Also, I was told by a Comcast line tech last summer that in Denver that they have fiber connections to the major locals. I don't know if that's true or not.I can't remember for sure when (Help me out guys) But I think we were at KCNC's tower picnic last year when they told us Comcast was pulling their signal off-the-air and not from a direct feed.

Might that have been Roger Ogden and/or Don Perez at KUSA recently?

:confused:

Originally posted by mayest
I can't compete with you and Ernie on knowledge of the technology, but it has been said repeatedly on these forums (more than once by KenH) that Comcast does not compress (or do rate-shaping) HD signals in any way. What you see on Comcast is exactly what they got (except converted to QAM). Also, I was told by a Comcast line tech last summer that in Denver they have direct fiber connections to the major locals. I don't know if that's true or not.

Well, that means however they are fed the signal, they are directly using the MPEG-2 video and audio. That is definately good for their customers.

Problem solved.

Just a reminder...

Next Thurs night @ 5pm, it starts all over again. JeffCo LCGII tower re-hearings begin. Just like a bad dream or is it more like having eaten bad clams??? ;)

Originally posted by santellavision
I can't remember for sure when (Help me out guys) But I think we were at KCNC's tower picnic last year when they told us Comcast was pulling their signal off-the-air and not from a direct feed.
I missed the tower picnic :(, but at one of KCNC's open houses (before Comcast ever did HD) they told us Comcast and Dish Network were pulling in their analog signal OTA. DirecTV at the time was the only provider with a direct fiber feed. Of course, that only applies to the SD channel.

I *think* we were told at KUSA that they have direct fiber link to Comcast for 9-1, and direct links to all the providers for their SD channel. Even though it was more recent, for some reason my recollection isn't quite as clear on this one.

Originally posted by santellavision
Next Thurs night @ 5pm, it starts all over again. JeffCo LCGII tower re-hearings begin.

But will the recent FCC directive (a few posts back) have any impact on this? As was stated, LCGII doesn't need the new tower to go full power. But it seems they'd have incentive to try to really move on the new tower. I wonder if they'd give up the thought of a single tower if they had to install full power transmitters on their current towers.

If I were in a decision making postion at any of the major network stations in Denver, I would be saying screw the LCG deal, put up my digital full power transmitter on the analog tower by next summer and be done with it. Enough already trying to be a good neighbor and do the right thing. No more lawyers, development costs or hassles. I would not want to lose the eastern Colorado market geography due to the FCC ruling mandating full power.

Cheyenne and CS, on the other hand, would hope that the legal battles would go on forever while they put up even higher power transmitters to establish a bigger geographic area.

What a total waste of time this whole thing has been. I now regret all the time I sat in either a TV station listening to LCG or the major time I spent last summer at the Taj listening to crazed people and ultimately speaking my 2 minute bit causing the commish to think I needed a sherriff escort to be safe leaving! At least I got a picnic dinner on Lookout at KCNC.

If I remember correctly, the current towers can't support both analog and digital antennas. And Jeffco won't let them modify the towers at all without the re-zoning. So, they could only switch them to digital if they replaced analog service with digital (post transition) using the current antennas.

Of course most of us here would say that's fine, but needless to say most of the population isn't ready yet for analog to be shut down.

Mark

How's this sound for an idea...

What if they were to 'switch'? Put a new Full-power digital X-mtter on Lookout and just keep a small analog X-mitter on republic for a couple of years.

While we are searching our memory.. is it not true that the broadcasters cannot put antennas for a different service (DTV) on the towers that have been grandfathered in. In other words, or so I thought, they can never put DTV antennas on the existing towers without getting a zoning change. I also am pretty sure that there would be no problem with installing new UHF DTV antennas on the current towers from any engineering point of view. There may be issues with fitting all of the equipment into the current buildings, and the question if the current backup systems would be sufficient. Expanding the buildings, adding larger generators, anything that thye try to do would require a permit...which would likely force things again to the zoning board...It all still boils down to zoning issues and having the MAD DOGS of SCARE constantly nipping at everyones heels.

Phil P.

The way I remember things is that the stations can convert the current facilities to DTV without making any changes outside of the current buildings. But they cannot do analog and DTV together without changes requiring a zoning change. It is believed that Jeffco officials agree that they can convert to DTV if there are no changes outside of the buildings. sCARE, of course, disagrees.

If LCGII is turned down, I think (my speculation, but suggested in the earlier hearings) that DTV transmitter facilities would get installed elsewhere (Squaw or Mt. Morisson) until some time around the analog shut-off (2009?). Then, the current analog facilities on Lookout (on land owned by LCG members) would get converted to digital. The net result is no reduction of towers or buildings on Lookout Mtn., which would occur if LCGII is approved.

Ah yes, the "different service" argument. Logic holds that TV is TV - ie a HD picture on a frequency used for TV is the same service as a SD picture on that same frequency from that same tower.

So JeffCo has, of course, ruled that a prettier picture is a completely different service. The stations cannot change their antennas on their towers.

The cool bit (for us, long term) is that they don't need to change the antenna. You know, since the antenna doesn't care what kind of TV signal is on the certain frequency it's transmitting. All they'd have to do is change out some equipment in their transmitter buildings. That won't require a permit. At least according to LCG. sCARE claims it would require a permit. That could well be another whole series of county hearings and whatnot. (more likely, a judicial hearings brought on by sCARE, since LCG likely wouldn't be applying to the county for anything)

Originally posted by ppasteur
I also am pretty sure that there would be no problem with installing new UHF DTV antennas on the current towers from any engineering point of view.
If this was the case, why would any of the stations have even bothered with LCG in the first place? I tend to think their current towers can't hold any additional antennas.

I would prefer for them to use the existing omni-directional antenna's. If they were to replace them with directional ones, I might have the same problem I am now with KWGN. I can't get a whiff of that signal from the west side.

Originally posted by dr_mal
If this was the case, why would any of the stations have even bothered with LCG in the first place? I tend to think their current towers can't hold any additional antennas.

Installing a new antenna would be a modification of the existing tower, which JeffCo won't allow without re-zoning.

Remember that KWGN had to get county approval to put their DTV antenna on an existing short tower. I think that would have required re-zoning except that the height of the tower was short enough that the site didn't have to be re-zoned as a telecommunications facility to allow that type of structure. Oddly, the county wouldn't let KCNC do essentially the same thing a couple of years earlier--maybe their short tower was a couple of centimeters too tall.

Mark

It is interesting to note that there are alot of possible solutions here - I like the switch of the existing towers with existing equipment from modulating a 6MHz NTSC stream to a 6 MHz ATSC stream as well. I don't know if any changes would be required on Lookout, since the signal to be modulated (AFAIK) could be analog prior to sending it to Lookout and the transmitters wouldn't care. This way, after the transition, the stations get to keep the channels they are known by now, rather than being "CBS 35" or whatever. For those needing OTA NTSC, all TV's have UHF receivers and leased space from Mt. Morrison or where ever could provide a good interim solution for continuing NTSC. A new antenna for viewers may be necessary, but if they can get FOX, they probably already have one. What I find most interesting is that there are, and have been, alternative solutions, but the hold out was for LCG - maybe to be a good neighbor, to upgrade fo a newer structure (like our stadiums), to resolve the pesky zoning issue, or maybe because it would take longer - or perhaps a combination of all of those. But, since there are alternatives to providing full power digital in the interim, the real reason we don't have it is economic. When faced with loosing protection, I think the FCC applying pressure will cause some to re-think where they stand.

EDIT: Not to say that implementing an alternative solution would be a picnic either, but more likely than LCG2 being ready by next July.

Chances are the existing analog antennas and lines would have to be "repaired" to support DTV transmission. due to age.

When we were at the KCNC picnic, the KCNC engineer pointed at where that had actually mounted their DTV antenna, then had to take it down.

The towers would certainly support the additional antennas.

As was mentioned :
"Installing a new antenna would be a modification of the existing tower, which JeffCo won't allow without re-zoning."

Which is why LCG came about in an attempt to satisfy all of the requirments needed to get a change approved to put "any" DTV antennas up there. Or at least that was my understanding of the situation.

Phil P.

Not to be picky, but DTV antennas are really either UHF or VHF antennas. Just like on the receiving side. The VHF antenna or UHF antenna currently in place would work fine for transmission of DTV signals. Antennas are frequency-specific, not modulation-type specific (someone please correct me if I'm wrong...).

Originally posted by ppasteur
When we were at the KCNC picnic, the KCNC engineer pointed at where that had actually mounted their DTV antenna, then had to take it down.

The towers would certainly support the additional antennas.

As was mentioned :
"Installing a new antenna would be a modification of the existing tower, which JeffCo won't allow without re-zoning."

Which is why LCG came about in an attempt to satisfy all of the requirments needed to get a change approved to put "any" DTV antennas up there. Or at least that was my understanding of the situation.

Phil P.
That makes sense. I was curious why they'd join LCG instead of filing their own zoning petition to add an antenna to their current tower. I guess they figured they had a better chance of one app being approved than all 4 or 5.

Absolutley true. The antennas don't care what kind of signal the radiate as long as it is the proper frquency. The antennas for channel 4 would be significantly different from those for channel 35 though. As KCNC is authorized currently to trnasmit DTV on chnnel 35, they would need a different antenna to do that from lookout. When I referred to DTV antennas, I guess that I really meant the new antennas for the new frequencies that all of th stations have been assigned to broadcast DTV on. I am pretty sure that in all cases new antennas would be required as they are (best I recall) cut for a single frequency.

Phi P.

...and all the way from Loveland I say, what in the hell is the deal here?!? With the FCC's release the other day, why can't those on Republic Plaza not just start booming their full signals out? ... do they need lookout mountain?

I have not followed a lot of what is in this thread but I find it shocking all the trouble LGC & sCARE are going though and/or causing. As it is I get full FOX and 90% KUSA (goes out when it is 90+ degrees ... odd) I would think if I am able to get this in Loveland, a full 300' lower in elevation that these could be received anywhere in Metro. Is this not the case? I know they work in Broomfield too, because I geared up a couple of family members there.

Not on topic (not to hijack) will FOX be HD ready for football season? I am only curious ... I think my NFL ST will cover all these games anyway but I would like to compare.

Back on topic ... what stops the LCG stations from powering up as authorized by the FCC?

The City of Denver, I believe, is the restriction on the Republic building, both for RF transmissions to buildings nearby and to run a lot more electrical power up to wherever the transmitters are in the building. Now, if they could only build TV antennas such are on top of other buildings like the Empire State (and were on the WT buildings) maybe they could crank up the power. But that would probably cost way more than the LCG II tower.

This really puts poor ol' KMGH in a tight spot next summer. With the 30 people they reach in Denver with theitr squirrel powered transmitter, the FCC ought to let the ABC Cheyenne and C.S. stations go gangbusters with power aimed to Denver and put KMGH out of business, at least geographically. Now wouldn't THAT be too bad.

Originally posted by dr_mal
That makes sense. I was curious why they'd join LCG instead of filing their own zoning petition to add an antenna to their current tower. I guess they figured they had a better chance of one app being approved than all 4 or 5.

Not only that, but I think the county had been pushing them to consolodate.

Mark

Thanks Dennis,

Every needs a piece I guess. I have read and thought about dual antennas. The 8bay I have now would certainly pull Cheyenne from my location ... I was getting reception with a Terk TV-55 (before I got an education on antennas). Not that this helps folks in Denver. Missing the Stanley Cup this year (in HD) really ticked me off.

I just like everyone, am frustrated at the impedance of technology by civil action groups. It is like they don't realize they will not get away from RF on this planet until there is a nuclear war. I'll bet everyone of those tree-hugging morons in sCARE carry and talk on their cell phones 6 hours a day which certainly would affect them more adversely than a DTV transmitter on Lookout Mountain.

Oh well on the bright side sCARE can listen to radio like the 1920's come 2006 and the rest of us will have HD feeds from SOMEWHERE, since the analong TV's they have will no longer process the DTV signals

Originally posted by ppasteur
Absolutley true. The antennas don't care what kind of signal the radiate as long as it is the proper frquency. The antennas for channel 4 would be significantly different from those for channel 35 though. As KCNC is authorized currently to trnasmit DTV on chnnel 35, they would need a different antenna to do that from lookout. When I referred to DTV antennas, I guess that I really meant the new antennas for the new frequencies that all of th stations have been assigned to broadcast DTV on. I am pretty sure that in all cases new antennas would be required as they are (best I recall) cut for a single frequency.

Phi P.

The antennas are tweaked differently,

In the analog world the antenna manufacturer worried about the antenna performance at two frequencies, the Visual (video) carrier which is VSB modulated (1.25 MHz above lower channel limit) and the Aural Carrier (which is an FM signal carrying the audio 4.5 Mhz above the visual carrier). With DTV the entire 6MHz. channel is used for the signal so the antenna performance is now critical across the entire channel. Depending on the age the analog antennas might have a problem producing a flat frequency response with low group delay and phase characteristics.

This would only work if they flash cut to the analog frequency.





.

That doesn't sound too promising. With the Zoning, they can't change the antenna... but, they can (cough) 'Repair' it. ;)

All this talk about stations sending digital out of their current antennas does depend on them using their current analog channel for their ATSC signal. At some point, the FCC will ask each station if they want to keep their analog (4) or digital (35) channel assignment. At the point in time when analog is shut off, the digital signals will be on the channel they choose to keep.

This is probably one reason why most ATSC channels are remapping to their analog channel number -- the theory is that one day, the ATSC channel will be on the same channel their NTSC is on right now. At that point, consumers shouldn't notice the switch from 4-1 (really 35) to 4-1 (really 4)

That's interesting. I had the impression that the FCC wanted everyone to vacate the VHF band and move all TV to UHF permanently. I figured the recent announcement about channel assignments just had to do with virtual mappings. Really, I thought the idea was to free up VHF so that the FCC could auction that off like they did with the PCS licenses in the 90's.

