Since posting your FCC letter seems to be all the rage this week .. here's mine.
Dear Chairman Powell:

I would like to bring to your attention how one Denver major network affiliate is doing so little to actually reach the public with their DTV signal. Although all broadcasters in Denver are relegated to interim low-power signals until county zoning applications are approved, KMGH-DT (ABC affiliate) has such a VERY low-power setup and poor location on top of their 4-story building, that it is questionable whether more than 100 viewers can receive their signal. This is not for lack of other better interim options. Three other major network broadcasters transmit from the roof of a downtown Denver skyscraper with their interim low-power signal and have significant reach for this temporary setup.

In case you aren’t aware of the history here, five of the major network broadcasters (KMGH included) have formed a coalition called the Lake Cedar Group (named after the road where all the stations own land and have separate towers). This unprecedented partnership came about in response to difficulties in getting each stations land re-zoned to allow for changes to their towers, as needed by the DTV transition. The area called Lookout Mtn., where the towers are located, is continually embroiled in a political battle over land use between the broadcasters, area residents, and open space advocates. The first application by the LCG in 1999 was denied by the county. Both that first and the current application specified tower consolidation, as required by the county land use plan; all five broadcasters would use one tower and remove their current individual towers within a year of construction. Unfortunately, as county proceedings go, a full power signal from Lookout Mtn can’t be expected for at least 2-3 years and that is assuming this second application gets approved by the county and is not appealed by the local home owners associations.
This political “mess” has prompted most broadcasters to comply with the DTV transition timeline by employing temporary low-power solutions, designed and placed as best they can to reach the most people. Except for KMGH, this means using the highest power transmitter allowed on the highest building in Denver. KMGH is of the opinion that this interim period deserves the least effort they can make, reaching the fewest viewers possible. Theirs is the only effort (or lack thereof) that hinders the DTV transition, where the other broadcasters are advancing it.

In researching this situation, I would also like to bring to your attention the inaccuracies of your own website. In using the FCC TV query, I was able to pull up the following for KMGH-DT:

Licensee: MCGRAW-HILL BROADCASTING CO., INC.
Service Designation: DT "Full Service" TV Station or Application (digital)

Channel 17 Construction permit
File No.: BPCDT -19980731KI Facility ID No: 40875
CDBS Application ID No.: 271738

Antenna Structure Registration Number (ASRN): 1058328

39 ° 43' 40.00" Latitude Zone: 2
105° 14' 3.000" Longitude (NAD27) Frequency Offset: None
Polarization: Horizontally Polarized (H)
Effective Radiated Power (ERP): 25.0 kW ERP
Ant. Height Above Average Terrain (HAAT): 450.0 meters HAAT
Ant. Radiation Center Above Mean Sea Level: 2467. meters RCAMSL
Ant. Radiation Center Above Ground Level: 240. meters RCAGLIf I am not mistaken, this entry is in reference to their low-power temporary solution. This Latitude and Longitude indicates it is on Lookout Mtn., however their low-power transmitter is not. This states 25kW ERP, but according to their own engineer they have about 3kW. Also, the HAAT is certainly incorrect for the rooftop of their 4-story building. I assume these references are for a temporary DTV transmitter on their current tower broadcasting analog TV. That was denied by the county in 1998 which precipitated the rezoning application now under way.

I belong to an online discussion forum that focuses on the Denver DTV issue. Through those discussions, I have been able to compile DTV reception data on a sample of 60 viewers spread across the Denver metropolitan area. I have mapped these 60 data points on the included three maps; for KCNC, KRMA (both transmitting from a downtown skyscraper), and KMGH broadcasting from their studio building. These maps quickly illustrate the huge discrepancy between the stations ability to reach their viewing community.

I understand that most Denver broadcasters are operating under Special Temporary Authorizations (STA) from the FCC. I am asking that the FCC review KMGH’s STA to determine if they are meeting the “community of license coverage requirement”. I was unable to find a concise definition of the term with regards to an STA in Title 47 of the CFR. I also suggest the FCC consider revoking KMGH’s STA if it has found it is not being utilized appropriately to serve the viewing community. I should not have to be in KMGH’s parking lot in order to receive their signal. In my opinion that is not covering the community of license.

Excellent Ron, your maps are worth thousands of words...nothing like a visual aid.

I am particularly impressed with the strong statements made in all our letters (such as "I also suggest the FCC consider revoking KMGH’s STA if it has found it is not being utilized appropriately to serve the viewing community. I should not have to be in KMGH’s parking lot in order to receive their signal. In my opinion that is not covering the community of license."). Wording like this leaves little room for doubt about the writers conviction and helps to drive home the point. I hope KMGH is listening (I do think we've got their attention now).

I just sent my letters. Probably a little long to post (OK, so I'm verbose).
I too have this statement:
"I would like to see the FCC revoke KMGH’s STA unless and until the DTV transmitter is relocated to Republic Plaza or another comparably suitable location."

I think that gets to the main issue. As long as they are secure with their STA, they probably see no reason to move. If the lose (or think they may lose) their STA, they won't be covered by the STA's protection:
“considered to have met this construction deadline, and their outstanding construction permits will be extended automatically until such time as the Commission determines otherwise”

Let's hope these have some effect.

Originally posted by gkanders
:
:
I too have this statement:
"I would like to see the FCC revoke KMGH’s STA unless and until the DTV transmitter is relocated to Republic Plaza or another comparably suitable location." I certainly hope this doesn't come to pass - if it does it might be a good thing the non-viewers outnumber the viewers or we could be in serious hurt. :)

Seriously, I don't think there's much chance of having KMGH-DT go silent but statements like this make clear that what we have now is not adequate.

Ron, excellent letter, job well done. The maps will be a true revelation to them. I really doubt the FCC realizes where the KMGH transmit tower is really located. Lets hope they turn up the heat on those guys. gkanders, thanks for writing too. I have a strong feeling that this will really shake things up over at KMGH. At least I know we have gotten their attention.

As someone who is interested in getting things rolling, I am willing to write a letter. But I'm not sure what angle to approach it with. I mean, the only digital channel I can get is fox and that won't change no matter what KMGH does.

So if anyone has any ideas on what to include, I'll also write a letter.

Mike
That's a REALLY tough question. I am not sure what you could write other than to express support for those in the Denver area and perhaps reference the DTV map on Ron's page to support your case. Perhaps you could allude to the possibility of justifying the expense of putting up an huge pole and an ultra high gain antenna if you could pick up all three networks in HD, which of course would also mean you could remind the FCC that KUSA would have to up their signal from SD DTV to HD (and we all know how often I encourage KUSA to 'up theirs' too :D ). I doubt anyone at the FCC is going to check your location to see if it is possible to pick up the STA's.

Here is my letter; it probably won't hit the mail until Saturday or early next week. I didn't go into great detail, but hope to contribute to the volume of letters going out on this topic.

Dear Chairman Powell,

I previously wrote to you in August of last year regarding the lack of DTV services in the Denver area. Since that time the situation has improved in some respects. In particular:

KWGN (WB) has secured permits to construct a ½ power transmitter on their property on Lookout Mountain where they transmit their analog signal. They hope to be on-line by this spring.

KUSA (NBC) has begun operating a low-power transmitter from atop a downtown Denver highrise, and has more or less matched the coverage areas of KCNC (CBS) and KRMA (PBS). At this time they still have not begun passing through the network-provided HDTV broadcasts but are promising that this is coming “soon”.

KRMA (PBS) has secured approval to construct a replacement facility on Mount Morrison, that will include DTV. There will no doubt be challenges before the final permits are issued, but I view this as particularly good news and Jefferson County has finally approved something for DTV.

While we all wait for a long-term solution for Denver, I believe that KMGH (ABC) is not doing enough (compared to other stations) to get its signal distributed over the Denver metropolitan area. While the other stations with temporary facilities in downtown Denver are broadcasting from a high-rise, KMGH is broadcasting from atop their low-rise studio, and using much less power (estimated at 3Kw ERP by their engineer), which limits the coverage area to a small radius. Even people within that radius have to put up large UHF antennas that are very carefully aimed to receive the signal, where the signals from the other stations are more easily received. As ABC has a large amount of Prime-Time HDTV programming, including some significant events such as sports playoffs, coming up, having the signal available to a larger audience would encourage the growth of DTV and HDTV sales in this area.

It is my understanding that for the STA to qualify a station as in compliance with the FCC DTV mandates, the signal needs to propagate to the entire city of license. While the other stations are more or less doing this, it is clear to me that KMGH is not doing all they can do. At this time, I am writing this letter to you to encourage you and the people at the FCC to use your leverage to get KMGH to relocate its transmitter to a higher spot, and to increase its power output to levels comparable to the other stations broadcasting from downtown Denver.

jm,

good idea, I'll do that. BTW, I just checked, and I can get a better signal strength on channel 11 out of Colorado Springs than I can out of any of the Denver stations (except fox).
:(

(of course that's only about 10 on my signal strength meter, but I didn't try adjusting the antenna)

So I would guess many of you closer to Denver should be able to pick it up (it's CBS).

Mike,
I guess I would just recommend that you voice your support for the digital transition and express your concern that KMGH is not reaching as large of an audience as they could be, which does little or nothing to convert viewers to digital. Especially considering high profile events that ABC is (or will be) broadcasting (like Monday Night Football). In other words, the best way to speed the conversion to digital is to actually offer a product, and KMGH is not doing that for very many people....

Thanks to everyone for posting your great FCC letters...I am getting a kick out of reading them. There are a lot of creative arguments being made in those letters....keep 'em coming!

Being a resident "On-the-Hill" i received the strangest form letter today from Al Hislop's wife.

What's so strange is that its this long, long litany of a story, that tells of them moving here from San Diego, moving near their family. Then, Al setting up shop and having trouble working because of RF interference, blah, blah, blah. (Yet, they still live here being blasted day after day with this dangerous, cancer-causing RF, but that's another story)

Then you have to read really hard into the letter to figure out what the hell they're asking? Best I can interpet is that, they are asking KRMA viewers to let Channel 6 know what you think of them... Now, i guess?

She writes, "Please let Channel Six know what you think of supporting it in these Mt. Morrison and Lake Cedar Group proposals." & "We will be supporting them heartily when they make a good faith effort to try Squaw Mountain as a broadcast site."

What's so weird is that it's dated 2/12/03???? A little late, don't you think? Channel 6 and Mt. Morrison is approved, and they don't care about being part of LCGII.

They should have saved all the postage and rented a U-Haul!

Thanks Ernie
Strange indeed! I find it hard to believe that Al still lives there, given his unique insight into the 'hazards' of RF radiation as well as the fact it has made it impossible to run his business there.

Nothing strange about folks still living on Lookout to me....if they ever succeed in getting the towers removed the property values will go up - can't sell till then. In the meantime the red-herring RF hazard plays nicely into trying to get the towers removed "oh you poor dear you're living inside a microwave oven, those towers must go....."

Just a quick note here...I received word this morning that we have KMGH's attention with the letters. That doesn't mean that they are actually planning on doing anything about it yet, but let's keep the letters coming!

After a great suggestion from Ron, I've just added a new page to the Denver DTV website. It's a timeline. Between Ron & myself, we only have a couple of firm dates and some rough estimates. Can you guys help?

Please email me with missing or inaccurate info.

Email me (santella@frii.net)

Ernie & Ron,
Good going. I like the timeline idea....wish I had dates for the missing events - if I get time I will try to research it....

Mark is right about the letters...we need to achieve "critical mass" so please keep those kick-ass letters coming....

Ernie,
Here are some more dates:

6/24/97 - LCG formed:
7/1/98 - First LCG Application submitted to JeffCo
8/3/99 - JeffCo denies Application
xx/yy/99 - JeffCo ruling appealed to Jefferson County District Court
11/2/99 - Filed petition with FCC to preempt JeffCo decision
1/4/01 - JeffCo lawsuit appealing decision withdrawn and request for FCC preemption withdrawn

I like the timeline!

I find it interesting that the PIC/BCDC application has its first planning commission meetings on 3/13/02. And the approved application is due to be signed on 3/11/03. Pretty much 1 year. Also, interestingly, the PCG I application took 13 months from application submission to denial. Take it for what it's worth, but if LCG II got through that fast (and I'd be surprised if an APPROVAL went that fast), it'd put approval at 4/04. Then a 1 year+ buildout, then testing. I'd say best case would put full power a no later than fall of 05. Over 2.5 years. That, KMGH, is why we're writing these letters!

I think I counted 13 people who posted letters, or posted that "I wrote mine...", or posted that "I will write one...". That's pretty good; hopefully we can get another 7-10 letters within the next week or so (hint, hint).

Greg

Still working on my letter hope to get it done this weekend.

I have a question. I have an antenna that I put up in the attic and it is a very large Channel Master (sorry I don't remember the number) that was recommended here. It works great for everything but 17. I was checked last night to see if I could get Channel 10 out of Springs but nothing was coming in, I didn't go up and move the antenna but I do have line of sight to Pikes Peaks so I thought there might be a chance of getting.

Now to the question, since my antenna is a UHF only antenna is that going to prevent me from getting channel 10 out of Springs?

Thanks for the help guys.

Later
Joe

Originally posted by joej
Now to the question, since my antenna is a UHF only antenna is that going to prevent me from getting channel 10 out of Springs?

Thanks for the help guys.

Later
Joe A UHF only antenna will typically have very little gain in the VHF band. You might get lucky depending on what you have but I wouldn't bank on it. If the Springs station has any kind of decent power output you may be able to get away with a small(ish) VHF antenna. Use a diplexer to combine the UHF and VHF antennas together to minimize signal loss. Make sure to use a VHF only antenna to avoid any sort of interference that could happen when combining two UHF antennas pointing in different directions.

PS: Please let us know if you do this and how it works....there may be a lot of us pointing south in the months ahead.....

Joe,

On the Springs thread, someone posted that they stopped braodcasting at 6pm. That's probably why you weren't able to get a signal. I was able to get a signal up in Greeley when I checked about 4pm. Not watchable, but I got a signal. And I just have a UHF antenna in my attic as well.

FYI, I sent a letter as well.

Michael Cohen

Cool, thanks guys. I get off at 3:00 so maybe I'll try it when I get home today. I have an old VHF antenna that I can hook up if necessary.

I'll let you all know my results.

Thanks for all the help
Joe

I read the postings on the Colorado Springs thread and it appears they are having problems with the gear used to insert the local commercials. This was posted by drvais:

"Bad news- just spoke with Tim T. again at KKTV, he said that he's shooting for March 1 as a full-time rollout date. He said that their HD server is still FUBAR and that it's been sent to Denver for a second time for repairs. Basically, the server won't allow them to pause network feeds so that they can insert their local spots. Nevertheless, he expects the server back in on Monday. He said that if the server works ok, plan on them being up and running by Tuesday."

Sounds like no grammys for the Springs folks. I just thought I would post this here for those of you trying to point south to see if you can pick it up. I wouldn't take a hammer to the antenna or the stb if you don't see anything, at least not yet.

Michael, thanks for writing the letter.

Thanks guys for the help on the timeline. I still need some more... Hot, where are you!!

I started looking through the old threads, I have been laughing my ass off. I wish I had a dollar for everytime someone posted; "We have to do something about...". Well guys, we have done quite a lot!

Did anybody else see that The Big Picture is now selling the Mitsubishi DVHS machines below $ 400.00?

Just an FYI

Jeff

I heard from Don Rooney over at KWGN this afternoon. He told me that KWGN is waiting for FCC approval to modify one antenna and operate at 450kW rather than their alotted 1MW power. He said that the transmitter is in place, and they are planning to power it up next week. All of the equipment that they need is in town and just waiting on their approval to be installed and go operational. Hopefully FCC approval won't take too long.

I feel another letter writing campaign coming on :D

I didn't get the feeling from Don's email to me that he was worried about the FCC not approving their setup. They just have to do it - one of those administrative things that has to be gone through.

Groundhog day is over

However, that is one of my favorite movies to watch over and over again. Been there, done that sort of thing. Same with writing to the FCC. So here we go, Geof. Thanks for leading us in this effort again. This simple minded letter is going out into the mail today.


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

Hello Mr. Powell,

Thank you for your efforts in boosting the conversion to digital television broadcasting. It is much appreciated.

I am sending you this letter to express my concern over the OTA DTV situation in Denver, Colorado. I know that we share the hope that the antenna zoning concerns in the Denver area will be resolved in the next year or two. This, however, does not appear likely to happen in the next year due to current delays in the 2nd zoning application of the Lake Cedar Group consortium. Antenna construction will then take a year to occur after approval by Jefferson County which puts us about a couple of years out best case. I also want to say that I fully support the 2nd zoning application of the Lake Cedar Group consortium.

