, I suspect that 17-1 will be down to around 10 Mbps if KMGHG sucessfully launches their all-news subchannel. Pixellation city... Another good reason to stop watching these clueless flunkies.

Hi there,

I feel like an idiot...
For some reason my Dish 6000 locked on 17-2 and I watched the game in standard def. The night before, when I watched Drew Carry's show in HD it had to be locked on 17-1, right?
What is the difference between the two? I found it a hard way that there is 17-1 and 17-2.
Will remember next time I guess...

Thanks,

Jacek

I had 2 families over to watch the game on 17-1. Overall everyone was impressed with the picture quality, but I did mention several times that the AFC playoff games on CBS looked much better (IMHO). My main complaints are as follows:

1) I had the problem with the cutoff time clock at the top of the screen. However, I was watching the game converted to 1080i (through my Hipix), on a Pioneer TV. (The "offical" super bowl thread identifies these as the 2 things most likely to cause this problem.)

2) The upconverted SD shots had an embarrasing amount of blurring. (Also mentioned several times in the "offical" super bowl thread.)

3) There was very noticeable pixelation during the transitions from the the "replay" logo back to the live picture. (Most likely a KMGH problem, since they do not broadcast at the full 19 Mbs rate.)

My signal strength on 17-1 is about 55, but I experienced no dropouts, and the 5.1 sound was rock solid (except for some lip-synch, which I understand was a national problem).

So I caught Hell on the Audi Form for saying that ABC was HD (HDTV). This guy repremands me that it is referred to as ED: http://forums.audiworld.com/other/msgs/777926.phtml

I noticed several of you also refer to it as HD.

Reggie

Whomever it was that stated to you that 720p isn't HDTV is grossly miss informed!! 720p and 1080i are both true HDTV, period.

I had the problem with having the clock cut off on the Super Bowl. This is using an Echostar 6000, upconverting to 1080i for my Toshiba RPTV. The picture position adjustment on the 6000 was adjusted "down" as much as possible, as it always is.

That was actually the most annoying thing of the broadcast. I had just about convinced myself that I was going to go through all of the service menu stuff to re-do the geometry to cut down on the overscan, but since so many others had the problem, I'm not sure I'll change anything and see if there gets to be more consistency on a 16x9 "safe zone" from the broadcasters.

There were other problems, but overall I enjoyed the SB very much.

Mark

Here is a link to a press release that states exactly what is considered HDTV and what is considered EDTV (SDTV). If you would like to rub this in the face of Eric Fletcher (Mr. I produce TV shows and feature films for a living) be my guest.

http://www.atsc.org/press/PR_Def.html

Sorry if my post is a little aggressive, but people like Eric really piss me off.

Well, according to the Consumer Electronics Association, 720p or 1080i are HDTV while 480p is EDTV: http://www.ce.org/shared_files/resources/69CEA_DTV_Definitions.pdf

The ATSC, who would have the final say, I would imagine, is vague as to the difference between HDTV and EDTV: http://www.atsc.org/faq_general.html

With all due respect, when it comes to defining HDTV standards, I'd take the word of avsforum (http://www.avsforum.com/hdtvfaq/HDTV-FAQ.htm) and the CEA over a car-oriented bulletin board.

Originally posted by mbuchana
I had the problem with having the clock cut off on the Super Bowl. This is using an Echostar 6000, upconverting to 1080i for my Toshiba RPTV. The picture position adjustment on the 6000 was adjusted "down" as much as possible, as it always is.

That was actually the most annoying thing of the broadcast. I had just about convinced myself that I was going to go through all of the service menu stuff to re-do the geometry to cut down on the overscan, but since so many others had the problem, I'm not sure I'll change anything and see if there gets to be more consistency on a 16x9 "safe zone" from the broadcasters.

There were other problems, but overall I enjoyed the SB very much.

Mark

I also had the top of the clock cut off this was on OTA KMGH-DT 17-1. I was told by a friend in Canada that the top of the clock was also cut off on Bell ExpressView.

Originally posted by A4Short
So I caught Hell on the Audi Form for saying that ABC was HD (HDTV). This guy repremands me that it is referred to as ED: http://forums.audiworld.com/other/msgs/777926.phtml

I noticed several of you also refer to it as HD.

Reggie It is HDTV. In fact that are some folks who believe it's "more HDTV" than 1080i because it's progressive and not interlaced. You may want to reply with some of the links posted above....

Just for informational purposes, I also watched the Super Bowl in HD on 17-1 via a DTC100 with no dropouts at all. Also watched Alias in HD and no droputs on the recording of it either. Since the game was not really riveting after the Bucs went ahead by so much in the 3rd quarter, I truly didn't notice the lip sync problems at all.

Did lose audio on the local commercials as did everyone else, but otherwise a fine day showing off the theater.

Jeff

Equipment recommendation
I am new to this and read quite a few of the old questions and responses but figured it may be easier to ask the question specific to my situation.

I live in Highlands Ranch and have a straight view to downtown from my roof or attic. I have a 55" Mits which is HD upgradeable. I currently have AT&T cable and I am totally confused by all the technology options out there. Should I buy a HD Receiver and antenna and get the local over the air HD programming? Should I go with Dish or Direct TV plus the antenna? Any advice on the best way to go would technology wise would be appreciated.

Thanks

Ken,
We are practically neighbors!! I live near the corner of Ken Caryl and Kipling. From my roof, I have a clear sight of downtown and can get all of the digital channels. KMGH is obviously my worst reception (65) but it was good enough to receive the SB.

Originally posted by RonH2O
I live in Highlands Ranch and have a straight view to downtown from my roof or attic. I have a 55" Mits which is HD upgradeable. I currently have AT&T cable and I am totally confused by all the technology options out there. Should I buy a HD Receiver and antenna and get the local over the air HD programming? Should I go with Dish or Direct TV plus the antenna?You can buy an OTA tuner and a good antenna to get CBS, PBS, FOX and likely ABC in HD. Instead of the OTA tuner, you could buy a combo satellite/OTA tuner (for more $$ of course) and also get HBO, Showtime, HDNet (DirecTV) or Discovery HD (Dish), and possibly ESPN HD in March/April (both?).

So it's up to you to decide if you want to pay extra to switch to satellite for those extra channels in HD. You can get some decent programming in HD from your antenna.

RonH2O,

When you start watching and enjoying HD, your gonna' be like the rest of us, and can't wait to watch more & more. I'd recommend getting the combo OTA and Sat receiver (either Directv or E*).

HBO is great, Showtime is mixed, but Discovery is always excellent. I've heard HDNet is also really good.

Just don't get too excited about HDO-HD until they start respecting the original theatrical aspect ratios of movies.

Dan

Anyone heard any rumors on when ATT here will be offering HDTV on cable?
Is is two months out, six, a year.

Before I rushout to get a roof top antenna I want get an idea of how long I would have t wait and have a solution that will be easier.

Reggie

As Tony Soprano would say:

Digital Cable... Forgetaboutit!

I've heard different statments. One phone rep said it could be 6 mo. in Certain Areas. An 'Insider' guy I spoke to said, it wouldn't happen for 2 years, and again he also said; in Certain Areas.

I don't about you, but does anybody know where 'Certain Areas' is located? It's like the cable equivilent of Area 51.

Ernie,

My guess is that certain area - means the ones that have been upgraded from the orginal TCI system.

Does anyone here in the Denver area have the Canadian Sat system?

Reggie

I asked the AT&T salesman that came to my door a couple of weeks ago about HD - and also told him that was the criteria for my subscribing to them. He seemed to know about HD and DirecTV's carriage of HD channels, and stated that they (AT&T) were waiting for finalized cable HD carriage standards and integrated ditigal tuners to be in TVs before HD would be available here (he hinted it would be several years).

Originally posted by A4Short
Does anyone here in the Denver area have the Canadian Sat system?



Alot of guys do. Personally I've never understood why even more dont. I realize money doesnt grow on trees but it's not like alot of the money (at least for the hardware) couldnt be recouped at some later point by selling the system to some poor S.O.B that lives so remote he'll never get anything OTA anyway.

Yeah, yeah I know a person shouldnt be forced to look in that direction to begin with, but a person can either wait and wait and wait and wait some more, or they can be watching the programming. It's up to them to decide how badly they want to see the programming I guess.

Has anyone heard anything on the status of KUSA's equipment required for them to pass the NBC feed for HD programming?

thanks,
Dustin

For those of you not on the mailing list, Pete just sent out the following email information.
***

Friends,

I know this wonÍt please you but the County has requested another delay so they can better prepare for the hearing.æ Obviously any delay is not good.æ However, I sense the County is looking to dot some ñIîs and cross ñtîs and needs a little more time to do so.æ We have a meeting with the County next week to firm up the schedule.æ I am hopefully we will get a commitment from them on a timetable.æ We are in agreement that starting /stopping is not in anyoneÍs best interest.æ I am hopeful that the 3/5 and 3/12 hearings will still happen.æ I will write again after our meeting when I know for sure.æ I know this is discouraging but believe in the long run, we will save more time by allowing the staff to be well prepared than proceeding otherwise.æ Thanks for your continued support and patience.

Thanks,

Peter McNally, Principal
The Grinnell Group

****
Hey KMGH, care to make a projection on what year the tower will be finished? Loser buys the beer.

Last we heard from KUSA a coule of weeks ago was that they were "30 to 45 days" out from passing the HD feed. Hopefully that now means 20 to 35 days out.

Given their history in the area of DTV, we rest assured they are working as fast as they can to get HD on the air!
:mad:
After all, although I know they are reluctant to mention it on the air, they are the number one station here in Colorado aren't they?

If anyone is looking for a decent deal on a DirecTv/OTA HD box, SoundTrack has the Hughes E86 on sale for $400. It wasn't advertised, but when the salesman checked in his computer, it came up at that price (it was marked $499)

Just an FYI!

This has nothing to do with HD in Denver, but I wanted to let you guys locally know that I'm currently giving away a Dish Network 508 receiver, and starting Monday I'll be giving away a Dish Network 721 receiver and a Hughes HDVR2 directivo II receiver. Email or PM for details.

Mark, Good luck, I will tell some folks without all of our equipment currently to check this stuff out.

Jeff

Interesting? articles in the on-line Jeffco Sentinal...

sentinal (http://www.jeffconews.com/)

click on "Site owner cries foul over tower hearings"

&

"Tancredo opposes tower plan"

-Wabisabi

P.S. - I think the Denver Post is doing an article of the tower issues on Sunday.

Wabisabi
Thanks for the links, they are interesting reading. I suppose Tancredo is opposed to Morrison so he can favor consolidation on Lookout, or otherwise one would have to interpret his oposition to mean there should be no TV towers in Metro Denver (since he opposes the visual impact and RF Radiation from such towers).
:D
Apparently he does not have a EE degree in RF communications. Without RF radiation, there isn't much signal for us to pick up with our home antennas. Great job Tom, it sounds like you said exactly what the (S)CARE folks fed you without any thought intervention.

"Millions of watts of radiation are expected to emanate from the proposed towers, a site only a few thousand feet from the historic Red Rocks Park and Amphitheater, as well as the hiking and biking trails of Matthews/Winters Park," he wrote. "Additionally, the residents of Genesee are just a few miles from the proposed antenna tower. At this point, the effects of long-term exposure to this type of radiation to human and environmental health are unknown."
Actually Tom, I think the FCC has been monitoring such levels for over 50 years. So far, no problems have been reported.

KMGH Sound

Not for nothing but, KMGH on 17.1 is having a sound problem again.....this time it is on/off/on/off/on/off and definately not 5.1.

Is everybody having this issue ?

Doug

No, I'm having the KMGH-DT signal strength of 0 problem.

How about you, jm in Boulder, how's your sound on 17-1?

(sorry Doug -- not picking on you)

Even if they get the sound right, they forget key things like remembering to pass an HD feed when it is available.

Last night, they forgot to flip the switch on the Columbo movie and it was shown in stretched SD. The sound did work, but I can't stand their stretch, so we waited for CSI and gave up on Columbo.

These people at KMGH really don't put much attention to detail on HD. What a shame when things appear to be taking off. (Lookout excepted, of course!)

I am sure glad we don't have the same type of problem here in the Springs! Too bad all of the Denver stations can't put antennas on top of Cheyenne Mtn. like our locals do. I'm also sure that it's probably the newcomers that built their McMansions in the hills that don't think antennas are a good idea...Too much cancer risk for sure!

Hey guys, anybody know what's happening with the other quasi-locals like cheyenne? Especially, of course, an ABC ota.

Originally posted by dr_mal
No, I'm having the KMGH-DT signal strength of 0 problem.

How about you, jm in Boulder, how's your sound on 17-1?

(sorry Doug -- not picking on you)

Still showing a very strong "0" on 17-1. I would classify the sound on KMGH just a tad bit worse than the HD on KUSA.
:D

Check this out!

I open the mail today and there's an invitiation to tour the "Sleeper/Space" house. Cool!
It's right above my place and i've always wanted to go inside since they finished it. So, i read on and there's a fee, but it goes to a non-profit charity and it says it's tax deductable... that's nice. Wow, I really want to go.

So, I read on it talks about the architect and the history, blah,blah, blah... and the kicker to the story is... All the money goes to (S)Care! AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!

So, ya goin' Ernie?
;)

Originally posted by dssset
Hey guys, anybody know what's happening with the other quasi-locals like cheyenne? Especially, of course, an ABC ota.

Cheyenne has CBS, NBC and fox. CBS (KGWN) is close - they are waiting for some part and hope to be up in February. NBC has a low power antenna that only reaches within the city limits, and it isn't HD yet anyway. And I don't know anything about the Cheyenne Fox station.

As far as ABC - I don't think we have any alternative other than KMGH.:confused: :rolleyes: (I still have a very strong reading of 0 for KMGH, also)

Let's stay on these people for improved sound, better signal strength, etc.

Jeff

I am sure that it is true for everyone in the forum, that our thoughts and prayers go out to all the families of the Shuttle Astronauts who died yesterday. Those of us struggling to get that extra 5% signal strength with our 'high tech' home theater set ups need to appreciate that this is child's play compared to getting a Shuttle safely into space and back again. I have spent nearly 30 years designing satellites (including work on components for the first flight of Columbia years ago), and I never cease to marvel every time a flight ends safely. This time something didn't work right.

After yesterday's Shuttle crash, HD seems a lot less important this morning, but I thought I would post this anyway. In the Denver Post editorial section (actually it is in the RMNews editorial section) there is a large editorial in favor of the current LCG proposal for Lookout Mountain. I don't believe the RMNews posts editorials on its web, so I figured I would mention this before the papers went off the stands or out to the trash tonight.

Fellas....Fellas.....Fellas,

No offense taken.....I understand the range limitations of KMGH and I look forward to the day when we all get the HDTV we so richly deserve. The sound was fixed about 15 minutes after I called to bitch about it. Thanks Chief Engineer Craddock.

However....

After 4 attempts to contact engineering, the conversation with the switchboard operator was enlightening. Apparently, 17.1 and 17.2 are only available on CABLE and only in FULL STEREO, not 5.1. They don't even do high definition. I was laughing so hard, I nearly did a spit take with the coke I was drinking.

Anyway, maybe this is the answer we have been looking for.......CABLE, in beautiful stretched standard definition and full stereo........

Doug

Here (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_1711675,00.html) is a story from the Sunday Denver Post-Rocky Mountain News about the proposed new tower. It appeared on the Rocky Mountain News Editorial Page.

Mike aka Hot
Thanks for finding and posting that link. Last time I looked for a link to an editorial in the RMN I couldn't find any link to the entire editorial page, so I didn't bother looking today. Thanks again.

Originally posted by JMartinko
Mike aka Hot
Thanks for finding and posting that link. Last time I looked for a link to an editorial in the RMN I couldn't find any link to the entire editorial page, so I didn't bother looking today. Thanks again.

You are welcome

Good reading today, thanks,
Jeff

Nice to see them talking it up a little bit. Cross our fingers!

About 24 hours to the Mt Morrision tower decision.

'Ya know... I wonder if Mr. Tom (Sure, I'll back you SCARE, because you're VOTERS, I love voters, and I don't really care, I get lots of full-power HDTV in my brand new D.C. home anyway) Tancredo will be at the final hearing?

Originally posted by santellavision

'Ya know... I wonder if Mr. Tom (Sure, I'll back you SCARE, because you're VOTERS, I love voters, and I don't really care, I get lots of full-power HDTV in my brand new D.C. home anyway) Tancredo will be at the final hearing?

Don't count on it, most likely he wouldn't want to risk exposure to all that nearby RF radiation from Lookout.
:D
Come to think of it, I wonder why the (S)CARE folks haven't been recording their testimony and sending tapes to the hearings in order to avoid the exposure too?????

Here (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E53%257E1153984,00.html?search=filter) is an article from the Monday Denver Post.

Update on the KNGH 5.1 sound problems. They were awful last night during Alias. It got to be unwatchable with unbelievable loud pops coming through the speakers at odd intervals. To save the speakers, I shut down the theater and watched via the DIRECTIVO in the bedroom.

Thank goodness for a backup. This was really my first problem with their sound on a more than random basis. Since it continued, I gave up, but I haven't had any other problems in a couple of years when they used to have severe lip sync issues.

Jeff

For tomorrow's Mt. Morrison vote, I think Ken is hoping that a good number of supporters can get there and wear a "yes" button. If a commissioner is "on the fence," the visible support could make a difference. So, if you can make it, load up your car with whoever you can and go to the Taj tomorrow, Feb. 4, 9 AM.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to make it.