Did I get that all wrong?

Boy! What a thread!

Why do the stations need a rezoning to put a new antenna on an existing tower? Sorry if I missed the original post

Because their land is zoned MR-1 (Mountain Residential).

BTW, got my letter plea from James Morgese for money to build their horiz. tower on Morrison. He says if the public can donate $348,000 he can get a grant for another $348k. That gives him half of the 1.3M needed to build the tower.

Send your check to KRMA marked "Tower Fund".

I started to answer your question about why a modification would require a rezoning and just lost the will to continue after my "short answer" response headed into the fourth long paragraph. I hope it will suffice to simply say that the towers are non-conforming but allowed under a grandfather clause. Any modifications would not get approved because the tower itself is non-conforming.

Originally posted by ppasteur
AI am pretty sure that in all cases new antennas would be required as they are (best I recall) cut for a single frequency.

That was what I thought until I was talking with the people involved with the new tower here in Madison. The DTV antenna that they are using is cut for the whole UHF range. It will be used for channels 19 and 32. But, I was told that they will configure the copper coax in the transmitter building so that there will be a combiner to also feed in the analog channel 57 signal if something goes wrong with the feed for that separate antenna. The channel 15 signal can't be combined as the transmitter is in the original building, not the new one.

Originally posted by weldon
I started to answer your question about why a modification would require a rezoning and just lost the will to continue after my "short answer" response headed into the fourth long paragraph. I hope it will suffice to simply say that the towers are non-conforming but allowed under a grandfather clause. Any modifications would not get approved because the tower itself is non-conforming.
That's enough answer for me. :)

Originally posted by weldon
That's interesting. I had the impression that the FCC wanted everyone to vacate the VHF band and move all TV to UHF permanently. I figured the recent announcement about channel assignments just had to do with virtual mappings. Really, I thought the idea was to free up VHF so that the FCC could auction that off like they did with the PCS licenses in the 90's.

Did I get that all wrong?
The idea is to free up bandwidth to be auctioned off. I'm not aware of any preference by the FCC to get back the VHF or UHF, but I'm probably ignorant in that regard.

The story as I know it - the OFFICIAL DTV channel range will be from 2-51, at their current existing frequenies. There are some possible issues with lower VHF (2-6) and DTV, but it should be possible for them to be overcome. Considering that UHF currently goes to 69 (it used to goto 83 !), I'd say the TV spectrum take-back has already begun.

two comments:

One, KWGN lost it's argument that ATSC and NTSC are the "Same Service". They ultimately went to court for a "final ruling" and I have not heard the outcome of that (or even if it's been decided). When JeffCo said it's not the same service they went to "plan B" and installed their antenna on the half height tower. (KWGN correct me if that is wrong).

So, unless ATSC and NTSC have been classified as the same service it's not a simple straightforward process of converting their existing NTSC towers to ATSC because they are not permitted to change the purpose of the antenna without county approval. I don't believe that modifying their existing NTSC antenna to make it ready for ATSC would violate any other county rules but since it's not the same service they'd be stopped dead in their tracks.

Secondly, a very long time ago KCNC Engineering told me they fully intended to vacate Channel 4 and stay on Ch 35 for DT use. The reason was because the lower VHF band is not the best frequency band to be using for ATSC. I believe the concern was impulse noise interference. That was before widespread adoption of ATSC and perhaps practical experience has alleviated that concern. Maybe William Smith can chime in and correct me if this is no longer an issue.

You can bet your ass, house, and any other item of value that SCARE would take anyone to court if they tried to convert existing NTSC towers to ATSC. Secondly, there are so very few ATSC receivers in this market as compared to NTSC receiver that there is simply no way the stations are going to abandon those viewers, however "temporarily" that might be. It just ain't gonna happen.

Lastly I very seriously doubt the FCC is going to penalize any Denver station for not being full power. I'd be willing to bet that they will get an exemption from losing their coverage area because of the situation. There is just no way the FCC is going to penalize those stations for what (has been to this point) problems with Lookout that are perceived by the FCC as being beyond the control of the stations.

I'm not sure about that - KWGN added UHF, another channel. That change added a service. This is not the case with changing the underlying modulation type sent out on channel 4. The scenario is quite different. And, if the LCG stations pitched in to help Mt Morrison, at least some of them could put their NTSC on UHF there prior to next July - so I believe possiblities exist that are open, but as I said before, they surely wouldn't be a picnic. As to channel 35 being preferable to 4, I'm hoping to hear about the viability of channel 4 being used for DTV myself...

If alternative solutions are available, there's less reason for the FCC to keep treating Denver as a special case. It may just feel if Denver can't fix its problems, maybe its time to stop holding the entire DMA hostage and let other solutions come to light.

Anybody know what the percentage of viewers still get their NTSC signals OTA? I bet it's very low with Cable and Sat supplying the majority. My guess is around 5% or less.

I may be remembering wrong, but I seem to recall from the KRMA meeting that about 1/3 of their viewers got KRMA OTA. Whatever the number was, it surprised me, so I suspect it's a lot more than 5%.

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
I'm not sure about that - KWGN added UHF, another channel. That change added a service. This is not the case with changing the underlying modulation type sent out on channel 4. The scenario is quite different. And, if the LCG stations pitched in to help Mt Morrison, at least some of them could put their NTSC on UHF there prior to next July - so I believe possiblities exist that are open, but as I said before, they surely wouldn't be a picnic. As to channel 35 being preferable to 4, I'm hoping to hear about the viability of channel 4 being used for DTV myself...

If alternative solutions are available, there's less reason for the FCC to keep treating Denver as a special case. It may just feel if Denver can't fix its problems, maybe its time to stop holding the entire DMA hostage and let other solutions come to light. Not really...

This was posted by Don on 6/14/02 (page 98 in this thread) Our plan invloves our existing, 450 foot main tower. No new tower construction in involved. The proposal has two main components:

First we get the two FM's KBPI & KALC to combine their existing two antennas into a single, combine antenna. Then we exchange an existing channel 57 antenna for a channel, 34 for DTV.

Even based on the restrictive zoning the county claims this tower to fall under, we feel we should be allowed to exchange these two antennas. The zonig regs. do allow the exchange of antennas designed to provide the same service, but they feel as though these are not the same service. Our position is that they are both Television service, as described by NIST.

Hope this helps.

DonBold emphasis is mine.

Reagrdless, the FCC has let the stations slide (KMGH in particular) with no penalties to this point. They are not about to limit their DMA when their full power facilities don't even yet exist. It would be one thing if they had full power capability and were broadcasting toy transmitter levels but they have absolutely NO MEANS of increasing their ERP [to full power] given their current situtaion and the FCC is NO WAY IN HELL going to penalize them by reducing there DMA. You can take that to the bank.

As to KCNC choosing 4 or 35 only they can answer that now but I am 1000000% positive they told me they would stay on Ch 35 (several years ago). As I said, that was awhile back and they may have changed thier stance since then. Maybe they can chime in and tell us their current thinking but until I hear otherwise I'll go with what I was told way back when.

Edited to add [to full power]

Originally posted by Geof
Reagrdless, the FCC has let the stations slide (KMGH in particular) with no penalties to this point. They are not about to limit their DMA when their full power facilities don't even yet exist. It would be one thing if they had full power capability but were broadcasting toy transmitter levels but they have absolutely NO MEANS of increasing their ERP given their current situtaion and the FCC is NO WAY IN HELL going to penalize them by reducing there DMA. You can take that to the bank.

It is interesting that the situation was a little different here in Madison for one of our stations. In Denver, your stations want to have facilities for full power DTV. The management at the local NBC affiliate didn't. Their current tower wouldn't support anything other than their current low power DTV sidemount. They were going to ask for a waiver to let them keep that. With the FCC release, it would have meant no protection for them if they ended up changing their mind. Here in Madison, I doubt that would have been a real problem, considering where we are located.

But, with the construction of the new tower and the new DTV antenna, they will have to go full power. I believe they are. I know the WB affiliate, whose 10 station group owner is paying for the new tower, is. It is going to be expensive though, since the ad rates are not as high as they should be for a market this size, as no one wants to pay the rates wanted by the stations. All that electricity and not much money to pay for it. It is one of the reasons the station group is in no hurry to convert the SDTV signal to HDTV.

Oh come on Geof, you know as well as I do that KMGH's only option isn't to continue their toy transmitter. They've lapsed in their mandate to provide digital TV to their DMA.

We've been bugging them for years now to move to Republic. We don't know for sure Republic could support another station, but to our knowledge they haven't even tried. At least KUSA finally came around and is providing (most of) us with a HD signal. KMGH and KUSA were both in the same "we're not doing anything at Republic or anywhere else until LCG2 gets approved, since approval is right around the corner" camp. KUSA flinched (and powerfully, giving us HD news and the nation's only HD traffic cam) after we wrote letters to the FCC (whether there's any correlation is anybody's guess). KMGH stonewalled. At this point, I'm OK with the FCC letting KRMA, KCNC, and KUSA slide. They've put in a good faith effort. But KMGH should be nailed to the wall.

(not picking on you Geof, you know I respect you, but for a minute it looked like you were defending KMGH)

OT, but for those of you who don't follow the programming forum and subscibe to D* with the HD package, you can now get the HD package free for 6 months. Just call and ask or go online and delete it and then add back the HD package. Took me one minute to do it online and it now says HD package $0.00/6 months.

Bugs me a little that you have to read forums to find this stuff out, but, maybe D* will put a flyer into the mail stating how to get the deal for the uninformed masses. Right!

I have emailed Don Perez at KUSA asking what their plans are for broadcasting HD Olympics coverage on 9-1 HD channel. I have not yet received a response from 3 days ago.
If I understand the D* policy correctly, we could get the HD feed from them even though we are not in an O&O market IF another multi channel provider is broadcasting coverage in our market. Does anyone know if Comcast will be showing HD Olympic coverage locally?

Originally posted by dr_mal
Oh come on Geof, you know as well as I do that KMGH's only option isn't to continue their toy transmitter. They've lapsed in their mandate to provide digital TV to their DMA.

We've been bugging them for years now to move to Republic. We don't know for sure Republic could support another station, but to our knowledge they haven't even tried. At least KUSA finally came around and is providing (most of) us with a HD signal. KMGH and KUSA were both in the same "we're not doing anything at Republic or anywhere else until LCG2 gets approved, since approval is right around the corner" camp. KUSA flinched (and powerfully, giving us HD news and the nation's only HD traffic cam) after we wrote letters to the FCC (whether there's any correlation is anybody's guess). KMGH stonewalled. At this point, I'm OK with the FCC letting KRMA, KCNC, and KUSA slide. They've put in a good faith effort. But KMGH should be nailed to the wall.

(not picking on you Geof, you know I respect you, but for a minute it looked like you were defending KMGH) Maybe you ought to use your TiVo and replay the portion of what I posted...:)

I don't think I said anything that looked like I was defending them (and I still don't see it in a reread of my post though) but if you took it that way then my post is unclear (I did try to clarify it). There is no way in hell anyone (not even KMGH) can defend their actions, let alone me, who does not, nor never will, watch them except under extraordinary circumstances. All I said is there is no way they (KMGH or more specifically LCG in general) can go to full power under the present circumstances. Even if KMGH were to move to republic Plaza they couldn't do pull power. yes, they should go to Republic but pigs don't fly and hell is nowhere near freezing.

Sorry I missed your point Geof - the KWGN situation is irrelevant - and I'm not sure what you believe to be a major obstacle to giving us full power (an antenna can be repaired to optimize performance(a 'tune-up'), and certainly repairs involve new parts where needed).. I don't believe the full power DTV facilities dropped in anyone's lap anywhere in the country. When I read the FCC's ruling, it appears very much that their main goal was to get away from special cases. They also want to be progressive. Simply put, they aren't reducing anyone's DMA. But, if there's market areas not being served by DTV, there's opportunity for someone else to provide it. There was nothing in it about loss of license or removal of DMA. It is simply a case of "if you don't, someone else can".

So who do we email to voice our displeasure with KMGH's intransigence?

Originally posted by Geof
Maybe you ought to use your TiVo and replay the portion of what I posted...:)
If only you knew how many times I've tried to instant replay real life :)

Yeah, what you posted there makes more sense. I didn't think you'd ever be sticking up for KMGH :)

Originally posted by CEB II
So who do we email to voice our displeasure with KMGH's intransigence?
We've tried talking to KMGH directly. They either blow us off (not mentioning any names Cindy Velasquez) or tell us it would cost too much to move to Republic -- especially since LCG2 is only months away.

We've tried writing the FCC (the same approach we took right before KUSA changed their mind and went HD). We cc'd KMGH. KMGH's lawyers sent us and the FCC letters stating that they were in fact covering the city of Denver with a HD signal. And besides, LCG2 approval was only months away (this was IIRC, about 18 months ago) and they'd be on the air from Lookout so soon, it would be silly to put up another temporary solution.

But feel free to try either approach again. KMGH has a new GM, and the FCC might be getting tired of hearing excuses from slackers like KMGH.

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
Sorry I missed your point Geof - the KWGN situation is irrelevant - and I'm not sure what you believe to be a major obstacle to giving us full power (an antenna can be repaired to optimize performance(a 'tune-up'), and certainly repairs involve new parts where needed).. I don't believe the full power DTV facilities dropped in anyone's lap anywhere in the country. When I read the FCC's ruling, it appears very much that their main goal was to get away from special cases. They also want to be progressive. Simply put, they aren't reducing anyone's DMA. But, if there's market areas not being served by DTV, there's opportunity for someone else to provide it. There was nothing in it about loss of license or removal of DMA. It is simply a case of "if you don't, someone else can". Well I am not sure what we're really arguing about. My opinion is KWGN cannot go to full power (ERP-wise) because they are using a "half height" antenna, brought about by some silly ass ruling that NTSC and ATSC are not the same service. KCNC, KUSA, KMGH, and KDTV cannot go to full power because they have no way of doing that. They never have had a way of doing that. IMO, the FCC is NOT going to let Cheyenne or Colorado Springs broadcast to the Denver market because the LCG are unable to comply due to factors out of their control (at least the FCC believes the Lookout situation is out of the LCG control). And no matter how you want to word smith it letting Cheyenne or the Springs stations broadcast into the Denver market is a loss of DMA for the Denver stations. I would bet heavy money, say Dr-Mals paycheck :) (not my own of course) that all of the LCG stations will be granted exceptions to losing their coverage area because they couldn't go to full power even if they wanted.

