Denver, CO - OTA [Text View] - Page 53

roller11

11-24-05, 01:10 AM

Going back to the original topic - although it's most likely that the switch to 4:3 SD during these shows is a local problem, you could always call or write KUSA to see if they'll share the reason (and then share it with us).

I have emailed Don Perez many times about these failures, and he has always
blamed NBC for them. I have never called KUSA because all I have for them
is a long distance number (970 prefix). Do you have a 303 or 720
number for KUSA?

I suspect that the LV PQ problem (16:9 but SD quality) is more of a national issue. I would think (but I could be wrong) that it would be very difficult for KUSA to take an HD feed (16:9) and downrez it to SD.

Absolutely agree, no doubt a national problem. I just can't see KUSA getting
a HD feed and turning it into SD widescreen.

Also, you mentioned that the only one of the six Monday NBC HD shows was clean, but you didn't say what was wrong with Medium this week (I did not watch most of it - never saw the 3D parts).

When I made the comment, I had not yet watched the Medium 3D episode.
Turns out, Medium 3D was 'clean'. 16:9 ratio HD, not the obvious downrez of
Nov. 14 Las Vegas. Since I watch nothing but HD primetime shows, it is
very noticeable to me when I observe the fuzzy DVD-like images that were Las vegas Nov.14. People who watch a mix of HD and SD progs on, say, a 50"
TV set at a distance of 12' may well not have noticed the fuzziness. But to me,
the poor PQ jumped out and i immediately recognized it for what it was..

milehighmike

11-24-05, 02:10 AM

Quote from LXIX
I couldn't find any info on the FCC or NAB web sites to tell me what signal they are broadcasting at (if they got an application approved for higher strength) so I thought I would ask if anyone else is getting this extra strength.

Refer to my previous post, #13104.

I usually receive 7-1 at around 90%, that's what I'm getting tonight.

mdamberger

11-24-05, 02:26 AM

I have emailed Don Perez many times about these failures, and he has always
blamed NBC for them. I have never called KUSA because all I have for them
is a long distance number (970 prefix). Do you have a 303 or 720
number for KUSA?

Absolutely agree, no doubt a national problem. I just can't see KUSA getting
a HD feed and turning it into SD widescreen.

Similar problems have been discussed in other threads, notably the ABQ NM thread. It seems that when NY get's heavy rain, NBC will switch their uplink to Burbank CA. NBC NY then feeds Burbank via fiber and they uplink programming for the duration of the bad weather. Burbank as of yet, does not have an HD capable uplink for the network. So they downres to SD and feed it out that way. From what I understand Leno is fed to NY via fiber and they then turn it around for the network. There are plans to upgrade Burbank. This coming from a senior engineer of an NBC affiliate. This sounds right, having worked at an NBC affiliate myself once. You could always find the direct feed of Leno on the old SBS4 satellite and it had a two second delay. With the fiber feed being primary. Also the NBC Bug looked slightly different, inserted by Burbank.

gakon

11-24-05, 02:48 AM

Do you have a 303 or 720 number for KUSA?Lots of them can be found here.
http://9news.com/9listens/
The main number is 303 871 9999. I don't know what it takes to get someone in engineering.
I know a while ago (last year?) KDVR upgraded their equipment so that no one at the station would have to "flip the switch" any more. I would think that KUSA has that capability as well. mdamberger's explanation sounded good to me, but there's probably lots of opportunities for problems at the local level, too.

kucharsk

11-24-05, 03:47 AM

Yes, part of the show was skipped--some witty dialog but nothing important to the story line. I watched the missing minutes later on KTLA. One of the benefits of maintaining a "Canadian address".
No need for a "Canadian address"; KTLA is WB, and WB isn't subject to regular network rules.

If you have a big dish, KTLA is (for the moment at least) available on AMC3, transponder 15, or via E* in their (unadvertised) "superstations" package.

santellavision

11-24-05, 10:02 AM

I know a while ago (last year?) KDVR upgraded their equipment so that no one at the station would have to "flip the switch" any more. I would think that KUSA has that capability as well.I doubt that it will be 100% perfect. Especially with us being in the mountain time zone. In our market, all the stations have to utilize servers for delaying. And as anybody with a PC knows, computers crash a lot for no reason. My gripe is that they should be watching the OTA feeds more.

Timay

11-24-05, 10:51 AM

I have a Samsung sir-451, with which I was able to get channel 7 HD...it took a couple of 'memorize channels' but I did get it and have been watching it for the last month or two. Last night my receiver died (went into boot and never left), I took it back to CC and exchanged it for another. Got home, memorized the channels and no KMGH! I have spent some time this morning and still can't get KMGH.

I look right into downtown, I can light up all the bars on the receiver (no signal strength number...just bars), channel 4 is a bit down from 9 but I can peak it, but still no channel 7.

Yesterday I helped a friend in Aurora get set up with OTA HD...the same thing with the same equipment...full bars on 9, nothing on 7, and he has a great look into downtown as well.

Can anybody give me a hint on why that would be? Does the receiver not grab the weaker channels, or do the stronger channels make the receiver deaf to the weaker ones? Why do we need to 'memorize' the channels, why not just tune them in?

And I wonder if Mr. Gakon would run a profile from 6337 S Lafayette Pl, Centennial, to RP, please?

Thanks all!

Tim

santellavision

11-24-05, 11:05 AM

Tim,
I don't own a 451, but have you tried both adding manually and auto-scan for DTV? Sometimes the auto-scans skip weak channels. And also, some receivers get confused with channel mapping. Have you tried scanning for both 17 and just 7?

Timay

11-24-05, 11:10 AM

Ernie ~

I tried manually at my friends and it said it wasnt' available...I didn't try 17, though. It does seem as though the strong signals kinda 'swamp' the weaker ones.

I probably just answered my own question...after writing the above question, I went back, moved the antenna a tad, memorized channels and *bingo*, got KMGH! I then peaked up the signal and the best I can get is 3-4 bars, about 1/2 the other channels, and I only move the antenna a very little bit to go from nothing to 3-4 bars.