I am also sending this to express the concern that one of the major network stations in Denver, KMGH Channel 7, is not yet broadcasting digitally to a majority of the Denver metropolitan area households. Channel 7 is broadcasting from the top of their building, however, their coverage falls far short of reaching a majority of Denver area residents. KMGH has so far denied that they need to come up with a low power temporary solution to cover the majority of the Denver metropolitan area households until high power digital broadcasting can be done.

It seems to me that KMGH could do just a bit more to offer digital broadcasting to a majority of the Denver metropolitan area residents by committing to offering a low power broadcast from the Republic Plaza facility until such time that full power digital broadcasts are possible in Denver.

KMGH is capable of being a great station that serves the public well. Recently, the KMGH news staff broke a story that got national attention as well as the attention of Congress and the Pentagon. The story itself reflects that KMGH is serving the public well in certain areas. I commend KMGH for their quality in news reporting. It is my opinion that part of serving the public well also involves compliance with their digital transmission STA, which I believe means to provide reasonable temporary solutions while a long-term problem is being worked on.

I ask that the FCC offer an opinion in this case as to specifics and expectations regarding appropriate STA compliance. Thank you for hanging in there with us in this matter.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thornton, CO xxxxx
xxxxxxxx@msn.com

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

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

Very nice letter Donyoop. I love reading these. Your's is nicer than most of ours (;)) but it's very effective at getting the message through. Well done!

I hope there's more letters to come - if they (KMGH/FCC) have already made a decision then it won't really matter but if they're still on the fence then more letters can matter .....maybe a lot.... since we haven't heard of a decision yet a last final push may be the deciding factor in getting KMGH to move. The bottom line - each and every letter matters....lets show them we're together on this....

----

PS: I probably should also say that I do not believe KMGH is "mad at us" (or anything like that) for writing these letters....I do think they will carefully consider each letter they receive (as will the FCC) and will go from there.

KCNC had 5.1 sound last night. However, there was no sound on the rear speakers and the center voice channel was coming from the left center and right front speakers with the left and right being actually louder. Subwoofer channel was OK. Overall, previous Dolby Pro Logic was better, but I know they will tweak their 5.1 audio before the Grammys.

I repsponded to an email from Pat Brus with these facts. He was letting me know the green flash issue is solved, which we knew already.

Any body else have an opinion on the CBS 5.1 sound??

Dennis, You're pretty much right on from what I noticed...overall I prefer the 2.0 but they need to get the kinks worked out. I am glad the green flashes are gone.

Wow!!! What a show!! (Grammy's) It seemed like they worked out the 5.1 issue!! Easily the best picture quality I've ever seen and the sound was awesome. Excellent job KCNC for working out the audio bug.

Well, I now know what my next letter to the FCC regarding KMGH is going to be about. Last night, with the snow and cold, I lost 13 points of signal strength, taking me right down to the edge of reception for 17. Now while it rarely snows in Denver anymore, it's really supposed to snow here. And to lose the signal of a major channel just because the temp drops down around the zero degree mark and we get a couple of inches of snow isn't acceptable...

I lost KMGH-DT also last night. I will be working on my letter this week.

That's strange. My signal for KMGH-DT did not change at all -- it stayed a rock solid 0 :D (sorry jm, I got here first!)

My KRMA went down to below borderline and unwatchable, though. And I just started watching the "Reptiles" series Sat. at 6PM.

Luckily KCNC is my best signal and the Grammy's were awesome! I wasn't too thrilled with the mix (too much echo/ambience in the surrounds) but the delivery was superb -- Thanks much, KCNC! Did anyone else have a huge audio/video dropout lasting about 15 secs. when Kim Catrall was presenting early on in the show? The rest of the show was nearly perfect reception. The audio was a bit loud; switching back and forth to the AVS game on UPN20 made me keep adjusting the volume. That's not a complaint, just an observation. I'd rather have that issue than no 5.1 at all.

JMartinko, I don't mind you posting quotes from me, but please quote directly and don't insert words that I never said. For instance, if you look the original post you copied from, there is no trace of the following sentence:

"It sounds like they will be intermittently broadcasting when the engineers are in until the problem."

You had me freaked out that I was generating bad grammar on this forum. Shame on you. ; )

I saw the same dropout, but that was all that went wrong. We really enjoyed the picture and the 5.1 sound. Overall a wonderful HD experience and very much like being there. The sound was not an issue for me as I didn't change the channel. Congratulations to CBS and KCNC.

I hope they don't pass 5.1 unless they really have a 5.1 signal because all you get then is the front left and right speakers. I will assume Pat Brus and David Layne will fix that problem.

Didn't bother to check KMGH last night. I will do so the next time it is snowing.

Originally posted by drvais
JMartinko, I don't mind you posting quotes from me, but please quote directly and don't insert words that I never said. For instance, if you look the original post you copied from, there is no trace of the following sentence:

"It sounds like they will be intermittently broadcasting when the engineers are in until the problem."

You had me freaked out that I was generating bad grammar on this forum. Shame on you. ; )

drvais
My apologies for the misquote, not sure how I got that extra line in there. I suspect I was originally paraphrasing your note and decided it wasn't fair to the poster not to quote directly. Looks like I didn't clear out the original field completely. Not sure which is worse, paraphrasing someone without giving them credit, or cut and pasting wrong. Either way, I have corrected the post. Sorry 'bout that.
:rolleyes:

Ron
I had KCNC on at that time and had the same dropout. I thought the storm had blown my antenna pointing, but by the time I went to check it, the show was back.

JMartinko rocks with his fast replies!

Originally posted by drvais
JMartinko rocks with his fast replies!

No doubt a serious indication that I really need to consider "getting a life".
:D

Sorry if this is off topic, or already been covered a million times, but I was hoping someone could give me a quick summary update on the status of Denver HDTV. I've tried scanning through some of the threads, but there are just too many.

The reason I'm asking, is that I am moving to Glendale at the end of March, and was wondering if is worth keeping my HD receiver. I currently live in boston and am getting pretty good coverage using an indoor antenna with my OTA HD receiver. I'm hoping that Denver has decent coverage as well.

Your help is appreciated, and I apologize for making you guys repeat yourselves.

Thanks,

C
Most of your questions should be answered here at the Denver DTV web site. In general, you probably will not like what you hear, we are pretty much an HD wasteland thanks to some mountain folks trying to increase the value of their properties.

http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/denverdtv.htm

If you have any additional or remaining questions you are welcome to post them here.

C Hall,
Welcome to the thread.
You should keep your receiver. Glendale is practically downtown. You should easily get CBS, PBS, FOX, and NBC (and you may have a chance at ABC) even though all are at low-power. To pull in ABC you may have to put your antenna in the attic or on the roof. Even with that, ABC may not come in since the broadcast from the top of their 4-story studio bldg currently. Here's some notable caveats:
NBC is not passing network HD through yet but may be by the time you move WB may be broadcasting by then too. And of course you know that FOX doesn't have any HD.
In 2 years we may get full-power and that would include UPNFor a website with all the latest developments, see Denver DTV Info Site (http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/denverdtv.htm)

It sure has been quiet in this area lately. Nothing has apparently been heard from KMGH. I wonder if that could be considered as their 'reply' to our letter campaign????? It will be intersting to see if any of us get a reply from the FCC. I know many of the letters had specific questions we wanted answers.
:confused:

While I too would very much like to hear if KMGH is planning to do anything, it has only been 6 days (counting the weekend) since they met to talk about it. If nothing is heard over the next couple of weeks, then I'd say we have cause for concern. I'm going to try to get my 2nd letter out tomorrow - how about anyone else? We need to keep the letters coming to the FCC.

On another note, I've heard nothing but silence from KUSA in response to a couple of emails that I sent Don last week. I'm starting to get worried that they're not going to be passing the NBC HD feed...

Mark,

I agree. KUSA seems more than content to not pass through the HD feed. Even when there is a national program on with no time delays.

Jeff

John and Ron,

Thanks for your replies, and the link to the website. Sounds like there is definitely some improvement needed in the Denver area, but hopefully things will be worked out in the near future. I definitely am not ready to give up my receiver yet, so hopefully being close to downtown will allow me some decent signals.

Thanks again,

Originally posted by markdl
On another note, I've heard nothing but silence from KUSA in response to a couple of emails that I sent Don last week. I'm starting to get worried that they're not going to be passing the NBC HD feed... Wouldn't surprise me a bit. OTOH, they did say they would be doing this so if they're being forthright they will follow thru.

Unfortunately I think wer're seeing broadcaster indifference (or maybe arrogance) from a number of stations here in town (notably KMGH and KUSA). I guess they feel like it is their prerogative to operate in a vacuum and not listen to enthusiasts eager to watch their digital channel and provide feedback during the transition. This is sad....

Originally posted by C Hall
Sounds like there is definitely some improvement needed in the Denver area, but hopefully things will be worked out in the near future. An major understatement followed by optimism....I fear you are in for a shock. There are no Bob Hess's working in this Cow-Town....

Originally posted by markdl
While I too would very much like to hear if KMGH is planning to do anything, it has only been 6 days (counting the weekend) since they met to talk about it. If nothing is heard over the next couple of weeks, then I'd say we have cause for concern. It's quiet alright but then again it always has been....they may have decided one way or the other and just won't inform us but I'd bet they're still cogitating. They may need to talk with corporate and they may also be trying to figure out if they meet the "City of License" coverage requirement. There could be a lot of factors that influence their decision - including how many people send them letters.....now is not the time to give up or give in....hopefully they'll continue to get letters from a lot of different folks....not just from the vocal minority.

Although I would be the first to admit that I don't expect KMGH to announce they are moving until they have time to investigate the costs of such a move, I would at least like to hear 'they are looking into the possibility' or some such statement.

On the other hand, if their word doesn't mean any more than KUSA promising to be passing HD 'very soon' (since last December), I suppose it is just as well that they keep silent. It is obvious that KUSA could indeed pass the live telecasts even if they don't have the 'tape' set up and servers ready. (After all, how could they have anticipated needing that equipment for HD when they had no plans to televise in HD in the first place-who from the FCC had ever warned them that HD and DTV were coming?).

It seems ironic for a station that has the attitude that there is no demand for HD and there are no viewers out there, that they feel they can't pass an HD feed without their commercials inserted to the 'ten' of us that would be watching. I can only conclude that KUSA (have I mentioned they are Colorado's Leading Station) must feel that if I can't see a commercial every five minutes telling me they are "Colorado's Leading Station", that I might forget they are 'Colorado's Leading Station'. I suppose just 'being' the number one station with their effort in HD wouldn't be enough to remind me. Actually, I am beginning to think KCNC and KRMA are Colorado's leading stations, but hey, maybe I just haven't seen enough KUSA adds lately. If you repeat something in public often enough (even if it is not true), it becomes a 'fact' doesn't it??

On the other hand, it's OUR prerogative to NOT watch KUSA or KMGH.

I don't know about anyone else, but seeing the Grammys in 16x9 1080i with 5.1 surround sound brought back the network television magic for me. I watch more KCNC now than I ever did before 12/30/01. Correspondingly, I watch less KUSA and KMGH. Their loss.

In other news, tonight I have my first HDTV conflict: Joe Sakic returns to the Avs to take on the Oilers on HDNet, and at the same time JAG on KCNC followed by 24 (though not HDTV, still better than NTSC) on Faux. And people say there isn't any HDTV content...

Sorry dr_mal, no conflict at my place, I have my tickets for the Avs game tonight, so I will be seeing it in HD+++.
:D :D

Originally posted by JMartinko
Actually, I am beginning to think KCNC and KRMA are Colorado's leading stations, but hey, maybe I just haven't seen enough KUSA adds lately. What took you so long :)

James Morgese is a true visionary (and certainly the only GM in town relentless in his pursuit to get a permit for HD facilites) and KCNC did the honorable thing by following KRMA to the Republic Plaza......to hell with the other "also rans" in town.... News-leader or not I can't help but fight the (now involuntary) urge to heave when I hear KUSA self promoting....

No argument here -- James Morgese is THE MAN. Not only in his quest to get his station on the air in HDTV, but also in his accessability. I talked to him at one of the Mt. Morrison hearings about the audio problem those of us with RCA tuners were having with his signal. His chief engineer, Mr. Schoedler, was there as well. I have the utmost respect for the KRMA engineers -- I know they worked their tails off to fix the problem. But I don't think it's a coincidence that the actual fix came shortly after talking to Mr. Morgese and Mr. Schoedler in person.

Hey Guys,

Is there any talk of Denver cable company (AT&T I think) offering any HDTV? Or must we only rely on half power OTA?

Thanks,

No announced HDTV over cable in Denver yet.

Actually dr-mal, I think it is a coincidence. I talked to Mr. Schoedler for quite a while yesterday and he suggested that the RCA sound lock problem might have disappeared when they retired a tape machine they used for locally originated HDTV (I'm not sure if the demo loop came from there also). I asked him to begin posting here since they will be changing their line-up on ch18 this year to comply with a date for 50% (or was it 75%) simulcasting. I suggested he fish for comments here on whether or not to reduce or eliminate the HDTV demo loop in that effort. Simulcasting, of course, is matching the analog channel with the same show at the same time on the digital channel (in HDTV if they happen to have it).

Anyway, their rescheduling/simulcasting efforts may require the use of that tape machine again and us RCA-ers will be enlisted to keep an ear out for that nasty LONG sound sync problem again.

Did anyone go to that Comcast facility HD tour last week? If so, how about a report?

C Hall, we aren't anywhere remotely close to half power OTA. Except for Fox broadcasting at about 1/3 power, and hopefully soon our WB, KWGN soon to be broadcasting at 450kW (almost 1/2 power), the other stations are broadcasting at 5kW and 3kW - 1/200th power and 1/333rd power...

Maybe by the time you get there, things will be different, but I wouldn't count on it. That isn't to say though that you won't be able to pick up the signals - you'll just need a nice big rooftop antenna like the rest of us use! :)

Originally posted by Geof
What took you so long :)

James Morgese is a true visionary (and certainly the only GM in town relentless in his pursuit to get a permit for HD facilites) and KCNC did the honorable thing by following KRMA to the Republic Plaza......to hell with the other "also rans" in town.... News-leader or not I can't help but fight the (now involuntary) urge to heave when I hear KUSA self promoting....
Note to self:
Self
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Don't let the doubt creep in! :confused:
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!

:D

Originally posted by JMartinko
Note to self:
Self
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds!
Don't let the doubt creep in!
Must watch more KUSA self promotion adds! Perhaps you should have watched those "Green Flashes" before CBS and KCNC fixed them :)

Originally posted by Geof
It's quiet alright but then again it always has been....they may have decided one way or the other and just won't inform us but I'd bet they're still cogitating. They may need to talk with corporate and they may also be trying to figure out if they meet the "City of License" coverage requirement. There could be a lot of factors that influence their decision - including how many people send them letters.....now is not the time to give up or give in....hopefully they'll continue to get letters from a lot of different folks....not just from the vocal minority.

Well, I guess KMGH has responded, and "surprise" :eek: , they don't see a need to spend $350K - $450K to move, since LCG II will be approved THIS SPRING! Check out these quotes from a letter to the FCC from KMGH/Holland & Knight, LLP:


We anticipate that Jefferson County will grant the necessary zoning this spring and construction of the proposed multi-user tower will commence as soon thereafter as is possible.


This spring? I want some of what they are smoking!


With regard to the temporary DTV facilities now being operated by KMGH-DT, they were the first DTV facilities installed in the Denver market, having gone on the air on Sunday, February 28, 1999 at 10:00 am. When installed, it was believed that the Lake Cedar Group original zoning application would be approved in a reasonable period of time and permanent DTV facilities would soon be constructed to serve the entire market. Unfortunately, local opposition to the Lake Cedar Group’s original zoning application resulted in its denial by Jefferson County.


Well, you have to admire their continued optimism in the face of all the evidence to the contrary (see the quote about this spring)!


Had KMGH-DT known that the zoning process was to take an addition four years, a more significant temporary facility would have been installed.


And that, KMGH, is why we're asking you to move now! I, for one, don't believe you will have a full-power DTV transmitter within 30 months at the very least. If full-power DTV was coming in 6 months, I wouldn't be expending the effort to get you to provide a useful temporary solution!