I do believe the FCC ruling is trying to correct situations where some stations do not transmit full power, even thought they have the facilities to do so, because they are trying to reduce electrical consumption (lower their power bill) for example. One might argue that perhaps KDVR falls into that category because they have the equipment to broadcast full power (up to the limit of their license) but are only transmitting roughly 1/3 of full power. I think in this case they've been throttled back to avoid interference with other channels (likely their own channel 31) and in this case I doubt the FCC is going to slap their wee-wee either.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
OT, but for those of you who don't follow the programming forum and subscibe to D* with the HD package, you can now get the HD package free for 6 months. Just call and ask or go online and delete it and then add back the HD package. Took me one minute to do it online and it now says HD package $0.00/6 months.

Bugs me a little that you have to read forums to find this stuff out, but, maybe D* will put a flyer into the mail stating how to get the deal for the uninformed masses. Right! Thank you Dennis. You saved me $61.

Geof: You are welcome. I think the number is actually $65.94. BTW, if you did it online, D* may have accidentally turned off the $4.99 DVR feature for Tivo (if you have one). If so, Tivo recording won't work. I couldn't figure out how to turn it back on online so I called them and they did it for me. Still got the free 6 mo deal.

Well, Geof, I'm only looking at things from my perspective (not exacly 'endeared' to their situation since I can't get the Olympics in HD and KUSA won't even answer my requests for a waiver). I already have been forced to Wyoming for CBS, and if I can get ABC-HD and NBC-HD from them, and not Denver, more power to them. I don't know if the Denver stations have a special arrangement with the FCC, but looking at the situation, I doubt it. In the first place, as far as the LCG tower goes, their plate is as lacking of definitive dates for completion as it was 5 years ago. The FCC won't see that as progress. Maybe if they had something on the plate, an extension would be granted - but as of today, it is most likely a game of chicken. Not something I'd wager my DMA on. The pressure is on, and that is the only thing that will cause the LCG stations to move. Perhaps to bring in federal mediators, the 'big guns' in law, or whatever it takes. But for now, Denver is looking like the only place in the country that won't be providing ATSC to its entire DMA for years to come, and that is exactly what the ruling is addressing.

Originally posted by dr_mal
I may be remembering wrong, but I seem to recall from the KRMA meeting that about 1/3 of their viewers got KRMA OTA. Whatever the number was, it surprised me, so I suspect it's a lot more than 5%. I would be surprised if the number is that low.

There are a lot of people who, for economic or other reasons, refuse to pay for commercial television. Cable companies talk about "free lifeline" service consisting of the locals and the local community access channel, but just try to get them to install that...

I've said this several times now, but I honestly believe the only way the LCG tower will ever get approved is if the FCC overrides Jefferson County in the name of the public interest (which they can do.)

Personally, I'm not looking forward to KRMA's move to Mount Morrison, as that will likely mean the end of their signal for me (I believe I'm close enough to the mountains that they'd shadow the signal.)

On a somewhat different note, KUSA has been talking of late of the new, digital full-time weather service they are looking to launch (sort of a local version of TWC.) They talk about it being available via cable and D*/E*, but I wonder how long before they cut the bandwidth of 9-1 to provide weather via a 9-2. (I don't even have a rumor to cite for this, but it just seems to be an obvious move on their part...)

I'm worried about KRMA's move also, seeing how I get them perfectly now. I realize there are people who don't get all the HD stations that I do, but all I've ever wanted was MNF and NHL in HD. I really feel that I'm gonna get it from somewhere else WAY before I get it from KMGH. I think it's kinda funny that the NHL is no longer on ABC and there is talk that MNF is going to move to another network after their contract is up in 2005. Either way, I will never ever watch KMGH now or anytime in the future.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
Geof: You are welcome. I think the number is actually $65.94. BTW, if you did it online, D* may have accidentally turned off the $4.99 DVR feature for Tivo (if you have one). If so, Tivo recording won't work. I couldn't figure out how to turn it back on online so I called them and they did it for me. Still got the free 6 mo deal. Right on all counts Dennis. Thanks again!

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
Well, Geof, I'm only looking at things from my perspective (not exacly 'endeared' to their situation since I can't get the Olympics in HD and KUSA won't even answer my requests for a waiver). I already have been forced to Wyoming for CBS, and if I can get ABC-HD and NBC-HD from them, and not Denver, more power to them. I don't know if the Denver stations have a special arrangement with the FCC, but looking at the situation, I doubt it. In the first place, as far as the LCG tower goes, their plate is as lacking of definitive dates for completion as it was 5 years ago. The FCC won't see that as progress. Maybe if they had something on the plate, an extension would be granted - but as of today, it is most likely a game of chicken. Not something I'd wager my DMA on. The pressure is on, and that is the only thing that will cause the LCG stations to move. Perhaps to bring in federal mediators, the 'big guns' in law, or whatever it takes. But for now, Denver is looking like the only place in the country that won't be providing ATSC to its entire DMA for years to come, and that is exactly what the ruling is addressing. I don't argue with what you'd like to see....that would benefit all of us. But I don't agree that this ruling will affect Denver stations. Time will tell, but in the meantime we'll all continue to lose out.

Sorry all, somewhat OT. I've tried to catch up with this post and man it's making my head spin! You realize that the "CONTINUED PT3" version of this thread has been active for almost three years now! Man that's got to be some sort of record!!

Anyway, my question. I live in Broomfield and just ordered a Samsung TS-360. Which, if any, OTA antenna should I go with. Yes I've done some research on this site and the rest of the net. I've gone to antenna web as well, but I want to know what works. What is anyone out there in this area using and does it work? If you had to do it over again, which one would you choose? I can roof, internal, attic mount so it doesn't make a difference what kind. I seem to have a "good" line of site from my roof as far as where antenna web says I need to point it.



Thanks in advance,
Mike

I have both the Channelmaster 3023 & 3021. Both are excellent. The 3023 is slighty better at longer distances, but is also more directional. They are really hard to find here in Denver. I bought mine from Stark Electronics. I would suggest trying the attic first, then the roof. (As we all have found out... most likely the roof will be better)

They are good reliable mail-order company. Usually somebody here on the Forum has one for sale.

http://www.starkelectronic.com/cmuhf.htm

santellavision,


Thanks for the quick reply. Sorry for the ignorance, but you use both antennas, is that at the same time? Is one better for certain channels, and the other for the remaining? Do you run any sort of pre-amp? Sorry for the "20" questions, but I'd like to get this up and runnin'!


Thanks,
Mike

I use the CM 3023 on a 10 foot pole on the top of my roof. I got it from Stark. Tried a CM pre-amp but it overloaded (becasue of other UHF strong stations like 31) and made things worse. I point my antenna to max KMGH and the others all come in fine. You won't get KMGH in Broomfield.

I use the 3023 for my house way up in Genesee. I can pull in a decent signal from downtown. I used the 3021 at my fathers home in SE Denver. Both work great.

For you in Broomfield, you have a bit of a split. KUSA, KCNC, KRMA are located on Republic Plaza (Downtown) and KWGN & KDVR from Lookout. Forget KMGH. I would suggest aiming at downtown and most likely the other two from Lookout would still come in ok.

Santellavision,

Thanks! That clears things up a bit. LOL. Nice web site by the way.



Dennis,

I think I've settled on the CM 3023 since I already have a professionally mounted 10' mast on the roof now. I can make it work for the CM. You said that your pre-amp overloaded. Is there something I need to look out for during the installation? Are the signals strong enough to pull in with out a pre-amp? Maybe I'll just try to do it without one to start with then if they don't come in I'll add it on. I just want to make sure that the reason the channels aren't coming in isn't do to my install. In other words, I don't want to go out and buy the pre-amp and find out that I had the antenna wrong and didn't need it in the first place. LOL.



Thanks all,
Mike

Mike,

I'm in Lafayette, and am getting by with an RS Double Bow-Tie for DTV. I get 2,4,6,9,31 (remapped analog channel numbers) via the DBT on a shelf in my living room pointing towards downtown. I have an RS Combo Log Periodic/Yagi style in the crawlspace over my garage on the NW side of my haouse. I can't get any of the downtown stations from it, but get DTV 2 and 31 with it. I get all of my analog television via the combo antenna. Unless you live at a bottom of a hill or some other low point, I think you'll do great with the Channel Master.

Kucharsk, I lived in Louisville before I moved to Lafayette. I got the same analog channels there as here OTA (pretty much all of them). I lived near Harper Res., which is pretty far west (but on a hill). You may have a problem with KRMA once they move and are at low power, but hopefully they can be convinced to crank up the power (at least a little) before too long. Once their power is up, I doubt you'll have a problem (and you may get lucky even with low power). I do get analog 12, but don't get a sniff of 38. I have a buddy in Erie (1.5 miles east) who gets 38 perfectly, so I am in that shadow somewhat.

Greg

gkanders,

That's awesome! Thanks. I live pretty much level with the rest of the surrounding area, so I think the CM will be on order this week and then the tuning "fun" begins! Can't wait 'til the TS-360 gets here!



Thanks again all for the great advice!
Mike

I tried to tune in KWGN-DT 2-1 over the weekend and can no longer receive it. Is something going on, or not going on? I am a Samsung 160 owner, I hope it is not a recurrence of those problems from the early days.

Mike - if you haven't already ordered your 3023, I have one sitting in the box in my garage that you're welcome to for whatever they're selling for now, and you'll save the shipping charges. I think 8 months ago they were around $40 or $45 plus shipping (I paid around $60 total if I remember right). I put it up once, and it didn't work for me as well as the radio shack antenna that I still use.

Originally posted by Iwanthd
I tried to tune in KWGN-DT 2-1 over the weekend and can no longer receive it. Is something going on, or not going on? I am a Samsung 160 owner, I hope it is not a recurrence of those problems from the early days.


2 seemed fine through out the weekend & now out here. Ummmmm? Maybe it was that big storm you had. I would check out your antena. Maybe it got knocked around & is not where you had it.

Somone posted over in the Comcast thread that KMGH is planning to have their HD signal on Comcast by September 1.

Hmm...do I want to pay to have KMGH-HD in a format that won't allow me to TiVo it? Lemme think about that :rolleyes:

markdl,


Thanks man! I sent you an email.


Mike

When I moved into my condo last summer, I had the satellite dish installed behind the building in a rock garden where a pole could be driven into the ground and where it was hidden from direct view of all units besides my own. Later I added an AntennasDirect DB-8 aimed downtown and a UHF Preamp. It's less than ideal, but it gets me 95% watchable reception of KUSA and KCNC, and strong reception of KWGN, KDVR, and KBDI without rotating. KRMA is the only major channel I'm completely lacking, and I'd given up trying to tune it in a few months ago.

We've had some flooding issues with the heavy rains, and people have been out snooping around the back of the building lately. The other day I came home to a letter from the HOA saying I have 10 days to move the satellite dish onto my patio and remove the antenna. After reading the FCC OTA reception devices rule again to make sure my memory hadn't lapsed, I believe I won't have to remove the antenna.

Unfortunately, after reviewing the architectural blueprints for the development, the rock garden area where the equipment is installed is considered a common element, and the 12 X 8 concrete patio slab directly outside my back door is the only area technically under my "exclusive control." The HOA president is on vacation this week, but I've requested a meeting when he returns to concede that I'll have to move the equipment, and let him know that the antenna is protected by the FCC ruling and will not be going away, no matter how big, ugly, and obnoxious some may view it as being.

Does anyone know of a good, stable way to mount a DBS dish and fairly large bowtie antenna onto a concrete slab without anchoring it to the side of the building? My patio aims directly towards a multi-story apartment building on the hill that already blocks my view towards downtown, so I'll have to go as high as possible (up to 12' above the roofline if they REALLY want to see obnoxious!)

The only other option if I can't make it work is to cave in, ditch the antenna, mount the dish in a tacky sand-filled bucket, subscribe to "lifeline + HDTV locals" on Comcast, and use a Silver Sensor for KWGN and KBDI. I'd rather not go that route out of principle, and because I don't want the extra cost and equipment that come along with Comcast.

Can ANYBODY else use your rock garden ? - If no - stand your ground. Otherwise - 12 foot pole...

Originally posted by michaeldare
Sorry all, somewhat OT. I've tried to catch up with this post and man it's making my head spin! You realize that the "CONTINUED PT3" version of this thread has been active for almost three years now! Man that's got to be some sort of record!!
Which, unfortunately, is more indicative of the attitudes of the JeffCo commisioners and sCARE towards LCG than anything else... :mad:

Originally posted by kucharsk
Which, unfortunately, is more indicative of the attitudes of the JeffCo commisioners and sCARE towards LCG than anything else... :mad:

True.............

Just received this update from Pete and thought I would share it with those not already on the distribution list.

*******

Friends,

The saga continues. The hearing required by the Court begins this Thursday
evening at 5:00 pm with overflow dates on Tuesday, August 17 at 5:00 pm and
again Tuesday, August 24 at 9:00 am. The hearing is limited to the issue of
whether the tower is setback far enough from occupied dwellings to prevent
damage to them in the event of tower failure as well as to allow comment on
documents we submitted at the hearings. While we believe the evidence and
process the County followed was adequate, appropriate, and consistent with
County regulations and practices, we want to do this right to satisfy the
Court.