As has been said, its a game of inches!

Tim

AwesomeFloyd

11-24-05, 01:18 PM

Falcons/Lions HD feed just went out for me. Anyone else having a similar problem?

That was a fast fix. Would whoever fixed the feed work some magic on the Lions? At least make it competitive? Thanks.

Couch Patato

11-24-05, 01:24 PM

It's all wacked out on Comcast too.

mrdobolina

11-24-05, 01:28 PM

It's wacked OTA (HD)here too. Luckily DirecTv allows us to get the west coast feed for FOX. It's fine off of the satellite.

santellavision

11-27-05, 08:58 AM

Our thread has been way too quiet over the holiday. Well... Watching HDTV is better now that we just got a new Lab puppy - Sophie

http://www.santellaproductions.com/S1w.jpg

Seedcar

11-27-05, 11:55 AM

Fine looking pup Ernie. How old is she?

santellavision

11-27-05, 06:21 PM

Thanks - She's 6 weeks old and a Bronco fan! (She's related to Elways Lab)

kgclark75

11-27-05, 07:54 PM

It's wacked OTA (HD)here too. Luckily DirecTv allows us to get the west coast feed for FOX. It's fine off of the satellite.

I just a card yesterday from Directv stating that all of my HD waiver requests (including Fox) were denied. Anyone have any ideas why? I thought that Fox had a blanket waiver since they are an O&O station.

kgclark75

11-28-05, 02:05 PM

Where are you located?

West City Park

colofan

11-28-05, 02:19 PM

I doubt that it will be 100% perfect. Especially with us being in the mountain time zone. In our market, all the stations have to utilize servers for delaying. And as anybody with a PC knows, computers crash a lot for no reason. My gripe is that they should be watching the OTA feeds more.

Normally I wouldn't comment on computers but in this case it is all a matter of money. If they wanted a reliable system they can get one that is more redundant than any satellite feed would provide. A PC on your desktop and a highly redundant server are about as different as a locomotive and a passenger car. Both burn fossil fuel and that is where the similarity ends.

santellavision

11-28-05, 08:51 PM

A PC on your desktop and a highly redundant server are about as different as a locomotive and a passenger car. Both burn fossil fuel and that is where the similarity ends.Actually, not really. I've been out the broadcast biz for a while, but I do work in production. I recently did a promotional video for a company that makes broadcast servers for air. They were HP units. Same as you can buy off the street. Obviously, the software is more to the heart of the issue.

Just about everything in broadcast is normal PC hardware with propriatary I/O's and control cards. All editing systems (Even both my HD and SD edit systems are off-the-shelf) Mac G5 DP 2.7's. And today, I was editing on a AVID Symphony Non-linear system. It was a Compaq.

Not to sound like Grandpa, but back in the day, yeah, most gear was propriatary hardware based systems like Chyron character-generators, CMX edit controllers etc. Not anymore.

sunshinedawg

11-28-05, 09:10 PM

I guess Surface is SD tonight. Anyone want to take bets on when or if it switches to HD? :mad:

gakon

11-29-05, 12:24 AM

No bets. Roller11, no need to check it out this week, since it never switched. Las Vegas and Medium were both HD, although I only watched a few minutes of both. The Surface problem affected most of the country, but the west coast got in in HD. I'm going to send an email to KUSA to see if they have an explanation.

TheBert

11-29-05, 10:36 AM

I guess Surface is SD tonight. Anyone want to take bets on when or if it switches to HD? :mad:

Even my 10 year old daughter is asking whats wrong with the picture, At least I was fortunate enough to have the zoom feature working on the ol 921 last night.

Is there really someone that is doing the switching manually? :(

KWGN-TV

11-29-05, 10:38 AM

Ernie,

Your post is most accurate in the true fact that we are seeing more and more companies getting into "Broadcast". I have been in the business 20 plus years and remember the days when the broadcast companies were "IT". Names like Ampex, Chyron, Grass Valley. Reputable names but many no longer exist or have joined the PC platform. As broadcasters, we are now at the mercy of waiting for a computer to boot in order to get back on air. Not the ideal scenario for our viewing public. Some companies are using off-the-shelf software for operating systems while others use a proprietry system and some use in-house hardware while others use things you can buy at Comp-USA. Unfortunately this is the broadcast industry of today and what has pushed the entire HD realm. Once a computer was placed on everyone's desk the industry seemingly changed overnight.

Dave Martinez
KWGN-TV

colofan

11-29-05, 11:41 AM

Actually, not really. I've been out the broadcast biz for a while, but I do work in production. I recently did a promotional video for a company that makes broadcast servers for air. They were HP units. Same as you can buy off the street. Obviously, the software is more to the heart of the issue.

Just about everything in broadcast is normal PC hardware with propriatary I/O's and control cards. All editing systems (Even both my HD and SD edit systems are off-the-shelf) Mac G5 DP 2.7's. And today, I was editing on a AVID Symphony Non-linear system. It was a Compaq.

Not to sound like Grandpa, but back in the day, yeah, most gear was propriatary hardware based systems like Chyron character-generators, CMX edit controllers etc. Not anymore.

So they aren't even using servers that are redundant? I mean these computers are mission critical to their business.

An example from HP would be in the midrange complete with redundant functions so you have 100% uptime.

http://www.hp.com/products1/servers/integrity/mid_range/index.html

Very odd to rely on desktop hardware when you need something built for a much higher on demand requirements.

santellavision

11-29-05, 12:02 PM

Very odd to rely on desktop hardware when you need something built for a much higher on demand requirements. Remember the almighty dollar. Why buy a proprietary system, when you can buy an off-the-shelf PC system that you can upgrade or replace for a few hundred bucks, when the other system charges tens of thousands of dollars for an upgrade. And in some cases, the cheaper system might be more stable!