As we know, if Mt. Morrison is approved, KRMA plans to move there and should have full-power DTV in about a year.

I think (my impression, not a fact) that Mt. Morrison could accommodate some additional DTV capacity. And, as I understand things, the following adjacent channels should ideally be co-located for interference reasons:

KUSA-DT (16)
KMGH-DT (17)
KRMA-DT (18)
KTVD-DT (19)
KTVD analog (20)

So, I wonder if any of them would consider locating their DTV antenna there, either temporarily or permanently.

This would not remove any additional facilities from Lookout like the LCG2 project would. It would strictly be for the DTV antennas.

Anyway, if Mt. Morrison is approved, maybe the push should be for KMGH to put their DTV antenna there, rather than moving to Republic Plaza. This could be either on a temporary (until LCG2) or permanent basis. Obviously it couldn't be done as quickly as Republic Plaza, but it isn't nearly as open ended as LCG2 is at this point.

These are just my own thoughts and speculations. No one associated with the project or any of the stations has ever mentioned anything like this that I am aware of. In any case, I certainly hope Mt. Morrison is approved tomorrow.

Mark

Mike
Thanks for the link, I didn't see the paper yet today. I notice the great quote from (S)CARE:
****
Deborah Carney, spokeswoman and attorney for CARE, said 10,000 people live in or just outside the towers' main beams on five mountains near Mount Vernon Canyon, west of Golden.

CARE contends the towers emit radiation at harmful levels, produce interference with electrical devices and perhaps cause an increase in cancer cases.

"None of the proposals reduces radiation," Carney said. "Instead, they increase levels for a large area of our community."
*****

Apparently she has not bothered to read the LCG proposal, or maybe she just figures telling a lie to the press is a more effective way to argue her case since she can't debate the facts.

"None of the proposals reduces radiation," Carney said. "Instead, they increase levels for a large area of our community."It is sad that this kind of bogus misinformation is still being perpetuated - I guess the philosophy is "say it enough times then it must be true". Some folks are going to believe this because it comes from the SCARE attorney but IMO she is doing a real injustice to her "fellow citizens" because lies like this do not inform the public - they hit an emotional chord where no amount of rational facts and statements presented by the folks for the tower are even considered. This is akin to yelling fire in a crowed theater and Ms Carney should be sued and/or jailed.

"West and Tom Baran are co-owners of Squaw Mountain Communications, a two-tower operation on Highway 103 between Bergen Park and Mount Evans.

In September, West said they ran field tests of 200 sites along a 40-mile-long strip of Jefferson County to help counter contentions that locating on Squaw Mountain would mean 100,000 residents west of Wadsworth Boulevard would not get signals.

West said only isolated pockets did not receive a signal. Oh, only "isolated pockets" of citizens are affected. I guess this makes it okay. On the flip side, only "isolated pockets" MIGHT BE affected by RF so we should move everything off of Lookout where it has served Front Range citizens for over 50 years.....does logic, reasoning and common sense mean anything anymore?

JM,

You haven't seen her "in action". She quite a piece-of-work! She just makes up so much stuff, and nobody calls her on it. The other side doesn't want to sound petty i guess.

I watched at the last couple public meetings. Most of the commissioners don't even pay attention to her anymore, they just look off or talk to each other. You'd think she'd get the message that nobody believes a word she says.

Jeff,

This is the sound problem I was experiencing over the last couple of days. Dragnet was solid last night after Alias. As for Alias, I just went to the computer and did some work. More productive, but less fun.

Doug

Ernie
Actually I have seen her (Deb C.) in action at some of the public information meetings held by the LCG. She is truly a piece of work. Obviously she believes in the theory that you "never let the facts get in the way of a good argument".

check this out:
Tower proposals swamp county officials, residents
Posted by Web Producer Susan Wells February 03, 2003 - 10:37 AM

GOLDEN (AP) - Proposals to build or add-on to broadcast towers along the Front Range have swamped officials and residents in several counties.

The plans stem from a Federal Communication Commission mandate that television stations replace analog signals with digital signals by 2006.

Tower proposals have already been presented for Eldorado Mountain on the Jefferson-Boulder County line, Mount Morrison above the historic town of Morrison, and Lookout Mountain.

Broadcasters say they need Jefferson County's height advantage to beam clear television signals throughout the metro area.

But some homeowners are fighting the towers. They claim the towers emit harmful levels of radiation, and may cause an increase in cancer cases.

It's on the 9news. web page...................

Ken Smith is asking for support for the Mt. Morrison Tower. (S)CARE is pulling out all their guns to make a statement tomorrow (Remember, the Commission is going to vote tomorrow)

And he also asks everybody to send an email directly to the commissioners if you can in support.

Email a quick Two-liner to just say I support the Mt. Morrison Tower: commish@jeffco.us

I guess (S)CARE is trying to stack the hearing with a ton of Anti-Tower people.

(FYI: I just fixed the link, ooops!)

Originally posted by jeffden
Update on the KNGH 5.1 sound problems. They were awful last night during Alias. It got to be unwatchable with unbelievable loud pops coming through the speakers at odd intervals. To save the speakers, I shut down the theater and watched via the DIRECTIVO in the bedroom.
Originally posted by Doug888
As for Alias, I just went to the computer and did some work. More productive, but less fun.Too bad you guys didn't stick around and watch the rest of Alias. The sound problems cleared up after about the first 15 minutes and the rest of the program was solid. The sound on Dragnet afterward was fine too. (I didn't care much for the show, however...)

Santellavision,
I sent an email to JeffCo in support of the new tower. I hope others will do so.

I sent an email as well.

The link in your message needs to get fixed, santellavision.

I just sent my e-mail as a former county employee and a current resident!

Good luck to those who are able to attend!!

I also sent an e-mail as a PBS deprived Castle Rock resident.

The correct address is commish@jeffco.us

The link above is missing the "H"

I noticed this on the Jeffco web site about the Channel 9 radar tower.

http://206.247.49.21/ext/dpt/coadm/pubinfo/pressrel/2003/9kusa_weather.htm

Maybe LCG is looking better!!!

Sent my email earlier this evening, hope you all will do the same, even if you can make it tomorrow.

Originally posted by Phil T
...

I noticed this on the Jeffco web site about the Channel 9 radar tower.....

http://206.247.49.21/ext/dpt/coadm/pubinfo/pressrel/2003/9kusa_weather.htm

Maybe LCG is looking better!!! The illegal weather radar is a big reason why Lookout area residents (along with County officials) are leery of anything proposed by the television stations. Their arrogance goes back a long long ways and, as far as I can determine, any mistrust on the part of JeffCo officials and residents is well deserved. The stations have not always played by the rules so folks are naturally skeptical that they will start to play by the rules. This is going to be very hard to overcome.

Thanks guys for the email catch. I did go back and fix it.

I sent my email

I got a returned email showing the invalid address this morning. I fixed the address and resent it. Hope it helps.

Hey guys,

I stopped by JeffCo for an hour or so this morning. The commissioners asked a few more questions about stupid little things like: "Option B says a red strobe light isn't required to meet FAA regulations, but there's no restriction saying you CAN'T put a red strobe light on the tower" From Commissioner Holloway: "During the snowstorm on Sunday, I lost a few of my (cable-delivered) local channels. Is Mt. Morrison really the best tower location for you?" (from Mr. Morgese: Channel 6 went off the air for a short time because the studio lost power. The tower could've been anywhere; without the studio to provide a signal, the tower can't transmit anything)

The commissioners left for an "executive meeting" with the county attorney sometime before 11:00; as of 11:20 (when I had to leave), they still weren't back.

I had to come back to work this afternoon -- if I hear anything further I'll post.

Can somebody Pleeeeeeease post what happened!
I'm dyin' here.

Approved 2-1

-Wabisabi

lemme guess: Holloway was the 1? :rolleyes:



[edit:]

Oh yeah:

WOO HOO

WOOOO HOOOOOO!

Broadcasters 2, (S)Care 2
That's two in a row. One more to go and we won't have to say the name (S)Care anymore.

Great news! Can someone please explain what will happen next?

Apparently they voted for "Plan B" with restrictions. Once this resolution is drawn up they will vote on it again come March 11th...(all this according to the Commissioner Secretary).

YIPPEE!!!

Why would they vote again?

Originally posted by markdl
YIPPEE!!!

Why would they vote again? I second the YIPPEE but I am unsure of the process from here. I would guess that they vote again to formalize the final resolution (along the lines of coming to agreement and then waiting for the paperwork to spell out all the details before casting the final vote). I think it would be unusual for the result to be changed, but I suppose it's possible.

I'm sure Wabisabi can clarify when he gets the chance.

This is a sane and rational vote. I thank JeffCo for their hard work on this (along with KRMA and BCDC of course). As much as we all wanted to see this happen much sooner I think the end result is that the proposal was refined to the point where it became acceptable enough to pass. When you stop to think about it, this process is working with LCG2 as well, because, (IMO) LCG2 is far far better than their first proposal. Time will tell if it's good enough to pass muster but I think the Commissioners have demonstrated they are willing to pass a viable & sensible resolution and are not joined at the hips with SCARE.

And, speaking of SCARE, there was some comment awhile back that suggested we refer to them as CARE. After reading Ms Carney's comments about RF increasing, and not decreasing, I think SCARE is entirely appropriate and I, for one, refuse to call them by any other name.

Now we shall see if the decision is appealed in Jefferson County District Court. Would anyone like to estimate the odds of such a lawsuit?

yipeee and woohoo (all the way from Tokyo!). And, might I add a "FINALLY!!!" on top of those!

I'm headin' to Vegas in a few weeks, I'll check the odds out there.

Also, there's a brand new LCGII website:

LCGII Consolidation Tower Website (http://www.lakecedarproject.com/)

Can (S)Care appeal the decision?

Originally posted by santellavision

Also, there's a brand new LCGII website:

LCGII Consolidation Tower Website (http://www.lakecedarproject.com/)

Ernie:

I noticed that the new LCG site has a link to YOUR site!

http://www.lakecedarproject.com/s16.shtml

See the "Click Here" at the bottom of the page.

Mark

P.S. re: Mt. Morrison
Woo Hoo!

Originally posted by Deamon Speeding
Can (S)Care appeal the decision? Yes.
To the Jefferson County District Court.

That will be a tough road though as they must show the Commissioners didn't take into account all public comment and/or failed to abide by County rules....

I hope the towers can reach as far as Fort Collins

Does anyone know the timetable for how long it would take to build the towers once the go ahead is given? My brief search did not see one.

Reggie

Mark,

Yeah, they included a link, cool!
I think we all have to give some credit to you for the Big Win, I think it was that Huge 'Yes' sticker you wore at the Public Hearing ;)

Originally posted by A4Short
I hope the towers can reach as far as Fort Collins

Does anyone know the timetable for how long it would take to build the towers once the go ahead is given? My brief search did not see one.

Reggie I don't think they'll be any problems with signals reaching Ft Collins. As to the timetable I would guesstimate a year or so from the final approval date....could be longer, could be faster, depending on lots of factors (and assuming no delays due to lawsuits).

Hopefully we'll get a update from Ken and/or James Morgese when they get done celebrating :)

Just got out of an all day spacecraft design course to hear the :D FANTASTIC :D news. Three cheers for KRMA, James and Ken and the crew there. Now that we have gotten over the first hill, it is time to attack the mountain, LCG2.
:D :D :D

Hey all,

I don't know how many of you are IEEE members, but I just got this notice in my e-mail. Even though I don't have an HDTV (yet), I went to the HDNet tour and am curious to see what Comcast folks will have to say. Note that you don't have to be an IEEE member to go, but you do have to pay either way (but dinner is included)

Here's the info:

February 18, 2003
"HDTV from the cable company perspective & a tour of the Comcast Digital Program Center in Littleton"
Presented by Ed Cooper, Comcast

Abstract:
High Definition Television (HDTV) is finally getting some traction. After years of being in committees and discussions, content providers are beginning to create programs in HDTV. Cable, satellite, and broadcasters are beginning to offer HDTV services to customers. HDTV monitors are almost affordable. Since the delivery mediums between the three providers are different, there are differences between modulation formats and bandwidth that could be a challenge for the end user. This presentation will briefly review HDTV from the cable perspective and be followed up with a tour of the Comcast Digital Program Center.

Ed Cooper Bio:
Ed Cooper currently works for Comcast (previously known as AT&T Broadband and TCI) as Director of System Test for the past five years. The Comcast system acceptance test lab concentrates on testing digital video products and software/firmware releases from uplink to subscriber. Previously, Ed worked as Director of Engineering for Integration Technologies, which was a consulting firm for the telecommunications industry concentrating on telephony deployments for the cable industry. Ed is a BSEE and is a registered professional engineer for the state of Colorado.

This meeting will be held in the Comcast Digital Program Center (previously AT&T Digital Media Center) located at 4100 East Dry Creek Road, Littleton CO. Please use the west entrance to enter the building.

- Meeting time is 6PM -8PM.
- Dinner is available to attendees who RSVP.
- IEEE members $10 - Non-IEEE Members $15
- Parking is free.
- Please RSVP by noon February 18. RSVP required for access to Comcast building.

RSVP to Jim West: j.west@computer.org or call 303-768-8080

Eric

Oh yeah, there will also be an HDTV related IEEE tour of Channel 4 on March 18th. I'll post more info when it becomes available.

in the post.

Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E53%257E1157804%257E,00.html)

-Wabisabi

Does this mean that KRMA will have an option of 2 sites if LCG is accepted, also?
But YEAH BABY, great win for the good guys.

One of the conditions of the Mt. Morrison app being approved is KRMA dismantling their tower on Lookout and occupying the new tower on Mt. Morrison. Mr. Morgese was quite emphatic that he would move to Mt. Morrison if this application was approved.

So, you are saying they would no longer be a part of LCGII, correct?

I agree, this is a great win for the good guys. KRMA, and James Morgese in particular, are to be commended for their dilligence and extra effort to get something approved. James has had the foresight and motivation to keep working on the tower problem even though It must have seemed hopeless (this must feel like a ton of bricks has been taken off his shoulders). I remember talking with him about Morrison long before any application was submitted. It was clear to me back then that he had a strong desire to "get this done" and it is clear today that he has succeeded. KRMA will beat all other Denver stations and bring high power HDTV to the Front Range. Sure Faux has been on the air with their crappy 14:9 lip-un-sync signal for a while and KWGN will likely be on the air before KRMA but both those stations have zoning that made it much easier for them to get approved. Meanwhile our other locals have struggled to get any sort of decent application before JeffCo and will be years late with high power H/DTV broadcasts (contrast that to KRMA which is not even required to be on the air till later this year).

Consider this: Our PBS Station may very well be broadcasting high power H/DTV signals while our ABC station tinkers around with their toy transmitter broadcasting to their parking lot....shame on you Cindy Velasquez.......

Once again, congrats and thanks to James Morgese, KRMA and BCDC.

Now we need to do our part and contribute to KRMA......

PS: Thanks for the Post link Wabisabi....it looks like my guesses were close (for a change).....

Great news! Congrats to KRMA!! I'll also add a
YIPEE!
:)

Congrats as well to KRMA, and thank you for all the hard work you guys put in.

Maybe KRMA will make KMGH a deal on there antenna on top of Republic Plaza :-)

Sorry, I was remiss in my earlier post. I should have also thanked the forum members who took the time to go to the meetings and voice their opinion and support. I am sure it helped.....thanks guys.....

In the Rocky Mountain News (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_1723163,00.html)

& the Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E53%257E1158475%257E,00.html)

-Wabisabi

"Our community is in the position of being caught in the cross fire of radiation," Carney said.The fact that RF levels will DECREASE with the new towers must be beyond the scope of her comprehension..... Geese if she'd only argue with the facts she might get somewhere.....(if not enlightened).

Geof,

(S)Care's real agenda is to remove all towers... to raise property values! If they really are Sooooooo worried about RF and Cancer, they'd move. But they just continue to live on Lookout, drive their big 'ol SUV's & B-B-Q in their beautiful ultra-rich backyards.

Remember (S)CARE's manifesto is "Do not build towers near people"*. They usually forget to put the asterisk after that... *Just as long as it's not in Jefferson county, near the my rich butt and we don't give a hoot about all the families that live up near Squaw. It's OK to radiate them all you want!

I can't wait until the day I forget all their names.

Sorry to take away from the Mt. Morrison decision celebration :), but does anyone know if KCNC will broadcast the Grammy Awards in 5.1?

I understand from this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1748353#post1748353) that additional dolby decoder equipment is required to pass a 5.1 feed but it only costs $4500.

I say we start a bake sale :D

Originally posted by santellavision
Geof,

Her real agenda is to remove all towers... to raise property values! If she really is Sooooooo worried about RF and Cancer, she'd move. So would Al. But they just continue to live on Lookout, drive their big 'ol SUV's & B-B-Q in their beautiful ultra-rich backyards. Oh I forgot, And also continue to fight a losing battle. Agreed, but she might have a better chance if she'd argue with facts instead of making stuff up.

I can't wait until the day I forget their names. That brings up an interesting question - will you remember that you forgot :)

Originally posted by santellavision
Geof,

(S)Care's real agenda is to remove all towers... to raise property values! If they really are Sooooooo worried about RF and Cancer, they'd move. ........., drive their big 'ol SUV's & B-B-Q in their beautiful ultra-rich backyards.



Geez Ernie, be careful there, I have a two Explorers in my garage and B-B-Q in my yard too, its just not an ultra rich back yard. Nuthin wrong with an SUV and BBQ once in a while. My Explorers get as good or better mileage than a Taurus.