Oh well, at least we have a "response"

Originally posted by gkanders
Well, I guess KMGH has responded, and "surprise" :eek: , they don't see a need to spend $350K - $450K to move, since LCG II will be approved THIS SPRING! Check out these quotes from a letter to the FCC from KMGH/Holland & Knight, LLP:


We anticipate that Jefferson County will grant the necessary zoning this spring and construction of the proposed multi-user tower will commence as soon thereafter as is possible.


This spring? I want some of what they are smoking!


With regard to the temporary DTV facilities now being operated by KMGH-DT, they were the first DTV facilities installed in the Denver market, having gone on the air on Sunday, February 28, 1999 at 10:00 am. When installed, it was believed that the Lake Cedar Group original zoning application would be approved in a reasonable period of time and permanent DTV facilities would soon be constructed to serve the entire market. Unfortunately, local opposition to the Lake Cedar Group’s original zoning application resulted in its denial by Jefferson County.


Well, you have to admire their continued optimism in the face of all the evidence to the contrary (see the quote about this spring)!


Had KMGH-DT known that the zoning process was to take an addition four years, a more significant temporary facility would have been installed.


And that, KMGH, is why we're asking you to move now! I, for one, don't believe you will have a full-power DTV transmitter within 30 months at the very least. If full-power DTV was coming in 6 months, I wouldn't be expending the effort to get you to provide a useful temporary solution!

Oh well, at least we have a "response" I am heading to the FCC site to look for this now but when was this sent and can you provide a url???

Hi Everyone,

Forgive me for interruption but I thought that it may be the best place to ask if any of you is using the Hitachi 5500 as your display devices?
Wouldn't hurt to exchange experiences...

Thanks,

Jacek

Originally posted by Geof
I am heading to the FCC site to look for this now but when was this sent and can you provide a url???

Geof,

I JUST got this in my email, the letter (a CC of the letter to the FCC) was an attachment, and according to the email header was sent to me only. My guess is, they sent it to those who provided an email address in our letters. The letter is interesting in that is references 8 letters and the dates (your letter was the first one). So they created this response after receiving 8 letters, my guess is a couple more were received after this, or maybe some letters were not cc'd to KMGH. I'll try to email it to you. If I can't, I'll PM you.

Thanks, Greg

Originally posted by gkanders
Geof,

I JUST got this in my email, the letter (a CC of the letter to the FCC) was an attachment, and according to the email header was sent to me only. My guess is, they sent it to those who provided an email address in our letters. The letter is interesting in that is references 8 letters and the dates (your letter was the first one). So they created this response after receiving 8 letters, my guess is a couple more were received after this, or maybe some letters were not cc'd to KMGH. I'll try to email it to you. If I can't, I'll PM you.

Thanks, Greg Thanks Greg, looking forward to seeing the letter.

Well this doesn't sound too promising but it's not over yet. KMGH had to respond to the FCC regarding our letters. I can only hope the FCC looks into how long it really will take the JeffCo process to complete - KMGH has been in denial on this forever...I guess it's their only excuse, which is pretty damn weak and lame IMO. I hope no one gives up on this yet....more letters are needed and now that we know their defense is: "it doesn't make sense to move because high power is just around the corner".... that theory should be shot down in any and all future letters.....

My take is that of course KMGH was going to defend their position but we have yet to hear what the FCC has to say......please keep writing folks.....

Just thinking "out loud" right now....

The Mt. Morrison Tower was approved and the testimony was pretty much even in terms of numbers who testified "for" and "against".... But aside from the AVS members who testified, the rest of the "for" testimony came from those who wanted to "save catholic TV", or to "save Ch 6".

....hmmmm......

LCGII does not have either a catholic TV station, nor a Public TV station.....

I guess that means that the only people who will testify FOR LCGII are AVS members.

Do we want to withhold support for LCGII because of KMGH? If we do not support LCG, who will?

Just some things to think about......

-Wabisabi

I'd very much like to see the full text of that letter. Gkanders, would you please email or PM me as well?

I'm working up my next letter tonight and hope to get it in the mail tomorrow. As soon as it's done I'll post the text of it here.

The struggle continues...

I have read the letter and forwarded it some folks....Eight of us should each be receiving a snail mail copy but the gist of the rebuttal is that KMGH was first and did not anticipate a long delay to approval. Further, the other stations operating from Republic came on the air much later (so what? - I guess the implication being they had the benefit of knowing it would be longer than the optimistic KMGH folks). They go on the state "our belief that Jefferson County will shortly grant the Lake Cedar Group zoning application which will permit the construction of permanent full power facilities on Lookout Mountain" and therefore a "350 to 450 thousand dollar" expenditure (plus rent) is not warranted.

Oh, and yes they rebut the coverage area concern saying "the calculated 41 dBu contour of the KMGH-DT STA operation encompasses the community of Denver, excluding a portion of Denver International Airport property which was annexed as part of the city but has no residents".

I think any further response(s) should dispute the approval timeframe and also dispute they are providing sufficient coverage for the city of Denver.....IMO, it is time to ask the FCC to perform an independent analysis of the KMGH coverage area. I do not know how we can successfully dispute the approval timeframe unless we can enlist the aid of Pete (unlikely) or a JeffCo official (also unlikely)....without some "expert opinion" it will remain our belief against KMGHs belief and therefore a draw....

This may be going down in flames unless we get more letters - both new and rebuttal....now is not the time to give in.....

I will also be drafting a response to this letter in the next several days. I'm considering a statement to the effect that I will NOT SUPPORT the LCG application. I do not like that but my position is that KMGH is playing serious games with their "beliefs" based on pure fantasy....they have been hiding behind the "approval is right around the corner" position for some time (they said it would be this January when we wrote on the KUSA situation). If they just came out and said it's not worth 400K for two years that would be their opinion and although I would not agree with it they would not be hiding behind the "right around the corner" excuse. As it is they can keep saying "right around the corner" forever....they can continue to use this excuse even if LCG2 is denied and it would be as untrue then as it is now. One look at Ernie's timeline shows the JeffCo process takes awhile.....approval by this spring is highly unlikely (especially considering the Planning Board hearings don't begin until Spring)...and IF they get approval they then have to get a building permit.....you don't walk into the county office pay a fee and walk away with all the necessary permits....that will take time, significant time....and then there is construction, and even the LCG is estimating 12 months (or so). Then there is testing. All this assumes County approval and no SCARE lawsuit. I really feel like KMGH is not being at all sincere and is using the "right around the corner" tact just to appease the FCC - but unless they just fell off the turnip truck they know this cannot be the case. In essence I believe KMGH is not being forthright and if that is the case why should I believe anything else they say. If I cannot believe anything they say why the hell should I go to bat for them before JeffCo? If I could support the other LCG stations while excluding KMGH that would be great but that is not an option....therefore If I cannot believe KMGH I find myself in a position where I may not want to support the LCG2 application....this really bites....I sort of expected a song and dance but to be downright deceiving (which I believe they are being) really puts this in a different light in my mind....They have no intregrity......

All,

I did not CC my letter to KMGH since I do receive their signal reliably, so my only letter was to the FCC. I, however, will still support LCG2 as I believe in the viability of the proposal and still believe it is the only way we will ever realistically get high power HD to the entire metro area.

I do respect the opinions of those who want to withdraw their support, though I truly think that is misguided and doesn't make sense with the long term goal of full power transmissions. Just an opinion.

Jeff

Jeff,
I've made some changes to my post above.....I am not sure what I will do....

Just got in from the Avs game and am too tired to deal with all this tonight. I read the letter from KMGH. Looks like the meaning of "Spirit of Colorado" has changed a bit since I was born here mumbletyone years ago. Thanks KMGH, by the way, what day was it you want me to testify on your behalf??? Please be sure to have your lawyer send me a letter with the date so I can be sure to reply to the right person.

Guess its not hard to see why so many Jeffco folks think the local stations are a bit arrogant. Was it just me who had this sudden vision of LCG2 going down (or is that up) in flames or did others see that shooting star flame out too.

(By the way, did anyone notice if any of the KMGH folks were wearing rings on those index fingers they waved at us tonight???)

Speaking of the Avs (slightly off topic here), I watched them on HDNet last night. In between the 1st and 2nd period they showed the little 6 year olds playing hocked. Thought that was cute. Towards the end the panned up to the team bench and Joe Sakic was watching them play!

Then in between the 2nd and 3rd period, the kids came back out again and had a shootout. Again Sakic was watching, as well as Mike Keene. I thought this was neat that big stars would want to watch 6 year olds. But then I saw why -- both their kids were on these teams. Keene's kid scored, Joe's hit the post. ;)

I like that HDNet shows some of the action around the arena during game days.

OK, back on topic now. :(

Well, this is not surprising. I hope that the upcoming news article clearly shows the arrogance of the local ABC and NBC affiliates.

However, Lookout is the proper place for digital transmission. LCGII needs to be approved in spite of the arrogance of the local ABC and NBC affiliates.

Don

I am working on getting some names of folks who are able to verify the coverage area....evidently the FCC will not do this. I do not believe there is any way KMGH is meeting their coverage area. It remains to be seen how much this might cost but first things first - get the names then make contact then make decision.

I am also trying to determine if the 350 to 450 thousand dollar estimate is reasonable. The last figure I saw posted on this board was 300 thousand ... either the original $300K estimate was low, or the equipment has gone up quite a bit, or KMGH inflated the price in their letter to the FCC. I firmly and absolutely believe KMGH has misrepresented this cost to the FCC.

Geof
I agree with your assessment that we need to get some folks to document the coverage area. Not sure where we will come up with the money to do it though. Let me know if I can be of assistance. I would be happy to talk to some of them too to help out.

I don't have a feel for the cost of doing the move, but I agree that $350-400K number seems high. I would also like to see a breakout of how much of that cost is equipment (microwave crosslinks, Microwave receivers etc.) which is needed for Lookout anyway, and would ultimately reduce the final cost to KMGH of the Lookout installation. I would bet that would bring that number down significantly. It seems to me the only throwaway cost is that of the tower (if they can't piggyback an existing one, and the application for the permit, and the construction). I think this is more a case that they don't want to spend the money now if they can delay spending it for a couple of years (oh, excuse me, that was a couple of months according to their lawyer). My bad!

Okay here is some info...

1) They could keep the same transmitter and antenna and move both to Republic Plaza to significantly increase their coverage area because of the increase in height. There would also be significantly fewer obstructions making the signal receivable to many who are blocked by various obstructions. There are no costs associated with this other than moving hardware and getting the necessary permits for Republic Plaza (and any associated "construction work" to get the Republic setup built). The cost of a STL (to get the signal from their studio to the Republic Plaza) would run $50K or so if microwave based but cheaper if done with fiber (fiber has a higher monthly rental).....so, the 350K to 450K figure is completely and utterly bogus. Why am I not surprised?

2) Based on the information in the KMGH response - and an assuming the terrain is pretty constant - the 41dBu contour is predicted to be no greater than 34.2 miles from the transmitter site - this assumes no physical obstructions like buildings. Obviously there are many buildings in and around the KMGH studio that are taller and the terrain does not favor their situation either. What we need are Longley Rice terrain and structural limited maps showing actual coverage. I have the name of a company that can perform this and I will call to see what this would cost.

I really feel like KMGH could have come right out and said they do not want to spend the money....but they did not...they are not being forthright with us and I find this deceitful.

BTW, I think it is safe to say this about KMGH, we DO have their attention!
:D

Just so there is no mistake here, they also have mine now!

Originally posted by JMartinko
BTW, I think it is safe to say this about KMGH, we DO have their attention!
:D

Just so there is no mistake here, they also have mine now! Thay have my attention too for the moment. But, as I eluded to in an earlier post, I find their actions reprehensible. I have not yet determined how to deal with this (as far as LCG2 goes) but I can in no way support KMGH in any manner...I do not find them worthy of any support and if they are deceiving us - their alleged allies - then how do they conduct themselves in dealing with JeffCo and its residents? At this point I certainly cannot condone their actions and I am struggling with how to deal with this as far as LCG is concerned. As to LCG2 I am also not too keen on supporting KUSA either as they have been resisting the DTV conversion and have yet to follow thru by broadcasting HDTV. KTVD is an unknown to me so that leaves KCNC as the sole station worthy of support in my mind. I would definitely support KCNC if they were going it alone but since they are affiliated with these other "thugs" I know not what to do.....but do not be surprised if I do not support LCG2 and perhaps actively campaign against it. I do not like being lied to by anyone or any corporation, much less one that delivers news to thousands of homes each and every night.

I emailed Geof my thoughts on this, but I thought I'd open it up to the group for discussion.

Geof, you mention that you may not be in support of the tower. I understand your frustration with KMGH, but I don't understand how not supporting the tower is a good solution.

By withholding your support of the tower, you are also not supporting KCNC (a true leader in HD!), and slowing the progress of HD in Colorado. Remember, there are many that can't receive ANY signal right now. I'm not willing to withhold my support because of KMGH's actions. (Notice I don't even mention our "news leader")

KMGH is clearly being an @ss about this, and I'm glad that they are being called on it. But I'm thinking of the big picture. So as of right now I fully support the tower, and hope that others do as well.

I will reserve judgment for a later date on whether or not I will support the LCG2 application as a result of this and the KUSA actions in the area of HD. To put it mildly, they have tempered my enthusiasm. I am well aware that if the LCG2 does not pass it may be a cold day in Denver before we see any OTA HD. On the other hand, there would undoubtedly be some serious fines levied against some of the stations for not being on the air. In several cases those would seem to be well deserved.

I do feel bad for KCNC, as they have certainly done everything possible to deserve our support. I am guessing the real one laughing (or at least beathing a sigh of relief) must be James Morgese and the KRMA folks. I'll bet he is real happy not to still be stuck depending upon the good graces of KUSA and KMGH for his own DTV transmitter. Congratulations once again James. It looks like your foresight in this DTV transition was better than anyone else in Denver.

In the meantime, I will be interested to see if/when the FCC replies to any or all of us. This whole thing is starting to smell like a rotten fish.

Well Mike, like I said I have made no final decision but I think I laid out my concerns regarding KMGH fairly clearly.... the bottom line is that supporting LCG2 directly supports KMGH as well and I am not sure I am willing to do that at this point. I would not have this nagging question hanging over my head if they would have just said no - or at the very least been upfront and honest with us. As it is I find their ethical behavior extermely questionable so I will have to decide what to do. Right now all options are on the table for me - support, keep quiet, or caimpaign against LCG2....I am sorry if this rubs everyone the wrong way but I am struggling with this right now.

I think this will take some time to play out so I don't have to make that decison right now....right now I have to work on a no punches pulled rebuttal to the KMGH letter......

Mike et. al.
I think there will be plenty of time for all this to play out before our support is needed for the Jeffco Commisioners. We still need to hear what the FCC has to say about all of this. I also think there are a few more cards to be played on the subject from our side as well. That is why I will reserve my decision for a later date. Unlike the 'lucky 20', I have never gotten so much as a whiff of KMGH DTV, so if they threatened to even shut off the existing transmitter and never come on the air in DTV, I won't notice the difference on my receiver.

I am reminded of a song I heard them play at the Avs game last night. "Oh Canada, our ........."

I agree with Geof, I hate being lied too, what KMGH is doing is no better than the lies that (s)care is passing around. I guess truth in broadcasting doesn't carry into the boardroom. If they won't do it fine, but don't make up BS.

So what do we have to do show the FCC that they are not covering the area that they say they are? Shouldn't the coverage map that we have help in this, these are real numbers from real people that show if you live outside of their parking lot you can't receive there signal.

Thanks
Joe

Geof, I edited my post. Sorry about that.
I understand your argument, just want to open up some discussion on it.

jm, that's a very good song! ;)

I suspect the the people that are really laughing their behinds off right now are Deb Carney and her bunch...

"The only supporters of this application are jumping ship! We WIN!..."

It may be time for the other KCNC, KTVD, and KUSA to step up to the plate with some pressure of their own. While we are a VERY small group here, we are VERY LOUD with our voices, and we will refuse not to be heard. (How's that for a double negative to make the point!) If some of our vocal members decide to jump ship, this hurts them. I just don't see a whole lot of other people standing up in support for LCG...no catholic stations, no public radio or tv stations...only people who want to watch big network television digitally. A very small minority...

Just for fun I went to the FCC web site again to check on the details of the KMGH DTV transmitter. FCC KMGH Channel 17 web site (http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state=CO&call=KMGH&arn=&city=Denver&chan=17&chan2=17&facid=&list=0&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=)

I not sure this is the latest STA application, but I do note that the power levels and locations shown on the FCC site indeed do not match the information provided by Mr. Hummers in his letter to the FCC. Can someone here show me what my misunderstanding would be.