For example, I edit on lots of different broadcast edit systems (AVID, Media100, Final Cut, Affinity) and the AVID which is most expensive, has proprietary hard drives which cost a bloody fortune, crashes the most. My new $995. Apple FCPro HD system is rock solid and hasn't crashed yet.

colofan

11-29-05, 12:42 PM

But the work you are doing is offline I was referring to the on-line servers that the broadcasts are coming from. If this was the only signal being broadcast (without SD backup) aI would bet that the resources would be available so they wouldn't lose advertising funds because they saved some money on the hardware platform.

The bottom line it isn't that the computers or even the software can't be made reliable it is the Microsoft thinking that down once a day is okay. Maybe for a desktop but imagine a bank saying well could you come back tomorrow to give you your money?

santellavision

11-29-05, 01:08 PM

I'm not defending them. Just dissussing it. There really should be NO reason we are having all these problems. There's way too many... "Our server screwed-up, so the show is in SD tonight". Or, "Ooops, somebody forgot to flip-the-switch" issues. That is unacceptable at the local level. If it's network, that's different but still unacceptable on their end. Everyone should have backups.

Also to the point, I don't believe the stations are paying close enough attention to their HD off-air. If they were watching more carefully, we'd have less on-air errors. When I worked master-control, guys got fired for screwing up this much.

Geof

11-29-05, 05:31 PM

When I worked master-control, guys got fired for screwing up this much.
I can think of a whole rash of folks who should get fired, and not for just screwing up by not flipping the switch or because of server issues. The whole HD availability issue in Denver comes to mind as one prime example. For example I'd probably fire the whole kit and kaboodle at KMGH and then hire some real professionals, but hey, maybe that's just me...:)

On the other hand everyone has got to remember that right now NTSC still rules since that is where most all the audience is. I am very confident that once NTSC dies and goes away that all attention will be keenly focused on the ATSC side of things.

skyburn

11-29-05, 07:19 PM

Hi, I've been lurking on this forum for a while, and figured there might be someone here with insight into an issue that I've seen with the Denver-area KDVR-DT channel and my Dish 921 receiver. I posted this message on DBSTalk a while back, nothing really materialized. Any ideas from AVS folk?

I'm kind of wondering if anyone on this forum that's in the Fort Collins area that has a Dish 921 receiver is seeing the same thing.

TIA,
- Joe

I live in Fort Collins, CO. The other day, I noticed that KDVR-DT (OTA) was getting a pretty poor signal via my 921, and so I started to investigate (it used to be in the 107-115 signal range; now I'm seeing 66-85ish) (this on the signal meter within the 921 which goes from 0 to 125 IIRC).

KDVR-DT is UHF 32 (channel 31), and my 921 maps it to 031-01 in the guide)

There's a repeater (or something; not sure if it's called a repeater) near Fort Collins broadcasting KDVR-DT on UHF 21 (channel 22) known as "KFCT".

Since I was having intermittent drop outs of my otherwise very good signal for KDVR-DT, I decided to remove all the scanned Digitals and do a re-scan. This actually helped a bit, but the signal is much lower than it was before (this past spring).

So, I went to the "Add DTV" screen, and played around with watching the signal meters for KDVR (UHF32) and KFCT (UHF21) and noticed something perplexing -- the UHF32 comes in solidly at 107-112; UHF22 comes in not as well at 66-87 sometimes dropping down to 0 then bouncing back up.

At this point, conspiracy theories flooded in, and I had the thought that the 921 is mapping UHF21 (KFCT) to the 031-01 guide channel, and ignoring UHF32 (KDVR).

To test that, I deleted all scanned or manually added DTV stations, and added only UHF21 -- the signal is still 66-87ish and lo-and-behold it maps to 031-01 in the guide. Not that surprising, I guess, since they are both the same station. What IS surprising is that if I then re-delete what I just added, then add only UHF32 -- the signal is the 107-112 version (on the screen where you add the DTV channel), then once it's added and saved, it's mapped to 031-01 as expected, BUT, while viewing the station, the signal meter on the top banner of the screen is the 66-87 version.

If I do an auto-DTV scan, a mapped 031-01 channel always gets added, but it's always the lower signal, ostensibly the KFCT/UHF21 signal. If I then go in and attempt to manually add either UHF21 or UHF32, nothing really happens -- I surmize because it sees the signal is the Fox Denver station, and will only add one of them.

So, what on earth is happening here? Is it possible for me to verify which UHF channel 031-01 is actually pointing at (21 or 32)? Is there a way to force the 921 to use one signal over another? Does anyone have an easy explanation for this?

Thanks in advance -- Joe

gakon

11-29-05, 08:20 PM

From Don Perez:
The delivery of the HD version of this show was late to NBC (NYC) for the feed that we air in Denver. When this is the case, their procedure is to run the SD version. I would assume the HD show was ingested into their servers for the west coast feed in time.

Iwanthd

11-30-05, 10:18 AM

Audiguy3

11-30-05, 12:34 PM

dr_mal

11-30-05, 12:36 PM

It looks like our pals at Lake Cedar Group have not given up just yet. There is an article in todays Denver Post about a poll that they commissioned to discover the mood of the front range community regarding the new tower. Golden officials have predictably discounted the results that show a positive response to the project. It also sounds like Golden is moving ahead with an appraisal for their eminent domain procedure for the tower site.

http://denverpost.com/search/ci_3263052
That same poll was mentioned on 9News 6am this morning. I was impressed that they're finally giving this issue some coverage in the news, but it's several days late and several dollars short at this point.

And Gregg Moss, did you have to say "supertower" in your report?

roller11

11-30-05, 02:12 PM

From Don Perez:
The delivery of the HD version of this show [Surface] was late to NBC (NYC) for the feed that we air in Denver. When this is the case, their procedure is to run the SD version. I would assume the HD show was ingested into their servers for the west coast feed in time.

This is the third consecutive week that the Monday night line-up was messed
up on KUSA/NBC. Because Surface is a serial, (each episode is related to the
previous one, unlike Medium and Las Vegas) this was a more serious problem.
Since Monday night's Surface was, in effect, not shown, now we have a missing
episode which means we won't know what's going on next week. Not that it will
matter if next week's Surface is also in lo-def.