As for not calling them (S)CARE in the forum, I am willing to do that as soon as Deb C. starts getting her facts right! (Translation, you won't see me stop calling them (S)CARE any time soon).

The fact that RF levels will DECREASE with the new towers must be beyond the scope of her comprehension..... Geese if she'd only argue with the facts she might get somewhere.....(

Actually, the RF levels will decrease near the existing Channel 6 tower, but will go up (a little bit) in other locations on Lookout Mountain. Granted, all the predicted Rf levels on Lookout Mountain are well within the FCC limits, but there are areas (with houses) that the Rf levels will increase from the Mt. Morrison tower.

The same is true of the LCG2 application. In many areas the RF levels will decrease, but to the south the levels will increase some. This is another example where two people can say opposite 'facts' (the RF will go up/the Rf will go down) but neither is 'wrong'.

-Wabisabi

Originally posted by weldon
Sorry to take away from the Mt. Morrison decision celebration :), but does anyone know if KCNC will broadcast the Grammy Awards in 5.1?

I understand from this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1748353#post1748353) that additional dolby decoder equipment is required to pass a 5.1 feed but it only costs $4500.

I say we start a bake sale :D

KCNC is CBS O&O, so the odds are good -- I thought I read somewhere they're working on getting 5.1 working in time for the Grammys.

Yeah, I read it in this very thread a while back: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1756514#post1756514

Originally posted by wabisabi
Actually, the RF levels will decrease near the existing Channel 6 tower, but will go up (a little bit) in other locations on Lookout Mountain. Granted, all the predicted Rf levels on Lookout Mountain are well within the FCC limits, but there are areas (with houses) that the Rf levels will increase from the Mt. Morrison tower.

The same is true of the LCG2 application. In many areas the RF levels will decrease, but to the south the levels will increase some. This is another example where two people can say opposite 'facts' (the RF will go up/the Rf will go down) but neither is 'wrong'.

-Wabisabi What you say may very well be true but what she implies in the comments I read in the newspapers is something entirely different. Regardless of location the RF levels will be well below the FCC requirements (and I believe that on avergae the levels will decrease). IMO, her comments are intended to raise the fear and emotions of Lookout are residents and this argument is just not well founded in fact. But hey, this may serve to be her undoing as we all know the story of the boy who cried wolf once too often....

While I'm hyped about the Mt. Morrison decision, it does seem to raise questions concerning how it affects LCG II.
[list=1]
Could there be a delay for LGC to update their proposal?
I followed a link just this week to the "new" LGC website. Of course, consolidation data is incorrect. And now it actually overstates the benefits of LCG II. KRMA 6 antenna will come down with or without LGC II, so there is one less antenna that gets removed than stated (and one in a particularly objectionable location it seems).
Does this hurt LGC?
Based on the fact that the consolidation is less that it would've been, does this hurt the chances for LGC (I read that one of the commissioners stated that 'consolidation is our objective' or something like that). What do you think?
Can (or would) another station replace KRMA?
From my viewing of the photo simulations, it seems like losing the FOX tower would make the consolidation look even better. But as near as I can tell there is no reason to expect FOX would be interested. WB2 may have more interest, as they did have to use a low-power signal off a short tower; although I expect they are not interested either. But I don't know if either could join at this point even if they wanted to.
[/list=1]

I was just wondering, because it seems clear that LGC will have to respond to this in some way. I wonder what their plan is.

Originally posted by squidboy
Hey all,

I don't know how many of you are IEEE members, but I just got this notice in my e-mail. Even though I don't have an HDTV (yet), I went to the HDNet tour and am curious to see what Comcast folks will have to say. Note that you don't have to be an IEEE member to go, but you do have to pay either way (but dinner is included)

Here's the info:

February 18, 2003
"HDTV from the cable company perspective & a tour of the Comcast Digital Program Center in Littleton"
Presented by Ed Cooper, Comcast

Eric

Well, this is interesting. I recently called ATT/Comcast to see if/when they might be offering HD cable. The other couple of times I called, I got responses like "Yes, we offer digital cable" or, "If they send it in HDTV, you can get it!"

But this time (It was right before X-mas) the guy told me that he knew exactly what I was talking about - but that they wouldn't be offering HD until more programs were offered in HD.:rolleyes: I tried to explain that the majority of prime time, playoffs, etc were in HD already. He said, "No, I mean EVERYTHING in HD."

I asked him if this meant that I needed to wait until Dr. Phil/Oprah were in HD before they would offer it? He just kept repeating that they wouldn't be offering it via cable until more pramming was available.

But, then he told me that in March, they would be offering a new cable box that was cable of delivering Dolby Digital and (like I was supposed to be impressed) S-video. I asked him if there was a chance that this was an HD box and he said no, he didn't think so.

So, I find it irronic that they are throwing an HDTV dinner.

Originally posted by gkanders
While I'm hyped about the Mt. Morrison decision, it does seem to raise questions concerning how it affects LCG II.
[list=1]
Could there be a delay for LGC to update their proposal?
I followed a link just this week to the "new" LGC website. Of course, consolidation data is incorrect. And now it actually overstates the benefits of LCG II. KRMA 6 antenna will come down with or without LGC II, so there is one less antenna that gets removed than stated (and one in a particularly objectionable location it seems).
Does this hurt LGC?
Based on the fact that the consolidation is less that it would've been, does this hurt the chances for LGC (I read that one of the commissioners stated that 'consolidation is our objective' or something like that). What do you think?
Can (or would) another station replace KRMA?
From my viewing of the photo simulations, it seems like losing the FOX tower would make the consolidation look even better. But as near as I can tell there is no reason to expect FOX would be interested. WB2 may have more interest, as they did have to use a low-power signal off a short tower; although I expect they are not interested either. But I don't know if either could join at this point even if they wanted to.
[/list=1]

I was just wondering, because it seems clear that LGC will have to respond to this in some way. I wonder what their plan is. All good questions. I raised some of these questions a year ago and don't think they were ever really answered.

The good news about Morrison is that the Commissioners have shown that they will vote for a new tower if they get an application that meets their requirements. Up until now many of us questioned if that would be the case and we now know the answer is yes, so I think that is a very positive development. As to LCG2 I think the application will have to stand on it's own merits - and I think it does. I think all the forum members who sat thru the LCG2 presentation at KCNC were impressed with the quality of the proposal and it has been refined and improved even more in the (almost) year since we got our first look at it. Judging from the comments the LCG has received on the proposal so far it looks encouraging but the process is far from complete. The bottom line remains that the proposal (significantly) reduces the number of towers and buildings and (on average) reduces RF levels. The proposal also includes legal agreements regarding monitoring, interference issues, and dealing with excess RF levels swiftly. In short, the proposal still has many fundamentally positive benefits that will not be realized if the application is denied. IMO, the LCG2 proposal can withstand sane and rational scrutiny so I think it has a pretty damn decent opportunity to pass muster and be approved. Here's hoping.....

Phil - did you ever get your 6000 problem with tuning 17-2 resolved? I now can longer tune to 17-2 with my 6000 either while I still can with my hipix with no problem. Not that I watch 17-2 much, but with the lip sync problems they've been having, tuning one receiver to 17-1 and listening to audio from 17-2 makes it much better.

Any other 6000 users still getting 17-2? Rick told me yesterday that nothing has changed at KMGH that would cause the loss of 17-2.

Thats interesting Mark. This morning my 6000, when I started watching it, was on 17-2 though I'm guessing I had left it on 17-1 last night cause I rarely eve watch 17-2. I never actually power down the receiver I just turn off my display and a/v receiver. Anyway, now I cant tune 17-1 (havent done a new scan yet). If I try to tune it it just stays at 17-2. And it "really" is 17-2 cause it aint stretched.

On my Mitsu tuner I can still tune to either one but 17-1 has no sound.

Originally posted by mknoebel
Well, this is interesting. I recently called ATT/Comcast to see if/when they might be offering HD cable. The other couple of times I called, I got responses like "Yes, we offer digital cable" or, "If they send it in HDTV, you can get it!"

But this time (It was right before X-mas) the guy told me that he knew exactly what I was talking about - but that they wouldn't be offering HD until more programs were offered in HD.:rolleyes: I tried to explain that the majority of prime time, playoffs, etc were in HD already. He said, "No, I mean EVERYTHING in HD."

I asked him if this meant that I needed to wait until Dr. Phil/Oprah were in HD before they would offer it? He just kept repeating that they wouldn't be offering it via cable until more pramming was available.

But, then he told me that in March, they would be offering a new cable box that was cable of delivering Dolby Digital and (like I was supposed to be impressed) S-video. I asked him if there was a chance that this was an HD box and he said no, he didn't think so.

So, I find it irronic that they are throwing an HDTV dinner.

I agree, quite ironic. However, this might be a good chance to get some answers from, and voice some opinions to, someone who probably has some control over the situation.

It would sure be nice to be able to get all our locals over cable in HDTV, especially given the mess with the broadcast towers.

Note that this will probably be a fairly technical meeting, since the target audience is engineers.

I wonder if LCG2 folks will be prepared enough to answer the question of the suitability of this as an alternative site. The Scare folks are sure to ask the question, "Since Morrison was OK for KRMA, then why not for every station?" I can hear that question from Comisioner H already in my mind. Man, get outta my head!!

For the record, I want Lookout for the site, but am sure that the question will come up during the hearings. LCG2 needs to be ready to answer this one completely BEFORE the hearings.

Jeff

Originally posted by jeffden
I wonder if LCG2 folks will be prepared enough to answer the question of the suitability of this as an alternative site. The Scare folks are sure to ask the question, "Since Morrison was OK for KRMA, then why not for every station?" I can hear that question from Comisioner H already in my mind. Man, get outta my head!!

For the record, I want Lookout for the site, but am sure that the question will come up during the hearings. LCG2 needs to be ready to answer this one completely BEFORE the hearings.

Jeff Agreed. However, the LCG2 app consolidates ALL of the analog and digital facilities for 4, 7, 9, & 20 and I don't think Morrison can handle all of that....In my mind putting digital facilities on Morrison and leaving analog facilities untouched on Lookout makes little sense...it doesn't bring forth any consolidation and those analog facilities could be around forever (there would be no agreement to remove them as in LCG2). Furthermore, RF levels would likely be higher in this scenario and if SCARE really cares about that (and I think that's nothing more than a red herring) this would not be the best way to go. But I agree with you that the question may very well be raised and a crisp answer is needed. Sure would be nice if the LCG could pull another station, like KWGN, into the fold to replace KRMA. I'd be willing to bet that Fox has no interest whatsoever but KWGN is limited to half power and if they joined the LCG that would eliminate even more buildings and towers on Lookout. That makes LCG2 even stronger and it solves the KWGN situation. I hope they both consider this.

I saw Pete at one of the Morrison hearings last year (OK, it was late December:)). He is well aware that they need to answer the "why not the new Morrison tower for LCG stations" question. Off the top of his head, he was able to give me a quick response. I'm not sure he'd want his off the cuff remarks posted publicly, so I'll keep them to myself for now. I'm sure that given the new delay before LCG II goes before the county, they'll have a good response for Commissioner H (and everyone else who's wondering the same).

I didn't think to ask him about KWGN or KDVR.

Originally posted by Geof
I'd be willing to bet that Fox has no interest whatsoever but KWGN is limited to half power and if they joined the LCG that would eliminate even more buildings and towers on Lookout. That makes LCG2 even stronger and it solves the KWGN situation. I hope they both consider this.
I have no reason to dispute Fox's likely lack of interest, but aren't they broadcasting at approximately 1/3 power from their current lookout site? I'm not sure if that is a county or RF restriction, of if they're just saving on electricity costs until the final analog shut-off.

Originally posted by HDJello
I have no reason to dispute Fox's likely lack of interest, but aren't they broadcasting at approximately 1/3 power from their current lookout site? I'm not sure if that is a county or RF restriction, of if they're just saving on electricity costs until the final analog shut-off. I think 1/3 power is about right but that is, as I understand it, an FCC requirement to minimize interferrence. There are (to my knowledge) no restrictions - JeffCo wise - for increasing the power output. I also believe thay have no tower/antenna issues precluding full power.

One other thought that comes to mind is that KDVR already has their stuff in place whereas KWGN has their stuff on order (if I remember correctly) so they might be in a position where they could wait for LCG2....(but probably not)....

Mark & Dan

I never did get my 17-2 issue resolved. I never have been able to receive it. Dish keeps telling me it is a signal issue and if I can test it at a known location that gets 17-2, with another 6000, they will replace it. (Dan, I may call you some weekend after it warms up.)

I did notice a new software download tonight version 777P. It made no difference for me - still no 17-2.

Mark, do you have any idea what is new in 777?

I just removed 17-2 (since I was no longer getting 17-1 as of this morn) and then re-saved 17 from scratch. Now I get 17-1 but not 17-2, Phil. So it doesnt appear to be a problem unique to your tuner.

Has anyone noticed a weird green pattern (looks like dots) randomly flashing on the screen during CSI, and now Without a Trace? I haven't seen it during the commercials which leads me to believe it's not a problem in my gear....I hope this isn't some new copy protection scheme cooked up at CBS....:)

I have been seeing some break-up on KCNC. KRMA is really bad and won't lock in tonight, even though my signal is 80+.

I guess those high power transmitters on Republic don't like the cold. ;)

I have a 6000 and cannot see 17-2 either.

I was wondering about the green flashes on KCNC last night. The only place I've ever seen those is on KMGH - never on KCNC before.

On the 6000s and 17-2, I don't know if this means anything or not, but KMGH sends their video and audio on 0x11 and 0x14 PID and all of the other stations send on 0x21 and 0x24 PID. I have no idea what that is, or what it means, but it is a difference between them and the other stations in town.

I've been lurking here for a while doing research on TVs and receivers. Last week I bought myself the Samsung TXM-3096WF, I hooked up my PC with the WinTV-HD to my TV last night and I could not get a good lock on KRMA, I also saw the green flashes during CSI. Did anyone else feel that the picture on CSI looked particularly bad, like it was up-converted? When I was able to get a lock on KRMA, the picture was good, but CBS' CSI was horrible, too dark, lots of red push. I had to switch back to my DirecTiVo and watch the 20/20 special.

Another cold reception story...

My in-laws came in last night, so I thought I'd show them the PBS loop. I couldn't lock up on it very well, and I got the green dots on KRMA (interesting look seeing an Atlantic City casino through a "green matrix").
KCNC was able to lock, but I didn't watch long enough to see how well it held, or see if the "matrix" came back.
Another interesting change from when KUSA was first on the air... KRMA and KCNC come in at 2,3 bars on my T150. KUSA comes in at 6,7 (almost the same as KDVR). Initially, KUSA was a real challenge (not worth it until they get that HD flange).

I also got was receiving the green dot pattern at the bottom of the screen last night on KCNC. This was different from a breakup pixilization. I also had a difficult time locking on to KRMA.

Doug

Well it seems enough of us saw the green flashes so I think it's real - and not due to some senior moment or anything like that :). I wonder what is causing that. If it persists I will try to get thru to KCNC Engineering but hopefully they read about it here and already found a cure :). So far I haven't found myself barking like a dog or chirping like a birdie so I guess it's not some sort of brainwashing attempt :). This could be bad news if it was due to some sort of interferrence......I gotta go now and chase those aliens outta my attic.....:)

I sent an email to David Layne asking about the green and black splashes. Here is their reply:

Dennis,
We saw the same thing on the analog feed as well last night. It may have
been interference on the incoming satellite feed. If you see it again feel
free to let us know.

Thanks,
Pat Brus
KCNC-TV
Engineering Manager


One thing about KCNC, they are responsive and care about quality HD.

That's good to know it wasn't just my equipment. I recorded Thursday night via 169time and it was bad, was afraid it was the JVC deck or STB failure.

Jeff

More green flashes on KCNC. It happened during the CSI reun on Friday and again last evening during the Agency.....I wonder if this has anything to do with the 5.1 capabilities CBS and KCNC are supposedly working on..??

More observed info with the E* 6000 and KMGH. Last night I was getting ready to watch Alias. Tuned over to 17-1 at about 7:30 and there was no audio at all for the Inspector Gadget movie that was on. Over the next 10 minutes the HD feed switched to the SD feed twice - both times, the channel my 6000 was tuned to changed from 17-1 to 17-2 (I didn't change the channel myself - it came from their end) and then back to 17-1 and the HD feed. During the times that it was the SD feed on 17-2, I didn't have a 17-1 channel on my 6000 - only 17-2. Then when the feed was back to HD, the channel was once again 17-1 and I had no 17-2.

I think what was happening was that the KMGH engineers were rebooting or resetting their audio encoder those 2 times to fix the audio problem. And I think what this observation points to is that there is something on their end that is preventing the 6000 from tuning to 17-2, rather than it being something with the 6000 itself. I've sent a message to Rick about this again. We'll see what he says.

Mark,

I sent an email about the satart of Alias being in SD and then after the firast commercial break, they switched to the HD feed and the Picture was fine this week. But, it was in Pro Logic sound, which after last week's annoying pops and audible cliks and surges was a welcome relief. No sound dropouts of any kind this time around. Looks like some issues all around for our local HD this week.
Jeff

I received a reply back from Rick this morning. They were having problems with the national ABC feed last night. Rick said that very soon their encoder is getting sent in for upgrades. The plus side is that hopefully the upgrades will fix some of the problems they've been having. The down side is that (and this is my supposition - haven't heard back yet from Rick on this one) we'll be stuck with SD until they get the encoder back. And we all know how well KDVR's experience with getting their encoder fixed and upgraded went...