"Several of the letters incorrectly state the location, height and power of the KMGH-DT STA operation. The data given are from the original KMGH-DT operation proposed from the original Lookout Mountain site. The KMGH-DT STA operation is 1.94 kilowatts ERP from an antenna with a center of radiation 22.9 meters AGL from 39º 43’ 34” NL, 104º 59’ 06” WL."

I notice that the height above the ground level has gone from 450 meters to 22.9. I wonder if that would have an impact on the coverage area??:confused:
I see the power level has gone from 25 kw to 1.94 kw. I wonder if that would have an impact on the coverage area?:confused:

I sure will be curious to see what the FCC has to say about all of this.

My name is Jim Schoedler, Director of Network Engineering for Rocky Mountain PBS (for the past six months).

The RMPBS network consists of our three analog stations (in Denver, Pueblo/Colorado Springs, and Grand Junction), our digital station in Denver (CH 18, KRMA-DT), and many analog translators around the state.

I've been interested in this forum and will post occasionally over the coming months to keep you informed about our digital transmission efforts.

1) Regarding the RCA receiver audio problems, we're not exactly sure about the cause, but as Ron has noted here, when the problem was reported to us we did discuss it and then removed from service an HD playback deck that seemed to be implicated. If the deck goes back in service later in the year we'll be monitoring carefully for potential audio problems.

2) By April 1, 2003 the FCC requires that we begin simulcasting our analog programming on our digital channel at least 50% of the day. That means replacing the widescreen SD or HD loops we're currently transmitting. We could continue to play the loops during the remaining half of the day. I'd be happy to pass along your comments on this subject to our programming department for their consideration.

3) Later in the year (as funding becomes available to us), we'd like to enhance the simulcast in two ways:

One is to time shift any HD programs PBS offers into the Mountain Time Zone so they can air in HD at the same time the SD version airs on our analog channel. Currently we air PBS HD programs on Channel 18 at the same they are fed to us, normally in the late afternoon, by passing through the PBS feed. Time-shifting will permit more digital viewers to see these programs.

The second enhancement is to air our locally produced widescreen (16:9) or HD programs in their native format on Channel 18, again at the same time the SD version airs on our analog Channel 6 in letterbox format.

4). With formal approval of the new site on Mt. Morrison by Jefferson County due on March 11, we're beginning to plan for the move which will take place in 12 to 18 months. Digital coverage from Mt. Morrison will be a marked improvement over the Republic Plaza building, as we expected.

5). We are in the midst of planning the installation of two new digital transmitters, one on Cheyenne Mountain to cover Colorado Springs/Pueblo, and the other in Grand Junction. Both will be low power but with excellent coverage of their market due to being located at high elevation transmitter sites. On-air dates are likely to be this summer.

Feel free to contact me through the forum if you have any questions or comments.

Thanks for the info Jim and welcome to the forum...

Agreed! Welcome Jim!

Welcome Jim!! Last July, I first wrote KRMA an email about my sound sync problems with an DTC-100. I very much appreciate whatever was done by you folks or the people at PBS to fix the problem. We are looking forward to more HD programming from KRMA.

I think the best approach for HD viewing would be to try to broadcast most programs in the evening. Also, repeating programs more than PBS does would be preferable over the ongoing HD demo loop when there would be no programming available. For example, Discovery repeats their HD programming every four hours during the day.

Hi Jim. Thanks for the info.

Has transmitting the SD feed (when there is no HD source) on a sub-channel while still feeding the HD loop been discussed? What are your (KAMA's) thoughts on that?

I personally don't have any experience with sub-channels (I THINK only KMGH is doing sub-channels in Denver, and as I don't live in their parking lot, I don't receive their signal). I read here on AVS that many people dislike that because the HD feed is then too compressed to look good, but if it could look nearly as good (there is usually not a lot of motion on the demo loop), it sure is nice to have.

Many times when people are coming over to the house for parties or such, I turn on the demo loop and put the audio very low. Kind of like an HD "Video/audio background". It doesn't annoy anyone, or become the "conversation killer" that a plot-based program would. It really becomes a conversation starter and has pleasing images; and it really is a nice demo of HD. It would be too bad if that was not available very often.

Repeating HD programming as mentioned above also appeals to me.

Overall, you plans sound very good. Time-shifting the HD to be at the same time as the analog really simplifies things!

Thanks Again, Greg

More food for thought (and bullets for the next FCC letter):

KMGH’s predicted (41 dBu) coverage area is estimated at 21.3 miles to 34.2 miles. This is for their existing location. If they were to move to the top of Republic plaza this would increase to (approximately) 43.2 miles.

As a point of reference, the other station's 41 dBu contour is out at 55.8 miles (the larger area is due to more power).

My point is that a significant increase in area (Pi*R-squared) can be obtained for a relatively “modest” investment. The numbers are:
Existing coverage area: 2420 Sq miles (based on a radius of 27.75 miles).
Coverage area from atop the Republic Plaza: 5863 Sq miles.
An increase of 3443 Sq-miles or 142%.
(NOTE: All numbers approximate with hopefully no math errors).

All these numbers are predicated on no blockage and even (level) terrain. Obviously this is not the case but equally obvious is the fact that the existing KMGH site is more prone to coverage area reductions due to blockage and terrain than antennas atop Republic Plaza. This alone would make it far easier for many folks to receive KMGH-DT.

Furthermore, they could share an antenna with KUSA or KRMA and I think this would further increase their coverage area - it seems likely that this would require an additional investment, although I believe no where near 400K (unless KUSA or KRMA want to make a killing). I do not believe this would impact the KUSA or KRMA coverage area. The benefit is that this would not require another antenna atop the Republic Plaza so they would save some money there. I will leave it to qualified broadcast engineers to determine which approach is better along with their associated costs but this is something that should be looked at and not dismissed out of hand (IMO).

I have just received this info:
(Company xxx) can produce a Longley Rice overlay for the station you are interested in at a scale of 1:250,000 or 1:500:000 to use with your topo map or we can supply a base map with the calculations.

RSL calculations $435.00
Base Map $140.00 (8 1/2 x 11)Is there any interest in trying to get a collection going?

As a reminder, Don Perez sent me an email on January 22nd stating they would have their equipment operational for HD in 30 to 45 days. I think 45 days is March 8. Let's see if they make it.

Hello again Jim and welcome.

The demo loop has fantastic picture quality, but it's getting a little old to me.

My first preference would be National PBS (and local KRMA) HD programming at the same time as the standard def version is on. I wouldn't mind the demo loop when there isn't any HD programming available.

Otherwise, repeating what you do have in HD every 4 or 6 hours as suggested would be good too. Ever since KUSA-DT went on the air and I've been able to pick up KRMA-DT, I've been itching to see some HD PBS. Unfortunately, all I ever seem to get is the demo loop.

My hats off to you and your engineering team for all your hard work in doing HD right. And to James Morgese for taking the FCC seriously (unlike some other stations) and doing what it took to get KRMA-DT on the air at full power. I think we're all looking forward to the first full-power HDTV station hitting the Denver airwaves.

Originally posted by Geof
I have just received this info:

(Company xxx) can produce a Longley Rice overlay for the station you are interested in at a scale of 1:250,000 or 1:500:000 to use with your topo map or we can supply a base map with the calculations.

RSL calculations $435.00
Base Map $140.00 (8 1/2 x 11)

Is there any interest in trying to get to get a collection going?

I'll contribute (at least a little) if we go forward with this.

Originally posted by dr_mal
I'll contribute (at least a little) if we go forward with this. Thanks,
I had a further thought....KMGH has to keep a public file which should contain all of the engineering data.....I wonder if this sort of map is in that file....we have a right to view it and ask for copies so this should be looked into before spending money....

(OR maybe we need to compare their map with one we get from an independed source....humm....)

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
As a reminder, Don Perez sent me an email on January 22nd stating they would have their equipment operational for HD in 30 to 45 days. I think 45 days is March 8. Let's see if they make it. Agreed....thanks for the reminder.

I'd like to put a new twist on things that may (or may not) help some of you who are questioning support of LCG2 because KMGH won't move their low-power transmitter.

In this very forum, there have been complaints that many broadcasters aren't really anxious to move to HDTV, and they want to put off the expenditures as long as possible.

With the approval of LCG2, the stations would then be OBLIGATED to provide a high-power DTV signal.

So, even if you think that KMGH is hostile toward HDTV, you should still support LCG2. If it helps, think of your support as "obligating" them, rather than supporting them.

Mark

Originally posted by mbuchana I'd like to put a new twist on things that may (or may not) help some of you who are questioning support of LCG2 because KMGH won't move their low-power transmitter.

In this very forum, there have been complaints that many broadcasters aren't really anxious to move to HDTV, and they want to put off the expenditures as long as possible.

With the approval of LCG2, the stations would then be OBLIGATED to provide a high-power DTV signal.

So, even if you think that KMGH is hostile toward HDTV, you should still support LCG2. If it helps, think of your support as "obligating" them, rather than supporting them.

Mark Just to make this "perfectly clear", my concern with KMGH is totally unrelated to obligating them to HDTV or whatever else....it's also totally unrelated to their refusal to move. I can accept their refusal to move (I would not like it but I would accept it).

It's their "less than honest" business conduct that disturbs me.....

Originally posted by Geof
Thanks,
I had a further thought....KMGH has to keep a public file which should contain all of the engineering data.....I wonder if this sort of map is in that file....we have a right to view it and ask for copies so this should be looked into before spending money....

(OR maybe we need to compare their map with one we get from an independed source....humm....)

Good thoughts. I think a prudent first course would be to get our hands on a copy of their engineering data and compare it with our "real-world" coverage map.

So...who knows who to ask and what to ask for?

Originally posted by Geof
Just to make this "perfectly clear", my concern with KMGH is totally unrelated to obligating them to HDTV or whatever else....

IMHO, whatever the concerns are, I don't think it is necessary for support of LCG2 to imply that you endorse what they are or are not doing right now. Approval will lead to expenditures and costs on their side, and a requirement to provide the signal.

Originally posted by mbuchana
IMHO, whatever the concerns are, I don't think it is necessary for support of LCG2 to imply that you endorse what they are or are not doing right now. Approval will lead to expenditures and costs on their side, and a requirement to provide the signal. With all due respect Mark, that is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to that opinion and I respect that opinion. I do not agree with that opinion though. I do not endorse companies that behave in questionable and perhaps unethical ways (and IMO that is what I think KMGH is doing).

Thanks for your programming comments which I'm passing along for consideration.

A few quick thoughts about meeting the simulcast requirement by transmitting our SD programs on a digital sub-channel. . .

One is that we would need to insure this would satisfy the FCC, although I imagine that it would.

The other relates to bandwidth. I understand we did a test here at KRMA last year of reducing the HD bandwidth to 15 mbps (from the maximum of 19.39) and the difference was noticeable. On the other hand, I personally witnessed HD at 12 mbps at the 2002 NAB conference and it was very acceptable. This may be due to a difference in hardware, as compression equipment improves constantly, and being an early adopter sometimes carries a performance penalty (as I'm sure you all know).

In any event, this multicasting approach requires hardware we don't yet own. But it's definitely an idea to consider.

Thanks again.

Originally posted by Geof
I do not endorse companies that behave in questionable and perhaps unethical ways (and IMO that is what I think KMGH is doing).

As you say, to be "perfectly clear," the point I was trying to make (apparently unsuccessfully) is that I don't think endorsing LCG2 is an endorsement of KMGH.

Mark

Jim
Welcome to the thread and once again congratulations on KRMA's recent win in Jeffco and your movement to get KRMA DTV on the air in full power and glory. Like many of the others have mentioned, I like to use the PBS HD feeds for eye candy when people are at the house. It is nice to always know there will be something outstanding to view. I understand the cost of simulcasting might be too much, but it certainly would be welcome. Since most of us have seen the loops many times, I too would recommend that if you are looping during the times you are not simulcasting with the SD channel it would be nice to see reruns of some of the recent HD shows in place of the loop. Some kind of mix between the two would be great. All in all, you guys are doing a great job, keep up the good work. Considering the effort of some of the stations in the area, I hardly feel justified in recommending what you guys at KRMA do. You are so far ahead of the curve it is amazing.

As for KMGH, I am sure that the (S)CARE folks are thrilled, (and no doubt not surprised) that KMGH may manage to split up our little band by their arrogant attitude. Geof, I might be willing to contribute to a map making effort, but only if we can get enough support so that it doesn't all fall on 3 or 4 people. If all of the folks who attended the meetings at KRMA, KCNC, and/or HDNet contributed 10 bucks we could easily get to the magic $450 number. We could think of it as a one month fee for being able to receive ABC HD televisions. Any takers out there????

Originally posted by Geof

KMGH’s predicted (41 dBu) coverage area is estimated at 21.3 miles to 34.2 miles. This is for their existing location.

This is so cool. For my letter, I got the lat/long of my house and of KMGH, and used a few websites to calculate my distance from their studio. I am exactly 21.3 miles away, so I must just have my antenna pointed incorrectly, as I should clearly be able to receive their "adequate" signal! :rolleyes:

Greg

Mark
I think it is safe to say there will inevitably be some disagreement on how to proceed with all of this KMGH stuff. I first floated the concept of withholding support for the LCG if KMGH didn't give us the effort mostly as a passing comment in a note, and at the moment I likely fall more with that idea than I do with supporting the LCG. I do not like being treated this way by the same people asking for my support. Believe me, I am WELL AWARE that the same people treating us like dirt, also will need our help. I am also WELL AWARE that I want them to succeed in the LCG2 application. That is why one of my posts compared this whole thing to the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) foreign policy during the cold war. We are truly locked in a no win situation here. My thoughts are that even IF I end up supporting the LCG2 application, I will not let KMGH (or for that matter KUSA) off the hook for doing everything possible to get us HD in the meantime. Those positions are not mutually exclusive. I would hope others will be able to see things that way too!

This is not intended for you, but rather for all the contributors and lurkers here in the forum. Whatever opinions pro or con people express here about supporting the LCG application under the circumstances, lets all keep in mind that we ALL have the same goal here, getting OTA HD/DTV on the air in Denver. We are only debating about the best way to achieve that goal. I have no doubt we can come to a consensus, and may still have a few who opt out of the methods selected for the final decision. That will still in no way reflect upon anyone's lack of desire to see HD in Denver.

"Now back to our regularly scheduled programming."

Originally posted by Jim Schoedler
Thanks for your programming comments which I'm passing along for consideration.

Jim,

Although what you do in this area won't matter to me until you are on Mt. Morrison, in general I would prefer not to have to tune to Analog 6 for anything, since it is pretty difficult to receive up here. But that may not make the most sense prior to full-power DTV.

Question: Do KRMA and KBDI have some type of "joint operating agreement?" If so, is there any plan to coordinate KRMA-DT with what KBDI-DT will do? I may actually be able to pick up KBDI-DT when they go live in May (if they broadcast with enough power...) I wouldn't think you would want both of them showing the same national PBS demo loop all day.

Mark

Concerning bandwidth and sub channels- If I am not mistaken, bandwidth is resolution dependent. Since this is the case, ABC uses 720x1280 resolution for their HD content. This resolution only uses an average of 12 Mbps for image transfer. This leaves the extra bandwidth for a sub channel (this is why 17.1 and 17.2 exist). PBS has chosen to use 1080x1920 resolution. This requires the entire 19+Mbps of bandwidth to be used in order to deliver an uncompressed image.
This might answer why PBS saw a noticeable deterioration in image quality when they used a 15Mbps data rate.
I am of the opinion that PBS should time shift their programming so that the majority of us can view it in the evening. This broadcast should be un-compressed without the use of a sub channel. During the day, I believe and I am sure you all will agree that it is an acceptable compromise to have a compressed HD feed run along with a sub channel to help meet the requirement of 50% simulcasting.

LCGII Comments- I don't know what side to take!! On one hand, I hate to reward KMGH for their deception. On the other hand, I WANT MY HDTV!!!

I don't know how feasible this is but here is my idea. Why not send letters to the advertisers of KMGH (making sure we copy KMGH). I am sure that they would love to know that the contract they signed with channel 7 that gives the market penetration figures is deceptive since one of their towers only reaches 25 miles beyond the KMGH building.
If I were an advertiser on this station and KCNC I would love to use this information when I negotiate my price for advertising with them.

Originally posted by mbuchana
As you say, to be "perfectly clear," the point I was trying to make (apparently unsuccessfully) is that I don't think endorsing LCG2 is an endorsement of KMGH.