We have provided written expert testimony by two professional engineers
stating that our tower setback meets the County standards. To date, no one
has submitted any information to the contrary. The County staff has
submitted a memo stating that we meet their criteria.

The "late" documents focused on alternative sites, RF levels, and on-site
fuel storage so we anticipate much testimony about that and will respond
accordingly on rebuttal.

Based upon the position of the staff, we feel positive that the County has
not changed their mind on the case.

If you would like to come testify, you are most welcome. Based upon the
voluminous testimony last year (which is still part of the record) and the
County's continued support, letters may be more effective than actual
testimony. If you do chose to testify, you will in all likelihood have to
wait until the 8/17 or 8/24 hearing as CARE has commingled the time of all
the HOA's on the mountain and plans to testify for four (4) hours.

Attached are a list of potential message points which you may find useful in
writing letters and a copy of the Health Dept's press release. Please feel
free to post the Health Depts press release.

Please call me at xxx.xxx.xxxx if you have any questions.

Thanks again for your continued support and unbelievable patience throughout
this long process.


Sincerely,



Peter McNally, Principal

The Grinnell Group



**********
I am sure any of the 'old timers' including me will be happy to forward a copy with the talking points and other attachement if you PM any of us.
I will refrain from any personal comments at this time (much to the pleasure of all....no doubt)!

Pete did ask that the attachments not be publicly posted, so if you want a copy of them, just say the word, and provide an email address.

Hey guys, me again......LOL.... It looks like I'm getting the CM 3023 from markdl. Here's the deal though. About two years ago, I tried both a Silver Sensor and Terk-55 antenna in my attic and only received FOX (480p) at that time. Are things 'any' better today then they were then? I was using an HD PCI card in my computer (HiPix) and it was all the rave then, but didn't do very well for me. I only hope things are a bit better now????


Mike

Nothing has changed with the channels that were otherwise "available" to you then. Like in regards to power output or receivablilty that is, with a given antenna. The only diff is now theres an extra channel or 2 available. KWGN-DT for example.

But then again his antenna is better than the ones you were trying back at that time too. You would have gotten more with a better antenna if you had bothered.

Put the 3023 on the roof on a pole, not in the attic. That will help a lot. Blow up the Terk as they are worthless.

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
Put the 3023 on the roof on a pole, not in the attic. That will help a lot. Blow up the Terk as they are worthless.



LOL!!! Both are a good plan......


Mike

I am at 120th & Colorado. I bought a radio shack yagi, and it worked on 2, 4, 6, 9, and 31, but switched back to my omni-directional (also rat shack) since my Dish 921 receiver didn't see all the channels. The internal tuner in my Sony TV was even picking up Cheyenne CBS-DT on 5 with the yagi without any rotation.

You are welcome to my yagi for free if you come pick it up.

Just PM me, or post back here, and you can have it as soon as you want to pick it up.

JackinThornton,

If Michaeldare doesn't want the antenna, I'd love to take it off your hands. I need something bigger that I can put up in the attic. And my wife and kids really want to see the Olympics in HD! :)

Weldon,


Sorry, I do want it. I PM'd Jack with my info.


Mike

Weldon, you have PM :)

Since antenna availability seems to be the topic lately, anyone have a Winegard PR-8800, in good condition, that they would like to unload?

Does any one contact info (name, address and phone #) of the people responsible for protecting the health of our Look Mountain neighbors and keeping us in the 20th century? I'd like send them my letter of thanks! :-)

I searched this thread (keywords - contact, address, golden {home of our illustrious local leaders} ) but couldn't find it.

Seriously, I'd like to add my voice to the fight to get strong HD signals in Denver.

In one of my summaries of the hearings last (spring? summer?) I tried to include the names and addresses of people who spoke. If you just read the whole thread, I'm sure you'll come across it :)

[edit: crap, it was December of 2002. Time flies when you're having fun. Here's the post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1660684#post1660684)]

Hello all,

This may have been posted elsewhere, but I cannot find it on the website:

Is our local NBC affiliate going to carry olympics in HD on their digital OTA channel? I understand that D* is also going to carry the olympics in HD--however, since Denver NBC is not NBC O&O, my understanding is that we won't be able to access the D* feed. Is this correct?

Thanks,
N123

KUSA will carry the HD Olympics on 9-1. My TiVo's ToDo list didn't have any airings of 9News 6AM for me next week, so that tells me they aren't going to break into the NBC-HD feed for local news or other programming.

Denver was listed on Dish Network's list of cities that will be able to get NBC-HD for the Olympics via satellite. The presumption is that DirecTV will offer it as well. (It's my belief that both satellite companies are allowed to carry it since Comcast carries KUSA-DT in Denver -- without any local advertising spots on the HD Olympic feed, there's no harm, no foul in getting NBC-HD from a satellite company instead of from KUSA's OTA signal)

TitanTV shows that channel 9 and 9-1 will be exactly the same. With all the hype KUSA puts out pushing their HD newscast, I would bet they will not show the HD continuous olympics feed.

So, my guess is that they will show the opening ceremonies on Friday at 7 PM in SD on 9 and in HD on 9-1 (16). From then on, I think they will just be showing the normal NBC feed on both channels. But, hey, this whole thing is very confusing and poorly advertised. I do hope that D* will show the NBC HD feed on channel 84, but that has not been announced by D* so far.

Originally posted by dr_mal
In one of my summaries of the hearings last (spring? summer?) I tried to include the names and addresses of people who spoke. If you just read the whole thread, I'm sure you'll come across it :)

[edit: crap, it was December of 2002. Time flies when you're having fun. Here's the post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=1660684#post1660684)]

Thanks dr_mal.

So the county commissioners are the only ones I need to write to?

Any point in going to the meetings? Aren't the next ones 8/17 and 8/24 at the Taj?

Yes, the county commissioners are the best people to write to.

The next meeting is tonight at the Taj -- I can't make it (I leave for vacation tomorrow and have all sorts of things to do tonight), but it would be nice if some people could go and show support (and report back here for those of us who couldn't make it).

If they open it up for public testimony (which it sounds like they'll do), you can even get up and tell the commissioners you want your DTV. They need to know that the tower reduction proposal isn't just good for businesses -- it's good for the people.

According to Pete, there won't be any public testimony tonight - the (s)Care people have combined all the HOA time together again and will be testifying for a continuous 4 hour block.

Dennis - I don't believe you are correct. A few months back when we went on the tour at KUSA, Roger Ogden told us all that KUSA-DT would be showing the HD olympics feed, separately from the NBC SD feeds. I would be very surprised to see them back away from that. And TitanTV is notoriously bad about being incorrect these days...

Mark, hope you are right. I vaguely remember the same thing now that you mention it.

I checked zap2it and it does show the HD olympics loop on 9-1. I sent Don Perez an email asking for clarification.

Unfortunately I'm really busy at work and won't be able to skip out early this evening to attend the hearing.

I'd really like to walk in carrying a large UHF antenna (like the 8' long AntennasDirect 91XG) and make the point that since sCARE doesn't want an antenna in THEIR neighborhood, thousands of antennas like this have to be erected in neighborhoods across the metro area in an attempt to receive the ridiculously weak digital signals.

Oh well, I'm sure this is far from the last hearing. If someone who attends would be kind enough to post a summary afterwards I'd really appreciate it.

Hi all, I realize this is somewhat OT, but I wanted to ask here since we're all from the denver area.

I recently went to BestBuy to check out the DirecTV HD box's, only to discover that the dont have ANY hd signals that you can look at, the don't have the HD DirecTV boxes operating. There only "hi-def" signal is an upconverted 1080i signal coming from a DVD player. Honestly!, I mean how are you supposed to sell HD if you don't even get to play around with it?

I'm asking because I'd really like to look at the way the Sat/OTA guide integration works, how the signals look etc. before I buy.

Anyone know of a place in the Westminster/Louisville area that has full-up running DirecTV HD with OTA signals as well?


Thanks in advance,

Micah

The SoundTrack store in Fort Collins has DirecTV HD up and running. I'd imagine that would be the case in most or all of their stores.

Originally posted by Fnkybtz
Anyone know of a place in the Westminster/Louisville area that has full-up running DirecTV HD with OTA signals as well? The Best Buy in Broomfield has live DirecTV HD.

No stores that I know of on the north side of town have OTA HD.

Originally posted by bikenski
I'd really like to walk in carrying a large UHF antenna (like the 8' long AntennasDirect 91XG) and make the point that since sCARE doesn't want an antenna in THEIR neighborhood, thousands of antennas like this have to be erected in neighborhoods across the metro area in an attempt to receive the ridiculously weak digital signals. It's a cute idea, but what makes you think anyone from sCARE or any of the HOAs would possibly care what is happening anywhere but near their own homes?

If they cared at all about anything other but themselves they'd not bother to testify on sCARE's behalf in the first place... :rolleyes:

Don Perez confirmed that KUSA-DT channel 9-1 will simulcast the opening ceremonies tonight and then run the HD loop, which is separate programming from the SD channel, for the duration of the Olympic games.

Any reports on the hearing last night?

Here is what Don told me in an email:

"NBC has been a bit of moving target. I believe at 7PM Friday the opening ceremonies will begin on our SD and HD channels. They will repeat the opening ceremonies throughout Saturday in HD. NBC is creating about 8 hours of HD programming each day and then repeat those 8 hours throughout the day. The NBC day will start at 3AM local. That is when fresh HD content would start showing and then replay until 3AM the next day. Normally the SD feed content will NOT simulcast with HD. Very little of the Olympic will truly be "live" given time zone issues. NBC is suppose to provide HD in true 5.1 Dolby. We have installed equipment at the station support this pass through. It has been a race to get it delivered and installed. Let me know what you think.....I hope this helps."


The NBCOlympics site and the D* Tivo guide show the 8 hour loop beginning at 2 AM on Sunday morning, not 3 AM. I've got my Tivo set to record this but it will start at 2 AM. Have to wait and see what really happens.

BTW, for any of you who have an HD Tivo, the 8 hour loop is in two segments, one from 2 AM - 7 AM and then 7 AM - 10 AM. If you want all 8 hours, you need to record both segments. Finally, the opening ceremonies is in the D* guide as only three hours, so I have padded an extra hour on the end because it really is 4 hours long. NBC is not making this easy!

Does anyone receive HDTV OTA in Aurora? With an attic/indoor antenna?

Originally posted by MadMonkey
Does anyone receive HDTV OTA in Aurora? With an attic/indoor antenna? Yes, according to this site:
http://bricklin.org/AVSForum/DenverDTV.htm

Originally posted by mbuchana
Any reports on the hearing last night?
This is rather long.
OK I will admit that I was at the hearing. However my scribe was left behind and no I didn't take notes so I was try and summarize what happened from memory.
Probably in most cases my wording will be different from what was exactly said, but hopefully I have not misquoted.
What you missed was a little humor, laughter, sarcasm and scolding. The room was not overflowing. Would say about 90 to 95% full.
Staff Danica started by explaining why certain portions of LCG's proposal was reopened (my observation from the presentations every area was fair to comment on) by judge Jackson.
Staff also stated that LCG has met all the requirements that were set forth by the county (this was disputed).
Marv from LCG spent about 15 minutes addressing the concerns that were raised by judge Jackson.
Deb and her presenters spent the next 3 hours stating their case. Most of their presentations was nothing more then what was presented last year which was increase in RF, set backs, ice fall, tower collapse, leaking fuel tanks, did I mention RF, history of tower collapses across the country, alternate sites, lower property values, high winds, did I mention ice fall (you get the picture), debris is still being found way down hill from when there where towers that collapsed in 1950 and 1953 (observation that's over 50 years ago and to listen to them you would think the towers are just waiting to collapse).
*
Care is very concerned with what might happen if the tower being built collapses during construction or the towers being removed collapse. They say it could be devastating which is true. The question that needs asked what is the probability.
*
Care. We really don't know if there is or isn't a RF problem so lets be on the safe side and not take any chances.
*
Care presenter. The set back requirements have not been met. If the tower were to topple it would land outside the property line.
*
Care presenter. I believe he was a structural engineer and believe this happened in the 1950's. Anyway he put a stone type chimney on his house and it was damaged by severe winds (129 mph measured by channel 9). Not sure what his point is there was no mention of wind related tower problems. Unless he just wanted to point out there are severe winds up there. I think I would be more concerned with wind blowing over a tree on my house.
*
Care presenter. Property values have dropped 15% (Don't recall exactly).
Mr. Sheehan. Where did you get this information and is it available?
Presenter. RE-MAX and it is the documentation that has been submitted.
*
Care presenter. He did put on impressive display. He displayed a 3D topographical view of Lookout Mountain on his laptop. It showed both towers and there guy wires. This display showed their concern as to what would happen should there be a tower collapse. Specifically while both towers exist at the same time.
Mr. Sheehan. Isn't it true that the new tower location would be in a much safer location when it comes to icefall?
Presenter. Yes from the West. No from the East. Points out that the Stone Hence (I believe) subdivision would be susceptible.
*
Care presenter. Dr. Kelly. (Dr. Kelly is a female doctor specializing in cancer).
She presented her information on computer slides. During her presentation there were slides that mentioned both UV and tobacco, but if you blinked your eyes you would miss them as they disappeared as fast as they showed up except the first UV slide she slightly touched on it. Her main objective was to attack RF.
Mr. Sheehan. Do you live in the affected area?
Dr. Kelly. Yes.
Mr. Sheehan. Why?
Care audience. Boo.
Ms Lawrence. Don't remember her exact words but in effect was that's enough now let her answer.
Dr. Kelly. Well I don't right now, but if this tower is built I will and yes I will move. Don't remember if she now lives North or South of I-70, but stated that no is no RF on the side she lives on now, but there will be if the super tower is built.
*
Last care presenter. In wrapping up. To the commissioners I have just one word for you. COMPATIBLE. Put aside everything else aside and ask yourself is this compatible for this location. Presenter I know this is the 21st century and yes these towers will use 21st technology, but again I ask you is this the right thing to do for this location.
Care audience clapped.
Ms. Lawrence. I realize your enthusiasm, but there will be no clapping in this room. There was some rumbling from the back of the room.
*
Now it was Squaw Mountain turn. Two presenters. In a nutshell they stated that Squaw is available has the capacity and can accommodate the towers LCG have proposed. Also they stated there is nothing in there proposal stating why Squaw is not a viable site.
*
The next hearing will Next Tuesday (August 17) at 5:00 pm. City of Golden will have 30 minutes to present, LCG will then have time for a rebuttal. This is followed with public testimony. If there are not to many a decision will be made. I would guess about 25 to 30 people were sworn in last night to testify. If the count doesn't go up drastically it should happen.
Link http://co.jefferson.co.us/ext/fast/commish/bcc.htm
*
If this is again approved it still must go back before judge Jackson.
*
If anybody finds anything out or context or inappropiate I will be glad to correct or delete it.
Thanks,

Leonard
Thank you very much for taking the time to post an excellent review of the meeting last night. I don't think I would have had the patience to sit through all that BS without loosing it. Sounds like nothing really new came from (S)CARE, just more of the same old 'woe is us, but I am not so afraid of RF that I will move since my property values could sky rocket if this opposition is sucessful.