Just got word back from Rick - KMGH will have a loaner (his words - "not free of course") encoder to broadcast with while theirs is in the shop getting worked on.

Originally posted by markdl
Just got word back from Rick - KMGH will have a loaner (his words - "not free of course") encoder to broadcast with while theirs is in the shop getting worked on. Heaven forbid if their toy transmitter had to do nothing more than SD.......Seriously, that is good news for the 20 or so able to receive their, ahem, "signal".

Originally posted by markdl
Just got word back from Rick - KMGH will have a loaner (his words - "not free of course") encoder to broadcast with while theirs is in the shop getting worked on.

Somebody stop me before I get on that dang soap box again! Too late.

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear, does it make a sound?"
"If a KMGH encoder is off line and there is no HDTV on their toy transmitter, does anyone see the SD DTV???"

Glad I don't depend on those folks for my ABC HD. Come to think of it, I really am NOT all that glad. Somebody suggest to them that while the encoder is in the shop and literally no one is watching, they move the rest of the cr*p to the Republic Building and start transmitting like a REAL station.


Test for the day or everyone in north, west and east Denver as well as 90% of the burbs:
Which is better, KUSA HD or KMGH HD? No peeking at the answer sheet now. You will be graded.
:mad:

For what it's worth, I have found that TitanTV's schedule for KRMA has been pretty accurate lately. Just click on the KRMA line to get a listing of the week for just KRMA. I use HiDefGuide for most everything else.

In addition, this is a heads up from KRMA on their February schedule:

The series Tracks Ahead will be fed in HD everyday at 15:00 (MT).
The series Chefs A' Field: Culinary Adventures will be fed in HD everyday at 15:30.

The series Smart Travels with Rudy Maxa will be fed in HD everyday at 17:30.

In addition to the above schedule:
on 2/11, 2/13, 2/16, 2/17 & 2/19-2/22, 2/25 & 2/28
the program
Whispers of Angels: A Story of the Underground Railroad will be fed in HD at 16:00.

and on 2/15, 2/22/ & 2/23 at 16:00 the program
One World: Japan will be fed in HD.

These programs will be broadcast on KRMA DT-18.


Lately, I have been able to get a sound lock on KRMA most of the time (this is a DTC-100 issue). Have any other members found it to be easier lately to get a sound lock on KRMA as well??

Tonight I got 73% reception on KMGH-DT channel 17-1. Usually, I get between 50 and 60%.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi

Lately, I have been able to get a sound lock on KRMA most of the time (this is a DTC-100 issue). Have any other members found it to be easier lately to get a sound lock on KRMA as well??

I'll second this observation. Seems much better on my F38310 the past 2 weeks or so.

On a side note, I contacted Thompson (RCA) tech support about this issue, and they agreed to send out a service tech to upgrade my tuner's firmware. It seemed as though they already knew about the audio problem, and the firmware upgrade was the standard fix.

The tech came out and tried to upgrade the firmware using a circuit card that plugged into the receiver's ID card slot, but for some reason the procedure didn't work. They're now looking at replacing the tuner under warranty.

No change for me on KMGH. 40-42 on a DTC-100. Occasional small breakups. They aren't broadcasting in 5.1 anymore. Also, on the local stuff, the sound frequently comes mostly from the front left speaker. They have a long way to go.

More green flashes on KCNC DT.....

Seeing as how some are comparing signal strengths, my KMGH signal level was up to whopping big 6 yesterday - wow !

Originally posted by Geof
More green flashes on KCNC DT.....

Seeing as how some are comparing signal strengths, my KMGH signal level was up to whopping big 6 yesterday - wow !

Haven't seen any green flashes in front of my eyes lately, but I haven't been watching KCNC the last few days either.

As for comparing signal strengths, I get a pretty solid signal from KMGH too, it has the indicator pegged at zero, and I have yet to see it fluctuate.....thanks KMGH.
:D
Of course, I am sure KMGH and KUSA will be asking us to help with their LCG effort and take our time to drive down to the 'Taj' and testify on their behalf in Jeffco whenever that occurs. Usually things get delayed so you have to go several times to actually get to speak. Too bad they can't do us any favors too. KUSA could have dumped just one of their self promotion commercials and likely bought that HD recorder/timeshifter in advance instead of making us wait. KMGH likely could have dropped some similar add and paid for the move to the Republic Building too.

Along that note, it has been some time since we heard from the LCG. Last we heard they were having some meetings and thought there might be a delay. Wonder what is happening there??????? Anyone????? Pete???

Originally posted by JMartinko
Of course, I am sure KMGH and KUSA will be asking us to help with their LCG effort and take our time to drive down to the 'Taj' and testify on their behalf in Jeffco whenever that occurs. Usually things get delayed so you have to go several times to actually get to speak. Too bad they can't do us any favors too. I'll help.
I'm preparing another letter to the FCC on the KMGH situation. This is untenable and ridiculous. Anyone who wishes to watch Monday Night Football in HD next season should be thinking of writing the FCC...now is the time to act, not next September. I hope to post my letter in the next day or so...

Isn't the "Green Flash" one of those new superhero genre shows coming to CBS this fall? Maybe those are just teaser previews.

Originally posted by Jetlag
Isn't the "Green Flash" one of those new superhero genre shows coming to CBS this fall? Maybe those are just teaser previews. They are so short - almost like subliminal messages.....I'm still not barking like a dog or chirping like a birdie but I am getting tied from chasing cars :)

Maybe all you guys seeing those 'green flashes' are just hitting menopause.
:D

Seriously, Goef, I think the FCC letter is a good idea again. Obviously sending notes to Cindy V. at the station doesn't have any impact (translation- she doesn't give a sh*t), maybe letters to the FCC will get her attention. Oh, BTW, for those of you without other access to ABC, its not just MNF this fall, there is also the Oscars next month (LOTR appears to be getting snubbed again--:( ), the Stanley Cup Finals, and the NBA Finals this spring among other shows.

Hey maybe we could get KMGH's attention (and pressure KUSA to get off of their But*s to if we refuse to testify in Jeffco until or unless KMGH gets a tower on the Republic Building. There is just no way in H, as we all well know, that they will be on Lookout in the next two years. Even the LCG"s own construction plan says it will take 'at least a year from Jeffco approval' to get on the air. Of course that assumes that the stations all have the right HD 'flange'. As it stands, KUSA can't record and replay shows and refuses to 'pass the HD feed live' since we might miss one of their 'self promoting adds', and KMGH (according to rumor) can't even get their sound up from a 'toy' transmitter. KCNC may be having problems with the "Green Hornet", but at least they are trying, and learning, and responding to the public comments from their viewers.

Actually I guess you could say KMGH is responding to its viewers too, its just that having Cindy Velasquez flash her middle finger at us doesn't help much. Maybe she is showing us one of her rings for us to see and we are all misinterpreting her replies, but I doubt it. Cindy is the station manager at KMGH isn't she? I was just looking at their website and it looks like I can easily contact just about anyone on the staff except the station manager. Come to think of it, doesn't this qualify as a taxpayer or at least a consumer 'rip off'? Maybe we should call the newsroom and ask for one of John Ferrugia's investigative reports to go in search of the elusive KMGH HD DTV signal. If he finds it, maybe he could add the answer of how to receive it to the FAQ's on their web pages. Hey, while he's at it, maybe he can find the KUSA HD DTV signal for us too. If these guys aren't going to use the spectrum 'given to them by the FCC', maybe its time someone was given the spectrum who intends to use it.
:mad:

You guys are killing me here :D

Your right, KMGH makes absolutely no effort to help us but when the time comes for people to testify on their behalf they expect us to take off work and spend hours on end at the Taj.

They really should be ashamed of themselves. And what is the delay on KUSA, so they need a VCR to do the time delay stuff, I saw an open box D-VHS machine for $500 at "The Great Indoors" the other day. They need to find a new supplier.

On a more serious note has anyone been following the Colorado Springs thread? sounds like they may be going full power very soon. (One station on Feb 14th, this Friday) They are for sure going to beat Denver at getting up and running. Since most of us have huge antenna's trying to pick up the low power signals that we have here, what do you think the chance are of us pointing them towards the Springs and getting there stations if they are full power? My father who lives in Pueblo is probably going to get HDTV before I do, just amazing.

I have a great view of Pikes Peak but I don't know where Cheyenne Mountain is in relation to Pikes.

Later
Joe

Cheyenne Mountain is probably 10 miles ESE of Pikes Peak, and is about 4500 feet shorter. But you know what, I sometimes pick up a snowy but watchable picture on some of the Colorado Springs analog stations. It's a much better picture than I get from KMGH-DT.

Joe
If you have LOS to Pikes Peak, I would bet you can get the Colorado Springs Stations transmitting from Cheyenne Mountain. For those with decent height in the Denver area, I would expect those high gain UHF antennas to have a really good shot. I haven't tracked it, what are the station numbers (freqs.) for the Colorado Springs stations and which one goes on the air Friday. It is easy for me to repoint my antenna, I might give it a shot too. It is really amazing, my parents live in Canon City and will be able to get the Pueblo and C. Springs HD stations before people in Denver. I guess that is the price we pay for not living in an up to date metropolitan area like Canon City!

FWIW, none of us will need a waiver from KUSA or KMGH if we watch the network stations from C. Springs or Cheyenne either. If we can get them, it probably is even worth an email or a letter to KUSA and/or KMGH letting them know we finally have their networks in OTA HD DTV too! It would be fun to see if they replied.
:D

Edited 4:46 PM
I found the answer to my own question.

ABC 24 KRDO-DT Mar 31 2003
CBS 10 KKTV-DT Feb 15 2003
FOX 22 KXRM-DT May 1 2003
NBC 42 KOAA-DT Awaiting FCC Permit
PBS 26 KTSC-DT May 1 2003

Not sure why KKTV still is assigned channel 10, that may make it tough to get up here in Boulder assuming good old KUSA spills over it analog band on Channel 9. It will only help those without KCNC anyway. Looks like late March would many people in the area might have a shot at getting some ABC signals from KRDO though.

Well, March 31st may be a good day for me then. I hope to have ESPN-HD from DirecTv (man they better have this day one), and ABC via KRDO in Colorado Springs. I can promise you one other thing, if I can get these channels by pointing my antenna to the south, I will not be going up to re-align it to get the Denver stations if they ever come online.

Thanks alot guys

Later
Joe

It is really amazing, my parents live in Canon City and will be able to get the Pueblo and C. Springs HD stations before people in Denver. I guess that is the price we pay for not living in an up to date metropolitan area like Canon City!

With all due respect to your Canon City heritage jm some of the folks involved in this Denver mess belong in Canon City.....you know, in the big old <ahem> "palace" - the one with guards protecting the place....

I am hoping we can get a letter writing campaign going on the KMGH situation....What say you folks? I know we've been here, done that but I can say it has worked in the past - our letters have had impact and effect. There is one thing I am sure about - sitting on our butts doing nothing will accomplish just that - nothing. Writing Cindy Velasquez will evidently get us nothing as well....

Report Card Time

KWGN TBD
KCNC B ;Green flashes on digital channel 35, not analog 4
(was that a "we saw it on analog" smokescreen?)

KRMA A+ ;DTC-100 audio sync problem fixed
KMGH D ;Thanks a lot Cindy, no SB, no Oscars, no MNF for north Denver metro (I'll grudgingly give them a D for the toy transmitter which let the lucky dozen times 2 see the Superbowl)

KUSA D- ;54 days of DT-16 without HD
KBDI TBD
KDVR C ;16:9 EDTV better than 14:9 plasma optimizer
KTVD F ;No effort

Commissioners Lawrence & Sheehan A

Anyway, the state of HDTV has changed little in the past 14 months. KMGH letter writing campaign? Like Geof said, been there done that. The FCC seems like it does not want to get involved. I was disappointed in William Powell's forum at CES broadcast on HDNet. Denver's digital broadcast problems seem to not bother the FCC; that may be why Cindy is so bold in inferring to the FCC that they comply with the broadcast mandate with their toy transmitter.

So, where are we going to be a year from now? Is Colorado's leading station leading the pack with that dynamic HD lineup from the Thomas Edison (GE) network that claims to have imagination at work? Will KMGH decrease power to their toy transmitter to save money? Will the Grinnell group fade away? Will the LCG forget to place their flange order with the Sandy Claws Flange Procurement Company during the busy month of December? Will Sean McLaughlin of Channel 7 interview Dave Workman on the fantastic MNF HD presentation?


Enough said.

Don

I think we should ask for a little 'deal' from LCG. What about a concession that we will provide support (i.e. attending, speaking, email campaign, petitions etc) at the Planning and Commissioners hearings, IF... KMGH moves to Republic in the interm 2-3 years while the battle continues. Thoughts?

Originally posted by santellavision
I think we should ask for a little 'deal' from LCG. What about a concession that we will provide support (i.e. attending, speaking, email campaign, petitions etc) at the Planning and Commissioners hearings, IF... KMGH moves to Republic in the interm 2-3 years while the battle continues. Thoughts? It would have to be a threat we'd be willing to carry out.....if KMGH refused would everyone really boycott the hearings and leave LCG without support? It would surely send a messsage if that were the case....whether they respond is a question I don't know the answer to....

We could do that in concert with an FCC letter writing campaign, which I think we ought to do. I have a rough draft of my letter and when I refine it I will post it for comments...


Note: I sent both these ideas to Pete so he is aware of them....(I did not ask for his opinion on this because I'm quite positive he will not like it)....nonetheless he should be aware of them....

Originally posted by Geof
I have a rough draft of my letter and when I refine it I will post it for comments... Geof, Pls post the addr/attn at the FCC -- I'll get my letter going too.

I noticed something new (to me at least) last night while flipping past KUSA's 9-1 channel. They no longer have their KUSA-DT logo on the gray sidebar. Makes me wonder if they *can't* put anything extra on the sidebars when using a HD encoder, which leads me to wondering if they are getting ready to flip the switch. Anyone heard anything from Don recently?

I agree with writing a letter to the FCC. I will do so, in my own words, once I see a good example with the relevant facts and history so I can be credible with what I write.

For those 'thousands' of you who can't receive KMGH, it might not matter with all the problems with their toy HD setup lately. Last night, the sound sync was so far off that it was unwatchable. I'm debating sending them an email, but am not sure if it would do any good.

Speaking of sync problems, I flipped over to fox 32 to watch 24 last night and the lip sync problem is STILL there. I had to watch it on the Tivo (no commercials!). Are they ever going to get that fixed?

Dennis - the audio sync problem is coming from their encoder which is going in for repairs and upgrades as soon as their "loaner" unit gets here. I agree - it was really unwatchable last night.

I've been busy today but here is my cut at the FCC letter....I will keep refining this before I send it but thought I'd post it here for comment. At the least it should serve to show where I am going with this....

Once again, I encourage everyone to write a letter, whether you receive KMGH or not. I'm confident our letters will be read and considered and I know our previous letters have helped (significantly) but I will not go into details beyond that in this open forum.

And lest you think I am being self-serving here let me assure you that I am not. I cannot receive the KUSA DT signal and I do not anticipate being able to receive the KMGH DT signal even if they do move their antenna to Republic.

NOTE: Letter revisted and posted (along with mailing addresses) on next page.

I wrote a thank you email to Jerry Butler, engineer at PBS HQ for doing whatever so that my sound would sync.

Here is his reply:

Dennis,

Thanks for the feedback. We made some changes in our servers that minimize discontinuities in the stream. I was not thinking that this would address the problem you described but I’m glad it did and you feedback adds to our body of knowledge.

Regards

Jerry


I hope it really is fixed. Anybody else still having problems???

Geof
Nice cut at a letter. It seems to get right to the point. You might get a round about dig at KUSA's non-HD format by mentioning that "even KUSA, the biggest procrastinator in the metro area has finally at least begun televising low power DTV, although they still refuse to pass on any of the available NBC HD content in an HD format. Their signal, while not HD compatible, is at least visible to a reasonable number of people in the Denver area".
Just my $0.02, although as I said, I think you did a great job.

Here was my last email to the KMGH with a CC to the FCC. I just sent it again. As you can guess, I'm not expecting a response... I didn't get a response the last time either.
--------------------
TO KMGH/FCC,

I have an HDTV TV and I am, like many others in the Denver market, not able to receive your DTV signal. I am able to receive KCNC, KRMA, KDVR and recently KUSA, which had publicly stated that they would never build a Republic Tower, low-power X-mitter either. Even they realized that there would be no tower decision to let them be on-the-air with an acceptable DTV signal from Lookout Mt. for at least 2-3 MORE years.

As your transmitter is extremely low-power and only on top of your building, I request that you please move it to Republic Plaza in the interim, while we all wait out the JeffCo decision like all the above network stations are doing.

Because, as you know, you are over 3 years past the FCC mandated transitioning date and nothing has been achieved to begin broadcasting an acceptable DTV signal. (I'm sorry, but twelve viewers within a mile or so of your building does not count as being "on-the-air")

Your lack of success for converting or building a new tower for DTV has only been met with complete failure. And with your next attempt, the Lake Cedar Group "SuperTower" application (which is already gaining negative support in the community) in Jefferson County, the public hearings will not even start until late February and that's only before the JeffCo Planning board. After that, weeks or months of more public meetings before the JeffCo Commissioners. Then, if the application is passed, the inevitable C-A-R-E Injunctions & Lawsuits etc. will begin. This will drag the transition out many more months and possibly years. If you make it past those immense obstacles, you will still have another YEAR before construction is completed.