Mark Ah, Now I understand.... On the whole you may be right - I haven't yet decided....to my way of thinking supporting LCG2 does endorse KMGH but when looked at from the other direction withholding support for LCG2 penalizes the other LCG stations...while that is not my intention it would be a consequence. It is a no win scenario. Fortunately I do not have to decide today. I agree with markdl that it might be time for the other LCG stations to work KMGH so this can be cleared up to the benefit of everyone involved. But even then I would have a problem with KMGH..because they've obviously chosen to be less than forthright with us and the FCC...so around this circle I go......



NOTE:
The one thing I have decided is that I will write the FCC detailing my findings posted above and also detailing my thoughts regarding KMGH's deceptions. I want to lay it all out on the table and see the KMGH response, along with of course, the FCC's response. I think [hope] the answer may become more clear at that time....

FWIW, I dropped a note to "General Management" (http://www.news4colorado.com/Global/category.asp?C=35871&nav=DIGm) at KCNC letting them know support for LCG2 MAY be waning in light of KMGH's anti-HDTV behaviour. Probably end up in their bit-bucket, but you never know.

-David

To reply to Mark about a joint operating agreement with KBDI, there is nothing in place that would govern programming. We do have a joint master control operation in Denver, but it doesn't extend to KBDI's digital channel.

Jim

I am perhaps beating a dead horse but I had to get this off my chest. I've written my letter and after some refining I expect to send it on its merry way tomorrow.

FWIW, here it is...

NOTE: Post deleted and reposted in final form..

I hope I am not alone in responding a second time. While I am not bouyed by KMGH's response we have yet to hear from the FCC so we should still keep going...I just wish I were better at this.

Great summary Geof. I sent you a PM with a couple of comments and will give it some thought tonight to see if there is anything else to comment on.

You might also add a paragraph pointing out the correction to the location of the transmitter as listed in the FCC documents and the letter from Mr. Hummers.

I would also recommend that anyone else considering a second letter, at the very least recommend a coverage survey be conducted since so few of us can actually get the signal, which appears contrary to the KMGH assertion.

Geof, I sent another PM with another 'nit'. I don't think there are any legal issues with including more signatures (disclaimer: I am obviously NOT a lawyer), but I wonder if multiple copies mailed separately might still be more effective if you are willing to let your letter be copied (it could be so noted in the letter that it is a copy of your submittal). Any other opinions???

Don't get me wrong, I think independent letters are best...letters from the first go-around made great points using stuff I never addressed in my first letter. To those still working on their first letter I ask you to "keep going". That said, if folks don't have anything further to add and they agree with my letter then I think it's fine to add their name at the bottom of mine...

Geof - I think your letter is great! I've just about calmed down enough after reading the KMGH response to write my 2nd letter in a calm and clear manner, rather than flying off the cuff like I would have done earlier this week.

I doubt that having several signers on one letter will have much affect, and certainly not nearly the affect of getting an individual letter from each signer. That's my opinion.

Mark,

I think the individual letters DID get the attention of KMGH and the FCC. What I was thinking was that it might make it easier for the FCC to have one letter going forward signed by "everyone" (whatever that means) with our combined concerns. In the same way that KMGH's lawyers replied to all the letters with one response, we could continue a one-off back and forth.

-David

Originally posted by markdl
Geof - I think your letter is great! I've just about calmed down enough after reading the KMGH response to write my 2nd letter in a calm and clear manner, rather than flying off the cuff like I would have done earlier this week.

I doubt that having several signers on one letter will have much affect, and certainly not nearly the affect of getting an individual letter from each signer. That's my opinion. I hear you about claming down...

Okay, I have been getting too many suggestions as to how to improve my letter....with all due respect to everyone I am going to retract my offer to consider additional signers to the letter.....I think it is best that everyone write their own response...I am just not up to getting my letter "approved" by "X" number of people so they're willing to sign it. It was a good idea while it lasted tho...:)

NOTE: I deleted the post discussing this idea....

The biggest problem I have with the 'one bullet theory', oops, I mean the one letter theory, is that it may leave the impression with the FCC that there are just a small group of 5 (or whatever number) people upset with the situation and the rest of the public doesn't care or see the problem. It would especially help if some new folks (not in the first salvo) could chime in with some comments or letters of their own. As I mentioned, they might refer to an included copy of Geof's letter and add their own comments. Perhaps the compromise would be to include signatures of the folks included as copied in the KMGH Hummers letter in the rebut. since we are already in the loop, and ask others in the forum (lurkers etc.) to include a copy of Geof's letter with a cover letter and paragraph or two of their own which might just say "I agree with this letter, or I agree with this letter and also feel that .......yada yada yada.....should be burned in effigy....yada yada yada.... McGraw Hill books should be banned from the library......yada yada yada....

OK just a bit of levity here at the end, guess I got carried away, but I think you get my drift. After all its still me, jm in boulder. BTW, has anyone mentioned in the last two pages or so that KUSA "Denver's Leading Station" still doesn't broadcast any HD yet???

Originally posted by Geof
Okay, I have been getting too many suggestions as to how to improve my letter....with all due respect to everyone I am going to retract my offer to consider additional signers to the letter.....I think it is best that everyone write their own response...I am just not up to getting my letter "approved" by "X" number of people so they're willing to sign it. It was a good idea while it lasted tho...:)

NOTE: I deleted the post discussing this idea....
Sure, after I make my great suggestions and comic post I find you have already retracted the offer.
:rolleyes:

Originally posted by JMartinko
It would especially help if some new folks (not in the first salvo) could chime in with some comments or letters of their own.Agreed.
As I mentioned, they might refer to an included copy of Geof's letter and add their own comments. ..."I agree with this letter, or I agree with this letter and also feel that .......yada yada yada..... I have no problem with that....please don't copy my letter, sign it and send it but anyone is welcome to use it along with a cover letter in the manner jm suggests.
(I wouldn't mention the McGraw Hill book burning part tho...:)

Originally posted by Geof
Agreed.
I have no problem with that....please don't copy my letter, sign it and send it but anyone is welcome to use it along with a cover letter in the manner jm suggests.
(I wouldn't mention the McGraw Hill book burning part tho...:)
Hey, wait a minute, you are suggesting anarchy here with the book burning suggestion. I clearly made no such suggestion.
"or I agree with this letter and also feel that .......yada yada yada.....should be burned in effigy....yada yada yada.... McGraw Hill books should be banned from the library......yada yada yada.... "

I clearly did not state whom or what should be burned in effigy, and I only yada'd banning McGraw Hill books from the library. The idea of organizing a group to burn McGraw Hill books on the steps of KMGH studios was clearly yours.
:D

Am I reading this correctly? CBS (at least the local affiliate) is only transmitting at 720i when the network feed is 1080i? Or am I missing something here?

If I am reading things right, then someone needs to get in touch with their engineers and get them to broadcast the original signal UNTOUCHED.

If any station is going to be broadcasting HDTV then they SHOULD be using the full 19 Megabits/sec transfer rate for the best possible quality. If they aren't then satellite is giving us the best HD broadcast quality at the moment. They'll be losing quality conscious viewers right and left.

I, for one, don't care about subchannels, data multi-casting, etc. All I want is the best possible HD video and 5.1 audio (now even DTS Digital Surround is available for broadcasting if they'll use it). Period. End of story. I'm trying to find any good excuse to even keep watching network TV as it is considering the bulk of their progamming is now commercial after commercial after commercial and a bunch of cruddy shows and chopped up, non OAR movies.

As for all of this craziness associated with getting FULL power HD transmissions to the Colorado Front Range, I can see why some people are calling this state an HDTV wasteland or even a digital cow town!!

I'm sitting here in Fort Collins still twiddling my thumbs because I can get JACK SH*T when it comes to network HD (and I don't even consider Fox on my radar scope because of their moronic HD stance-- sounds just as stupid as Encore's belief that even the 4:3 ratio is good enough). Looks like I will be going to satellite and ignoring ABC, CBS, NBC, WB, UPN, PBS, etc. for some time to come.

Absolutely flabbergasting!!

Dan

Dan, KCNC-DT (CBS) is broadcasting at 1080i at the full 19 Mb/s rate. KMGH-DT (ABC) is broadcasting at 720p at about 12.1 Mb/s and multicasting a SD feed of the channel at about 4.5 Mb/s.

I'm not sure where you heard that KCNC wasn't broadcasting at 1080i because they are. :)

Originally posted by MattF
Concerning bandwidth and sub channels- If I am not mistaken, bandwidth is resolution dependent. Since this is the case, CBS uses 720x1280 resolution for their HD content. This resolution only uses an average of 12 Mbps for image transfer. This leaves the extra bandwidth for a sub channel (this is why 17.1 and 17.2 exist). PBS has chosen to use 1080x1920 resolution. This requires the entire 19+Mbps of bandwidth to be used in order to deliver an uncompressed image. ... It was here, in thist post -- which is incorrect. I guess if you change CBS to ABC, it's correct.

Here is the final version of my letter...If anyone wants a pdf copy (all nicely formatted) to send as attachment to your letter send me a PM with your email address and I'll send it along.February 28, 2003

Chairman Michael K. Powell
Federal Communications Commission
445 Twelfth Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20554


Subject: Temporary DTV Operations of KMGH-DT, Denver, Colorado
Reference: 1) Letter from Geoffrey A XXXX dated 2/14/03
2) Letter from Edward W. Hummers, Jr. Counsel for McGraw-Hill Broadcasting Company dated 2/26/03
3) FCC submittal by KMGH in February 2002 titled ?COMBINED, EXHIBIT NO. 1, EXHIBIT NO. 2, EXHIBIT NO. 3, FCC Form 337 February 2002 KMGH-TV?


Dear Chairman Powell,
I find it necessary to respond to the letter from Edward W. Hummers written on behalf of KMGH. In my opinion that letter is not based upon a foundation of fact. Below is my rebuttal to the statements set forth in Mr. Hummers response:

1. Mr. Hummers notes KMGH began low power operations on February 28, 1999. He further states: "When installed, it was believed that the Lake Cedar Group original zoning application would be approved in a reasonable period of time and permanent DTV facilities would soon be constructed to serve the entire market."

The following timeline can be constructed from references 2 and 3:
7/1/98: First LCG application submitted to Jefferson County.
2/28/99: KMGH begins low power DTV operations.
8/3/99: First LCG application was denied by Jefferson County.
x/x/99: A "timely appeal" was filed against the ruling in Jefferson County District Court.
11/2/99: The LCG petitioned the FCC to preempt the Jefferson County ruling.
1/4/01: The LCG requested that the legal appeal filed in Jefferson County District Court be dismissed.
1/4/01: The LCG requested that the FCC withhold action on their preemption request.
2/x/02: KMGH states "LCG has begun the formal rezoning process and its application is ready for filing."

NOTE: The following date is not presented in References 2 or 3.
7/14/02: The second LCG application is formally submitted to Jefferson County.

I have no basis to dispute that "when [low power facilities were] installed, it was believed that the Lake Cedar Group original zoning application would be approved in a reasonable period of time". However, I contend that when the LCG application was denied some five months later the LCG was in no hurry to complete the zoning process. I believe they were taking advantage of the Jefferson County situation to delay implementing their DTV facilities. They filed a lawsuit against the decision that had virtually no chance of success (as witnessed later when they withdrew the suit) and they also petitioned the FCC for preemption. There was a period of seventeen (17) months (Aug '99 to Jan '01) wherein they could not have meaningful discussions with Jefferson County officials due to the pending lawsuit. One cannot help but wonder what the Denver DTV broadcast environment would be now if that 17 month period was used to "push ahead" rather than "sitting back". We (area residents) are still hindered by this delay - a delay in which KMGH took part.

The KMGH submittal dated February 2002 states: "LCG has begun the formal rezoning process and its application is ready for filing. The meetings with local interested groups required to be held prior to the filing of the formal rezoning application are scheduled for April 2 through April 4, 2002. LCG will consider all public comments and it is anticipated that the formal rezoning application will be filed by the end of April or shortly thereafter, depending upon extent of public comment. It is anticipated further that the hearing before the Jefferson County Planning Commission is likely to be scheduled by the County approximately six weeks after the filing of the rezoning application. The hearing before the Jefferson County Commissioners is likely to be scheduled within a few weeks after the Planning Commission has made its recommendation. The extent of public participation will, in some measure, determine the length of the hearing process. A decision will be issued on the final County Commissioner hearing date, which is anticipated to be by early fall."

Clearly KMGH believed the second application process would be submitted by April '02, or "shortly thereafter". The actual submittal was July 14 2002. They also anticipated a decision on the application request would be completed by the fall of 2002 such that "digital and analog operations of the LCG member stations from the proposed tower at the Lookout Mountain Antenna Farm will commence in the fall of 2003." The sad fact of the matter is that the hearings have not yet started and, as currently scheduled, the hearings will not commence before April (at the earliest). Given the lengthy Jefferson County rezoning process there is very little likelihood that a decision will be rendered by the Jefferson County Commissioners this spring (especially considering the hearings don't begin until this spring). The LCG application is one of the more controversial and contested land use applications in recent times for Jefferson County. Significant opposition and delaying tactics by local groups is (or should be) expected - as evidenced by past applications. Even KMGH notes in reference 3: "The extent of public participation will, in some measure, determine the length of the hearing process". Upon consideration of the likely resistance to the application one can reasonably conclude that the process will take until late summer or early fall before a decision is rendered. A review of the timeline for the recent KRMA Mount Morrison rezoning application (also conducted in Jefferson County) should further dispel any myths that the process will be completed this spring.

Given their February 2002 FCC submission KMGH has a demonstrated history of stating "overly optimistic" time frames for various milestones. In my opinion Mr. Hummers statement: "In light of our belief that Jefferson County will shortly grant the Lake Cedar Group zoning application which will permit the construction of permanent full power facilities on Lookout Mountain, such an expenditure is not prudent" is self serving. I'm convinced this assertion is unachievable yet it forms the basis of their argument as to why nothing needs to be done to improve KMGH's low power broadcasting setup.

A number of local area HDTV enthusiasts met with Lake Cedar Group representatives during the March/April timeframe last year (2002). The meeting took place at the KCNC studio building and attendees included Engineering Managers from KCNC, KUSA, and KMGH. When the KUSA and KMGH Engineering Managers were asked if they'd be willing to setup temporary facilities on top of Republic Plaza KUSA flatly refused while KMGH's response was: "approval is imminent" - there is no need to move. Since that time KUSA has built facilities on the Republic Plaza building and KMGH is still telling us "approval is imminent" a year later.

It is very clear to me that KMGH can continue to hide behind the "approval is imminent" charade from now until eternity unless they are called on it. Should the second Lake Cedar Group application be denied (a very real possibility) or if it is approved but appealed (by local neighborhood opposition - CARE) (also a very real possibility) what then? When does the "approval is imminent" argument lose bite? As it currently stands (and given no further delays) the LCG will not have full power broadcast capabilities until late 2004 - that's 1.5 to 2 years from now. This is hardly "imminent" by any reasonable definition I can imagine.

To summarize this point, I believe there is evidence of past delaying tactics and "overly-optimistic" milestone dates set forth by KMGH. Their credibility regarding milestone dates is surely questionable. To this end I believe KMGH is misleading the Federal Communications Commission, as well as petitioners to the FCC who are requesting they relocate their facilities, with regards to their overly optimistic estimate for approval of the second LCG application. Given their history I remain concerned that future delays and unmet milestones will continue to occur even while we are being told "approval is imminent". It is clear to me, as well as other local citizens, that the only station in the Denver area with the sincere desire to implement their DTV facilities was and is KRMA, our local PBS affiliate. KRMA submitted an independent application to Jefferson County (they were formerly a member of the LCG) and have since gained the necessary approval from Jefferson County to build their DTV facilities, so when KMGH (and the LCG) portray themselves as being subject to Jefferson County issues I hope it's realized that KRMA was also subject to the very same issues yet managed to overcome those issues. It is clear to me that KMGH has not yet demonstrated a "good faith effort" to build their facilities nor are they demonstrating a "good faith effort" to reach any sort of audience with their currently pathetic low power setup.

2. Mr. Hummers states: "A move of KMGH-DT to the Republic Plaza building and an operation with ERP comparable to that of KCNC-DT and KUSA-DT would require an additional capital expenditure for a new transmitter and microwave equipment of $350,000 to $450,000, plus the applicable rental fee at the new temporary site."