Thing is, this is pretty much a problem only on KUSA/NBC, the other networks
rarely degrade primetime HD progs to SD. But NBC screws up about one third of
HD primetime progs, in whole or in part. Over the last three weeks, 5 out of 9
Mon night one hour time slots have been affected in this way. HD is no longer
cutting edge, and this rarely happens on CBS, FOX, WB. Why can't NBC get it right?

cjh404

11-30-05, 02:59 PM

Cause they're number four?

But they have been doing HD for a long time and should know what the hell they are doing by now.

roller11

11-30-05, 03:47 PM

Cause they're number four?

But they have been doing HD for a long time and should know what the hell they are doing by now.

I'm just glad that the NFL didn't give broadcast rights
to NBC. If they had, then Sunday NFL games promised in HD would constantly
be in SD. Not to mention the Superbowl! "Sorry folks, we forgot to flip
the switch".

gakon

11-30-05, 03:56 PM

Since Monday night's Surface was, in effect, not shown, now we have a missing episode which means we won't know what's going on next week. Not that it will matter if next week's Surface is also in lo-def.It's a little harsh to say that the episode was "not shown". You can certainly follow what went on in lo-def, unless you don't want to.
You are correct, however, about NBC being the weakest network when it comes to HD. Even if you believe Don's email (which implies that the Surface problem this week was not NBC's fault since they probably don't produce the show), you don't see that many problems on other networks. There was another thread discussing the number of "first run" moves shown on NBC recently that were NOT in HD. And, since Surface is in reruns for the rest of the year, what are the odds of those reruns actually being broadcast in HD?

skyburn

11-30-05, 03:58 PM

Joe - not a problem on my D* reciever. Wish I could help

It's not a problem so much as it's just odd. Right now, the lower signal strength seems to be holding up with pretty good signal. Sometimes I'll get a bit of pixellation here and there, but not too often.

eze232

11-30-05, 07:09 PM

I bought one of those rabbit ears antennas from radio shack...I live near broadway and bellview, the guy said it would easily pick up channel 4, but I could only get 31, 2, and 12 I cannot get 9 or 4 or 7. Anyone have a good suggestion for an antenna that is under 100.00?? I would prefer indoor.. anyone have any suggestions?

santellavision

11-30-05, 08:15 PM

eze,

The reason you only get 31, 2, are they are about 1/2 power. 12 is low-power but they have a good altitude (over 10,000'). 4, 6, 9 are also low-power, but their transmitters/antenna are only on the roof of Republic Plaza and much lower in height. 7, well...

You are most likely going to need an outdoor roof antenna if you want to get these low-power signals (like the rest of us) Don't worry about BS HOA rules, the FCC laws overide HOA's. The wife rules may require jewelry! :)

cjh404

11-30-05, 09:04 PM

I'm just glad that the NFL didn't give broadcast rights
to NBC. If they had, then Sunday NFL games promised in HD would constantly
be in SD. Not to mention the Superbowl! "Sorry folks, we forgot to flip
the switch".

Safe to assume that that was sarcasm?

CEB II

11-30-05, 09:50 PM

Well KUSA did it again tonight. Their 7 PM "Christmas from Rockefeller Center" had a overlay that said "Presented in HD". Well, when and where will it be presented in HD? It is in letterbox on a 4X3 projection. Really bush league! Moooo!

gakon

11-30-05, 10:06 PM

How could you be watching that drivel when Rudolph is on? And it really is in HD (because it's not on NBC). Or as HD as claymation gets.

roller11

12-01-05, 12:15 AM

It's a little harsh to say that the episode was "not shown". You can certainly follow what went on in lo-def, unless you don't want to.

I have no interest in watching any primetime prog in SD, that's why I never watch
reality shows.

You are correct, however, about NBC being the weakest network when it comes to HD. Even if you believe Don's email (which implies that the Surface problem this week was not NBC's fault since they probably don't produce the show), you don't see that many problems on other networks.

I talked to Don Perez today about this problem. Predictably, he blamed
equipment failure at the network level. When I informed him that NBC had ten times
as many failures as all other networks combined, he seemed surprised.

There was another thread discussing the number of "first run" moves shown on NBC recently that were NOT in HD. And, since Surface is in reruns for the rest of the year, what are the odds of those reruns actually being broadcast in HD?

The chance of a rerun primetime program being in HD is the same as when it
first aired. Statisically, about 70% for NBC. That is, about 30% of NBC's HD progs are degraded to SD, in whole or in part.

santellavision

12-01-05, 11:40 PM

KUSA didn't send "Will & Grace" in HD tonight. Must have been the same runner who didn't get the tape to 30 Rock on time, again... wink, wink.

Timay

12-02-05, 02:52 AM

Gakon, would you please run a plot for me from 6337 S Lafayette Pl, Centennial, to RP? I think that should be a good shot...

Thanks!

Tim

santellavision

12-02-05, 08:02 AM

gakon

12-02-05, 09:26 AM

would you please run a plot for me
Here it is. That hill should have no effect on signals from the top of RP. KMGH shows up on the plot because it's in your line of sight to RP. Notice how it's down in a little valley.

Timay

12-02-05, 10:26 AM

Here it is. That hill should have no effect on signals from the top of RP. KMGH shows up on the plot because it's in your line of sight to RP. Notice how it's down in a little valley.

That is an interesting valley! What software do you use? Does it automatically show whats in line-of-site?

Thanks!