This will push us (If you have been keeping score) to approximately 2005! Six years past the date you were required to be broadcasting Full-Power DTV.

I feel, your station is not currently serving this community in which you are required to do so. A license to broadcast is not a license to just 'Make Money' like most think, but its a Privilege and should not be abused like you are currently doing.

Ernie Santella
A DTV supporter, but not a KMGH supporter.
Golden, CO

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
I wrote a thank you email to Jerry Butler, engineer at PBS HQ for doing whatever so that my sound would sync.
:
:
I hope it really is fixed. Anybody else still having problems??? I've been watching (listening) the past few days and the issue with KRMA sound not sync'ing has not happened even once! That's great -- for a change, they didn't think they fixed it and they did. Don't you hate it when it is the other way around.

Another thumbs up here for KRMA's engineers! I am no longer getting the breakups on my DTC-100. Great job KRMA!

I'm glad they're ironing out their HDTV problems now. Of course, I'm sure KUSA-DT won't have any issues at all when they finally get their flange :rolleyes: Not that I can get KUSA-DT, but since they went on the air I can now get KRMA-DT. Decent trade, I think :)

Here is another example of a great TV station (KCNC) that listens to feedback and cares about viewers. I got this this morning:


Dennis,

We have been upgrading alot of our equipment to be able to pass the 5.1
audio. This includes satellite IRD's, muxes, demuxes, etc. Along the way we
have seen a few glitches and are working on resolving these issues.

Thanks,
Pat Brus
KCNC-TV
Engineering Manager


For what it is worth, lately I have seen the green and black flashes on KMGH as well. They are no longer broadcasting in 5.1 so maybe they have the same problem. I am sure that if I told them about it, I would hear nothing back! Their sound sync was much better last night, although I didn't watch anything -- just checked it once or twice.

Does anyone have the simple FACTS? Such as:

* Literal FCC Mandate, to include:
- Dates for compliance
- Terms of compliance
- Statements that imply intent of the ruling

* Specific details, point-by-point, of KMGH *non*-compliance.

* Quoted responses from KMGH management when asked for their response.

* Of course, a description of the stark contrast in KMGH response to the *mandate* versus KUSA, KCNC and others.

I should think a well-crafted letter that addresses these specifics would gain the attention of community leaders, including State and National Congressmen, as well as that of appropriate FCC personnel.

In fact, I wonder if it might not be the sort of thing that KMGH competitors would be interested in commenting on - subtley, of course. Perhaps find a media outlet that would not be intimidated by open criticism of KMGH (not sure who that might be).

Just a few spurious thoughts this AM.

- Dan

Originally posted by Geof
I've been busy today but here is my cut at the FCC letter....I will keep refining this before I send it but thought I'd post it here for comment. At the least it should serve to show where I am going with this....

Once again, I encourage everyone to write a letter, whether you receive KMGH or not. I'm confident our letters will be read and considered and I know our previous letters have helped (significantly) but I will not go into details beyond that in this open forum.

And lest you think I am being self-serving here let me assure you that I am not. I cannot receive the KUSA DT signal and I do not anticipate being able to receive the KMGH DT signal even if they do move their antenna to Republic.

I will provide names and addresses to send our letters to in the next day or so....

Originally posted by dhcoop
Does anyone have the simple FACTS? Such as:

* Literal FCC Mandate, to include:
- Dates for compliance
- Terms of compliance
- Statements that imply intent of the ruling

* Specific details, point-by-point, of KMGH *non*-compliance.

* Quoted responses from KMGH management when asked for their response.

* Of course, a description of the stark contrast in KMGH response to the *mandate* versus KUSA, KCNC and others.

I should think a well-crafted letter that addresses these specifics would gain the attention of community leaders, including State and National Congressmen, as well as that of appropriate FCC personnel.

In fact, I wonder if it might not be the sort of thing that KMGH competitors would be interested in commenting on - subtley, of course. Perhaps find a media outlet that would not be intimidated by open criticism of KMGH (not sure who that might be).

Just a few spurious thoughts this AM.

- Dan By all means please dig in and try to get these answers but I think you're going to find this very hard, if not impossible. You will have no luck with KMGH competitors commenting on this because they are in the same boat. I also think you'll have no luck with State and National Congressmen but by all means have at it...

FWIW:
The top 4 networks for markets 11-30 (Denver is market 19) were supposed to be on air digitally by Nov 1, 1999. Obviously the "big three" are well past that. KMGH, KUSA, and KCNC were recently (on 1/30/03) granted extensions until 8/6/03. They will be granted extensions again because the FCC is basically rubber stamping extensions for Denver TV stations given the problems with JeffCo/Lookout.

KMGH, KCNC, KUSA & KRMA are operating Special Temporary Authorization (STA) low power transmitters but I do not think this makes them in compliance (after all they each have an extension until 8/6/03).

Curiously, the FCC web site (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html) shows the following:

KCNC:
11KW ERP
177 Meter HAAT (Antenna Height Above Average Terrain)
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KUSA
10.9 KW ERP
178 Meter HAAT
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KMGH
25KW ERP
450 Meter HAAT
39 ° 43' 40.00" Latitude
105° 14' 3.000" Longitude

Now I know I am not the brightest guy in the world but the way I read this is the KMGH STA antenna is much higher (by more than 2 times) than the KCNC and KUSA antennas and has an ERP 2.5 times greater than KCNC and KUSA. WTF, over? What am I missing? Do we all need to re-point our antenna to this mythical KMGH location and suddenly have our signal strength meters pegged at 100???

Hi Geoff:

Thanks for the additional information. As you undoubtedly discern, I am new to all this and only trying to be helpful. I hope I didn't offend you with my remarks.

I am now a bit confused by some of what you wrote. As I now understand it, the original FCC mandate required the stations to be broadcasting by Nov 1 '99 - BUT - the Denver stations have all been granted 'relief' from the FCC till August of this year. If I understand that correctly, then the stations *today* are NOT operating under a mandate and anything they choose to broadcast is being done for reasons other than the mandate - correct?

If so - then we need to understand the station's motivations to broadcast any DTV prior to mandate. Some may choose to as preparation for the *future* requirement - others may wish to gain the goodwill of DTV early adopters - others - well, I don't know what other reasons there may be??

It is now a bit difficult for me to understand what we may do to gain FCC intervention - particularly as it is the FCC that grants these waivers in the first place - true?

Since I was (and admittedly, I still am) quite ignorant of the history and issues, I thought we might bring some authority to bear if KMGH were in non-compliance with a mandate. If they are not - due to grant of extension dates to the mandate - then I doubt we have any leverage whatsoever and our only outlet is to appeal to KMGH management.

I *did* see where that has been tried and the station director is non-responsive. Unfortunately, that appears to be her prerogative - unless I am again missing some salient facts.

FWIW

- Dan

Originally posted by Geof
By all means please dig in and try to get these answers but I think you're going to find this very hard, if not impossible. You will have no luck with KMGH competitors commenting on this because they are in the same boat. I also think you'll have no luck with State and National Congressmen but by all means have at it...

FWIW:
The top 4 networks for markets 11-30 (Denver is market 19) were supposed to be on air digitally by Nov 1, 1999. Obviously the "big three" are well past that. KMGH, KUSA, and KCNC were recently (on 1/30/03) granted extensions until 8/6/03. They will be granted extensions again because the FCC is basically rubber stamping extensions for Denver TV stations given the problems with JeffCo/Lookout.

KMGH, KCNC, KUSA & KRMA are operating Special Temporary Authorization (STA) low power transmitters but I do not think this makes them in compliance (after all they each have an extension until 8/6/03).

Curiously, the FCC web site (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html) shows the following:

KCNC:
11KW ERP
177 Meter HAAT (Antenna Height Above Average Terrain)
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KUSA
10.9 KW ERP
178 Meter HAAT
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KMGH
25KW ERP
450 Meter HAAT
39 ° 43' 40.00" Latitude
105° 14' 3.000" Longitude

Now I know I am not the brightest guy in the world but the way I read this is the KMGH STA antenna is much higher (by more than 2 times) than the KCNC and KUSA antennas and has an ERP 2.5 times greater than KCNC and KUSA. WTF, over? What am I missing? Do we all need to re-point our antenna to this mythical KMGH location and suddenly have our signal strength meters pegged at 100???

Originally posted by dhcoop
Hi Geoff:

Thanks for the additional information. As you undoubtedly discern, I am new to all this and only trying to be helpful. I hope I didn't offend you with my remarks.....

FWIW

- Dan No offense taken. This situation has been very frustrating and this thread bears that out....this thread started a long while back and this is actually the fourth thread relating to the Denver tower situation (the first three having been closed and locked). Most people here have been following the situation for a long time and/or have read some of the previous 184 pages (a daunting task no doubt).

A brief overview:
The big 4 stations were supposed to be on the air 11/99. Fox was able to get on the air since their property is zoned diffidently than KMGH, KUSA, KCNC. Because of this they could secure the necessary permits from JeffCo to get their digital gear in place. The other stations have property that must be re-zoned before JeffCo will authorize any changes (the stations can maintain their existing site but cannot make any modifications without the land being rezoned). Five stations (KCNC, KRMA, KMGH, KUSA, & CH20 <KDTV?>) got together and formed the Lake Cedar Group (LCG). The LCG filed an application with JeffCo way back in 98/99 to build a common tower...after almost a year of JeffCo hearings and what-not the application was denied. Then the LCG filed a lawsuit against the decision but subsequently dropped the lawsuit about a year later because they knew they had no chance in hell of winning it and it was getting close to being on the Jefferson County District Court docket. About a year after that the LCG presented a new proposal and that is currently in process in JeffCo (hearings are supposed to start in April). All the while these stations were telling the FCC "our hands are tied", "we cannot get the permits". As such the FCC has been granting extensions to the stations and this is likely to continue until the current LCG application is approved or denied. Whether or not the stations are obliged to broadcast low power is a matter of some debate but nonetheless they are (most of them willingly took this step - I think they wanted to demonstrate they were doing the best they could with the current JeffCo problems). KMGH was one of the first and they chose to put the antenna on their building....the others sought higher ground and chose a skyscraper. I do not think we can "force" KMGH to move and I doubt the FCC could "force" them to move. However, realizing it will be 1.5 - 2+ years before the Lookout tower is built - if it is approved <a big IF> - the right thing to do in my mind is for KMGH to move to higher ground....however, we've had no luck "lobbying" KMGH and it certainly is not going to hurt to try "lobbying" the FCC (again). I seriously doubt anything will happen if we don't bitch and complain but I also don't think we have (much of) a legal leg to stand on....

In that vein(IMO) we all need to write the FCC and ask them to intervene and give KMGH a much needed "push" to move. The FCC could deny a further extension requests if KMGH refused to move but I'm not sure if the FCC would hold that over their head (and now that I said that I am going to include that in my letter). The other alternative is to do as Ernie suggested and threaten to withhold our support during the JeffCo hearings. This could be very powerful leverage because our support is very critical but unless we all agreed to boycott the hearings this approach carries no weight. And I doubt everyone will want to withhold their support if KMGH doesn't move because that could likely result in the LCG2 application being denied, which would be far worse than not having KMGH move...

Sorry for the "short" synopsis. This post has likely bored everyone else (and I over simplified a number of things). For a more complete understanding of this situation I invite you to get the no-doze and travel back to page one of this thread....just don't have ayone around when you get done reading it because you will be frustrated as hell....

dhcoop,
I don't know the specifics of the extensions that are granted the Denver stations nor the exact details of the STA, but the STA is issued for the stations to establish a low-power temporary alternative and reach as many of their existing viewers as possible. Clearly, KMGH doesn't make an effort with their STA to reach even 1% of their existing viewership. And until recently, KUSA was reaching 0%. It is definitely worthwhile to point out to the FCC that we the Denver viewing public definitely see (pun intended) a difference between what KMGH is doing with their STA and the other stations or doing.

This in from Pete McNally on LCG2 ...
From: Pete McNally [pete@grinnellgroup.com ]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 1:47 PM
Subject: Lake Cedar Group Update

Friends,

As you know, Jefferson County recently approved Ch 6’s application to locate on Mt. Morrison. The remaining LCG stations are proceeding with our application on Lookout Mt. because it is a superior site and there is not adequate space to accommodate the LCG facilities on Mt. Morrison in light of the building size and antenna restrictions the County required. Before locating on Mt. Morrison, we would need to complete a whole new rezoning process for that site to expand the building size and number of antennas. Considering the County contemplated approving a larger building size and more antennas before requiring the limits, expansion at Mt. Morrison does not appear to be timely or likely. Moreover, the analog would remain on Lookout indefinitely. No improvements to Lookout would be realized.

Yesterday, we submitted our revised application to the County reflecting Channel 6’s decision. In short, three broadcast towers and the Ch 9 radar tower are being removed and the building is considerably smaller. The County is in a two-week referral process to obtain comments from various departments, home owners associations, etc. Depending upon the extent of new comments, they have tentatively scheduled April 2 and April 9 for 6:00 hearings with the Planning Commission. We will know definitively on March 19th if those dates are to hold.

Attached is a copy of the letter sent to the County outlining the changes and the continued basis for approving the proposal. (Again, I’d ask that the letter not be posted as it is in a modifiable format). We strongly believe our application stands on its merits and is a win-win for the neighbors on Lookout and for residents throughout Jefferson County and the metro area.

We greatly appreciate your support to date. I’ve received an email indicating that some of your continued support may be contingent on action by KMGH. I have offered to meet with the author to listen and see how I might be of assistance. I have also received emails from members reaffirming their support. We all have a shared interested in making HDTV widely available as quickly as possible. I believe our proposal for Lookout Mountain is the best solution. I want to express my gratitude to those who continue to support LCG and my continued dedication to work together with those whose support we’ve yet to earn. Please call or write with any concerns or suggestions and I’ll do my best to respond.


Sincerely,

Peter McNally, Principal
The Grinnell Group

Thanks Ron,
I haven't opened my ISP email (I cannot access it at work). Good to hear from Pete regarding the latest update. I am also happy they modified their proposal (it would have surely met with resistance had they not) but I am not delighted with the April date (obviously)....too bad they couldn't get KWGN to replace KRMA but I figured that had a snowballs chance in hell.

In my mind this delay is all the more reason to write the FCC on KMGH.....it will be 2005 (plus or minus) before anything emanates from a new Lookout tower (again assuming LCG2 is approved).

Originally posted by dhcoop

If so - then we need to understand the station's motivations to broadcast any DTV prior to mandate. Some may choose to as preparation for the *future* requirement - others may wish to gain the goodwill of DTV early adopters - others - well, I don't know what other reasons there may be??

It is now a bit difficult for me to understand what we may do to gain FCC intervention - particularly as it is the FCC that grants these waivers in the first place - true?

- Dan
Dan
We can only really 'guess' what the various station's motivations are for being on the air in various forms by now. I think it really boils down to 1) How seriously did they take the FCC mandate to be on the air in 1999, and 2) How bad do they really want to get on the air in the public interest.

I think it is very safe to say that KRMA (PBS) was easily the most motivated since day one. They cannot depend upon commercials for their revenue, but must depend upon the public donation and a very limited amount of government funds. Of course they are motivated in showing the government they are doing their best, and they also need to show their viewing public they are doing their absolute best to provide the best entertainment (including format) as possible. They certainly have shown by their actions they are trying.

As for KCNC, I think they are showing by their actions to join KRMA they also take the mandate seriously. It is also true that especially last year, CBS had more HD on the air than any network, and they had the most to gain in viewership and goodwill to be on the air in an STA mode too.

Last fall, the FCC announced that they were looking into the possibility of giving large fines to stations who were non-compliant or perceived to be lacking the effort to be on the air. Chairman Powell suggested these fines would be MAJOR. I believe that is the reason that KUSA went on the air before the end of the year. It is obvious from their lack of HD availability yet, that they scrambled at the last minute to get something up on the air, and are not the least bit concerned about the quality of their signal for the time being. They responded out of fear of being the subject of an FCC fine. As for the public interest, I think they still see themselves as the "leading station in Denver" (even though they are obviously too humble to mention that on the air......more than once or twice every 15 minutes). Since they have the highest ratings, they certainly are not the least bit concerned about the public goodwill at this time. Besides, by not spending money on HD, they have more money to make those 'aren't we a great station, look how much we care about our viewers" commercials they run 24 hours a day. Obviously their marketing people have told them that telling the public your the best is much more effective than actually being the best. This is America in the 21'st Century, and we all know, "Image is everything"! Image wins over substance just about all the time in this country, and no I am not going to make any political comments here. For that you all should be thankful.

As for KMGH, I believe they tried to cover their own bu*ts with their toy transmitter from early on. By putting up the toy version, they can for all time in the future make the claim they were 'first on the air in Denver in DTV format'. Not bad pub 20 years from now when nobody can remember exactly what they did to make that claim. They get some great pub for their signal and they hope to keep the FCC from giving them a fine since they are 'technically' on the air even though no one can see it.

Obviously, KDVR took the mandate very seriously as well, but were stuck with the fact that FAUX did not. They also had a tower in a location which allowed them to get on the air sooner. They not only did what they were mandated to do, but they did it in a timely fashion. Good for them. KWGN seems to be taking it all seriously as well, but they were not required to be on the air as soon since they are not an affiliate of a major network. I think their original deadline was last fall, but someone might correct that for me. At any rate they are approved and on the way, so they are meeting their mandate.