I would like to see the cost breakdown as to how they arrived at these inflated dollar figures. This is surely bogus. Several local enthusiasts asked KMGH about moving to the Republic Plaza late last year. At that time they were told it would cost $300,000. Their most recent response states 350 to 450 thousand dollars. Which is it? Can they make these statements without backing them up? Are they not accountable to the FCC? Has the FCC verified these numbers? Are they reasonable? Does this "estimate" include equipment that will be required when they get permanent facilities built on Lookout Mountain? If so, they would have to spend this capital at some point regardless of any potential interim move and as such these costs should not be included in the cost to move to the Republic Plaza.

Have all options been explored? What if KMGH moved to the Republic Plaza and used their existing transmitter and antenna? Since KMGH is assigned DT Channel 17 could they not share an antenna with either KUSA (DT Channel 16) or KRMA (DT Channel 18) (both stations are currently located on Republic Plaza)? What are the costs of these options (and are they being fairly represented)? Have they even been considered?

I have some rough coverage area estimates (generated by a Broadcast Engineer):
* KMGH's existing predicted (41 dBu) coverage area is estimated to be no more than 34.2 miles.
* If they were to move their existing transmitter and antenna to the top of Republic Plaza this would increase to (approximately) 43.2 miles.
* As a point of reference, the other station's (KRMA, KCNC, KUSA) located atop the Republic Plaza have a predicted 41 dBu contour of approximately 55.8 miles (the larger area is due to more transmitter power).

The fact is that a significant increase in coverage area can be obtained for a relatively "modest" investment. The rough numbers are:
* Existing coverage area: 3674 Sq miles.
* Predicted coverage area from atop the Republic Plaza: 5863 Sq miles.
* That?s an approximate increase of 2188 Sq-miles (or 60%).

All these numbers are predicated on no blockage and even (level) terrain. Obviously the existing KMGH transmitting site (on top of a four story building) is significantly more prone to coverage area reductions due to blockage and terrain than signals broadcast from antennas atop Denver's tallest skyscraper (Republic Plaza). This is especially true for residents who must "look through" downtown Denver to "see" the KMGH antenna or for residents situated on the far side of hills that are higher in elevation than the 4 story high antenna. Added height alone would make it far easier for many thousands of folks to receive KMGH-DT. There's a long history of broadcasters seeking high ground for their antennas for these very reasons. Given that Denver is 19th largest television market any move to Republic Plaza that yields even a 60% increase in coverage area, coupled with far fewer line of sight (blockage issues), means a potential increase of tens of thousands of possible viewers.

I believe KMGH could move their existing setup to the Republic Plaza at a dollar figure much less than that quoted in their response. It is my understanding that a microwave STL to get their signal from the studio to the top of the Republic plaza would cost on the order of $50,000. I also understand this could be done for less if fiber were used (albeit with a higher monthly cost).

To summarize this point I believe there are alternatives that KMGH has not considered and to my way of thinking they were predisposed to say "no we can't move - look how much it would cost". The rough overage area estimates given above are only intended to show that alternatives do exist (I do not wish to quibble over the numbers). Nonetheless, I very much question the cost estimates they've presented for a new low power transmitter and antenna (or antenna sharing). KMGH should consider various options rather than dismissing the request for relocation out of hand because of costs - costs which they themselves have apparently inflated to aid their case for staying put.

3. I continue to dispute KMGH's assertion that they are meeting the coverage area requirement for their "City of License". It may sound great on paper but in practice their coverage area is significantly impeded due to their low antenna height coupled with the Denver terrain and significantly taller downtown Denver buildings. I again request that an independent analysis be performed to determine if they are in compliance. If the FCC is unwilling to undertake this analysis then I request you have KMGH hire an independent outside contractor to perform this analysis. I have researched the costs of procuring a Longley Rice overlay showing KMGH's coverage area and while the cost is nominal (less than $500). I am not eager to spend my money to do what I feel is the obligation of the FCC. I do not believe it is incumbent upon me to prove that KMGH is or is not meeting their coverage area. To my way of thinking that's is the job of the appropriate regulatory agency, which in this case is the FCC. Please ensure their compliance.

4. Finally, Mr. Hummers states; "We appreciate the complainants' interest in digital television and seek their active support of Lake Cedar Group's Lookout Mountain new zoning application now before Jefferson County."

I have no reason to doubt that this is indeed the case because without public support the second LCG application will surely be defeated. I find it sad however that KMGH treats the very people who are likely to support the LCG application with insincerity and contempt by responding with misleading statements and a hasty "no we can't move - it costs too much, besides approval is imminent" attitude. Given their attitude it is not going to be easy for them to "rally the troops" in support of the second LCG application. I cannot speak for others on this matter but I was planning on offering my support during the Jefferson County hearings but I am now unsure because I do not appreciate (or condone) the manner in which KMGH conducts themselves, as evidenced by my reading and interpretation of their response (and frankly there are others who feel similarly).


One undisputed fact remains: KMGH has the means to significantly increase their DTV coverage area but evidently not the desire. Why is this okay?



Sincerely,
XXXXX



CC: David Fiske (FCC)
Cindy Velasquez, (GM, KMGH)
Edward W. Hummers Jr., Counsel for McGraw-Hill Broadcasting Company, Inc


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

Holland & Knight LLP
ATTN: Edward W. Hummers, Jr.
2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 100
Washington, D.C. 20006-6801

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 ]

-----
Obviously I hope others join with me and send a letter...

Sorry for the long post....

I apologies for the mistake in my post about CBS being 720P. I meant to say that ABC is in 720p (17.1 17.2). I have edited my post to reflect ABC. Sorry.

No problem. :)

Did anyone else read the Jennifer Beauprez story in the Post about Comcast ( formerly ATT, TCI, etc. ) making Denver area a priority for upgrade ( before the rest of their systems in the country ) to include HD, etc. .

I believe the story indicated before the end of this year.

Unfortunately, I read this very early this morning and don't remember the specifics right now.

Jeff

Link here (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E33%257E1209759,00.html?search=filter)

Deamon,

Thanks,

Jeff

I hope the cable story happens. ATT/Comcast has been rewiring my area since early January and promised cable modem service early this year - I really want to see that happen (28.8k really blows). If they offer HD I may be interested depending on what they offer...

Changing the subject, my old Mits HD STB degraded to the point where it would only pick up about 1/2 of the DirecTv channels. Mitsubishi was really good about it and arranged store credit at Soundtrack, so I picked up a Hughes E86 (which is basically the same thing I had). The interesting part of this story is that I am able to receive KCNC-DT with a signal strength reading between 37-44 and experience very few dropouts (if any, but fortunately the reading is usually a little higher). On the other hand KUSA-DT usually comes in around 37-44 and it is a totally unwatchable...there has only been one night where I could receive a usable signal from KUSA-DT....(if KMGH ever moved there is no way I'd ever see the signal so maybe the folks at KMGH can take some satisfaction from that given the letters I written)....anyway both STB's acted the same way and I gotten the same signal readings (for digital OTA) with both STB's.....I was curious if they would act similarly and I can now say yep....

Geof,

Were the Mits STB and the Hughes clones? I seem to remember that being the case.

Jeff

Originally posted by jeffden
Geof,

Were the Mits STB and the Hughes clones? I seem to remember that being the case.

Jeff Yes they are clones. I just found it odd that a 37-44 reading is ok for KCNC but not KUSA and that it's true for more than one sample....

I would see that as another data point for proving what is and is not available in the area.

Jeff

Fellas,

Anybody getting sound but no picture on 17.2 ?

Before I get the "I'm not getting any picture on 17, are you guys getting any picture on 17 ?" I am actually in the 123 Speer parking lot.

Doug

The cable announcement is very significant, if they can make it happen by year-end, and if they also include local DTV channels. Obviously, that could reach many more viewers than the current low-power transmitters. Comcast could practically have a monopoly on this for awhile--they would be the only choice for network HDTV for many people since OTA is difficult or impossible for much of this area. I hope they recognize this and give us a reasonably-priced offering.

HDTV on cable is one thing that has made some real progress recently in many parts of the country, and it could offer some real help for our HDTV-starved area.

I've had cable internet service here since early 2000, so I hope that means our system is essentially ready to go.

Mark

Mark,

I too have had cable internet since then. I would drop Directv and get cable if they offer more programming in HDTV - and save on my cable internet bill too. Comcast just raised rates on those of us who only get internet service.

Reggiie

Originally posted by A4Short
Mark,

I too have had cable internet since then. I would drop Directv and get cable if they offer more programming in HDTV - and save on my cable internet bill too. Comcast just raised rates on those of us who only get internet service.

Reggiie

Reggie,

That's interesting regarding rates. I sent them an e-mail asking about that, since I had heard rumors that this was the case. I got this answer last Thursday, 2/27:


Dear Comcast customer,

Thank you for writing to Comcast.

As your market pricing structure is set now, your monthly service fee will not change if you choose to cancel your cable TV service. However, please do note that this may change in the future
if your market decides to increase the price for those subscribers who subscribe only to the Internet service.

Thank you again for contacting Comcast.

T-Liem T
Comcast Online Customer Support Center


I guess that "the future" meant March 1, just two days later! :mad:

Doug,

I also have no picture on 17-2, just sound. I checked my antenna readings and they were down on 17 from 70 or so to 46 yesterday. Haven't checked today as I won't be tuning in until Alias and I only randomly saw the 17-2 problem yesterday by surfing channels and I rarely do that.

Jeff

Originally posted by A4Short
Mark,

I too have had cable internet since then. I would drop Directv and get cable if they offer more programming in HDTV - and save on my cable internet bill too. Comcast just raised rates on those of us who only get internet service.

Reggiie

Even though there was a Denver Post article that Comcast was going to make HD a priority in Colorado, the good folks :rolleyes: who answer the phones (and their "supervisors") don't seem to think there is any future in it. I called them last week to talk to them about it.

Last summer I talked to someone who said that he thought it would be available by the end of January - and that Greeley would be one fo the first because this whole area has already been "upgraded".

But when I got ahold of someone last week, they told me that there were no plans for HD until "there is more content available in HD":mad: . I asked if there was anyone else there who might know more about it and she told me that she had already discussed this with her supervisor and that he would tell me the same thing.

*sigh* So who knows.:confused:

Anyone heard anything about KGWN lately??

I decided to take a different tack on the KMGH issue. So, I wrote my response directly to Cindy Velasquez and copied the FCC and Holland & Knight. Maybe this will help some to get them to think about being proactive on this instead of getting lawyers to make excuses.

Here is my letter:


March 2, 2003


Ms. Cindy Velasquez
General Manager
KMGH TV
Denver, Colorado 80203-3417

Re: Temporary DTV Operations of KMGH-DT, Denver, Colorado

Dear Ms. Velasquez:

I recently wrote a letter to Chairman Powell of the FCC to make him aware of the situation with your unacceptable DTV temporary transmitter. I copied you and have now received a copy of the reply Holland & Knight sent in response to the FCC.

I am writing directly to you in order to make a plea for what I think could be a win situation for everybody, most especially the Denver TV audience, as well as your television station. I will make my recommendations at the end of my letter. And, I will copy Holland & Knight and the FCC.

The response to the FCC from Holland and Knight makes three points for KMGH-DT that I would like to respond to.

The first is “We anticipate that Jefferson County will grant the necessary zoning this spring and construction of the proposed multi-user tower will commence as soon thereafter as is possible.”

The track record of getting this approval has been anything but quick, and I see nothing to indicate that it would get approval this fast. Without going through the details, the opposition by the CARE group alone will drag this approval out, through lawsuits and court actions, for many, many more months. While I, too, am confident that the LCG proposal will eventually prevail, there is a high probability that a lot of time will go by before your transmitter is operational on Lookout Mountain.

Second, the statement, “the calculated 41 dBu contour of the KMGH-DT STA operation encompasses the community of Denver…” may be true with calculations, but it is certainly not true in practice.

I, and many others who wrote, want the FCC to look into this issue. From my own experience, it takes a large antenna on my roof to receive your line of sight signal 11 miles away. A neighbor, only two blocks away, tried harder than I did and could NOT get an acceptable signal. Additionally, all of the downtown buildings and other buildings taller than yours effectively block your signal completely, especially to the north and northwest. The other Denver station’s DTV signals can usually be picked up with a much simpler indoor UHF antenna throughout a very large area.

Third, your statement that an expenditure of up to $450,000 is not prudent deserves an explanation. That is a lot of money, but have you really tried hard to find alternative, cheaper methods to improve your signal? For example, do you really need to buy a new transmitter?

If you look ahead in time, for example, to the first of next year, I think it is entirely possible that the Lookout Mountain tower completion will still be many months off. And, despite what you say, MOST people in the Denver area can NOT receive your transmissions today. So, why not be a community leader and be proactive with a solution to keep KMGH-DT ahead with DTV?

I suggest you just move your current transmitter to the top of the Republic Plaza building and find the cheapest way to get your signal from your station (fiber or simple microwave). The down time for the move would only affect the very few of us who get your signal anyway. Capitalize this, hopefully much smaller, expenditure over four or five years along with your upcoming larger costs for the Lookout Mountain full power transmitter and construction. The resulting incremental out of pocket 2003 money should be far, far smaller than $450,000!

By doing this, KMGH will be positioned to be a leader in Denver television as more and more viewers realize the increasing amount of HD programming they can get this year and next. I, and many others who follow this industry, firmly believe that we are at the knee of a HD growth curve that is now taking off, and will likely expand exponentially.

My hope is that KMGH will be there for the Denver community and not be satisfied with just making excuses. Take action now, let the community know what you are doing, and then blow your own horn. As you well point out, you were first with DTV in Denver. By taking no action, you will be LAST in DTV behind all other Denver networks and potentially the laughing stock of our community. And, considering the great programming that ABC continues to offer, that would be a shame!

Please take my suggestion seriously and CHOOSE to be a leader now, not in two years. Thanks in advance for your consideration to this serious matter.

Sincerely,



xxxxxxxxxx

cc: Mr. Michael K. Powell, FCC
Mr. David Fiske, FCC Media Relations
Mr. Edward W. Hummers, Jr., Holland & Knight

Good letter Dennis....I hope it doesn't go in one ear and out the other....we shall see.

Thanks Jeff. I use a panny STB without a signal meter, so I am never really sure how strong my signal is/is not. Or if it is a station broadcast problem.

Doug

Originally posted by mknoebel
Even though there was a Denver Post article that Comcast was going to make HD a priority in Colorado, the good folks :rolleyes: who answer the phones (and their "supervisors") don't seem to think there is any future in it. I called them last week to talk to them about it.

...

Anyone heard anything about KGWN lately??

I caught the end of a little snippet on Channel 2 News last night on the AT&T Comcast change, and the spokesperson specifically mentioned high definition, but I didn't catch any reference to time frame. It would be good to lobby them to carry the Denver DTV channels, though I have no idea how to do this or who to contact.

KGWN (Cheyenne) is still a mystery--I sent an e-mail a couple of weeks ago, then another on Feb. 27. I haven't received a response, nor have I seen any sign of a signal.

Mark

Mark,

Yeah, I sent her one a couple of weeks ago and haven't gotten a response either. Strange, because she used to return emails right away.

I have an antenna pointed that direction and haven't seen any activity on channel 30 yet.

I checked again last night and this morning before I left for work. KMGH is down still in the 46 range where it had been consistently in the low 70's for quite some time. There were no breakups in Alias, but in SD programming, there have been some digital glitches and some breakups.

Just an informational point.

Jeff

I just installed DirectTv with the Hughes E86. I am able to receive KMGH DT-17, KCNC DT 35,KUSA DT-16(changes to 9-1), KDVR DT-32. All of these channels come in with a signal strength of 80 or above. When I go to KRMA DT-18 I get no picture or sound. I check the signal strength and it says it is at 93. I thought that if I was able to receive DT-17 I would surely receive DT-18 PBS. Anyone have any ideas why I wouldn't be able to receive PBS. I am in Highlands Ranch and have a direct line to downtown.

Thanks,

Ron

Hi Ron, and welcome to the thread! (And if you've been here for a while and I'm just not remembering, sorry bout that! :))

During the day, the KRMA signal is on Channel 18-1, but during the evening, and morning hours, the signal is on Channel 80-3. Your receiver should automatically switch over for you, but maybe you need to rescan for that to happen.

Mark,

Thanks for the response, I have tried 18 and 18-1 with no success but I will try 80. Is it a safe assumption that if I can get NBC,ABC and CBS in DT that I should be able to get PBS?

Thanks

Ron

Ron, did you ever enter your zipcode into the Setup menu on your unit? If you did, and since you're also subbed to DirecTv you should have the local digital channels listed in your Program Guide. They come down via download along with the rest of your DirecTv channels. But you'll see them in the guide as "re-mapped" to their analog channel number along with a -1 next to them.