Tim

KWGN-TV

12-02-05, 10:31 AM

Phil T

12-02-05, 10:39 AM

A lot of coverage information resides here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=168587&page=1&pp=30

If I remember correctly it showed almost no coverage of KBDI-DT west of Wadsworth.

sunshinedawg

12-02-05, 10:53 AM

That is not an accurate quote. The people in Golden will say anything to further their cause, which has nothing to do with the facts and people's safety. KWGN-DT 2-1 is my strongest signal at over 93%. I can even receive your station at 80% if I point my antenna away from your transmitter. I do this because the "stations" on RP are so weak that I have to aim directly at them to receive a lock. KBDI is my weakest channel by far and I don't even bother with them because they are only digital, not HD. I'm up in Longmont by the way. Smallville is the wife's and my favorite show, keep up the good work!

colofan

12-02-05, 11:23 AM

Well I point my 4228 at RP as well but I have no problem get both 2-1 and 31-1 at all. Hat's off to the technical team of those stations becuase they really are the only consistent stations we can get up north. ( I live in loveland). You might also post to the cheyenne,wy thread since most northern colorado folks monitor that thread.

I do get some weather variations but over all never lost the signal and very rarely get pixellation.

TheBert

12-02-05, 11:24 AM

I am in Longmont as well and my antenna is pointed directly at RP, I have seen KWGN 2-1 coming in as high as 125 on my E* PVR 921 and 811 receivers. This is my strongest signal by far. Most of the others are around 68-92.

dr_mal

12-02-05, 12:09 PM

All,

I noticed a quote in the Rocky Mountain News that stated "DTV enthusiasts on the AVSforum Web site consistently report better reception from KBDI than from much higher-power digital transmitters on Lookout Mountain." Since we have one of the mentioned "higher-power digital transmitters", I was wondering if people are having problems receiving WB2 Colorado on 2-1. Perhaps I have missed some postings in the forum regarding our reception. Perhaps people could verify their signal strength with the various channels received to dispel any discrepancies.

Thanks!

Dave Martinez
WB2 Colorado
KWGN-TV
HDTV 2-1
That quote was from Al Hislop, a dedicated anti-LCG activist. So first off, don't take it at face value.

Secondly, KBDI is probably my weakest OTA signal. Yes, I can get it, but that's only because I live in Brighton - on the extreme east of the metro area, so the shadowing effects of Squaw-based signals are minimized for me.

When Fox and WB went live on Lookout, there were scattered issues with people receiving the signal. The issues tended to be from people further north (Longmont, Ft. Collins).

When KBDI went live on Squaw, there were widespread issues. In fairness, some of those issues were probably due to the "on-again, off-again" testing they were going through when we were trying to track coverage. But as has been previously posted, west of Wadsworth KBDI coverage is spotty at best.

In short, KWGN is doing a great job. Your signal is strong, "flipping the switch" issues were the rarest of any station when you went live, and you have the guts to come in here and apologize when the occasional screwup does occur.

Now if we could just get the -DT channels to be as reliable and consistent as the -TV channels... :)

JMartinko

12-02-05, 12:10 PM

Al's back.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/letters/article/0,2777,DRMN_23966_4281984,00.html

Hmmmm? I wrote a rebuttle to the Rocky...

After hearing him speak at many of the JeffCo public hearings on the issue of a consolidation tower on Lookout Mountain, I have to point out some contradictory facts. First, Mr. Hislop and his association with the C-A-R-E organization, has publicly stated their creed, "Build no towers near people." But, then he contradicts himself when he then supported building a new Digital TV tower on Eldorado Mt. in 2003.

Or now, he's suggesting building this new digital TV tower on Squaw Mt., way west of Denver. Then he goes on to say how great the reception is from KBDI on Squaw Mt. Well, in 2002, when Mr Hislop did his own testing of signals from Squaw Mt., his findings weren't really that great, and stated that there would be problems with 'dead' spots along the front range due to the tower on Squaw Mt. being so far west, that the foothills would cause 'shadowing' for viewers west of Denver and Boulder.

And the biggest contradiction of all is, What happened to the "Build no towers near people" mantra? By his flip-flopping, is it now OK to build towers near the familes on Squaw Mt.? Or is it just OK to build towers near 'Other' people, as long as it's not in his backyard?

Nice job Ernie. Apparently Al has no shame. I would really like him to show the postings on the AVS where "DTV enthusiasts on the AVSforum Web site consistently report better reception from KBDI than from much higher-power digital transmitters on Lookout Mountain." I don't recall anyone ever saying such a thing, and I would love to see him have to reference the post numbers to back his claim. Many folks like myself here in Boulder have never even had a sniff of KBDI digital (to Al that would mean I get at least as good reception as I do for KMGH). I suppose Al is living proof that hypocrisy does have a price for him. Of course no one here is surprised that someone from (S)CARE would resort to a blatant lie to buttress their case.

oxothuk

12-02-05, 12:28 PM

Many folks like myself here in Boulder have never even had a sniff of KBDI digital (to Al that would mean I get at least as good reception as I do for KMGH).Never a sniff, John? We must be right on the edge of the shadow, because I can get a weak KBDI signal that locks with just a few dropouts from certain places on my property, and we're only about half-a-mile apart. I don't bother, though, because KBDI has no HD and an antenna orientation that works for KBDI is useless for the Republic Plaza stations.

TotallyPreWired

12-02-05, 12:32 PM

All,

I noticed a quote in the Rocky Mountain News that stated "DTV enthusiasts on the AVSforum Web site consistently report better reception from KBDI than from much higher-power digital transmitters on Lookout Mountain."
Dave,
For people living in my area(Woodland Park), the statement is true. KBDI is easy to receive. I've tested in 2 locations, my house & a friends house. In both cases, KBDI was one our strongest signals. In both locations KWGN was impossible to receive. KDVR is also tough to receive, but we had better luck with it, than with KWGN.

What's interesting here, is that KWGN has a much more favorable radiation pattern than does KDVR.