As for the motivation of the FCC, I can assure you they do NOT want to get involved in the mess in Jeffco if they can. Although the FCC is believed to have the power to over rule a local zoning law in order to allow communications towers, it is my understanding that this power has never really been tested in the courts. I don't think the FCC yet sees this problem as serious enough to test that power, especially knowing that the (S)CARE group would likely have the funding to try a court test. I do think the FCC can bring pressure to the local stations (kMGH) if enough people protest their little evasive actions with the toy transmitter. The threat of a fine certainly could get KMGH to move their transmitter. Also remember, all of these stations must apply for a license renewal about every 2 years. They have to show they are serving the public interest in their actions in order to keep their 'free' spectrum. Obviously, none of them want to have 3000 letters posted to the FCC saying they are not serving the public when their renewal comes up.

That is my $0.02 worth on the motivations of some of the major players here in town. Maybe others can fill in the blanks on the things I left out. Reading motivations though, is an inexact science, and my comments and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at your local Starbucks.

I have tweaked my letter and this is what will be sent in tomorrows mail:
Dear Chairman Powell,

I am writing the FCC because I would very much like to understand why the situation with KMGH (our Denver ABC affiliate) is acceptable to the FCC.

As you may be aware, several of our local network affiliates have been unable to secure the necessary permits from Jefferson County to construct their digital facilities. This has been a long and frustrating experience for many Denver area Front Range residents. In the interim, several stations (KRMA, KCNC, KUSA) broadcast digitally using a low power setup (STA) from an antenna located atop a downtown Denver skyscraper (Republic Plaza). This temporary arrangement serves many local residents well (but it is clearly understood by everyone that this temporary setup is far short of a permanent solution). On the other hand, KMGH is broadcasting an even lower power signal from an antenna atop their studio building, which is significantly lower in elevation (height) than the skyscraper used by our other stations. Many residents are able to receive broadcasts from the Republic Plaza. However, receiving the KMGH signal is difficult at best and only a very small subset of residents able to receive Republic Plaza broadcasts can receive the KMGH signal. Even then, these fortunate few local enthusiasts are usually only able to receive KMGH by employing extraordinary means to find a suitable antenna location and height - where inches and weather conditions literally make a world of difference between reception and nothing.

I note the obvious: ABC is broadcasting many hours of primetime high definition. Next fall they will be broadcasting high definition Monday Night Football in addition to their regular high definition prime time lineup. High definition Monday Night Football is sure to help pick up the pace of the digital transition - except here in Denver of course where the signal will only be receivable by a lucky few who are willing to go to great lengths to receive the signal.

The question I would like answered is this: Why is the FCC content with the abysmal effort put forth by KMGH to "broadcast" H/DTV? Clearly we are in need of a permanent long term solution but that is, at best, 1.5 to 2 years off, and probably longer given past history and current progress (Jefferson County zoning hearings will not begin before April and construction is estimated to be a year or so after county approval, which will take months). The downtown skyscraper is clearly a far better location for KMGH to broadcast their DT signal yet they refuse to move from their studio building (many have asked). Should not the FCC be requiring KMGH to serve as many residents as possible during this interim period? It is clear that they have the means to do so but not the desire to do so. Why is this farce allowed to continue? The other stations have chosen the best available site until their zoning issues are worked out, why should KMGH be allowed flaunt the intentions of serving the public? They are serving only a very few residents beyond the range of their parking lot. Would it be acceptable for KMGH to continue broadcasting from their studio site even after the Jefferson County Lookout Mountain site is approved and constructed? At what power level does the FCC become content with broadcaster efforts to comply with the digital mandate?

I might also note that information on the FCC site regarding KMGH's current ERP and HAAT (for example) is incorrect and misleading (this shows their STA setup as being higher in elevation and with higher ERP than either KCNC or KUSA but that is most definitely NOT the case).

I understand that the FCC requires low power operations to cover their city of license. I do not know if this is the case (I have not measured KMGH-DT power levels and plotted them on a map) but I hereby request that this be investigated to determine if KMGH is conforming.

Regardless, I respectfully request an answer as to why their current setup acceptable, or better yet I would prefer that the FCC look after the best interests of Denver area citizens and require KMGH to relocate to the best possible location while their zoning and construction issues are resolved. In this vein I suggest that they be denied further DTV build out extensions unless they commit to serving as much of the public as possible during this interim period.

Sincerely,


xxxxxxxxxx


CC: David Fiske (FCC)
Cindy velasquez (GM - KMGH)Here is where I am sending this:

Federal Communications Commission
ATTN: Chairman Powell
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

Federal Communications Commission
Office of Media Relations
ATTN: David Fiske
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

KMGH-TV
ATTN: General Manager
123 Speer Boulevard
Denver, Colorado 80203-3417

Snail mail works best for these sorts of letters so I encourage that over email.

That said, please send an email version to Pete McNally: [pete@grinnellgroup.com ]

------

With enough letters I think we stand a chance of making this happen.

Obviously their marketing people have told them that telling the public your the best is much more effective than actually being the best. Well said!

NOTE: I made a (perhaps significant) modification to my letter just now....I added the second to last paragraph.....

Geof (et al):

Thanks for the background information. I now better understand the frustrations expressed here.

Out of curiousity, has anyone floated the idea of 'organizing' a response? I know you guys are talking about a letter-writing campaign - nothing wrong with that, but what about the option of creating a sort of organization that would speak with one voice for those of us who are frustrated and believe we have a better solution to propose?

I really don't know exactly how this might work - but the early thoughts tend toward some sort of signed petition that rallies our collective energies in a specific direction - and then ask someone (Geof or Ron or whomever) to 'lead the charge' and invite KMGH to a meeting to discuss the proposed initiative.

Do you suppose this may offer more of a center of gravity than an individual letter-writing effort?

I don't know - just a thought.

- Dan

Originally posted by Geof
NOTE: I made a (perhaps significant) modification to my letter just now....I added the second to last paragraph.....

Expansion of the thought:

How about everyone that sends a letter to the FCC or KMGH *also* send a copy of their letter to ?? maybe Ernie at his business address - or if preferred, they can send them to my business address.

In this way, the letter-writing campaign goes forward AND we have the additional benefit of someone gathering up the letters so that a 'spokesperson' may take all those letters to represent the interests of a group of us and request a meeting with KMGH management.

Admittedly, I am leaning towards face-to-face contact as I think it offers the greatest opportunity to learn KMGH's position and issues - and to stimulate a positive direction from them.

If the letters come to me, I would ask that someone much more experienced and invested (and knowledgeable) in this issue carry these forward to request a meeting with KMGH - though I will be happy to support in any way I am able. Any suggestions? Ernie? Geof? other?

My business address is:

CPM, Inc.
8223 South Quebec St., # I-182
Englewood, CO 80112

For the record, my business is in international consulting and I have no other interest than to enjoy wide availability of the new technologies.

Also - if you folks think this is a silly idea, just say so. I am only trying to think up a possible success path.

- Dan

Originally posted by dhcoop
Geof (et al):

Thanks for the background information. I now better understand the frustrations expressed here.

Out of curiousity, has anyone floated the idea of 'organizing' a response? I know you guys are talking about a letter-writing campaign - nothing wrong with that, but what about the option of creating a sort of organization that would speak with one voice for those of us who are frustrated and believe we have a better solution to propose?

I really don't know exactly how this might work - but the early thoughts tend toward some sort of signed petition that rallies our collective energies in a specific direction - and then ask someone (Geof or Ron or whomever) to 'lead the charge' and invite KMGH to a meeting to discuss the proposed initiative.

Do you suppose this may offer more of a center of gravity than an individual letter-writing effort?

I don't know - just a thought.

- Dan

Dan,
I believe the "sucess path" involves the FCC. They are the regulatory agency for KMGH. KMGH has to do as they require, not as we desire. Many of us have already written KMGH (individually) and have gotten nowhere....I don't think they will suddenly listen to us as a group. In fact I think they are quite aware that we are a group. The stations, JeffCo, & SCARE are all aware of this forum and this thread, and some have even posted here. IMO, we need to write the FCC and send a copy of the letter to KMGH and Pete at the LCG.
If anyone here believes that meeting with KMGH (if they will even agree to meet with us) will work I'm all for trying. That said, I think we need to write those FCC letters in any event and if a meeting happens then great.

Hi Geof,

Fair enough - I'll certainly join you in sending a letter to whomever can possibly help.

Not to belabor the point, but doesn't the fact that FCC grants these waivers tell us something about their willingness to intervene? It just strikes me that if they (FCC) are going to grant an extension to the deadlines, then I have a hard time seeing how they are going to be willing to intervene in any positive way in the interim.

I am sorry, but I remain confused on the logic of that point.

As for forming a 'group' and lobbying KMGH for a meeting - I certainly agree they are unlikely to honor any request for face-to-face contact from a private party. It is only through some sort of collective effort that they *may* (emphasis on MAY) be willing to engage us if they think we offer a large enough group of vocal users. And then - we would also need to make a show of impartiality. By that I mean, Pete would probably not be the best spokesperson or central contact by virtue of his vested interest in this project going forward (no offense Pete - just seems like a fact - to me, anyway). Far better for someone that can be nothing more than one of the masses who is interested in adoption of the technology and wishes simply to have access to it - someone like yourself Geof (again, if I understand what I *think* I understand correctly).

You are absolutely correct that a meeting with KMGH may prove entirely unfruitful. It may even lead to greater frustration - but as I was re-reading this thread (yes, all 185 pages of it), I see little in the way of direct and explicit understanding of KMGH's position and issues. We are largely surmising their motives from what little we see of their outward behaviors, and there is a certain amount of animosity generated by (and towards) their insensitive station director.

All I am saying is that - just like the letter-writing campaign cannot harm anything - neither can an organized effort to gather up those letters (along with, perhaps, additional signatures on a petition) and present those to KMGH management along with an appeal for a face-to-face meeting.

For whatever it is worth.

- Dan

Originally posted by Geof
Dan,
I believe the "sucess path" involves the FCC. They are the regulatory agency for KMGH. KMGH has to do as they require, not as we desire. Many of us have already written KMGH (individually) and have gotten nowhere....I don't think they will suddenly listen to us as a group. In fact I think they are quite aware that we are a group. The stations, JeffCo, & SCARE are all aware of this forum and this thread, and some have even posted here. IMO, we need to write the FCC and send a copy of the letter to KMGH and Pete at the LCG.
If anyone here believes that meeting with KMGH (if they will even agree to meet with us) will work I'm all for trying. That said, I think we need to write those FCC letters in any event and if a meeting happens then great.

Don,

I don't remember if you were at the KCNC meeting/tour about a year ago where Pete first showed us the new LCG2 plan.

There were representatives there from KUSA and KMGH. We asked them, point-blank, will you put up (KUSA) or move (KMGH) a transmitter on Republic Plaza in the meantime? Both stations' representatives clearly said "No, Lookout Mountain is the best spot, we think LCG2 will be approved within 18 months [fat chance], so we'll just wait for that".

Interestingly, very shortly after our last letter-writing campaign to the FCC, KUSA announced, out of the blue, plans to put a temporary transmitter on Republic. Their lack of "flange" to time-shift HD network programming proves, in my mind, that this wasn't something they had been planning on doing.

2 points I want to make here:

1) KMGH has told us, in person, they don't want to waste money on a temporary transmitter since LCG2 approval is "imminent"

2) KUSA also told us that, but after we got frustrated and wrote the FCC, their plans changed. I don't believe that was a coincidence, but I have no proof.

-David

Geez these posts are getting long!. Here's a short one ...

Did anyone watch the 90-minute CSI last night? All that T and A, lip-teasing and decomposing bodies -- is it sweeps week again?

It also had a fair amount of annoying green dot flashes. I haven't seen posts about it in a while. Didn't someone post they got a reply email from David Layne saying that they thought they fixed it?

The FCC does grant waivers and they are the regulatory agency overseeing the broadcast stations but they are also accountable (in theory at least) to us, the taxpayers. I know for a fact that they have listened to us in the past and our letters to them have had positive results in the past. I am certainly not going to go out on a limb and guarantee results this time but a) it has worked before and b) what the hell have we got to lose (asides from some time, paper, and 3 stamps). There is a lot to be gained though so I hope everyone keeps in mind your efforts now when Monday Night Football is on next year and you cannot receive it. As we could see from the KCNC and KUSA experiences getting setup on Republic Plaza takes time so we need to do this now to give us the best chances of having them get done by Football season (and next years primetime season).

The FCC letters don't have to be as long winded as mine - tell them you can't get it and wonder why you have to wait for two years when they could move tomorrow and you could get them. Or tell them you had a hard time getting them and need to be lucky with the weather....The station might not care about 1 or 2 or even 30 viewers but I will guarantee 30 letters will catch the attention of the FCC.

As to carrying these ideas and letters forward, we should send a copy of our letter to KMGH out of courtesy. We should also send them to Pete. He is the Principle figure in the LCG and he will want to enlist our support for their hearings...I don't think he will ignore our pleas but on the other hand we've got to keep in mind who's paying his salary and where his allegiance lies. That said, I am sure he will take our cause forward because he wants and needs our support. Sending him our letters gives him the facts and understanding he needs to go forward to KMGH. I will likely be meeting with Pete early next week and hope to discuss this issue with him and it would be quite helpful if his email is clogged with FCC letters before I meet with him.

I have been following this thread since mid-December and I am also frustrated by KMGH's refusal to place their transmitter on Republic Plaza's roof and with the other station's low powered transmitters.

How many of us are there in Metro Denver with HD equipment that cannot get KMGH's signal? Is there a specific email address for more information on this problem? Has anyone started a petition to show KMGH how many viewers they are alienating?

I would also be willing to send a copy of Geoff's mail to the FCC, et al, if that is OK with Geoff. Or should we each come up with our own letters?

Update:
I work for the Denver Newspaper Agency, and I just talked with one of the Rocky Mountain News reporters about doing a story on the frustration we are all experiencing with KMGH and the entire situation. He asked me if the Denver viewers are organized? He also mentioned that he would be willing to interview some of you. If you are interested, please email me at fletcher@denvernewspaperagency.com.

Originally posted by jpfletcher
I have been following this thread since mid-December and I am also frustrated by KMGH's refusal to place their transmitter on Republic Plaza's roof and with the other station's low powered transmitters.

How many of us are there in Metro Denver with HD equipment that cannot get KMGH's signal? Is there a specific email address for more information on this problem? Has anyone started a petition to show KMGH how many viewers they are alienating?

I would also be willing to send a copy of Geoff's mail to the FCC, et al, if that is OK with Geoff. Or should we each come up with our own letters? Personally, I think it's best to come up with individual letters...it demonstrates more commitment than just sending off a copy. You really only need to say something like you can't get KMGH and wonder why you have to wait for two years when they could move tomorrow and you could get them now and it would carry the message forward. If you want to use my letter I suggest an introductory paragraph stating that you agree with the following comments....

As to finding out how many viewers are alienated I don't know....but if we all send out letters to the FCC and KMGH and emails to Pete he will obviously know how many he's received.....that is why I am urging everyone to write now (and email those letters to Pete) before I talk with him early next week....

Originally posted by jpfletcher


Update:
I work for the Denver Newspaper Agency, and I just talked with one of the Rocky Mountain News reporters about doing a story on the frustration we are all experiencing with KMGH and the entire situation. He asked me if the Denver viewers are organized? He also mentioned that he would be willing to interview some of you. If you are interested, please email me at fletcher@denvernewspaperagency.com. You have an email from me. Many thanks for opening the door. I will be happy to talk with him, as I am sure others are.

We are sort of organized thru this forum. Sure would be nice to get a plug in for this forum and this thread as it would direct interested parties here and add to our numbers.

Originally posted by RonAuger
Geez these posts are getting long!. Here's a short one ...

Did anyone watch the 90-minute CSI last night? All that T and A, lip-teasing and decomposing bodies -- is it sweeps week again?

It also had a fair amount of annoying green dot flashes. I haven't seen posts about it in a while. Didn't someone post they got a reply email from David Layne saying that they thought they fixed it?

I noticed in the HD Programming forum this green-dot problem is also being seen in Illinois and Detroit. Maybe not a local problem...

I watched CSI on the Dishnetwork 61.5 East feed (WCBS-DT) and did not notice any "green dots", but I did notice them later when flipping across KCNC-DT 35.

I reported a while ago that I got an email from Pat Brus (original email was sent to David Layne) at KCNC about the green and black flashes. It appears others in the country have the same issue. The good news is that they are quick and don't bother the audio.

Here it is again:

Dennis,

We have been upgrading alot of our equipment to be able to pass the 5.1
audio. This includes satellite IRD's, muxes, demuxes, etc. Along the way we
have seen a few glitches and are working on resolving these issues.

Thanks,
Pat Brus
KCNC-TV
Engineering Manager


I emailed jpfletcher that I am willing to be interviewed. My story of putting up a large antenna and finding a sweet spot just to get KMGH might be interesting. And, a friend (two blocks away) and I spent considerable effort to get him going -- all for naught!!

I plan to write my own letter (shorter) to the FCC (copies to everybody) about the deplorable KMGH situation.

Here's an interesting article showing the FCC's resolve in forcing stations towards a DTV solution:

"Broadcasting & Cable

2/10/2003 8:00:00 AM

Eight big network owned-and-operated stations and affiliates long-plagued by zoning and technical problems were given another six-month extension Thursday to launch digital-TV service.

The stations were among nine big-market, big network stations given extensions to construct digital facilities six months ago.

Of those, the only one to make it on the air was CBS owned KTVT(TV) Fort Worth, Texas.