As Yogi says, Deja Vu all over again.

Glad I wasn't there this time around. I've given LCG enough.

After a few minutes in 2.0 the Opening Ceremony switched over to DD5.1 audio on KUSA-DT. Looks and sounds great so far!

I noticed the switch to 5.1 as well. Looks like that new equipment works!

But now at 8:00 all I see is that "Hawaii" is on Wednesdays at 8/7c. No picture at all besides the overlay in the bottom left. Audio is still working just fine.

When I switched over to see the SD broadcast on DirecTV, I noticed that they have different announcers for the HD program. Why wouldn't they do the entire opening ceremonies in HD and then downconvert for SD? Oh well, I guess I'll complain in the Olympics thread so we can get back to complaining about Lookout Mtn

Never mind on the picture freeze. I figured out a bit later that my 1 yr old hit the "freeze" button for the Zenith STB. :)

It looks like KUSA is allowing us to get the NBC digital Olympic feed on Directv Channel 84. It came on for me at 11:00 P.M.

Originally posted by MadMonkey
Does anyone receive HDTV OTA in Aurora? With an attic/indoor antenna?

If you are the same MadMonkey I think you are, we should talk off line. I can give you the scoop without cluttering up the thread.

Otherwise, I'm in Aurora and I've got a rooftop antenna, and get all the channels except KMGH (ABC). I haven't tried an indoor antenna.

Yea, that's me. I didn't hear from you about Fri Nite Fest. Anyway, see ya at work.

Leonard,

Thanks for the update. I was out of town all last week, but I plan on attending Tuesdays hearing. I can't wait to hear that crowd groan, when they approve it again!

Anybody else going?

Curious if we will be able to continue getting the NBC feed on D... and perhaps FOX this fall, or we will be excluded. Thanks

Originally posted by santellavision
Leonard,

Thanks for the update. I was out of town all last week, but I plan on attending Tuesdays hearing. I can't wait to hear that crowd groan, when they approve it again!

Anybody else going?
I managed to get through the first one without getting sick so will return for a 2nd dose.

Is KWGNDT, Channel 2-1 off the air? We have not been able to receive the channel for the last couple of days. We have DirectTV with a Hughes E86 STB. Signal strength when tested shows 100, but yet we receive no picture on 2-1 or 2-2. Any ideas.

rmaestas,
I haven't noticed it being off the air, so I just checked for you and I do indeed get a picture and sound on 2-1 and 2-2 (at least as of 8:45 this morning)

I lost both 2.1 & 2.2 after this last weeks update (6.20). I even turned my antenna so I had a 99 signal strength during manual tunning. I would still skip over it & not lock during the all channel scan. I finally got my bed room rec. to lock on & show just one of the channels(2.1). That's it though. My living room rec. will not do it.:mad:

There are alot of other people too without 2 allso. http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=11887&page=14&pp=15

As of last night I wasn't getting 2-1 & 2-1 either (around 9:15 PM on 8/15). This is on an Echostar 6000. I had good signal strength, but no picture/sound.

Originally posted by skyview
Curious if we will be able to continue getting the NBC feed on D... and perhaps FOX this fall, or we will be excluded. Thanks We'll continue to get the NBC HD feed on D* ch. 84 (Special HD Events) but only through the Olympics. Fox will begin their HD on Sept 12. Hopefully D* will begin feeding us at that time. Fox and CBS are available to us in HD continuously because they are O&O here in Denver, NBC is not.

Ernie, I'm going to try to go tomorrow night also. I'd like to see those dejected faces when the tower is approved, again.

Originally posted by RonAuger

Ernie, I'm going to try to go tomorrow night also. I'd like to see those dejected faces when the tower is approved, again.
Will the vote really be taken tomorrow night???? What are the odds??

I just booked a shoot tomorrow and I am not sure I will be finished in time to go to the meeting.

John, from Leonard's assessment, it sounds like they might have enough time to get through all the items. Last time, Bada-bing-bada-boom, they took the vote right after the last testimony.

Originally posted by RonAuger

Ernie, I'm going to try to go tomorrow night also. I'd like to see those dejected faces when the tower is approved, again.
The more I think about seeing those outraged and/or dejected faces, the more I am thinking about showing up myself. Just not sure I have the energy to sit through the diatribes from all the (S)CARE folks to get to the fun stuff.

Just when you thought it was safe to tune to 2-1, it disappears. Sorry about that!! We had a problem over the weekend with our PSIP table. More specific, we lost our PAT and PMT tables as well as VCT. Without these tables, some receivers will have a problem while others will not. After rebooting our computers, hapiness was restored this morning. You may also note that we have removed 2-2 from our data stream as this was designated for SAP but we have since incorporated SAP into our main 2-1 channel.

Enjoy!

Dave Martinez
Engineering Maintenance Supervisor
KWGN-TV
2-0,2-1

Originally posted by KWGN-DT
Just when you thought it was safe to tune to 2-1, it disappears. Sorry about that!! We had a problem over the weekend with our PSIP table. More specific, we lost our PAT and PMT tables as well as VCT. Without these tables, some receivers will have a problem while others will not. After rebooting our computers, hapiness was restored this morning. You may also note that we have removed 2-2 from our data stream as this was designated for SAP but we have since incorporated SAP into our main 2-1 channel.

Enjoy!

Dave Martinez
Engineering Maintenance Supervisor
KWGN-TV
2-0,2-1

I'll be damned!:D All along I thought it was my Voom rec. since this coincided with their last update. Thank YOU DAVE!!!!!!!!!

Just for the record, KUSA's DT channel 9-1 OTA broadcast of the Olympics Opening Ceremonies had superior PQ and SQ (DD 5.1 vs PCM) to the E* NBC-HD Olympics channels. I switched back-and-forth several times and the wife and I actually agreed that 9-1 was sharper on my Sammy DLP fed from a Dish 811 receiver via DVI.

Thank you KUSA. I hope the DD 5.1 isn't just a one-time thing.

I agree CEB II, and frankly I'm surprised because Dish is pumping out a 22 MB/s feed on the HD channel, and KUSA is still at 19.0 MB/s. But I'm seeing the same thing. Plus we're getting the 5.1 audio from KUSA and only 2.0 audio from Dish.

I told Don Perez that the quality of picture and sound from KUSA and D* channel 84 were comparable. This is using an HD Tivo.

I don't notice the 5.1 much at all as the crowd noise from the rears is pretty soft. Nice to have though and we are enjoying the HD Olympics even if they are delayed one day.

Thanks for the info (again) Dave!

One question since I've asked this in another tread without success...

Are our STBs supposed to have an SAP function? I was always wondering how SAP was supposed to work since I can't find an SAP button on my Sammy 150 remote. If I want to hear SAP on 2-1, am I supposed to just be able to click a button a-la the analog channel?

Thanks, Greg


Originally posted by KWGN-DT
Just when you thought it was safe to tune to 2-1, it disappears. Sorry about that!! We had a problem over the weekend with our PSIP table. More specific, we lost our PAT and PMT tables as well as VCT. Without these tables, some receivers will have a problem while others will not. After rebooting our computers, hapiness was restored this morning. You may also note that we have removed 2-2 from our data stream as this was designated for SAP but we have since incorporated SAP into our main 2-1 channel.

Enjoy!

Dave Martinez
Engineering Maintenance Supervisor
KWGN-TV
2-0,2-1

Originally posted by gkanders
Are our STBs supposed to have an SAP function? I was always wondering how SAP was supposed to work since I can't find an SAP button on my Sammy 150 remote. If I want to hear SAP on 2-1, am I supposed to just be able to click a button a-la the analog channel? Yes, the button is probably labeled MTS (multi-track sound).

Cool, I'll check tonight. Thanks!

I was hoping to get to the meeting tonight but a last minute schedule change prevented it. Will check back later to see if there was any significant news.

Also, I am currently switching to comcast cable broadband from my not-so-hot DSL provider. I was going to have them add on the HDTV package but the CSR said they still only have CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS and WB2 in their lineup (other than "pay" channels) and I get them all plus ABC OTA for free. Can somewone who subscribes confirm this for me? Thanks!

Originally posted by Jetlag
I was going to have them add on the HDTV package but the CSR said they still only have CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS and WB2 in their lineup (other than "pay" channels) and I get them all plus ABC OTA for free. Can somewone who subscribes confirm this for me? Thanks!

It's worse than the CSR told you (WB2 is not carried.) See http://www.comcastcolorado.com/ComcastColorado/channels.html for a relatively accurate listing. I believe the only recent addition not shown on that list is Discovery HD Theater.

The current "non-pay channel" Comcast HD lineup is CBS, NBC, Fox, KRMA (PBS), DiscoveryHD, INHD1, INHD2, and ESPNHD. These are the channels you get when subscribed to the basic digital package with no additional pay channels.

Rick

Thanks! It looks like I would only be adding INHD1 and 2 as I already get the rest., not really worth the extra cost.

I just got home...

Leonard, Is it good or bad news??????

Originally posted by santellavision
I just got home...

Leonard, Is it good or bad news??????

Ernie,
Same as last year. LCG 3, CARE 0.
After LCG's rebuttal. The commissioners asked a couple of questions then immediately made there decision. This was around 10:15 pm.

Leonard

The Dream Is Still Alive!

Originally posted by santellavision
The Dream Is Still Alive!
Yep and of course I had to hang around and celebrate for awhile. CARE didn't seem to take it as hard as last time. There was no out burst from them.
I am not going into a lot detail except to say LCG really brought in the fire power. Exceptional testimony. John will probably have more to say tomorrow.

Originally posted by Lawood
Ernie,
Same as last year. LCG 3, CARE 0.
After LCG's rebuttal. The commissioners asked a couple of questions then immediately made there decision. This was around 10:15 pm.

Leonard
Just got home and had some 'dinner'(? or would that be breakfast at this point?). As Leonard wrote, the LCG won again. They were extremely well prepared and brought in some TOP people in the field of tower construction and RF radiation and testing to counter the (S)CARE tactics. I will be busy at an all day meeting tomorrow at work, so I likely won't have time to write anything until tomorrow night at the earliest, I did take a few notes. It may be old news by tomorrow. Too tired from a long day to do it now.

The final formal vote will likely be on Aug 31 after the lawyers draw up the formal papers. Pete said he will be back in town then and I told him I think I could arrange a AVS group celebration and this time WE might buy HIM a drink. I will post more later on the plans if there is any interest from others.

FWIW the two women on the commission board came down and mingled with the group after the vote. They seemed very relieved to have it over, and said they don't ever want to see it again.

Well good news on the re-vote. Now let's hope the Judge closes the case and lets this whole issue die.
I'm delighted to hear that LCG brought in the experts - the vote indicates SCARE didn't baffle them with bullsh!t.

Their used to be a bunch of bumper stickers where I lived in N Calif a few years ago that addressed a similar battle to dam the American River to form a reservoir. The slogan seems most appropriate here: "Build it - Dammit!"

So does anyone know what the process is from this point on? Does the decision automatically go back to King Jackson, or do we have to wait for sCARE to file another suit to send it back?

Originally posted by oxothuk
So does anyone know what the process is from this point on? Does the decision automatically go back to King Jackson, or do we have to wait for sCARE to file another suit to send it back?

The way I understand it from the hearings was that it automatically goes back the judge Jackson.

Here is a link to the article in the Denver Post.
[/URL]

From the article here is CARE response.
"(The commissioners) have violated the public's trust," said Deb Carney, attorney for the Canyon Area Residents for the Environment.

The umbrella group of homeowner associations near Lookout Mountain will take whatever legal action is necessary to block the tower, Carney said.

I went to CARE's web site and looked at their news letter. It appears to me that they maybe losing some of their support. 600 supporters last year. There was no way near that many this year.

Here is the Rocky article.
[URL=http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3118948,00.html] (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2341490,00.html)

Huh...good news again. I guess I didn't really expect that.

YIPPEE!

Thanks for the word, Leonard, and I very much look forward to reading your comments John.

Time to go change the signature again... :)

Very good news indeed......:D

Originally posted by markdl
August 18, 2004: Just waiting to hear about the new lawsuit filed against the tower...What else can they file a lawsuit for? Oh wait, I forgot... We haven't had a suit related to 'Sleep Depravation'. ;)

Or maybe the health effects caused by wearing aluminum foil hats to bed at night to combat the fear...while the toaster is speaking in tongues to the dog...