In general, we have better reception with the downtown transmitters, than we do with the transmitters on Lookout. I also receive an excellent signal from KGWN in Cheyenne(147 miles).
....jc

milehighmike

12-02-05, 12:39 PM

Dave (KWGN),

I receive 2-1 OK but only in the low 70's on my Dish 811. It is very stable, though, with no dropouts, pixelation, etc. To even receive the signal, I must rotate my antenna, which is a 4 bay bow-tie outdoors on my roof, towards Lookout and I must be within about 10 degrees either side of the tower to receive it. When I point the antenna to RP, I cannot receive 2-1 at all but receive all of the RP stations in the low to high 80's and KMGH at around 90. When I point the antenna to receive 2-1, I still receive the downtown stations but they drop off about 10%. I receive KBDI 12-1/2/3 in the low 70's and find their signal to be as sensitive to antenna pointing as KWGN's. My reception of KDVR 31-1 is just like KWGN's except that I receive a low 80's signal when the antenna is pointed at Lookout. Hope that helps.

gakon

12-02-05, 12:50 PM

What software do you use? Does it automatically show whats in line-of-site?I use National Geographic/TOPO Back Roads Explorer. Pick two points on a map and it will draw an elevation profile for the line between them. It does not show buildings. It covers the entire country, although not at the level of detail you would want for something like hiking or backpacking. I think I got it for $40 at REI.

gakon

12-02-05, 12:55 PM

TotallyPreWired

12-02-05, 01:06 PM

Going back to Al's letter, is he correct in stating that KWGN is broadcasting at higher power than KBDI? I checked the FCC TV Query page and both stations are shown at 1000 kW. Is that correct, or is that just what they're licensed for, and they're broadcasting at lower power?
Yes, KWGN is shown to be broadcasting at 450kW and KBDI is shown to be broadcasting at 42 kW. Most stations have 2 power levels out there. 1 for temporary, and 1 for final, and the 1000 you are seeing is the final.
....jc

LXIX

12-02-05, 01:44 PM

Who do you think you are? How dare you use this forum (an obviously pro tower forum) to further your self-serving interest. I notice that you didn't bother to give the specific forums that "said" KBDI is easier to receive than KWGN and KDVR. After all, if you let people know where they can find this information, then people might actually visit the forum and read what a bunch of lying fear mongers you people really are.

I have been around this forum for over 5 years now and have yet to see a single post in this forum in favor removing the towers from lookout (to be fair there may have been some support in the 1st version of this forum). In fact, the only support I have seen for Squaw was in utter frustration because of your efforts to block progress on Lookout.

If you feel that it is okay to selectively quote "facts" from this forum, why don't you nut-up and post your views here? Are you a coward? Do you lack confidence in your facts? Are you afraid that we will be able to completely contradict you and show you for the fraud that you really are?

-Matt

mikeaco

12-02-05, 02:19 PM

My reception in SW Loveland is as follows:

KBDI (mid 90's) > KDVR (low 90's) > KWGN (high 80's)

I have never had any problems receiving any of these channels even though KBDI is my strongest signal.

PinkoCommie

12-02-05, 03:15 PM

oxothuk

12-02-05, 03:25 PM

No problems receiving 2-1. In fact, 2-1 and 31-1 are the ONLY channels I can receive at all. I am in Westminster, around 120th & Sheridan.What kind of antenna are you using? With a good outside antenna I would think you could get 4,6, and 9 from Westminster.

Al h

12-02-05, 06:47 PM

TotallyPreWired

12-02-05, 06:58 PM

Backup material that can be presented in a letter to the editor is severely limited. Please see posts

On the bottom of every page:
(C)opyright 1995 - 2005 AVS Forum, Inc. - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.

dr_mal

12-02-05, 07:10 PM

Backup material that can be presented in a letter to the editor is severely limited. Please see posts
11778 (page 589)
11851 (page 593)
12812 (page 641)
12968 (page 649)
and now
13210 (page 661)
13216 (page 661)
For ease of reference, here are links (this is by no means an endorsement of Al's views):

11778 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6063683&&#post6063683)
11851 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6093598&&#post6093598)
12812 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6398349&&#post6398349)
12968 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6479476&&#post6479476)

13210 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6642215&&#post6642215)
13216 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6643114&&#post6643114)

So 6 references of better reception from Squaw. Out of dozens of reports. But two of them are duplicates (2 each from TPW and Smuuth), so that's only 4 people who get signals from Squaw better than Lookout.

Extending this logic, since TPW gets KMGH's signal, why not move every transmitter to the top of KMGH's building? We have to throw out TPW's data (sorry, man) since his location is so abnormal.

That leaves only 3 reports of Squaw being better than Lookout.

3.

It doesn't even pass the laugh test.

Al h

12-02-05, 07:11 PM

(C)opyright 1995 - 2005 AVS Forum, Inc. - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
Imaginee that! The Rocky Mountain News is also copyright. How dare you discuss what was printed there today!

Jetlag

12-02-05, 07:37 PM

Hey Al, welcome.

I've always wanted to ask a (S)CARE person why you are so very concerned about radiation and tower fall issues (at a location where the towers existed LONG before you moved there), but these issues did not seem to bother you when you purchased your property?????

If they are as hazardous as (S)CARE likes to claim (with their 'creative' pseudo-science), why on earth would you move there in the first place?

Also, you are aware that the existing towers can stay there forever, correct? If you want to get a few of them removed, why not back the newer safer tower (lower RF)?

TotallyPreWired

12-02-05, 07:45 PM

Imaginee that! The Rocky Mountain News is also copyright. How dare you discuss what was printed there today!
Al,
You don't want to get into a pissing contest with me, you'll lose. 'Discussing' and 'Taking' copyrighted data are 2 different things.
....jc

Lawood

12-02-05, 08:08 PM

Imaginee that! The Rocky Mountain News is also copyright. How dare you discuss what was printed there today!
By the way I would like to remind you that CARE was the first ones who violated copyright laws.
Why would someone go as low as what Deb Carney did. She violated Copyright Laws by lifting information from this forum and putting into a letter and sending it to the previous commissioners.
In case you forgot go to Letter to Commissioners (http://www.citymtnviews.com/AT-DebCarneyLtr_083004.php4).

Lawood

12-02-05, 08:16 PM

No problems receiving 2-1. In fact, 2-1 and 31-1 are the ONLY channels I can receive at all. I am in Westminster, around 120th & Sheridan.
I live at 112th & Sheridan. With a CM4228 mounted on the side of my house and pointed to downtown Denver I am able to receive 4-1, 6-1, 9-1 & 9-2. I can also get 2-1, but not 31-1 even though at one time I did. For 2-1 & 31-1 I use the antenna I have mounted in the attic. It is pointed at Lookout.