KCNC (35) wll show as 4-1, KMGH (17) as 7-1 and so on. KRMA (18) shows up as 6-1. If you have those listed you might just try tuning to it that way. In any case, yes certainly you should be able to get KRMA-DT one way or the other.

Ernie,
Pls add a link from the timeline list on your Denver DTV website to here. (http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/TimelineF.htm)

Feel free to check my facts/dates.

Ron,
I'll add a link when i get back. I'm out of town at the moment.

On the road and posting after midnight -- you are a dedicated AVS'er!

Even though I had my CH 17 reception tweaked, I am now seeing a lower signal level and occaisional dropouts. Are they getting even with us for telling the FCC on them?

p.s. You to can get ALL of the Denver HD broadcasts by using this simple setup... (see photo)

I hesitate to post this - because it is a canned response - but I thought I'd post an email I received from Comcast/ATT about when/if HDTV will be brought to cable in Colorado:

********************************************************
We have received your e-mail regarding the merger of Comcast and AT&T
Broadband. We appreciate your interest.

High-Definition Television (HDTV) programming is currently available in
the following communities served by AT&T Broadband and Comcast:
Baltimore area, MD; Chicago, IL; Greater Detroit Region of Michigan
area; North, Central and Southern New Jersey areas; Philadelphia area,
PA; Seattle, Washington; and the Washington, D.C. metro area. HDTV
will continue to be available in these areas, and we are working toward
bringing this service to more customers in the future.

Thank you, again, for your e-mail. We appreciate you taking the time
to contact us!

If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please feel free to
contact me.

Sincerely,

Comcast Customer Care Specialist

*******************************************************
Feel free to email them and get your own canned response! ;)

ecare@comcast.com

Originally posted by Jetlag
Even though I had my CH 17 reception tweaked, I am now seeing a lower signal level and occaisional dropouts. Are they getting even with us for telling the FCC on them? Gee, if they wanted to get even with me they'd have to put a "cone of silence" around my property so I couldn't get Ch7.....then again they can save themselves the bother cause I don't watch Ch7 (or 9 even tho they are "Colorado's New Leader") (I just puked on my keyboard) .... :rolleyes:

On the brighter side...

Bell ExpressVu announced today they'll have full-time feeds of ABC, NBC, CBS, and PBS HDTV and Faux DTV from Boston and Seattle soon. That would give any "southern Canadians ;)" a choice of 3 different times to watch CBS, PBS, and Fox DTV programming and 2 different times to watch NBC and ABC in HDTV. Who needs KMGH or KUSA, anyway?

Yeah, ExpressVu is going to be quite a leader in HD. I think the number of "southern Canadians" is going to grow in the near future! ;)

PS. Thanks, Dan!! :)

Great news from BExpress Vu. Star Choice of Canada has also announced they have purchased the use of GE3R to replace the soon to die Anik E2 at 111°. (They had been waiting for the launch of F2, a Hughes 702, but solar panel problems on an earlier version have delayed the satellite). This should allow their HD signals to be expanded as well, and also be received in the states. GE3 has a rather wide Ku footprint and should be visible from Colorado unlike the current E2. Star Choice is rumored to be expanding their HD as well to inlcude US east and west HD networks as well. Looks like things are 'looking up' for network HD in Colorado. It is great to see the Canadians are interested in bringing HD to the public. Too bad the Americans in the Denver area are not.

BTW, what was the day that KUSA was supposed to start televising NBC HD? I took a quick look at their signal last night (just to see if they are 'still Number 1) and it sure didn't look like HD to me. Come to think of it, neither did KMGH.

JMartinko - I received an email from KUSA (Don Perez) on Monday stating that they are delayed due to equipment installation, and that they now plan to televise HD sometime in April.

wow -- that's about the time KMGH expects LCG2 to be done, isn't it? Great news for Denver HDTV enthusiasts :rolleyes:

Originally posted by dr_mal
wow -- that's about the time KMGH expects LCG2 to be done, isn't it? Great news for Denver HDTV enthusiasts :rolleyes: That's pretty much what went thru my mind when I read the April timeframe.

Did he say April of what year? :rolleyes:

Nope, sorry. But, hey, it wasn't April 1st! This April will be a good month - I thought KMGH would begin their full power transmissions from the LCG2 towers in April, a couple of days after Jeffco's approval... no???

I sent an email to Don Perez at KUSA regarding the status of KUSA passing NBC's HD. Here is what I got back from Don:

Well...some other projects that related to HD have not gone as planned and slowed our process. There are some control systems that are needed, but will not be in until late March. I expect sometime in April we will start our HD pass through service. I think I we will have a more informed answer in a few weeks...thanks

- Dustin

Thanks dustin. The response I got was similarly sincere and cordial. I just couldn't resist the jab at KMGH, but perhaps that's a bit of salt in an open wound. I always wonder, however, why the FCC assigned PAX to channel 17 in Ft. Collins. hmmm....

Has anyone noticed a severe lipsync issue with KCNC-DT newcasts? I have a new (replacement) STB and was beginning to wonder if it had a problem. I have had some lipsync issues on HD HBO as well but I haven't noticed issues with HDNet or Showtime HD and KCNC-DT also seems fine when watching a network program (it's really off with newscasts though). Thoughts??

I have noticed the same thing in the last two days. Last night the local news was way off, but Dan Rather was better although not perfect. I still can't believe how often this happens (never though on HDNet). Why don't the station engineering people watch their own DTV broadcast once in a while to check things? For example, on Tuesday, KMGH 17 5.1 sound would not sync.

Guys,

Just received an email response from Rick Craddock from KMGH. He says that nothing has changed on their end with their DT-17 signal though many of us have posted about a 25 % drop in signal strength the last two weeks.

Jeff

I have seen no change on KMGH: 40-42 on a DTC-100. Nevertheless, their sound is frequently screwed up.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
I have seen no change on KMGH: 40-42 on a DTC-100. Nevertheless, their sound is frequently screwed up. Me either - it's still 0-3 on a Hughes E86....

Interesting.

Jeff

I haven't noticed a difference in KMGH signal either. I get 50-58% on my Dish 6000.

I sent an email to Pat Brus at KCNC regarding their lip sync problem. They promptly fixed it! Here is a heads up reply:


Thanks for the feedback on the audio issues.

As an FYI Republic Plaza is going to be testing their power systems on
Saturday March 8th starting at 6pm and lasting for a ten hour period. They
do this once a year, we have contacted them and it is not a total building
outage but different systems will go down at different times during the 10
hour period, although our systems may not be affected we hope that any
outages will be minimal and of short duration.

Thanks,
Pat Brus
Engineering Manager
KCNC-TV

Hello Everybody!
I just found this forum, and have spent the last few hours reading the past threads. It seems the HD situation on Denver is quite dismal, and I want to do my part to help it (for my own selfish reasons of course, I want my HD). I live up here on Breckenridge, and as I am sure you are well aware loveland pass at 12,000ft separates us.

My question is simple. Is there any chance at all, with the right equipment, of me receiving an OTA HD signal up here, now or in the future. My house sits at about 10,000 ft, and I have an great view of the eastern sky. I have a Mits 55" HD set, and a Mits SR-HD5 DSS, among other things. Is there any test I can do to see if I can receive the signals without buying an antenna. If I know I can get the signals, I'll get the best deep frnge I can find, I just don't want to buy an antenna just to junk it if there is no chance. I stripped off about 10' of coax to make a rudimentyr antenna as a test but I got nothing except an unwatchable (except readable channel logo) of channel 7.

Any information any body can provide would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jay

Jay, I seriously doubt you'd be able to get anything up there. I suspect your only hope will be full power, and then it'll be iffy at best. Pop over to radio shack and get a big outdoor UHF antenna and try it - at least from RS you'll be able to return it. But you've got everything working against you.

On the other hand, I kind of envy your living location...do you work at one of the ski areas?

Hi Mark,
Thanks for the info. I figured my chances were slim and none. I'm just sick if the directTV lame programming and would love some local progamming.
I actually have a home theater custom install company up here that does home theater, distributed audio, and video systems. Similar to ListenUp. I just have never dealt with any OTA HD stuff because I never thought I could get it.
Jay

Jay -- you might be a good candidate for the Canadian small dish system, Bell ExpressVu. With their recent Nimiq 2 launch, they now have full time HD feeds from all the US network affiliates in Buffalo and Seattle. The only thing you'd be missing is local commercials and local news, neither of which is in HD at present.

dr_mal,

Actually, it's the Boston and Seattle feeds.

I've been following this thread for a long time. However since I live east of Parker, I figured that I would never get any OTA HD until full power towers are built.

Yesterday as I was looking for an excuse to not clean the basement, I decided to throw up a small RS antenna on a 20' pole and hook it up to my DTC100 and see what would happen.

Well I was surprised to be able to receive four channels.

KUSA 16 40%
KRMA 18 80%
KDVR 32 80%
KCNC 35 40%

If I have antenna pointed to get 18 then I will loose 35, and if I get 35 then I seem to loose 18. However this is very rough figuring since I Don't even have the mast tightened down -- easy to swing around and test.

I have coax running from antenna to FM filter to DTC100. About 30' of coax.
The antenna is a 40" Radio Shack U-75R UHF.

So my questions are: If I want to get serious about this, Will a better antenna help? Would another 10' in height help? Should I be looking at two antenna's --- one to downtown and one to mountains? Would an amplifier help?

Thanks
George M

I picked up the latest copy of "City & Mountain Views", which is the 'newspaper' put out by Carole Lomond. It is important to note that "City & Mountain Views" is NOT put out by CARE, and that Carole Lomond is NOT an official spokesperson for CARE.

However, if what she reports is correct, CARE is suing because of the KWGN DTV antenna approval. She goes on to say that even though the county gave approval for DTV to be added to the shorter tower (at lower power), that KWGN is suing Jefferson County for 18 claims. She says:
To protect the Mount Vernon Canyon community from this sociopathic corporate behavior, enabled by Jefferson County, Canyon Area Residents for the Environment is suing Carl (the zoning administrator), the Jeffco Board of Adjustment, Board of County Commissioners (who had nothing to do with this), and KWGN.
(I added the stuff in green.)

So, who thinks that an approval for LCGII will be challenged in court?

-Wabisabi

Originally posted by wabisabi
:
:
So, who thinks that an approval for LCGII will be challenged in court?

-Wabisabi Just about everyone in the known universe....except KMGH of course who says "approval is imminent".....There is going to be a lot of bitching around here when folks can't get MNF in HD for the next two years.

George M,

If you can do it, I would try to get another 10 feet of elevation and try it again. You will probably need the extra points to avoid dropouts with the signals you do receive. Instead of two antennas, maybe try a rotor ( available also at RS ) instead of two separate antennas. Just an opinion.

Jeff

Hi George M,
Let me know how you make out with that. I don't have a problem puting the biggest antenna i can buy or build on my house.

You have given me new hope.

Jay

OK

I'm off to get a rotator and mountings to install a 10' mast on my chimney. That would get me about 10' higher than what I am now. It will increase my coax run by about 60', but am going to try without amplifier first.

Not sure yet about getting a larger antenna.

George M

George,

Good luck with your Sunday project. I use 100 feet of coax and have had bad results whenever using an amplifier on the line. I don't have any splitters, etc. anywhere on the run though and have had no problems.

Again, have fun and good luck,
Jeff

Welcome George:

There is a lot of information on antennas on AVS and on HomeTheatreSpot. Do a search. I think a better antenna will help you as well. I have a Channel Master Yagi 4248 on a 10 foot pole on my roof. It is very directional and I have it aimed to get ABC on 17 and then the rest come in fine. You will likely not get 17 since you are so far away. I tried an amp up on the mast but it made things worse for me because of overloading by strong UHF signals (Fox 31, for example).

Some people have gone to great lengths around the country to get digital TV. For example,you can even double up antennas. The best antennas are reported to be made by Televes and Blake, if you are really trying to maximize signal strength.

Good luck!

Dennis,

You are rightabout Televes and even Channel Master, but I was giving him the easiest to implement and easiest to return if need be as well.

Jeff

hello again,
I.ve been researchng antennas a little bit. RS has 2 models a 160" long range VU-190 XR. I guess this is uhf/VHF, and one that looks just like it, without the long back end (it doesn't have a model # but looks just like a channel master 4348.)

So if i only care about the uhf, will the larger antenna be better in some way. I've also seen these directional parabolic antennas

brief situation: 1oo miles away from denver, mountanious terrain, antenna size is not an issue.

BTW, I hope we have not heard from George M B/C he is having too much fun watching HD!

Jay, The only thing I know about the VU-190 XR antenna is it is huge. I had thought about getting one a long time ago when it looked like ColoSprings would be on the air before many of our stations around here. But, I couldn't get it into any vehicle I had access to.

Jeff

As a result of the Republic Plaza power tests, KRMA-DT went off the air Saturday night and hasn't yet come back on. Our transmitter has been running 24/7/365 since December 1999, and it failed to turn on after the tests. We've located a bad component and should have it replaced sometime Tuesday. We're sorry about the outage - it's not in your TV.

Jim Schoedler
Director of Network Engineering
Rocky Mountain PBS (KRMA/KRMA-DT/KRMJ/KTSC)

Originally posted by DennisMileHi

As an FYI Republic Plaza is going to be testing their power systems on
Saturday March 8th starting at 6pm and lasting for a ten hour period. They
do this once a year, we have contacted them and it is not a total building
outage but different systems will go down at different times during the 10
hour period, although our systems may not be affected we hope that any
outages will be minimal and of short duration.

Thanks,
Pat Brus
Engineering Manager
KCNC-TV [/B]

I was wondering about that last night -- if the Republic Plaza power outage had affected your signal. I couldn't pull it in and was blaming the warmer weather.

I've lost my OTA KRMA-18 signal for the last two days, it
stays around 100% but nothing now, any one having this
problem too. -Pete (never mind :) )

Any status on the vote at the TAJ today? It was on their agenda, on the JeffCo web site...

Originally posted by pookers
Any status on the vote at the TAJ today? It was on their agenda, on the JeffCo web site... I thought that was scheduled for the 11th....

I understand it to be tomorrow. The BCC meets on Tuesdays...

thanks jeffden,
I really don't care how big the antenna is, I just want it to work. I guess my real question is will all the vhf stuff hanging off the back of it somehow help the "grabbing" of the narrow uhf signal i am looking for. I'm waiting to see how George M made out, to help me guage if this is even a possibility.
Thanks,
Jay

Originally posted by SummitJay
thanks jeffden,
I really don't care how big the antenna is, I just want it to work. I guess my real question is will all the vhf stuff hanging off the back of it somehow help the "grabbing" of the narrow uhf signal i am looking for. I'm waiting to see how George M made out, to help me guage if this is even a possibility.
Thanks,
Jay Far be it from me to discourage you from trying but George is quite a bit closer than you and has no Continental Divide between him and downtown. Considering that folks in Greeley can't get those channels I wouldn't put too much hope on your succeeding.

Originally posted by Jim Schoedler
As a result of the Republic Plaza power tests, KRMA-DT went off the air Saturday night and hasn't yet come back on. ... Thanks Jim. I noticed on Sunday and this morning but hadn't had a chance to post. I'll look for KRMA again tomorrow evening.

Hi Guys!
Just got back into town after a Loooooong road trip. Any news on KWGN turning on yet?

Not yet, Ernie. Last I heard was a couple of weeks ago from Don saying they were basically ready to go but were awaiting FCC approval to broadcast at 450kW rather than their allotted 1MW.

Hey everyone -- the final Mt. Morrison vote was today and the results were the same: Holloway voted against, the other commissioners voted for.

Let the construction begin!!!

(OK, my source says construction won't start per se this week, but the planning can now go full steam ahead)

Hi folks,
I have been reading in other threads that some CBS affiliates might be multicasting NCAA tournament games or at least televising out of market HD games on their digital side, so I dropped a note to KCNC to see what they would do. My note read:

Gentlemen,
Can you give us an idea of how you plan to handle the NCAA basketball games this year? Will you try to multicast tournament games, and/or provide an out of market game which is telecast in HD? Also, should CBS cut to Iraq coverage, is there any chance the digital feed may remain on the college games. I would like to post some information in the AVS forum for the viewers. Thanks in advance for your time
jm

I just received the following reply from Wendy Holmes at the station:


"Thanks for writing. We will not be multicasted the games, but we will once again carry the games from the HDTV sites on Fridays and Sundays in their entirety. That's Birmingham, AL on 3/21 and 3/23, and San Antonio, TX on 3/28 and 3/30. The Final Four and Championship Game will also be in HD. If war begins during the tournament, CBS plans to carry coverage on both analog and HD channels.