When do we get to file a lawsuit against CARE over our pain and suffering due to the length of this thread? :)

If they are going to continue to fight this in the courts obviously they need money. I have an idea they can auction off the 1950's debris they claim to have found at the bottom of Lookout. Surely somebody would want it. I am sure if you ask them it ended there as a result of the collapse why else would they go to the trouble to take pictures. It wouldn't surprise me if someone went up there and helped to get it the bottom of the mountain. Oh and by the way it was in with other debris IE. Light bulbs, ETC.

So who's land were they 'Tresspassing' on to take the pics?????

So assuming (probably naively) that sCARE's threatened lawsuits are unable to block construction again, we're looking at an early 2006 on-air date, correct?

bikenski, you reminded me that long ago we all had a pool going of the estimated date of high powered OTA from the new tower.

My estimate was woefully over-optimistic and will never happen. Does anybody remember what their estimated date was, especially if you were looking at a time in 2006? Should we start over with new guesses? I wonder what the KMGH lawyers would come up with now.

Maybe we can get this thread up to 1,000 pages by the time the tower is actually operational!

Originally posted by santellavision
So who's land were they 'Tresspassing' on to take the pics?????

I have no idea. Possibilities are County, City of Golden.

If not...

$omebody $hould $ue $CARE's A$$!

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
bikenski, you reminded me that long ago we all had a pool going of the estimated date of high powered OTA from the new tower.

I found that post. The pool which was started right after the proposal was approved the first time.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2462455#post2462455

I had picked April 21, 2005 but that might've been too optmistic :)

If people want to do this again, give me a day or two and I'll put together a pool tracking site. Actually, I need some help deciding on the options - I think there should be more than one just for interest.

0) date of groundbreaking
1) date that construction is complete (final inspector signoff)
2) date of first signal of any kind from tower
3) date of first full power signal
4) date of first regular continuous broadcast from new tower
5) date of first signal to move completely from old tower(s) - off on old tower, on on new
6) date of last signal from old tower(s)

Can anyone think of any more?

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
I wonder what the KMGH lawyers would come up with now.

Late summer, early fall. Right??
:rolleyes:

I'm betting on the safe side this time...

July 18, 2041 for first signal from the new tower. :)

If nothing else steps in to delay construction, my best engineering guess is sometime between March and August next year (depending on how hard a winter we have) for tower construction to be complete.

Originally posted by dr_mal
I'll take my birthday next year: 7/29/04. Hoping for an early on the air date and a great birthday present :) Hahahahahaha!!!!

Dr_Mal's disqualified because his date is past already!!! ;)

Welton,
(#6) We'll all be dead by then!

Originally posted by DennisMileHi
bikenski, you reminded me that long ago we all had a pool going of the estimated date of high powered OTA from the new tower. I still have the original pool dates in an Excel spreadsheet. dr_mal and Phil T have already lost. Oddly enough, 2006 wasn't even included at the time. I have Nov 3 this year. I don't suppose LCG can hurry it along (before another lawsuit gets issued)?!

Originally posted by weldon
I found that post. The pool which was started right after the proposal was approved the first time.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2462455#post2462455

I had picked April 21, 2005 but that might've been too optmistic :)

If people want to do this again, give me a day or two and I'll put together a pool tracking site. Actually, I need some help deciding on the options - I think there should be more than one just for interest.

0) date of groundbreaking
1) date that construction is complete (final inspector signoff)
2) date of first signal of any kind from tower
3) date of first full power signal
4) date of first regular continuous broadcast from new tower
5) date of first signal to move completely from old tower(s) - off on old tower, on on new
6) date of last signal from old tower(s)

Can anyone think of any more?

Yea. The date CARE finally raises the white flag admitting they lost the battle.

I know I was a pessimist, so I picked 1/11/05. Maybe I can just add 1 year :) (and then next year, I'll probably have to add another :( )


Originally posted by DennisMileHi
bikenski, you reminded me that long ago we all had a pool going of the estimated date of high powered OTA from the new tower.

My estimate was woefully over-optimistic and will never happen. Does anybody remember what their estimated date was, especially if you were looking at a time in 2006? Should we start over with new guesses? I wonder what the KMGH lawyers would come up with now.

Maybe we can get this thread up to 1,000 pages by the time the tower is actually operational!

Originally posted by JMartinko
Pete said he will be back in town then and I told him I think I could arrange a AVS group celebration and this time WE might buy HIM a drink. I will post more later on the plans if there is any interest from others. I will buy him an entire keg if we can celebrate at the ground breaking!

I'm always up for a P-A-R-T-Y!

Let's try to organize a ground-breaking event.

The word I got was that once construction started it would take approximately 10 months. This time could be shortened if the stations want to get real aggressive.
Obviously with all the extreme wind conditions on Lookout ( tongue in cheek ) it will far exceed 10 months.

Being sarcasic my pick was the 1st Monday after the last Monday Night football game (yes this was because of KMGH) 2004. Well guess what now it looks like it may be ready just before MNF starts in 2005 (fingers crossed). To make it more ironic I don't think ABC will doing MNF next year.

Originally posted by santellavision
I'm always up for a P-A-R-T-Y!

Let's try to organize a ground-breaking event.

In front of Deb's house.

The commissioners made no comments in taking the vote, which turned aside community pleas to wait until May 2005, when Colorado State University completes a study of health effects of tower radiation.

The above is from the Denver Post. Note: The area in red is nothing more then a smoke screen. Why. Because this hearing would be before three different commissioners. In a short conversation I had with Ms. Lawrence she agreed that the out come would probably have been different had the hearing been in front of a different board (even if the CSU's study showed no ill effects my guess is they would still reject it). I thanked both her and Ms Holloway for still being on the board for this hearing. Patricia stated that the decision relative to RF/cancer was really a tough one for her as she lost her father to cancer. However she said her decision is what her father would have wanted.
They all get my thanks.

If anything, I bet the study will say something like...

"If we were to strap a mouse directly onto an antenna, outputting full-power for a year and feeding the mouse 50 times it's body weight in 'Fresca', and 100 bags of 'Olestra' fried chips, then we might have a problem. ;)

I may have to change my guess to - never.

Denver could become the first city in the country with no high power digital and everybody will be forced to go with satellite or cable. The compression technology could change and the NAB would become history thanks to SCARE. :)

Then again, if pigs could fly........

The result of this vote is most welcome, however, it ain't over til the skinny tower sings.

Will this satisfy the judge? It seems to the wannabe lawyer in me that the judge's job is to validate that the county follows it's own regulations, not to make decisions for the CC's. I was worried after Leonard reported that LCG spent only 15 minutes addressing the open concerns on the first day, but then those worries were put to rest when it was reported that expert testimony was brought in on Tuesday to address those concerns of Judge Jackson. Also, it seems that since it was ruled that the judge found that the CC's acted in good faith initially, I don't know how the judge could continue this any longer.

So now we need the lawsuit hearing re-convened. Lift the injunction and dismiss the lawsuit.

Don

P.S. My initial prediction of November, 2005 now has no slack time for delays in flange deliveries.

Sorry I couldn't get to this today, but I still have to pay the bills for all this HD gear. BTW, after reading the above comments, I am starting to think my birthday in July 2005 may be looking better today, although I still am waiting to see what the Judge says.

Thoughts (mostly summary) about the Jeffco hearings last night.

Since this seemed to me to be the REAL end of the line for one side or the other, I decided to invest an evening into watching the two sides spar. The initial presentation of the evening was made by representatives from the City of Golden. With any luck I won't butcher the names too badly.

Mayor Baraoch of Golden introduced his side and the representatives to speak for Golden. Gwyn Green (City Council) spoke first. She discusses the recent CDH health study which 'showed brain and central nervous system cancers' in the area in direct line of site of the towers. She said that the City of Golden suggests a less populated sight like Squaw. She also read a letter from Glen Lapiro (?sp?) who could not attend. He claimed the study showed Golden residents had a higher incidence of cancer (I guess I must have missed that part of the study when I looked at it) and requested a delay until May 2005 when the first report from the CSU study would be due. Marcy Mill (City Council) then spoke about the fact that with the danger from the towers, NREL may move out and damage the high tech corridor in Golden. She suggested that in the future Golden may be a blighted area without industry due to the fear of people locating or working that close to the cancer causing towers. She also left a 'not so veiled' threat for the commissioners who are all term limited. She said to remember their votes would leave a legacy for their future political ambitions in Jefferson County.
Dave Ketchum was up next and showed a series of pictures of the proposed towers. He pointed to a series of RF elements in his picture and claimed that that each weigh at least 500 pounds and if the tower fell, they would become 'rolling projectiles' going downhill until they found some unsuspecting child playing in a yard (OK, the child part is my own comment). Dave very cleverly demonstrated how a pencil can roll using his clipboard, and then even show a hexagonal shaped pen would also roll. A very clever physics ploy indeed, just not sure what it had to do with the subject of the antenna. Steve Gluek (Golden Planning Board) then spoke. He said the applicants MUST prove 'non-availability' of other sites and that two locations on Squaw were not covered by the LCG. He said Squaw has 'excess capacity' and could accommodate the LCG. He also said the Morrison owner was willing to submit for a re-zone and says he has enough space for all of the antennas. He also suggested that if the approval is granted Golden will look to pursue additional litigation to stop the tower.

The Golden group was followed by a series of local citizens who addressed various points. James Martin talked about Squaw and said that Al Hislop's numbers confirmed that there is an increase in the power levels on all the local residents.Roger Mattson brought up the comment that levels should be "ALARA" (As low as reasonably acceptable) and adding more DTV stations would not do that. He suggested that they were being asked to add risk to their lives for the benefits of others. Tom Carney spoke, but I missed most of it due to a phone call.

The highlight of the evening turned out to be the presentation by Dr. Mark Johnson of the Jeffco Department of Health. He gave an excellent discussion of the recent cancer study and really put some perspective on things. He presented the various types of cancer which are the leading causes of death and showed that nearly all of the cancers believed to be caused by RF radiation were among the least frequent cancers. (Breast cancer in women was high, but there are other causes besides RF). He also showed cancer data for the various types of cancer since 1930 and showed there was no upward trend in any of the RF related cancers, while lung cancers had risen and now tapered off. He said the data was taken from 1930 since it was about that time when significant amounts of RF radiation started to be emitted from radio stations etc. He also discussed the sample data in the study of the incidence of several specific cancers. He compared the study to a shotgun blast at a wall. He said the shots should be randomly distributed over the wall, but if you take small circle areas you will find some places with several shots and others of the same area with none. He said this had to do with sample size and could be the reason several cancers were found in a particular area. He concluded by saying that although he would still like to see the data from the CSU study, at this time he could not attribute any significant health hazard to Lookout. He was asked by Sheehan if he would attribute his own brain tumor (apparently he is recovered but had a serious tumor) to Lookout, and he said he could not do that from the evidence available.

After a short break it was the LCG's turn. Marv Rockford introduced the presentation by saying "Last year we told the truth and still stand by what we said". The LCG led with Dr. Randall Musselman from the Air Force Academy who did the LCG calculations for the revised power levels. He started with several charts which quoted comments by Al Hislop and others claiming the radiation would be higher in many areas. He said their calculations used incorrect assumptions and were not credible. He explained his study and pointed out that areas with 11% (for example) were 11% of the maximum allowable exposure levels, and the maximum allowable energy levels were 1/500th of the levels which begin to cause heating, and not 1/50th as advertised by CARE. He also said that he had seen the health study and suggested that the missing piece was that the study did not take in to account the levels at the areas where the cancers occurred. He said the two tumors reported occurred in areas with the lowest levels on the mountain. (Slam!!!)

Next was a lawyer (James Campbell) who discussed the zoning rules. He pointed out that the alternative site was legally a circular argument since in order to relocate at Morrison or Squaw he would also be required to provide show no alternative sites existed. Since Lookout was there and all sites needed zoning changes, it could not work. He also read the zoning regulations applying to Squaw and said they specifically exclude the use of buildings from other towers to support another tower. He said the main existing tower with 34,000 sq. ft. of space was being used for other services and not available and the other two tower locations proposed were restricted to 2000 sq. ft. of space which could not support the LCG. He then discussed the ruling on the service typed for the KWGN tower. He said the fact it was ruled 'not the same service' did not apply to Lookout. He pointed out by reading the judges comments, that the tower was a backup for KWGN, but had been used by Trinity Broadcasting for their transmitter, and that Trinity was obviously NOT the same service as KWGN. He concluded by saying that the LCG could indeed convert the existing towers to DTV if they so chose since it would be the same service (unlike KWGN) and the other ruling did not apply.

Next up was John F. X. Brown. His credentials included being on the ATSC measurement committees and actually setting the standards for broadcast television. He first discussed the Lookout issue and pointed to data that showed the channel interference (35 with 34, and 17 with 18) would affect over a million viewers. CARE has suggested that the stations apply to the FCC to change the channel assignments, but could not suggest any combination that could be co-ordinated with all the other assignment. He also said that in order to speed up the transition, last week the FCC had announced that they would no longer accept applications for channel re-assignments so that was out. He then got in to a discussion of the techniques used by Al and CARE to measure a sample of signals from Lookout and proceeded to show that their techniques were not conducted by the standards set forth by his own committee. (Bonk!, Boof!). He said from his own studies, there was no way the coverage from Squaw could be within 5% of the current station coverage areas as required by the FCC to maintain their area. This guy had credentials out the wazoo, and really shut down all of the tests and calculations done by CARE (in some detail) as not following FCC guidelines. Between FX and Musselman they really tore the CARE RF studies to shreds. During his talk I noticed some of the (S)CARE folks start to leave with 'resignation' in their eyes. It was worth the trip for that.