TotallyPreWired

12-02-05, 08:18 PM

...Extending this logic, since TPW gets KMGH's signal, why not move every transmitter to the top of KMGH's building? We have to throw out TPW's data (sorry, man) since his location is so abnormal.
Doc, it's not really that 'abnormal', a friend living within 0.6 of a mile, has similar reception results(actually a bit better) including KMGH.

Reason's to Throw My Data Out:

He doesn't even live in the Denver DMA... :rolleyes:
He's crazy, nothing he says makes sense... :eek:
He lives so far above us(3,600') he's cheating... :p
He just can't be trusted... :(

Actually, Al's attempts to prove anything in this cow town low power atmosphere, are right inline with sCARE's tactics. As of today, we are only 149 days from SHREVA mandated digital signal tests. One way or another, we will get our HDTV.
....jc

Al h

12-02-05, 09:06 PM

Jetlag,
Direct towerfall is not a danger to my home (other than possibly causing a fire), but many residents in Golden below the tower felt it was a danger to their homes. Judge Jackson stated in his last ruling that some may find it strange that towerfall might be the issue that decides the case, but that towerfall was the only issue remaining. The RF issue is a whole other matter. As one who operates a small electronics business out of my home, I am plagued with interference from the towers, but I can cope with the present levels. Others, such as the laser lab and other engineering departments at the School of Mines have had severe interference trouble with even the existing levels. My interest is in keeping RF levels from increasing, and if possible to decrease them. Jetlag, you say that the new tower will have lower RF levels. Can you point to a study that shows lower levels in populated areas from the proposed LCG tower, or are you relying on the claims of Marv Rockford? Have you seen the proposed antenna patterns? LCG gave them to me to perform analysis. Id did, and the results showed RF increases in the most populated areas to the south of the tower. JeffCo’s consultant performed the analysis, and came to the same conclusion. Even better, LCG’s own RF expert’s report showed the same increases. Only LCG’s non-technical spokespersons maintained that RF would go down in residential neighborhoods.

The point of my letter to the RMN was to show that LCG member stations deliberately placed their temporary transmitters in a poor location. Honestly, how many of you believe that the current coverage of the LCG digital stations is better than that of KBDI?
Sorry to be so wordy. Al

donyoop

12-02-05, 09:12 PM

jpco

12-02-05, 09:43 PM

JMartinko

12-02-05, 10:09 PM

skyburn

12-02-05, 10:22 PM

I live on the northern fringe of Fort Collins, v. close to US287. With my Dish 921 and a RS VU-90 antenna mounted fairly high on the roof (~20ft. AGL), pointing due 180deg., I get the following:

(all equally watchable)
KDVR (031-01) (there's a bit of debate whether I get the actual Denver station from Denver, or whether I'm picking up KFCT 22 near Ft. Collins) bounces between 82-87SS)
KBDI (012-01) bounces between 116-120SS (strongest signal of all of them)
KWGN (002-01) bounces between 107-112SS

- Joe

santellavision

12-02-05, 11:07 PM

Al, answer me this...

Why is it OK now to suggest LCG build their so called "Super Tower" with millions of watts of power on Squaw Mt, when you keep saying "Towers and RF are dangerous", and don't give me that tired crap about Lookout residents being "in-the-beam" (which by the way, my home is one of those) and Squaw Mt. residents are not. Because, there are plenty of families with small, innocent, little children, who live incredibly close to the broadcast site on Squaw.

With the new proposed directional antenna's of LCG, all of us will be better off. Especially if CARE keeps blocking this, the stations will use their existing omni directional antennas.

Oh... and you are sadly mistaken, if you think Golden will win any Eminent Domain Seizure. Ain't 'gonna happen.

milehighmike

12-03-05, 12:01 AM

skyburn,

I raised this issue on this forum a while back but no one responded because, I presume, no one had this issue regarding KFCT and KDVR both remapping to 31 because no one received both DT 21 and DT 32. I receive both signals. While I have a Dish 811 rather than a 921, I have incurred the same problem you are reporting.

What the 811 does on a channel scan is the same as you report for your 921. It scans in KFCT and then will not add KDVR since a remapped 31 has already been scanned in. I confirmed this with a friend who is a programmer for both the 811 and 921 at E*. The only apparent difference with the 811 in my case is that I can manually add KDVR but then KFCT drops from the menu since the 811 cannot hold more than one remapped channel on each channel. I also have two RS Accurians that do not have this problem. The scan and hold both KFCT and KDRV as two separate channels.

I did some research in the meantime. The ATSC organization sets the various standards for ATSC broadcasting. In their document A/65B, issued in March 2003, they covered the fact that two (or more) stations that broadcast the same programming and have overlapping signal coverage, such as KFCT and KDVR, cannot remap their signals to the same channel, in this case, 31. This remapping of both stations occurred, I suspect, from the fact that KDVR did not change the PSIP info before sending the signal for rebroadcast on KFCT. The PSIP info for both stations, under this ATSC requirement, is that KDVR must remap to 31 and KFCT must remap to 22.

I emailed KDVR regarding this situation several times but received no replies. I complained to the FCC and the FCC informed me that I had to file a complaint in writing. I had planned to write the complaint this weekend. However, I noticed for the first time last night that KFCT was properly remapping to 22 and KDVR was remapping to 31. So it looks like KDVR finally decided to fix the problem and comply with ATSC requirements regarding PSIP remapping.

I suggest you do a rescan. If you have the same results as me, you'll have two Fox channels - KFCT on 22 and KDVR on 31.

mattn6

12-03-05, 12:04 AM

Add me to the list of those that cannot see either RP or KBDI. I get KWGN and KDVR just fine.