That's funny -- you address the note to "Gentlemen" and get a response from Wendy. :D

I originally sent the note to Pat Brus and/or the engineering staff, and they apparently passed it on.

For those interested in KGWN out of Cheyenne, I received an email from GM Joan Turner today.

She said that their transmitter has been delivered to the site, but they are waiting on a delay unit (to adjust for the time zone difference). She is hopefull to be up within a month!! They will broadcast on channel 30.

Originally posted by dr_mal
Hey everyone -- the final Mt. Morrison vote was today and the results were the same: Holloway voted against, the other commissioners voted for.

Let the construction begin!!!

(OK, my source says construction won't start per se this week, but the planning can now go full steam ahead) Excellent. Now we need to hope that SCARE doesn't take it to court....hopefully our friends at KRMA will let us know if that happens.

Isn't it amazing that our PBS station will be broadcasting high power HDTV when our ABC affiliate continues to play around with their toy transmitter to provide coverage for their parking lot?

In my mind this nicely illustrates what the desire to get on the air can accomplish. On the other hand it clearly shows KMGH has no desire...sad...sad...shame on you KMGH.....

Any idea on the initial power level? Does the south metro area have a chance? And what is their network affiliation?

(hoping for the answers: full power, absolutely, and ABC) :D

If you are asking about KGWN, your answers are:
-full power
-hard to say
and
-CBS

Sorry
;)
Originally posted by zeedave
Any idea on the initial power level? Does the south metro area have a chance? And what is their network affiliation?

(hoping for the answers: full power, absolutely, and ABC) :D

Zeedave,
If you're in the south part of town and want ABC, check out the Colorado Springs thread. I believe the ABC-DT there (channel 24) is supposed to go live at the end of this month. That usually means they will go live sometime after this month (don't know if it will be soon after or if they'll get another extension, but ask them on the CS thread). After they are up, try pointing the antenna that way. If I could get ABC from any other source, I'd never watch KMGH even when they start DTV.

Hey everyone -- the final Mt. Morrison vote was today and the results were the same: Holloway voted against, the other commissioners voted for.

Let the construction begin!!!

(OK, my source says construction won't start per this week, but the planning can now go full steam ahead)

It seems that Mt. Morrison need to go through a "platting" process before they can get their building permit. As it was explained to me, this is because they need to make a lot to put the building on. It appears that the platting process also involves public hearings before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. However, the "platting" is more or less just to make sure that the engineering of the site follows the rules. It should take significantly less time than a rezoning (which changes land use).

-Wabisabi

Not more Public Meetings.... Ahhhhhh!!!!!

I saw this little blurb in the RMN today. An article about Comcast offering Video-On-Demand within 12 months mentions some other plans:

Comcast Cable President Steve Burke, says "Video-on-Demand is one of three products that Comcast plans to develop and emphasize over the next two years. The others are High-speed Internet access and High-definition television."

I have had Cable High-speed Internet for about 4 years in Westminster. I thought it was pretty much developed. I hope their priorities are to "develop" and "emphasize" HDTV for those of us that have already had their cable upgraded. I am located behind a ridge off of 104th and am fairly certain I am unable to get Denver’s low powered OTA HDTV signals.

BTW, I'm new to the forum and would like to know who to write letters to complain about the Denver's dismal HDTV situation. Could someone post some addresses? I'm sure they are in this thread somewhere but this is the "Mother of all Threads!”

Thanks.

nu2this

Welcome to the thread and the battle, nu2this. Nice to have you aboard.

Copied from Geof's letter message on page 194,:

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

Holland & Knight LLP
ATTN: Edward W. Hummers, Jr.
2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 100
Washington, D.C. 20006-6801

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

The first 2 are to the FCC, the third is KMGH's lawyer and the 4th is obviously KMGH for our letter writing campaign about them specifically.

Pete McNally is the consultant that the LCG has hired to present the application to Jeffco. Anything sent to the FCC or local stations should also be cc:ed to him via email. :)

Click on my Denver DTV link at the bottom of my Signiture. It has links to all the stations. And on the Links page, you can find the link to the FCC. We've especially been on a campaign to write them about the KMGH problem.

Originally posted by Geof
Excellent. Now we need to hope that SCARE doesn't take it to court....hopefully our friends at KRMA will let us know if that happens.

Isn't it amazing that our PBS station will be broadcasting high power HDTV when our ABC affiliate continues to play around with their toy transmitter to provide coverage for their parking lot?

In my mind this nicely illustrates what the desire to get on the air can accomplish. On the other hand it clearly shows KMGH has no desire...sad...sad...shame on you KMGH.....

What's CARE's history with court battles over DTV? I know they lost a fight to keep KWGN from going mid-power on their small tower. Have they won any of these battles or do they just waste time and taxpayer money?

Originally posted by dr_mal
What's CARE's history with court battles over DTV? I know they lost a fight to keep KWGN from going mid-power on their small tower. Have they won any of these battles or do they just waste time and taxpayer money? I really don't know what their history is. I do think that it would be an uphill battle to get the court to overturn yesterdays ruling but that might not matter if they could get an injunction that keeps construction from proceeding. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens...

Well, I don't know how long it will be before KUSA gets that HD "Flange" so they can start passing HD.

BUT, people WAAY north should get some relief soon, and people not so far north may get some relief in a year plus or minus...

Today I got an update from K2 NBC from Cheyenne (originates in Casper)...

They broadcast on 33, DTV assignment is channel 11.


We had begun broadcasting a digital signal in Cheyenne on Ch.11. We have some problems over the past week or so, so it is currently off the air. I hope to get it back on next week. It is a very low power signal, so I am not sure if you will be able to receive it in Fort Collins. We have applied to the FCC for a substantial increase in power, and to move our transmitting site closer to Fort Collins. It could take a year to get that approval.

Thanks for your continued interest in K2.

Mail again in a week or two and I will let you know when it is back on the air.

Mike Brown
Chief Engineer
K2 TV


Actually, I should note Mike said nothing about HD, so they may just be passing SD as well.

Greg

Greg,

Thanks for the info.

Jeff

Tonight for the first time since Dan (DP1) helped me point my antenna towards KMGH, (last October) 17-2 showed up in the guide on my 6000. I didn't do a scan or add it, it just appeared.

So then I did a digital channel scan, and only 17-1 was detected. I didn't save the results of the scan so I could keep 17-2. Go figure....

On my DTC-100, the second subchannel is not digital. It is a 4:3 normal SD transmission. That allows me to use my zoom stretch to full or fill, if I were so inclined. I still have the exact same signal strength.

This is only the second time the thread has dropped to page 4 that I can remember. Just shows that nothing has really been happening for quite a while.

Jeff

I recently got an open box hughes e86 (best buy, $330) and am getting 4-1, 6-1, and 31-1 just fine, but 9-1 is totally breaking up - actually if I switch from 6-1 to 9-1, some of the picture of 6-1 remains, with wild pixelation happening. I've tried some other hd receivers in the past, including other e86's, and didn't have this problem. Signal strength is high for 9-1 (16-1) but it does rapid occilations. Since I don't see anybody else talking about problems receiving 9-1, is it likely a problem with this particular e86?

Originally posted by dssset
.....Since I don't see anybody else talking about problems receiving 9-1, is it likely a problem with this particular e86? Good question. Since I've gotten my E86 (to replace a Mits SR-HD5) I haven't had luck receiving 6-1 and neither the old Mits nor the new Hughes receives 9-1 adequately enough to produce a picture. What's strange is that the signal level meter shows about the same level for 4-1 and 9-1 and while 4-1 works fine 9-1 does not. The good news is I don't watch "Colorado's News Leader" so I don't care.

I swapped out the cable from the antenna and 9-1 is fine now - strange that the old (bad?) cable wasn't affecting 4-1, 6-1, or 31-1. However, 9-1 still always indicates "Regular Schedule" rather than the actual program info (in the menu schedule etc.) , no big deal, tho it is strange since all the other digital channels show the appropriate info. Geof, do you get the same thing on your e86 (9-1 "regular schedule"), and what signal strength are you showing for it?

Uh-oh...fell off of page 1 again... :)

Nothing really new here to talk about, but if we end up getting 3 feet of snow of the next couple of days and the snow ends up drifting over the top of my roof-top antenna, think I'll lose 17? :D

I watched Alias last night, and it was back in DD 5.1 sound. KMGH must have gotton their encoder back, and as there weren't really too many glitches, it must be fixed. The 5.1 sound mix wasn't the greatest, but at least it was there.

[Edited to add] Oh, and welcome to page 200!

I have been able to get Channel 17.1 at around 78-80 staring for some time now down in Highlands Ranch (Direct view of downtown). Recently, it has dropped to around 49-50, which is not viewable. Anyone else seen this type of drop off?

Thanks,
Todd

Hey Mark, don't worry about your antenna if we get 3 feet of snow. I would worry more about KMGH's antenna getting coverd up first :-)

Later
Joe

I am not getting any sound on channel 17, wait a minute, I am not getting a picture either. You mean KMGH has a digital signal? Could have fooled me. That's funny, cause I get all of the other digital channels fine. So I know it aint my set-up. Wait, I can get ALL of the analog Colorado Springs stations too, and I receive KKTV-DT just fine.

Maybe we should call or write them to say no one can get their signal from their baby xmitter!

STATUS: Channel 17: a big, fat ZERO.
Unbelievable

Originally posted by pookers
Maybe we should call or write them to say no one can get their signal from their baby xmitter! Now why didn't I think of that :eek:

Todd,

I reported a similar drop recently and basically, everyone else who responded had not seen any dropoff of signal strength. Contact KMGH engineering ( Rick Craddock ) and let them know you see the same approximate drop in signal.

Jeff

Hey Geof, I thought it was a good idea! too bad I didn't think of it first...like say three years ago ! or was it four?

"we were the first Denver area station to go digital"
what a joke.

Last night, KMGH was breaking up on Alias and Dragnet although the sound was 5.1 and pretty good. My signal has gone from 40-42 down to 38-40. That puts me on the fringe of getting a solid signal.

So, has anyone gotten any feedback about our letters that we DID write? All I can see that has been accomplished is to cause some ABC legal fees to be spent at Holland & Knight to keep the FCC off of KMGH's back.

I wrote two letters and only got a copy of the Holland & Knight letter to the FCC.

Apparently you guys just didn't read the letter from the KMGH lawyers close enough. They will be on the air in the full power mode shortly. Didn't you read this section?

"We appreciate the complainants’ interest in digital television and seek their active support of Lake Cedar Group’s Lookout Mountain new zoning application now before Jefferson County. We anticipate that Jefferson County will grant the necessary zoning this spring and construction of the proposed multi-user tower will commence as soon thereafter as is possible.
With regard to the temporary DTV facilities now being operated by KMGH-DT, they were the first DTV facilities installed in the Denver market, having gone on the air on Sunday, February 28, 1999 at 10:00 am. "

They were indeed as they state the first to be on the air, (and I am sure glad they stated it, as apparently no one outside of their parking lot knew about it), and it appears they should easily be on the air in time for the fall Monday Night Football season. What more could you want????

Oh, yes, and make sure you slot your evenings this spring to drive to the Taj in Jeffco to lend your support to them as a token of our appreciation for their fine effort to be on the air no more than about 3-4 years late.
Speaking of which, has anyone heard from Pete about the firm dates for the meetings at Jeffco???? If I believe the KMGH lawyers (and why would they have any reason to mislead us or the FCC?), things couldn't possibly have slipped could they?

:rolleyes:

Originally posted by pookers
Hey Geof, I thought it was a good idea! too bad I didn't think of it first...like say three years ago ! or was it four?

"we were the first Denver area station to go digital"
what a joke. At this point I am not sure who thought of it first (:)) but unfortunately it has had no affect thus far. With Spring being right around the corner (this week even!) I too expect KMGH to make good on their committment to have approval "shortly". Oh, wait, I take that back, they also told the FCC last year that they would be broadcasting high power by the fall of '03 so that must be true.... now I'm confused....just what is KMGH saying (in DD5.1) ???

Well, according to CARE, the LCG hearing dates are:

Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 6:00 PM
Wednesday April 9, 2003, at 6:00 PM
Wednesday April 23, 2003, at 3:00 PM

Of course, since the dates keep changing, I'm not blocking out the time on my calendar just yet...

Originally posted by dr_mal
Well, according to CARE, the LCG hearing dates are:

Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 6:00 PM
Wednesday April 9, 2003, at 6:00 PM
Wednesday April 23, 2003, at 3:00 PM

Of course, since the dates keep changing, I'm not blocking out the time on my calendar just yet...

I think that to show our support for the KMGH folks in particular, we should just block out every night this spring until we know for sure when they want us to show up. After everything they have done for us it is the 'least' we can do.
:mad:

I could not get KMGH-DT last night. Lucky I was able to watch Alias on BEV N2 at 82 degrees. I did get a 50% signal this morning.

I'm having fun composing my "response" to KMGH's "response" to my letter to the FCC. It's interesting to note that in their letter to the FCC, they indicate that they expect an approval sometime this spring. That means they think they'll have their approval within 10 weeks of the first hearing!

Boy, we may want to block out EVERY evening, since they'll probably have to work overtime to get everything done in 10 weeks.

Greg

Originally posted by gkanders
It's interesting to note that in their letter to the FCC, they indicate that they expect an approval sometime this spring. That means they think they'll have their approval within 10 weeks of the first hearing! Take a look at this timeline http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/TimelineF.htm. Track record of the last two applications show 398 days and 517 days! A good estimator would avg that and say 1 year and 3 months from submittal to decision. That would be November of this year. (and I feel that's optimistic!)

Originally posted by RonAuger
Take a look at this timeline http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/TimelineF.htm. Track record of the last two applications show 398 days and 517 days! A good estimator would avg that and say 1 year and 3 months from submittal to decision. That would be November of this year. (and I feel that's optimistic!) Optimistically I think August/Sept timeframe at the earliest. Another delay will be getting the necessary permits. Don't look for all the county paperwork to be completed much before the end of the year. That's what really rubs me about the KMGH response - Evidently they see no harm in feeding us bullsh!t to get us off their backs and then later plead for help when they need it. I really hate that, I really do (and it is likely going to cost them - and LCG2 - my support).

Ron & Geof, I actually think you guys are quite optimistic. The earlier applications didn't sit 9 months from submittal to first planning board hearings. The PIC/BCDC app took just at 1 year from first planning board hearing to approval. I would say add a couple of months to THAT timeframe (since LCG is going to encounter more resistance).

Either way, it'll also be enlightening to see how long any "platting" process (as reported by wabisabi on page 199) takes for the PIC/BCDC application. Assuming approval of LCG II, I'd expect any platting process to take longer for it than the Mt. Morrison application. If they really have to go through planning commission and back to the county commissioners, it will have to take at least a few months.

Remember, LCG calls for a year build-out. Add these up: 1 yr, 3 mo, + 4 mo for Platting, + 1 yr buildout. 2 yr, 7 mo. How about testing, any weather related delays... It could easily be 3 years. Best case 2+ years; reasonably could be 3 years; worst case is even worse than that.

Now I'm depressed. I'm not having fun composing my response anymore! :(

I might be wrong but I am not sure the platting process will be required for the LCG2 site. Platting effectively establishes a "lot" and I believe the LCG site is already a "lot" (if anyone knows for sure please enlighten me). Nonetheless they will still have to get building plans finalized, submitted to JeffCo, and then approved.

Does anybody with a hughes e86 get the proper program info in the schedule etc. for 9-1(kusa). I just get "regular schedule". 4-1, 6-1, 31-1 are fine.

Originally posted by dssset
Does anybody with a hughes e86 get the proper program info in the schedule etc. for 9-1(kusa). I just get "regular schedule". 4-1, 6-1, 31-1 are fine. I think that's "normal" right now. The Advanced Program Guide info is sent from DirecTV and until they update their database "Regular Schedule" is what shows up. It took awhile (I forget exactly how long) for 4-1 to show correct guide info but it ultimately got there.

Since I have only gotten 9-1 once I had taken it out of the guide. Right now the signal level for 9-1 is 51 and I am getting a watchable picture. The signal level for 32 has fallen considerably though and is presently in the mid 50's for me and it's usually pegged at 100. Unfortunately KRMA signal level is again too low for me to get a watchable picture.