Finally, to complete the 'slam dunk in yo' face' of (S)CARE, the LCG brought up Mark Malouf. He is the head of the largest consulting firm on tower construction, a registered PE in 48 states and also in Europe, and an expert in the subject. He showed his calculations on the towers to show it was safe even in 200 mph wind. He then displayed a study submitted by (S)CARE and showed the assumptions used to create the results were not standard assumptions and were geared to make the results look bad. (SLAM! BOP!) He discussed the LCG tower in great depth. He showed that there were no guy wire issues (overlap) between the old tower and the new tower during construction. He also showed that it was not possible for the wires or the tower to fall far enough to hit power lines on the mountain. He fielded all questions and really put the issue to rest. He was even familiar with the tower failures referenced by (S)CARE and proceeded to discuss why they were not similar to or applicable to this case.

Marv Rockford closed out the evening by restating his opening that nothing had changed since last year and asked the commissioners to again OK the plan. There was some very brief discussion as to whether to take a vote and the three agreed it was time, so Ms. Holloway worked with the attorney to get the correct wording for a resolution and the vote was taken. All three voted in favor. Since it was late, the (S)CARE folks headed quietly for the exits and the LCG group stayed a bit. Ms. Holloway and Ms. Lawrence came down to the group and expressed their relief that it was over and were very friendly with all of us. Leonard already commented on some of the things they said. It was an interesting few minutes to see everyone in such a relieved mood.

I spoke to Pete for a brief time after the meeting and he said he will be back in town around the 31'st to wrap up the legal side and get the papers signed to get it closed out and sent back to the judge. Pete and I will likely try to get together then and I offered to buy him a drink. I suggested we invite the whole AVS team and have a small celebration and he thought that was a great idea. I told him we might even buy HIM dinner this time. At any rate, he will get back to me with some firm dates if any of you are interested in joining the party let me know and I will post details when we get something set up.

Boy, this is the kind of slip-shod reporting we get from you when your too busy?! ;)

Seriously, Thanks John. Very interesting points made; especially regarding "same service" which seemed to be inconclusive as discussed around here.

I wonder if we can get 9News to televise the ground-breaking ceremony in HD! When did Pete say that would be !?

Originally posted by RonAuger

.................
I wonder if we can get 9News to televise the ground-breaking ceremony in HD! When did Pete say that would be !?

That was one of the first things Pete said to me after the vote, "Now everyone will want be asking me WHEN will it be finished".
He said it would get back to us with a good estimate when he rolls in next week, but Mr. Rockford stepped in and said it would be about a year or late next summer.

Of course, that willl be subject to any 'detours' along the way, thankfully we have never had one of those before.
:rolleyes:

Thanks John. Maybe you should be a reporter considering your excellent write up. You can count me in for an AV's get together.

Slam dunk there John! Thanks very much for the report. I'd be interested in getting togther with Pete when he's back.

Originally posted by markdl
Slam dunk there John! Thanks very much for the report. I'd be interested in getting togther with Pete when he's back.
I will post here when Pete has a night free. As for the report, I guess for a time last night I was feeling a bit of the 'old' enthusiasm that left me last year. I actually had some fun going again instead of feeling used, maybe it was because I could be there just as an observer and I didn't have some dude from KMGH telling me to get involved when I know they don't give a sh*t. At any rate, I felt some of the enthusiasm return, and also, as an engineer, it was just plain interesting to see the discussions of the power levels etc. done in a professional manner instead of the (S)CARE way. One of my major frustrations in the past has been the way the Al and Deb and the group distorted the facts just enough to fit their case, and to know that many in the audience couldn't see through all their crap. It used to make my 'blood boil' to see their distortions. Last night, for a change, things were handled by people interested in the true facts as they are supposed to be calculated.

(As Spock might say) Most interesting indeed, to see logic applied instead of emotion! :)

I certainly didn't expect such a quick resolution -- thanks everyone who went and reported back!

I'm up for a celebration with Pete whenever he's in town. I like Leonard's idea of having it in front of Deb's house :D

Disneyland is great, but I'm kind of bummed that there's no HDTV in the hotel -- at least there's free broadband!

Wow! This is all really great news. My thanks to all involved as well, and for that really great report John!

Awesome summary John. Thanks for reporting back!

In a way, the (s)CARE folks helped - to ensure that the process was thorough and the decisions made were the correct ones, but they didn't have to go so far to do that. Sure, the sCARE leaders now have credibility issues to face not only with Jeffco, and with the general pubic, but also with their all-along supporters and, most importantly, with themselves. They didn't need to do that. But, they were part of the process, and, as a complete surprise to myself, I thank them also.

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
In a way, the (s)CARE folks helped - to ensure that the process was thorough and the decisions made were the correct ones, but they didn't have to go so far to do that. I'm not so forgiving myself. Junk science and scare tactics cheapen the public debate. And we have too many real threats in today's world to waste our time and attention on phantom risks.

Maybe LCG II is a better tower, but the original proposal was good enough and whatever improvements are in LCG II were not worth the extra cost and 5 years of missed DTV for the region. Plus the delays and cost overruns made KRMA jump ship.

I applaud everyone's effort and enthusiasm. And, while I still lurk here, I maintain the same attitude about the Lookout Tower as about much else in this life: I will believe it when I see it through my picture window view of Lookout.

'Til then, it is just a pleasing theory.

Originally posted by Mgibsoj
In a way, the (s)CARE folks helped - to ensure that the process was thorough and the decisions made were the correct ones, but they didn't have to go so far to do that. Sure, the sCARE leaders now have credibility issues to face not only with Jeffco, and with the general pubic, but also with their all-along supporters and, most importantly, with themselves. They didn't need to do that. But, they were part of the process, and, as a complete surprise to myself, I thank them also.

Leonard and I talked about that very subject on Tues. Although it shouldn't have dragged out this long, I do believe the tower will be a better and safer design as a result of the opposition to it. I doubt there are any angles or details that haven't been considered and the whole process should make the 'long term' results much better than it could have been. As the 'old timers' like me especially remember, the first submittal presented by the LCG back in 1998(?) or 'there abouts' wasn't even a complete package of all required items. Originally the LCG members really didn't seem to feel all that accountable for their actions. Their attitude in those days was like the 10,000 pound gorilla who thinks he can 'sleep anywhere he wants'.

BTW, I forgot to include one of my favorite slams from the other night in my report. While Dr. Mussleman was discussing the power levels from his analysis, he decided to put the levels in Golden into perspective. After discussing several (S)CARE and City of Golden comments about the 'high levels' expected in Golden, he said (not an exact quote, but close), "The levels in the City of Golden will be about the same or less than the levels which will be seen by the people in Aurora, and I don't think any of them will be here complaining about their safety". It reminded me all the (S)CARE statements of concern about "being in the line of sight", and "power levels being measurable" with an old saying from an old professor of mine, "That's how radio works!" (or in this case TV). Just an afterthought from the other night.

Still FINALLY feeling good about this one. I really don't see how (S)CARE can attack this thing now, at least in terms of blocking or stopping the start of construction. Just hope I am not (after all these years of severe cynicism) becoming delusional too.
:D
Still though, I can't help but think, like others here, that I will feel a whole lot better when I can scan my HD channels and see KMGH-DTV and then flip to another channel in protest.

Originally posted by oxothuk
............
Maybe LCG II is a better tower, but the original proposal was good enough and whatever improvements are in LCG II were not worth the extra cost and 5 years of missed DTV for the region. Plus the delays and cost overruns made KRMA jump ship.

Actually, as I mentioned above, the original proposal, was NOT good enough, in fact it didn't even include all the the required documents. It was rejected by the commissioners almost immediately. Only after that failure, did the LCG even start to take the whole process seriously. That was a LONG time ago though and a LOT of water has passed under the bridge since then. It certainly should NOT have taken this long. To me, the real key which sold me on the LCG design was their agreement to pay for an independent service to continually make safety measurements in the area. The whole Lookout mountain complex has indeed been plauged by 'hot spots' and other problems over the years, although most of these, I would argue, were likely caused by the local residents refusal to allow the various stations to update their towers and equipment. This meant that, in many cases, old, run down, and out of date equipment has been forced to work when more modern and safer equipment could have replaced it. At least if constant testing is performed, we can all rest assured the residents in the area will remain safe. After all, that IS more important than my getting KMGH-DTV. The review process really worked, it just took a year or two longer than any of us would have liked due to the 'junk science' claims from (S)CARE. Part of the reason it all is so late STILL falls back on the LCG, they didn't do their own homework in the early days either. Just my $0.02 on that subject.

My only thought is what about plain old 'Civil Suits'? Can't the NIMBY locals just bombard the LCG with those? I would think they might be able to get injunctions to at least gum-up the works with more delays.

Any lawyers out there who can comment?

Thanks to JMartinko and Lawood for keeping us informed on this. Excellent work!
I too fall into the "I'll believe it when I see it " camp. Hopefully a year from now we'll be seeing most of it.

Wow John,

Thanks for the report !!!

Originally posted by JMartinko
Still FINALLY feeling good about this one. I really don't see how (S)CARE can attack this thing now, at least in terms of blocking or stopping the start of construction. Just hope I am not (after all these years of severe cynicism) becoming delusional too. If you're feeling optimistic, then I guess the end really is in sight!

Originally posted by RonAuger
If you're feeling optimistic, then I guess the end really is in sight!

Ouch! OK, sorry, I take it all back. I didn't realize I had gotten that far out of control. Being optimistic is soooooo out of character for me, and I worked so long and hard to cultivate that cynical image too. Here i nearly blow all that work with a couple of posts. I take it all back, the tower will never happen! Whew, now life feels normal again.
:D

http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2004/08/16/daily32.html

Not even a mention of sCARE in this one.

Originally posted by JMartinko

BTW, I forgot to include one of my favorite slams from the other night in my report. While Dr. Mussleman was discussing the power levels from his analysis, he decided to put the levels in Golden into perspective. After discussing several (S)CARE and City of Golden comments about the 'high levels' expected in Golden, he said (not an exact quote, but close), "The levels in the City of Golden will be about the same or less than the levels which will be seen by the people in Aurora, and don't think any of them will be here complaining about their safety". It reminded me all the (S)CARE statements of concern about "being in the line of sight", and "power levels being measurable" with an old saying from an old professor of mine, "That's how radio works!" (or in this case TV). Just an afterthought from the other night.
John. Correct me if I am wrong. Wasn't it Dr. Mussleman who compared the RF to a fire hose. Basically he stated that if you take a fire hose and shoot the water horizontally people standing slightly in front of the hose will only receive a small amount of water. OK now lets increase the water pressure to reach Aurora. What affect do you think this will now have on those people. I believe his intent was to explain why the RF levels in Golden would same or less in Aurora.

Originally posted by Lawood
John. Correct me if I am wrong. Wasn't it Dr. Mussleman who compared the RF to a fire hose. Basically he stated that if you take a fire hose and shoot the water horizontally people standing slightly in front of the hose will only receive a small amount of water. OK now lets increase the water pressure to reach Aurora. What affect do you think this will now have on those people. I believe his intent was to explain why the RF levels in Golden would same or less in Aurora.

You are correct, he was the one who made that analogy. I was watching faces in the room while he was discussing this issue and I noticed several of the (S)CARE backers looking at each other like this was a 'new concept' to them. I think it had a serious impact on Deb C. and (S)CARE's credibility with some of the folks. Of course there are still many who will refuse to believe the facts since they do not support the outcome they want. I did notice a lot of folks leaving at various times during the LCG presentation, and although I know it was also getting late, I also think some of them were leaving as they realized the scientific facts just didn't support their opposition claims.

The City of Golden September newsletter has their slant on things. I think most of the article was written before the decision, then updated.

http://golden.projecta.com/News.asp?NewsID=20

Mark

While we're posting reading material...

From today's Rocky Mtn News Opinion section (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_3120643,00.html)

The purpose of the tower is to allow five TV channels - 4, 6, 7, 9 and 20 - to begin broadcasting a digital signal. The Federal Communications Commission requires this, and among large markets only Denver and New York City aren't in compliance.

I can't believe they were able to squeeze that much misinformation into two sentences!

Originally printed in the RMN
But after Tuesday's vote, the homeowners threatened to reactivate their suit. Another good one! This was the mother-of-all-suits.

The fight to stop the broadcast towers and radiation to our community has been long and arduous. Many volunteers have been active since 1998 when the proposals to build more towers began. There have been victories, and defeats, but the super-towers have not been built! Now is the time to join, or join again as time has all but run out for the broadcasters who must be HDTV-ready by 2006. It is very likely that further denial or delay will cause the broadcasters (Lake Cedar Group) to locate elsewhere due to time constraints and federal mandates.

The above paragraph is from CARE's newletter.

Locate elsewhere. Marv emphasized and I mean emphasized the fact that the existing towers could be converted over to and be used for digital transmission.

That newsletter was published before the 8/12 and 8/17 hearings. Since then there haven't been any updates to City & Mounatin Views (http://www.citymtnviews.com/) or CARE's (http://www.c-a-r-e.org/) websites.

The City of Golden link that was posted earlier has been the only publicity I've seen from the "other side" of the fence, so hopefully they're finally running out of steam.

Hi all. I am new to this forum. I live near Lyons. Is there a particular thread here that will summarize the state of HDTV broadcast in the Denver area and when we can expect all the channels to get going?
thanks,
joe

Welcome Joe!
This is a site that has lots of info on the state of Denver DTV.

www.denverdtv.info

Here's another link that has reception data for our area. Read through it and you can find out who gets what in your area.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168587&highlight=denver+data

Originally posted by Laurienti
Hi all. I am new to this forum. I live near Lyons. Is there a particular thread here that will summarize the state of HDTV broadcast in the Denver area and when we can expect all the channels to get going?
thanks,
joe
Santella's site here s a good one:
http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/denverdtv.htm

Net of it is a follows:
KDVR (Fox) and KWGN (WB) have medium power broadcasts from Lookout Mountain which can be received as far north as Ft. Collins.
KCNC (CBS), KUSA(NBC) and KRMA(PBS) have low power signals from the Republic building in downtown Denver. A good number of people are able to receive these stations in Longmont, but it takes a good antenna and careful positioning.