The FCC said continued delays that were "unforeseeable and beyond their control" warranted extensions for Denver stations ABC affiliate KMGH-TV, CBS O&O KCNC-TV and NBC affiliate KUSA-TV. Also: Chicago CBS O&O WBBM-TV; New Britain, Conn., NBC O&O WVIT(TV); Fox affiliate WTIC-TV and CBS affiliate WFSB-TV, both Hartford, Conn.; and Miami NBC O&O WTVJ(TV).

Affiliates and O&Os of the four major networks in the top 30 markets were required to be broadcasting digital TV by November 1999 unless they received FCC waivers."

Anyone want to venture a wild guess as to what the FCC will do in another six months? No wonder KMGH doesn't care about a decent signal. They know they don't have to.

John in Jeffco

Anyone want to venture a wild guess as to what the FCC will do in another six months? No wonder KMGH doesn't care about a decent signal. They know they don't have to.

John in JeffcoThat may not be entirely true. I mentioned in a previous post that an extension had been granted on 1/30/03, which is good thru 8/6/03. However, they also have to have their STA license renewed every 6 months and it has to meet certain minimum requirements - such as coverage for the "city of license"....I seriously doubt KMGH is receivable in all parts of the City of Denver so there may be something that can be done....I will need time to understand these rules as I just recently became aware of them...meanwhile I know I am harping on this but the more letters the FCC gets the better our chances become....I may be foolish (please no debate on that) but I really think there is a shot at getting them to move.

And I have been thinking more about the suggestions that we withhold support from the LCG2 app unless KMGH obliges...that may indeed be something we should do......

Geof
I still agree with your idea of writing the FCC and plan to do something this weekend. I would be curious if you could post a link to the source of the rule that an STA should cover the city of license, I would like to reference that in my letter too. I too encourage everyone else to write a letter as well. It my not help much, but I can assure you it will not hurt.

As for a boycott of the LCG unless KMGH moves the transmitter, I still think it is a good idea for discussion. I would certainly want to talk to Pete about it before we follow through, but I think it is worth looking into it. It is a bit like the old 'Mutually Assured Destruction" (MAD) policy the US had with Russia in the cold war. If KMGH still refuses to move, everyone is likely to be 'destroyed' in the process since the LCG loses our support. I am guessing that could lead to some serious 'bickering' among the LCG members, and perhaps break the whole thing apart just when they need to be the most organized. (S)CARE could eat the LCG alive in the hearings if that happened. On the other hand.........????.....maybe KMGH would see the light and not want the responsibility of explaining to the FCC why the LCG proposal came apart. I do think this is where the letters to the FCC come in handy. It insures that the KMGH folks can't keep this whole mess hidden from the FCC. Yes, they do have to re-file for another extension, and a lot of letters of protest at the very least, would get the FCC to look more closely at the situation. I am quite sure no one at KMGH is interested in having the FCC folks out looking over their transmitter and making measurements around town as well. I am sure they have been using their anonymity at the national level to cover their tails in this one.

John,

Here is the link (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2001/fcc01330.txt). I haven't read the whole document yet but the interesting stuff appears to start at paragraph 34....

I understand that the minimum signal threshold is 6 dB above receiver threshold (or -47 dBuV). This signal level required throughout the coverage area, which in this case is all of Denver. Does KMGH meet this???

I am not sure if I should write to the FCC. Tonight I am getting a 70% signal for KMGH-DT channel 17-1. I am getting 85% for KCNC-DT channel 35-1.

Originally posted by Hot
I am not sure if I should write to the FCC. Tonight I am getting a 70% signal for KMGH-DT channel 17-1. I am getting 85% for KCNC-DT channel 35-1. In my case I get a 0-3 signal level for KMGH and if they did move to the Republic Plaza I'd guess the signal would be around 40 (which is what my KUSA signal level is). So, in either case I don't think I'd be able to receive KMGH....but there would be 10's of thousands more potential viewers who would be able to get kMGH if they moved their antenna. Personally I think that's important because it helps quicken the pace of the digital transition, especially with HD Monday Night Football next year. I suspect there will be a lot of unhappy campers post here when they can't receive KMGH (but can get the other low power stations)...

40's not enough for you, Geof? If I can get a stable 34, I can get a picture.

I used to be thrilled that I was getting KCNC at 40. Now that KUSA-DT's on line, I get KCNC in the high 50s.

OK. I got busy and sent a letter to Powell. Mine is a lot shorter than Geof's.

Here it is:

Dear Chairman Powell:

By now, you should be aware that the Denver ABC affiliate, KMGH-TV, is broadcasting their digital signal from a very low power transmitter on top of their 4 story studio building.

Due to zoning problems, all the Denver stations have put up temporary transmitters until the zoning situation is resolved, which could still take 2 or more years before facilities could be built. Unlike KMGH, however, other stations have placed transmitters atop a tall downtown building or in the mountains with sufficient power that people in the Denver area are able to receive them fairly easily with simple antennas.

I and a number of other people have requested that KMGH relocate their temporary transmitter to the same downtown location so that it would be much easier to receive their signal. They refuse to even answer queries.

I only live 11 miles away and I am able to get their signal, but only because I spent considerable time and energy installing a very large antenna on my roof JUST to get the KMGH signal. A neighbor, two blocks away, tried everything and did not succeed. We receive all other digital transmissions easily. To summarize, KMGH is NOT serving the needs of the Denver Metro area when it comes to providing an acceptable digital broadcast. They appear not to even care.

So, I am asking that the FCC formally look into this to see if KMGH is actually adhering to current FCC rules regarding digital transmissions. Even if they have complied with the rules, they certainly are not putting forth the same efforts that all other Denver stations have done to allow the public to receive an acceptable digital broadcast.

Thank you in advance for your efforts to improve this unacceptable KMGH digital situation.

Sincerely,



XXXXXXXXXXXX

cc: David Fiske, FCC Media Relations
General Manager, KMGH-TV, Denver, Colorado

Excellent Dennis...just excellent. I really liked Ernie's letter as well....it is nice to get these points across to the FCC (and KMGH) by coming at them from different perspectives.

dr_mal, the last time I tried, KUSA pixelates and breaks up - even with a signal level in the (low) 40's....it's not really watchable. Maybe a newer generation receiver would work better I do not know....

Originally posted by Geof
Excellent Dennis...just excellent. I really liked Ernie's letter as well....it is nice to get these points across to the FCC (and KMGH) by coming at them from different perspectives.

dr_mal, the last time I tried, KUSA pixelates and breaks up - even with a signal level in the (low) 40's....it's not really watchable. Maybe a newer generation receiver would work better I do not know.... Well dr_mal, after you questioned the 40's results I tuned in DT18 tonight and it was reading 58. What a surprise. I had actually taken it out of the channel guide because I never got a stable picture, which I'm getting tonight at least. Go figure. The bad news is the reading on DT35 is poor tonight (a steady 44)....the picture was watchable but I did have some dropouts...these number sure do change from "day to day".....

My numbers for digital signals do not vary much. For me all of them except KMGH are around 64 and stable. KMGH is usually stable at 40-42, but is lower to around 35 once in a while. When that happens, I get dropouts on KMGH. This is on a DTC-100. I need 34 to get a picture.

I wonder if any of this might have something to do with the directional nature of our UHF antennas. I have a large CM Yagi 4248.

The obvious solution is a high powered transmitter on Lookout. Gee, I wonder if anybody has looked into that. All would be well then and we would have to think of other things to complain about!!

Well, I finished my FCC letter last night. I will try to get it in the mail today although I guess the Post Office is closed, so I suppose that really means tomorrow. I don't plan on posting the text here unless people need some more templates to help them write their own letters. I pretty much followed the format already posted by Geof in my own 'unique' abrasive style.

Is anyone else going to be writing the FCC?? I think it is a good idea for as many people as possible to do it, even if you already get KMGH. More letters will grab more attention.

I will try to take one of the templates are write a letter as well. I'm not very good at that sort of thing but will give it a shot.

Later
Joe

Good going guys....

Once again, here are the addresses:

Federal Communications Commission
ATTN: Chairman Powell
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

Federal Communications Commission
Office of Media Relations
ATTN: David Fiske
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

KMGH-TV
ATTN: General Manager
123 Speer Boulevard
Denver, Colorado 80203-3417

Snail mail works best for these sorts of letters so I encourage that over email.

That said, please send an email version to Pete McNally: [pete@grinnellgroup.com ]

I had a friend come over Friday night for my daughters birthday party. He has an HDTV but does not have a STB because he doesn't think it's right that he'd only get a couple of channels.

Then he started to get mad and asked why the heck can't we get HD channels like other places?? I tried to explain the Scare/tower nonsense. Well, that didn't help because he knows that most other places in the country get OTA HD (including my parents in Green Bay - a city of 100,000, and soon Cheyenne!!) He's real frustrated with the whole situation.

My question is - if many of you think that letters to the FCC will work to kick KMGH into action, why won't the FCC help get things moving with the tower situation? Why haven't they stepped in a long time ago and told Scare how full of it they are and help the tower situation get resolved??

Originally posted by mknoebel

:
:
My question is - if many of you think that letters to the FCC will work to kick KMGH into action, why won't the FCC help get things moving with the tower situation? Why haven't they stepped in a long time ago and told Scare how full of it they are and help the tower situation get resolved?? Those are two different things (unfortunately).
First off, the FCC regulates broadcasters so it is up to them to approve or deny applications that meet or do not meet their requirements. Time will tell if KMGH meets FCC requirements. The FCC is apparently sensitive to public opinion so that is where our voices matter. Personally, I do not think KMGH is doing what they could during this interim period and I think they may be in violation of existing FCC rules, in that they may not be providing an adequate low power signal. It’s not like they don’t have any options – in fact they do have options – they could move to the Republic Plaza and be receivable by 10’s of thousands more potential viewers. As it currently stands they could be broadcasting from Nebraska because very few people can receive their signal. I believe the FCC has the power – and obligation - to change that. We shall see.

The deal with JeffCo is that any modifications KCNC, KMGH or KUSA wish to make on their towers – like adding antennas – requires a zoning change. Zoning changes are under the auspices of the county government. In my mind, this is as it should be. I don’t think the US government should be telling Jefferson County (or any county) how to use their land. Jefferson County residents elected their County Commissioners to make those decisions (this process is not unique to Jefferson County – it works that way all over the Country). So, anyone who wants to use land for something it is not currently zoned for has to request a zoning change - and that requires following the procedures and rules set forth by the county for County approval. If the FCC were to step in and say “we don’t like your procedures or rules, or decision, we are authorizing the stations to build their facilities” (or something along those lines) it would surely go to court and probably be appealed and then appealed again. While the FCC can regulate broadcast requirements it remains entirely doubtful they can also regulate land use. I would have hoped the FCC could have prodded the County to move a bit quicker but in the end I think the process has to take it's due course or else be subject to appeal from some group like SCARE who could claim the zoning process wasn't followed.

I see your point, Geof. I would just think that SOMEONE should be able to say that they have dragged their feet with long enough. Cheyenne, WY will have a full power station before Denver. Come on. Colorado Springs. And how many other stations with a smaller population than Denver? I guess knowing that friends of mine who have the TV, and the means to get into HDTV but can't, I'm frustrated. I wish that Cheyenne had an ABC station so that I wouldn't have to worry it anymore.

Originally posted by mknoebel
I guess knowing that friends of mine who have the TV, and the means to get into HDTV but can't, I'm frustrated. I think we all share your pain on that...it is frustrating, and very very disappointing....Denver is still (in some ways) nothing more than a cowtown.

Mark
I presented my own spin on why the FCC doesn't step in on page 185 in my post of 02-13-03 03:33 PM. The FCC in theory has the power to over-ride local land use zoning laws, but they have never really used that power to any great degree. I have no doubt that if they tried to force their will on Jeffco the (S)CARE folks would take them to court. It is not a slam dunk that the FCC would ultimately win. I don't think they really want to press their luck on that one.

As to why write letters, the FCC does regulate and approve the operational licenses of stations. In the case of KMGH's STA, they could refuse to approve another six month extension to KMGH unless they move. They would not be test of any zoning issues. If KMGH then refused to move they would have to shut off their current signal, and now would be subject to potential serious fines by the FCC in order to keep their license. I think the STA case is a "perfect" example of where the FCC can indeed have some serious impact. In the case of Lookout, it is just not that clear they can intercede.

Well I wrote a letter to the FCC and sent a copy to KMGH-DT

Thanks for your support Mike. It's especially nice seeing as how you already receive KMGH. I hope all our efforts are not for naught - we shall see...

I sent one as well even though, I, like Mike, can receive the signa without problems.

Jeff

In my letter I mentioned I am three miles away. But emphasized that other people in the Denver DMA should also be able to receive the KMGH-DT signal.

Mike and Jeff. Thanks for the letters too. I suspect the pressure from additional voices can only help.

Yes indeed, thanks Jeff, and thanks to everyone else who has written a letter. Each of us brings different viewpoints to the situation which can be important.

FYI: A small group of us are meeting with Pete later today so that he may more fully understand our thoughts on this matter....I don't expect anything earth shattering to result from this meeting but at least Pete is listening so our letters have opened that door at least.

I forwarded contact information from everyone that emailed me to the reported, hopefully he'll be calling or emailing you soon.

Originally posted by Geof
KMGH, KCNC, KUSA & KRMA are operating Special Temporary Authorization (STA) low power transmitters but I do not think this makes them in compliance Yes, I think it does. From the FCC document MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION:
"36. Commercial and noncommercial stations that are operating pursuant to a DTV STA by their respective construction deadlines (May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003) will be considered to have met this construction deadline, and their outstanding construction permits will be extended automatically until such time as the Commission determines otherwise (for example, by requiring that licensees either construct full replication or maximization facilities or relinquish interference protection). "
Curiously, the FCC web site (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html) shows the following:

KCNC:
11KW ERP
177 Meter HAAT (Antenna Height Above Average Terrain)
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KUSA
10.9 KW ERP
178 Meter HAAT
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KMGH
25KW ERP
450 Meter HAAT
39 ° 43' 40.00" Latitude
105° 14' 3.000" Longitude

Now I know I am not the brightest guy in the world but the way I read this is the KMGH STA antenna is much higher (by more than 2 times) than the KCNC and KUSA antennas and has an ERP 2.5 times greater than KCNC and KUSA. WTF, over? What am I missing? Do we all need to re-point our antenna to this mythical KMGH location and suddenly have our signal strength meters pegged at 100??? The Lat/Long for both KMGH listings are on Lookout. One says "Channel 17 Construction Permit" (low-power) and the other says "Channel 17 Application" (high-power). I'll assume the low-power one is outdated. Since it was granted on 12/02/1998, that was probably when KMGH initially tried to add DTV to their existing tower. And the high-power listing is probably the location of the LCG1 application's "supertower". I intend to bring up this erroneous data in my letter to the FCC on KMGH

Originally posted by RonAuger
Yes, I think it does. From the FCC document MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION:
"36. Commercial and noncommercial stations that are operating pursuant to a DTV STA by their respective construction deadlines (May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003) will be considered to have met this construction deadline, and their outstanding construction permits will be extended automatically until such time as the Commission determines otherwise (for example, by requiring that licensees either construct full replication or maximization facilities or relinquish interference protection). "
I understand this but, on the other hand, I don't believe the FCC is counting any stations using an STA as being "on the air" (at least the way I read this (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/files/dtvstat11.html)). So it appears as if the STA counts as having met the construction deadline but not as being on the air. What are they in compliance with? This is confusing to me at least so that's why I said "I do not think this makes them in compliance". You may very well be right though and I readily grant that operating with an STA is far better than not operating with anything...The Lat/Long for both KMGH listings are on Lookout. One says "Channel 17 Construction Permit" (low-power) and the other says "Channel 17 Application" (high-power). I'll assume the low-power one is outdated. Since it was granted on 12/02/1998, that was probably when KMGH initially tried to add DTV to their existing tower. And the high-power listing is probably the location of the LCG1 application's "supertower". I intend to bring up this erroneous data in my letter to the FCC on KMGH Yes, I beat around the bush in my letter and I read jm's letter where he was a bit more specific but driving this point home with more facts is a good thing...There is no way they are near anything like 25Kw ERP. I suspect KMGH has filed the correct paper and there is just an oversight on the FCC site but not having factual info makes it hard to prove their disgustingly low power output.

I see your point Geoff. I guess "compliance" is somewhat subjective and the FCC is the only one that determine what that is. In my letter, I'll be asking the FCC to verify if KMGH satisfies their STA, particularly in regards to the STA section entitled "City Grade Coverage" and the definition of such.

Originally posted by RonAuger
:
:
In my letter, I'll be asking the FCC to verify if KMGH satisfies their STA, particularly in regards to the STA section entitled "City Grade Coverage" and the definition of such. Yes, that is the 64 million dollar question before us. The curious thing about Denver is that it has some very uneven boundaries...Then again if they are complying (which I doubt) isn't there anything else that can be done?

rant mode on...
I think the thing that irks me most about this is KMGH's refusal to even talk with us about this...To me this demonstrates the arrogance that SCARE and JeffCo have had to deal with for years....get over it KMGH you are accountable for your actions...being a newscaster doesn't give you rights that you do not have.
/end of rant

(Had to get that emotional outburst out of my system before I meet with Pete in a couple of hours....)

I approached the issue differently in my letter. I kept reading references to signal maximization. Normally it refers to the full power license and that the station to try to maximize its signal coverage without breaking any FCC rules (signal power, spectrum etc.) and without overlapping nearby station coverages. It strike me that the same 'maximization' principle should be applied to the STA, and thus KCNC et al have arguably 'maximized' the coverage from their low power transmitters, while KMGH has not. Hey, it is worth a try just to get the FCC involved here. Rather than rehash what I wrote, here is a copy of the letter I sent to the FCC.