KMGH (ABC) has a low power broadcast from their studio which is pretty much hopeless to receive north of I-70.

I'd guess you're going to have a tough time from Lyons unless you are at least some ways up on the foothills with a clear view to the southeast.

All of this will change when the new tower is built on Lookout, but that is at least a year away.

right now I get WB, FOX, channel 9 and channel 6 most of the time. I do get dropouts on all of them though. I was watching the HD broadcast of the olympics on wednesday night (the picture was AWESOME by the way) and then it suddenly disappeared. I have never gotten a signal from channel 7 or channel 4. What channel will the Broncos be on this year? and will the broadcats be HD?

Hi Joe -

Same situation for me in Longmont for KUSA-DT - there, then gone - not like fade out, but like something overrides the signal. Different antennas and different locations change the signal strength, but don't fix the problem. It may be different for you, so you may want to try various locations, a few inches can make a big difference. I don't get them at all during daylight hours with few exceptions. But I do get FOX and WB solid anyway. For watching the broncos in HD, you may want to try going to the north. KGWN-DT (CBS) in Cheyenne is on channel 30 with a strong enough signal - I still have something overriding that signal on occasion, but ususally it's good. There's the FOX repeater in Ft. Collins on channel 21, but it's tough for me to get.

Originally posted by Laurienti
What channel will the Broncos be on this year? and will the broadcats be HD? Broncos will mostly be on channel 4, since CBS has the AFC games. KCNC channel 4's digital assignment is 35, which is somewhat higher than the assignments for KRMA and KUSA, and will make KCNC harder to receive even though it comes from the same place and has about the same power level. What kind of antenna do you have?

On a touchy subject, another irony with the tower situation and KMGH-DTV that no one can get, is that this may well be the last year ABC will televise MNF. Rumors I have read say that MNF may switch to ESPN or another network next year when the new contract is negotiated. Wouldn't it be funny if KMGH finally got on the air in HD outside of their parking lot and NOBODY CARED.

I have a TERK TV55, which i had before I even got my HDTV.
What antenna do you guys recommend?

Originally posted by Laurienti
I have a TERK TV55, which i had before I even got my HDTV.
What antenna do you guys recommend? I get very good results with my Channel Master 4228. It's a flat screen design which is roughly three feet square.

This is what the CM4228 looks like, mounted on a mast next to my deck.

can that type of antenna go in an attic?

Terk antennas are generally viewed as junk.

I use a CM 4248 (actually a 3023 which is the same only in two pieces) which is very long Yagi. It is on a 10 foot pole on the roof. Generally, you will find much better results on the roof as compared to the attic, but you can try either to see what you get. In my case, I use this antenna so I can get KMGH and all the other stations come in fine. Without KMGH, I could have used a simple RS double bow-tie or a Silver Sensor even in the attic.

I did try a pre-amp, but it made things worse because it overloaded from the stronger UHF signals such as Fox 31.

Go here for antenna information:

http://www.keohi.com/keohihdtv/hdreception/antenna.html

Originally posted by Laurienti
can that type of antenna go in an attic? some people have put these in the attic, but there can be a problem making it fit through your access hole. Given how marginal your reception is to begin with, I think you'd be wasting your time trying it in the attic; it didn't work for me and I'm 10 miles closer.

Joe,

I agree outside is your best bet. If you're worried about HOA problems. HOA's cannot stop you from putting up an antenna on your own, controlled property, it's the law!

HOAs may be defeated by Federal law, but the WAF isn't. If you have to use the attic, I do because of the WAF, a pre-amp is pretty much a given. Also, the type of roofing, roofing sheeting, and any insulation between your antenna and the signal can make the attic feasible or impossible.

To see what you are up against, visit:

<http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Welcome.aspx>

If your LOS angle between the downtown broadcasts and the LOM broadcasts is more than about 30 degrees, the Yagi style antenna will generally give you a better chance of capturing both locations w/o a rotor. The bay type antennas are generally more directional, but better at picking up a weak signal from the direction at which they are pointed.

Also, some models of a given type of antenna are better for trying to get weak signals from a given group of UHF channels. For example, if KCNC-DT, channel 35 is the weak signal you want, then the CM4228 is a champ. But, if you wanted channel 17 (probably a non-starter for your location) then a Winegard PR-8800 might be the better selection. See:

<http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html>

On the Internet you will find a lot of declarations about a given antenna being the best. Be advised that most of the comparisons are based strictly on distance, where the challenge really doesn't begin until about 30 miles out. Seldom will you see a discussion of the kind of problems we have in metro-Denver, with broadcasters at two widely separated locations and with the downtown signals being at ridiculously low power levels (e.g., KMGH-DT is broadcasting at 1,910 watts, a bit more power than a blow dryer).

Oh yeah... the WAF factor. I feel lucky as my wife is totally into it. She loves to show off the HT to her friends. It all a matter of give-and-take. I give her flowers and then take her shopping. ;)

Originally posted by santellavision
It's all a matter of give-and-take. I give her flowers and then take her shopping. ;)


Now that's funny! Can I use that?....:D


Mike

I've been checking, not a peep on either the City & Mountain Views, the Canyon Courier or the sCARE website. Absolutely nada about getting their A$$ kicked at the JeffCo hearing. I'm really surprised... I was sure they would have 'spun' it to make them look like they won. ;)

Originally posted by santellavision
Absolutely nada about getting their A$$ kicked at the JeffCo hearing.


What does this mean for us?


Mike

It means that LCGII could, er, might, er, still, er, possibly proceed with construction of the consolidation tower leading to 'US' actually getting DTV. (including Mark and others in Ft. Collins)

Hopefully that they're tucking their tail and running.

Their was an article in yesterdays Columbine Community Courier (not available on line) that said that Golden was considering its options on what to do next to fight the tower.

Anyone know when this is going to get back in front of the judge to get the injunction lifted?

And John - any word yet on when Pete's going to be back in town and we can get together?

Originally posted by santellavision
I've been checking, not a peep on either the City & Mountain Views, the Canyon Courier or the sCARE website. Absolutely nada about getting their A$$ kicked at the JeffCo hearing. I'm really surprised... I was sure they would have 'spun' it to make them look like they won. ;)

On the other side, not a peep on the Lake Cedar Project (http://www.lakecedarproject.com/) page about the outcome of the hearing yet either, which is just as surprising.

Originally posted by Phil T
Their was an article in yesterdays Columbine Community Courier (not available on line) that said that Golden was considering its options on what to do next to fight the tower. I think their only option now is to go fight some other 'real' cause like the lousy clean-up job at Rocky Flats.

Originally posted by markdl
Anyone know when this is going to get back in front of the judge to get the injunction lifted?

And John - any word yet on when Pete's going to be back in town and we can get together?

The paperwork has to be drawn up in all the legal formats to describe the actions taken and in order to formalize the final vote taken last week. Once that is done the commissioners sign the papers so they can then be returned to the judge. AFAIK, that is suppose to occur on or about the 31'st of August, or at least so Pete thought after the vote that night. He expected to be here for that signing, and that is when we talked about getting together to celebrate. I just dropped him a note to see if there is any new or 'more firm' news. I will let you all know if I hear and he doesn't send out another info mail to the group.

Well, I'm moved in here at Highlands Ranch.... set up my little Radio Shack UHF antenna and I'm happy as can be! I get digital for all 4 major networks! Here's my signal strength here at University and Wildcat Reserve:

CBS 86%
FOX 77%
NBC 69%
ABC 69%

I was quite surprised to get the ABC affiliate.... I flipped it on Monday night and was watching HD football!

*sings* It's the most wonderful time, of the year *sings*

Now if only my Tucson locals hadn't switched to the new DirecTV satelitte (and thus spot beam) the day after my install I would be the happiest man alive.... I'd get the PAC-10 college games I wanted too! alas.... it wasn't meant to be... but I sure did get happy for that 24 hours when I flipped on the TV and still had my old locals!

Thanks guys...oh yeah, and I went with Qwest for broadband :-)

'Accurate Al' is in the RMN editorial section again today. Rambling on and on and on.

The only difference this time, is now he's accusing the RMN of being in bed with the LCG because they printed the so called LCG 'lies' that the tower will decrease RF, not increase the levels, as sCARE's group has so accurately testified.

Well... of course we all know now after the last JeffCo public meeting just how accurate the sCARE group's results are!

Originally posted by santellavision
'Accurate Al' is in the RMN editorial section again today. Rambling on and on and on.

The only difference this time, is now he's accusing the RMN of being in bed with the LCG because they printed the so called LCG 'lies' that the tower will decrease RF, not increase the levels, as sCARE's group has so accurately testified.

Well... of course we all know now after the last JeffCo public meeting just how accurate the sCARE group's results are!

Scroll down about half way.
RMNews Editorials (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_3138302,00.html)

Always a pleasure to hear from our friend Al. I wonder how his RF shield screen business is doing on Lookout these days???

The Canyon Courier finally posted a story on the latest sCARE defeat. When interviewing Ms. Carney, she says "they haven't heard my opening brief yet". Uh... yeah, we've heard it one too many times. What's she going to say... 'If the tower won't fit, you must acquit!' ;)

http://www.canyoncourier.com/articles/2004/08/26/news/news03.txt

Anybody know what time this 'amazing' event will happen?

Anyone else seeing flashing bars in the upper right on KWGN (2-1)?

Yup, just tried Blue Collar, and there it was, again...

Might it just be another Samsung thing?

Oh well, they cured it pretty quickly last time.

Originally posted by ByH2O
[BMight it just be another Samsung thing? [/B] Have the Samsung's had problems like this sometime in the past? I've had my Samsung for 9 months and never seen this problem before. Only KWGN is affected - the bars are still there this morning.

It was on my Dish Network 921 also...

And on my HD TiVo during Blue Collar TV.

Had to dig a little.

Found references to KWGN upper right corner pixellation back on page 422...

July 26-27.

jpco and kucharsk both noticed it then, but I do not know what equipment they have.

Sorry about the Samsung reference, I just recalled those earlier times when the Sammy's were unhappy with the KWGN stream.

Looks like several others are affected.

No written response from KWGN, but they obviously had corrected the issue at that time.

Not able to check right now, but hoping for a quick return here, as well.

Later,

I saw Adelphia made a deal today to carry Altitude Sports Network, and dishnetwork will be a provider. Any rumors or insight when Directv will be carrying this channel. Or will thousands of people have to complain before Directv carries the channel?

Nothing new since last month --> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=4098707#post4098707

Call DirecTV and demand they carry it!

Is it too late to change my tower finish date... again.

http://www.canyoncourier.com/articles/2004/05/07/news/news07.txt

That's old news, Ernie. The URL seems to indicate the story is from May of this year.

Not sure how that affects the decision last week, though.

Ooops, my bad. I saw Aug 27th at the top. Just trying to keep up on ALL the local news. Although, I don't remember if we heard that this problem went away.

I hope we don't run into this current Evergreen nightmare...
http://www.canyoncourier.com/articles/2004/08/26/news/top_story/top.txt

Originally posted by ByH2O
Found references to KWGN upper right corner pixellation back on page 422...

July 26-27.

jpco and kucharsk both noticed it then, but I do not know what equipment they have.


I'm not following this part of the thread right now, but if it matters, I have a Hughes receiver.

jpco,

Thanks for your update.

Is your Hughes currently doing the "KWGN upper right hand corner boogie"?

I just got home and checked my system, still there...

:rolleyes:

I'm also seeing the "KWGN URHC Boogie" on my RCA. First time I've ever seen it.

Also, for Comcast users, KMGH-D is up on ch. 652... Looks like they've got the stretch for SD. Also noticing occasional audio drop-outs.

cheers...

Originally posted by santellavision
Is it too late to change my tower finish date... again.

http://www.canyoncourier.com/articles/2004/05/07/news/news07.txt

I followed the URL. Had to laugh. I think today's online poll shows the level of journalistic integrity of the Canyon Courier: Do you think the Olympic Games are Rigged?

What's up with that?

:rolleyes:

Originally posted by hoopsbwc34
Well, I'm moved in here at Highlands Ranch.... set up my little Radio Shack UHF antenna and I'm happy as can be! I get digital for all 4 major networks! Here's my signal strength here at University and Wildcat Reserve:

CBS 86%
FOX 77%
NBC 69%
ABC 69%

I was quite surprised to get the ABC affiliate.... I flipped it on Monday night and was watching HD football!

*sings* It's the most wonderful time, of the year *sings*

Now if only my Tucson locals hadn't switched to the new DirecTV satelitte (and thus spot beam) the day after my install I would be the happiest man alive.... I'd get the PAC-10 college games I wanted too! alas.... it wasn't meant to be... but I sure did get happy for that 24 hours when I flipped on the TV and still had my old locals!

Thanks guys...oh yeah, and I went with Qwest for broadband :-)

As a UA alum, I get the Fox MultiSport so I can get Fox Arizona on Dish. I get 10-12 more basketball games a year, plus they wil be showing a coupel of footbal games, including the NAU game. I think DirectTV offers it as well.

The first two pre-season games were SD over their HD channel. Does anyone know if any of the games, other than the big-deal network covered ones, going to be HD? Is there a listing anywhere that shows which games?

yes, I'm spoiled already.

I'm pretty new to the whole HD scene but based on what's happened thus far I doubt that anything short of a national football telecast will be in SD. My first opportunity to watch the Donkies in HD will be the opening night beat down at the hands of the Chiefs on 9/12 on ESPN HD.

Since I'm already beating one dead horse, it's nothing short of infuriating that I can't get ABCHD. According to antennaweb.org there's but 1 mile and 3 degrees difference between KCNC-HD and KMGH-HD yet I get nothing from the latter.

Yes, one taste of HD football and there's no going back. At least the USC V-Tech game is on ESPN HD.