***

Dear Chairman Powell,


I am writing the FCC because I would the FCC to become more involved in the DTV (or lack thereof) situation in the Metropolitan Denver area.

As you must be aware, the majority of our local network affiliates have been unable to secure the necessary permits from Jefferson County to construct their digital facilities. This has been a long and frustrating experience for many Denver area Front Range residents who have the equipment to watch DTV and especially HDTV broadcasts. In the interim, several stations (KRMA, KCNC) broadcast digitally using a low power setup (STA) from antennas located atop a downtown Denver skyscraper (Republic Plaza). Most recently KUSA has finally also erected a tower and DTV transmitter on the building as well, although they still refuse to pass or broadcast any of their own NBC network HD telecasts. This temporary arrangement serves many local residents well, but it is clearly understood by everyone that this temporary setup is far short of full coverage and will never be a permanent solution. KMGH, however, is broadcasting a much lower power signal from an antenna atop their own studio building, which is significantly lower in elevation (height) than the skyscraper used by our other stations. Many metro Denver residents are able to receive broadcasts from the Republic Plaza. I live in the community of Boulder and also can receive the stations located on the top of the Republic Building. Receiving the KMGH signal is difficult at best and only a very small number of residents (probably in the hundreds) are able to receive Republic Plaza broadcasts and also receive the KMGH signal. Even these fortunate few local HDTV enthusiasts are usually only able to receive KMGH by employing extraordinary means to find a suitable antenna location and height. Many of the few who can receive the KMGH broadcasts report they are still at the mercy of weather and other atmospheric conditions.

The ABC television network is broadcasting many hours of primetime high definition programming. They recently televised the Super Bowl in HD and next fall they will be broadcasting high definition Monday Night Football in addition to their regular extensive high definition prime time lineup. Although this significant content of HDTV is available to most of the country, the Denver television market, one of the top thirty markets in this country, continues to lack access to this programming.

Clearly the Denver people are in need of a permanent long-term solution. As you may know, the local stations have formed a group (Lake Cedar Group-LCG), and have applied to Jefferson County for permission to build a new consolidated building and tower on Lookout Mountain as the solution for providing permanent DTV broadcasts to the Metropolitan Denver area. As you may not be aware, this application is moving very slowly through the Jefferson County Commissioners Offices. The earliest hearings are still only tentatively scheduled for April, and the date has yet to be confirmed. Previous hearings for the KRMA DTV application (the local PBS station) took over 6 months before approval. Since that was a single station tower, the local opposition from the Lookout Mountain/Mt. Morrison area was not nearly as focused for those hearings, as they no doubt will be for the LCG application. It would be foolhardy to think the new LCG application could be accomplished in a time frame anywhere near the 6 to 8 months that the KRMA application required.

The plans for the LCG build out <http://www.lakecedarproject.com/index.html>, once approval is granted, call for at least one year of construction, assuming the Colorado weather cooperates. The new design calls for the transmitter building to be recessed in the Lookout Mountain hillside, in order to hide it from the view of the local residents. This construction requires a significant amount of blasting and digging for its completion. It is certainly realistic to believe that it will take at least a year if not longer.

If you combine the time required for approval as well as the time required for construction, it is easy to see that this DTV build-out will take a minimum of 18 months from today, and more likely will require 24 months or more. All of this assumes the local opposition does not try to tie up any decision by the Jefferson County Commissioners in the local courts.

Although I would support, but do not expect, the FCC to enter in to the zoning fight on Lookout Mountain, I would like to request the FCC take another look at the special STA granted to KMGH for its DTV broadcasts during this interim. The Republic Building, used by the other local stations (KRMA, KCNC, and recently KUSA) is clearly a far better location for KMGH to broadcast it STA DTV signal. A number of area residents have written KMGH and requested them to move their small transmitter to the better location on the Republic Building. KMGH has consistently refused to consider such a move.

Your own FCC website http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html lists this information for the location of these particular stations:

KCNC:
11KW ERP
177 Meter HAAT (Antenna Height Above Average Terrain)
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude
KUSA
10.9 KW ERP
178 Meter HAAT
39 ° 44' 37.00" Latitude
104° 59' 18.00" Longitude

KMGH
25KW ERP
450 Meter HAAT
39 ° 43' 40.00" Latitude
105° 14' 3.000" Longitude

I would request that you have your people examine these facts once again. There is virtually no way the KMGH studio is located some 250 Meters above the KCNC and KUSA transmitters. One or more of these applications must be misrepresenting the facts about their transmitter locations, and perhaps even power levels. The KMGH transmitter simply does not provide even a small percentage of the coverage provided by the other two stations. A quick visual inspection can easily establish that the top of the Republic Building is significantly higher than the KMGH studios.

The FCC website:
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2001/fcc01330.txt also provides this information concerning the STA application, which you have approved for KMGH. It includes the following:

“34. Licensees must construct at least the minimum initial facilities required to serve their community of license by May 1, 2002 (commercial) or May 1, 2003 (noncommercial)………We will also permit licensees that have not yet been granted a construction permit for allotted or maximized DTV facilities to request an STA to commence digital operation…..The STA request must specify the
technical facilities requested, including the station's ERP, HAAT, antenna pattern, if any, geographic coordinates, and tower registration number, if any………In this regard, we urge licensees to pay special attention to compliance with FAA and FCC tower requirements, the community of license coverage requirement, and the FCC's environmental rules governing radio frequency ("RF") radiation.
35. Once the Commission has granted a DTV STA request, the licensee or permittee will be authorized to commence digital service as specified in the STA…..STAs will be granted for a period up to six months. The Commission delegates authority to the Mass Media Bureau to continue to extend STAs for additional periods not to exceed six months each until such time as the Commission determines otherwise (for example, by requiring that licensees either construct full replication or maximization facilities or relinquish interference protection). Under our rules, STAs are revocable at will.
36. Commercial and noncommercial stations that are operating pursuant to a DTV STA by their respective construction deadlines (May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003) will be considered to have met this construction deadline, and their outstanding construction permits will be extended automatically until such time as the Commission determines otherwise (for example, by requiring that licensees either construct full replication or maximization facilities or relinquish interference protection……Periodically, the staff will issue public notices identifying the stations authorized to operate on DTV STAs and the parameters under which they are or will be operating.……Until the Commission determines otherwise, we will continue to provide interference protection to the facilities specified in outstanding DTV construction permits issued to permittees operating pursuant to a DTV STA as of their applicable construction deadlines, in addition to protection to the allotted facilities.”

I would respectfully request that the FCC and Mass Media Bureau follow their own guidelines and review the applications for the above stations to determine if the exact height and power levels in the applications are true. I would also like the FCC to explain to the people of Denver what is meant by the term ‘maximization facilities’. Would that not mean that any transmitter (STA or permanent) must provide the maximum possible coverage of the assigned area up to the point where its coverage would overlap or interfere with another station. Although it is obvious that the current KMGH transmitter facilities will never duplicate the current analog coverage, it would surely appear that in no way can the current KMGH transmitter be considered a maximized facility at it current location. The other two major network affiliates have found a way to broadcast to a major portion of the city of Denver as well as a portion of the surrounding suburbs, even though they too are broadcasting under low power STA arrangements.

I do not believe that KMGH can be considered ‘in compliance’ with your own STA regulations, which imply the stations are required to ‘maximize’ their coverage area under an STA provided they comply with all other FCC regulations such as not interfering with other nearby markets. More importantly, I believe the best interests of the metropolitan Denver public are not being served in the KMGH situation, and I do not believe an extension to their existing STA should be granted unless the transmitter is moved to the Republic Building or a similar location. I would hope that you would request that someone from your office look in to this situation in Denver and provide a suitable answer to my questions. The existing STA for KMGH is obviously going to be in place for nearly two more years (likely through 2005), but I do not think it is reasonable to expect the people of the Metropolitan Denver area to have to tolerate this inadequate situation that long.

I hope that you, or someone from your office will take the time to look in to the matters I have presented and take the time to reply to my questions. I look forward to hearing your reply. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.



Sincerely,

XXXXXXXXX

I like these letters....I really do.

In looking back I wish I would have asked the FCC what we should expect if the second LCG application is denied. More of the same from KMGH?

Note: KMGH seems to be under the impression that a permanent solution is right around the corner....if the application is denied they could use the same argument then because "right around the corner" has no definable time line.

Unfortunately approval is no sure bet...I guess that's another reason to write and try and have the FCC deal with this sooner rather than later.

Ernie and Ron,
Do you guys have a problem if I reference your website and map data in my letter to Mr. Powell? I think it is interesting to look at the data. I see NO verifiable data indicating reception beyond about 10 miles from the transmitter. But do see at least one data point only 5 miles from the transmission who can receive KCNC, KRMA, and KDVR that cannot receive KMGH. I think that provides some anecdotal evidence that the KMGH signal is unacceptable.
Let me know what you think. My letter is about 4.5 pages long, so removing that section would help in the editing process :).
Thanks, Greg

Guys,

Here's the letter that I wrote. It may not be as well spoken as some of yours, but every one counts.

RE: Denver, Colorado DTV transition, KMGH compliance

Dear Chairman Powell,

I understand that you are aware of our situation in Denver, where we have KRMA, KCNC and KUSA broadcasting at low power from the top of the tallest building (Republic Plaza) in downtown Denver, and KMGH broadcasting in low power from the top of their 6 story building.

The KMGH signal can be received only be a very few people in Denver because of the Denver topography. Receiving the KMGH signal requires an almost direct line of sight to transmitting antenna which is impossible for most Denver residents. I am one of the “lucky” few that can receive KMGH’s digital signal.

The purpose of this letter is to ask you to investigate whether KMGH broadcasting in this manner meets your guidelines for broadcasting digitally. The FCC website erroneously indicates that KMGH is broadcasting from a higher elevation and at a higher power than any of the stations broadcasting from the top of Republic Plaza. In fact, your site lists KMGH broadcasting digitally from Lookout Mountain, which is impossible at this time due to local county zoning ordinances and local citizen opposition. KMGH (along with the other stations in the Denver area) is broadcasting their analog signal from Lookout Mountain, but their digital signal is coming from the top of their building.

From reading the information given on the FCC site, I understand that the FCC requires stations broadcasting digitally to cover the entire city where they are licensed. It is definitely not possible that the KMGH digital signal is covering the entire city of Denver. I live less than 4 miles away from the KMGH building, and I had to put a large UHF antenna on my roof to lock onto the KMGH signal. In fact, the KMGH signal is weak enough that adjusting my antenna less than 2 inches in height or less than 2 degrees in rotation causes me to completely lose their signal. There is no way that they are covering the Denver area.

I would ask the FCC to intercede on the behalf of Denver HDTV viewers. ABC currently is broadcasting their entire prime time lineup (except for reality television shows) in high definition. The Stanley Cup finals will be broadcast in high definition. The Oscars will be broadcast in high definition. Next season, Monday Night Football will be broadcast in high definition. With the current situation here, my estimate is less than 5 percent of HDTV viewers in Denver can receive the KMGH signal.

Denver is at very best more than 18 months away from getting full power digital television broadcasts. Currently, the Lake Cedar Group application (which KMGH is a part of) is set to be heard by the Jefferson County Planning Commission at the beginning of April. Significant opposition is expected during this time, so at best the Planning Commission hearings will take 2 months to complete. Then, the application must go before the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners for approval. Past experience indicates that these hearings could not be scheduled until at the very earliest September or October of this year. With those hearings taking a minumum of 2 months to complete, the earliest construction on the new transmitting tower could begin would be January or February of 2004. A year to construct the tower and facilities, we are looking (best case scenario) of high power broadcasts in February 2005. And through all of this time, 5 percent of the people in Denver can receive KMGH digitally.

I ask you to take action. During the interim period, KMGH must move their transmitter to the top of Republic Plaza along with the other Denver stations.

Thank you for your time,

Greg, Good idea about referencing the map data!
Originally posted by markdl Guys,

Here's the letter that I wrote. It may not be as well spoken as some of yours, but every one counts. What are you kidding? Your letter is Great! So far I like just about everyone I read better than mine.....Keep 'em coming guys!! Great reading.

----

FYI: Four of us met with Pete to express ourselves further on this situation. We also discussed the LCG2 App a little bit. It was a worthwhile meeting from my perspective (although I bet Pete was glad to leave after hearing us whine for an hour)!

One noteworthy item we discussed is the LCG2 timeline. I won't quote Pete but here is my take: Assuming the process starts in April final approval (if it's approved) could come by the Aug/Sept timeframe.....hopefully get a building permit by Dec '03 and construction complete by Dec '04. This is all subject to a lot of things and things could go faster (ha) or slower (given our luck) but this is pretty much in keeping with what most of us have been saying in our letters....

Hey all these letters are making the thread too long. Oh wait it is already 187 pages and this is the 3rd continuance - please continue posting.
----
BTW this reference reports that KMGH is 3KW ERP: http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/Map_files/Low-Power%20DTV%20Downtown%20map.gif . Not sure what the source of the data is.

Originally posted by ADent
BTW this reference reports that KMGH is 3KW ERP: http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/Map_files/Low-Power%20DTV%20Downtown%20map.gif . Not sure what the source of the data is. Source of the data is Rick Craddock, Dir of Engineering at KMGH (his off-the-cuff estimate of their ERP).
Originally posted by gkanders
Ernie and Ron,
Do you guys have a problem if I reference your website and map data in my letter to Mr. Powell? I think it is interesting to look at the data.
:
:
My letter is about 4.5 pages long, so removing that section would help in the editing process :). Thanks, Greg Greg, Go ahead and remove that section in your letter. I have already included a hard copy of the maps in my letter with an explanation of where the data came from (and it's anecdotal-ness).

Hi Guys, Great letters! Sorry it took so long to post, I was out of town on a shoot in beautiful Idaho! Please use any reference to our Denver DTV website. No Problem.

Ernie
Thanks for passing on your approval to use your Denver site in the letters. I wish I had thought of that in time to use that information in my own letter. I hope one or two people here will do that so whomever gets assigned the task of reviewing things at the FCC will get a chance to see some practical cases. Since I plan on writing a new letter on a regular basis now until KMGH gets with the program, I guess I will use it in my next letter. In the meantime it will be interesting to see if there is any reaction from KMGH in the next few days, as they get a chance to read our letters. Definitely one of those cases where it would be fun to be a 'fly on the wall' as they are being read.

What was discussed at the meeting with Pete?

Don't have a lot of time to get into it this morning, but it was a cordial meeting with Pete. We kicked around the idea of a 'boycott' due to KMGH as well as a lot of other ideas. There really didn't seem to be a consensus of what to do. Pete was going to see the folks at KMGH today and said he would take copies of the letters he had received and give it to them while he is there. I think everyone agreed we would wait to see what the reaction is from KMGH before we think about what to do here.

That's pretty much what the gist of the meeting was about. We also talked a little about the LCG2 application, and the speculated timetable for events to come, and how Pete really wants to buy an HDTV, and how Des Moines Iowa has most if not all of their stations broadcasting digitally at high power.

Well several days ago KUSA was coming in with a 58 signal strength and KCNC a fairly steady 44. Today KUSA is bouncing between 37 & 44 and is not even close to watchable while KCNC is booming in at 78. Go figure. Makes no never mind to me about KUSA though with no HD....

nag mode on
If anyone is still thinking about writing the FCC about KMGH please do it! It's certainly not too late to be heard and if these guys keep getting letters it's bound to register a very powerful impression.
/nag mode off

Sorry about that but we need to keep the pressure on, especially now that they have received some letters and are discussing what to do about them....

Apparently so far there has been no reaction from KMGH. Although its a bit early to tell, Pete reported they have gotten some of our letters and were going to have a 'meeting' of some kind to discuss it. It is always possible the results of the meeting may be to continue to ignore us, you never know, they might also see the wisdom in keeping their viewers happy.

FWIW, those of you on the south end of town, KKTV DT-11 CBS from Colorado Springs is apparently up and running at times. If you can't get KCNC give your antenna a spin once in a while. Reports are that it is on and off as they are still getting the kinks out. It is on Cheyenne Mountain if you need to know where to point. CBS will do the Grammy Awards in HD and 5.1 surround on Sunday night, so if your a music fan (or just want to see (through) what JLo is wearing this year) you might give the Springs a shot. This is the first of their networks up, and if you can get KKTV, you likely will have a shot at the rest as they come on line this year.

If you haven't written a letter to the FCC yet, feel free to copy sections of letters already posted and stick your name on it. We need all the letters we can get. I plan to wait to see the reaction from KMGH, and if it is thumbs down, I plan to fire off another letter.

Originally posted by JMartinko
If you haven't written a letter to the FCC yet, feel free to copy sections of letters already posted and stick your name on it. We need all the letters we can get. I plan to wait to see the reaction from KMGH, and if it is thumbs down, I plan to fire off another letter. Yes indeed. I think there is a "critical mass" sort of phenomena that happens with these sorts of letters....6 or 8 may not register but 16 or 20 will...sort of thing. I will probably write another letter also if KMGH ignores us or refuses to move but I did specifically ask the FCC to answer my question so I will likely wait for that before writing again.

In the meantime anyone can go to KMGH and ask to see their "Public File" - in it will be all of the pertinent data regarding their STA application(s) (along with engineering data and other "good stuff"). Broadcast stations are obligated to allow public access to this file (although I understand they can charge for copies). If they refuse then it should be noted and a complaint filed with the FCC. I will likely ask to see this file depending on their reaction/answer.