# Matt

santellavision

12-03-05, 12:44 AM

Dave,
Add me to your list. I cannot even get a whiff of KWGN. I'm just southwest of the tower near the 'sleeper house' and can't a signal at all. Your directional antenna works great at focusing your signal toward Denver and away from Lookout Mt. (well, maybe too well). I've tried 3 different roof antenna to no avail.

But, even with a yagi in my garage ceiling, I can pull in all the low-power signals from Republic. And for the record, even pointing directly west, I cannot get KBDI at all. I'm shadowed by two big hills to the west. Completely blocks their signal.

kucharsk

12-03-05, 04:40 AM

Never a sniff, John? We must be right on the edge of the shadow, because I can get a weak KBDI signal that locks with just a few dropouts from certain places on my property, and we're only about half-a-mile apart. I don't bother, though, because KBDI has no HD and an antenna orientation that works for KBDI is useless for the Republic Plaza stations.Zero signal, absolutely not even a hint of KBDI-DT for me in Louisville, but I can get all the RP stations plus KWGN and KDVR just fine.

Geof

12-03-05, 09:56 AM

This latest comment is nothing more than another misleading and innacurate SCARE statement made in an attempt to confuse and befuddle. The truth means nothing to these people. They're basically a bunch of self centered liars intent on nothing more than furthering their own greed (IMO).

slacker9876

12-03-05, 11:51 AM

Wow it is getting hot in here now that the other side has reared it's head! I wanted to post my signal info again just for the record of those who may be reading.

NW Loveland
KTFD-DT 14-1, 68-70, consistent
KUSA-DT 9-1, 68-72, consistent
KMGH-DT - 7-1 0-9 , consistent
KRMA-DT 6-1, 40 - 65 weather variant
KFCT-DT 22-1, 75, consistent
KDVR-DT 31-1 90-91, consistent
KWGN-DT 2-1, 84-85 consistent
KDBI-DT 12-1 68-71, consistent

My receiving equipment consists of the DirecTV HR10-250 paired with a ChannelMaster 4228, 8-bow antenna, I am NW of 37th & Taft.

I wanted to get in my two cents from Loveland and as a person who has spent hours (at least 40) working on OTA reception. I must say to all sCARE backers that I have not been able to find a recorded "tower fall" issue anywhere in the state. No surprise. As far as RF emissions are concerned, well that would be a joke, so would claims of interference. In this day and age it is impossible to escape RF emissions anywhere. We are bombarded 24x7x365 with RF from TV, Radio, Satellite, Police, Military, Cellular and various other sources of RF emissions. While they me be slightly higher near the source, it is nominal. Those higher emission analog towers have been there since the 50's, they are for the public and greater good, if you don't like them, you should move. The public airwaves like anything also advance in technology.

I might add that I "moved" my satellite services to NYC becuase of KMGH and their defiant position on waivers. Rick Craddock and his superiors will be happy to know they have effectively lost all advertising revenues to my household. However, I never watch ABC other than Monday Night Football and Desperate Housewives ... GO WABC #1 in NYC LMAO!!!!

mbuchana

12-03-05, 12:30 PM

It isn't difficult to find places where Squaw's coverage is superior to Lookout. But Al latched on to a few cases to suggest that Squaw is better from an overall coverage standpoint, which is very misleading.

As I remember things, Squaw does a better job in terms of geographic area coverage to the north and east. However, in terms of audience coverage, it is much worse than Lookout due to shadowing issues, and it doesn't replicate the current analog coverage area well. This can be confirmed by current reception results from KBDI. Many on the west side who are used to getting their analog signal from Lookout would not get a digital signal from Squaw.

Lookout remains the best choice, but I have always been annoyed that Squaw wasn't considered as a temporary solution rather than RP. Maybe it would have cost considerably more. The stations were also probably concerned that it would open up a can of worms about alternative sites (even though it probably would have helped prove their coverage argument, rather than hurt it).

Mark

P.S. For me, Lookout-based KDVR-DT & KWGN-DT typically read 80-85 on the signal strength meter. KBDI-DT tends to be around 70 and requires much more careful antenna orientation. It is pretty obvious they are operating at much lower power.

skyburn

12-03-05, 01:12 PM

gakon

12-03-05, 04:26 PM

I must say to all sCARE backers that I have not been able to find a recorded "tower fall" issue anywhere in the state.Unfortunately, the only records I could find were on CARE's own web site. IIRC, two towers collapsed; one in 1955 and the other in 1958. I don't recall if they were under construction at the time. I think it's somewhat telling that these are the only collapses that have occurred on Lookout in 50 years. I'm guessing (CARE doesn't have to believe this) that construction techniques, materials, and maintenance have improved since then.

Al h

12-03-05, 06:00 PM

Oh by the way...

This was in your RMN editorial.
Quote:
Actually, it is the Lake Cedar Group (that is, TV stations KCNC, KMGH, KUSA and KDVR)

KDVR is NOT a part of LCG, KTVD is. Just another shining example of your thorough, expert knowledge and fine attention to detail!
Eddie,
The KDVR/KTVD switch was an editing error by the RMN. My copy to the RMN listed the stations by channel number, but the RMN changed the numbers to call signs. If you would like to confirm this, the phone number for the commentary dept at the RMN is 303 892-5018

I think your problem receiving KWGN DT is related more to blockage than antenna pattern. According to the FCC records, the pattern is down only 10.4 dB at 230 degrees (the approximate direction to your home). The terrain profile, however, shows a large obstructing hill (7570 feet elevation) between the channel 2 aux tower (7450 feet at antenna) and your home (7576 feet elevation).
Al

Smuuth

12-03-05, 06:45 PM

For ease of reference, here are links (this is by no means an endorsement of Al's views):

11778 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6063683&&#post6063683)
11851 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6093598&&#post6093598)
12812 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6398349&&#post6398349)
12968 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6479476&&#post6479476)

13210 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6642215&&#post6642215)
13216 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6643114&&#post6643114)

So 6 references of better reception from Squaw. Out of dozens of reports. But two of them are duplicates (2 each from TPW and Smuuth), so that's only 4 people who get signals from Squaw better than Lookout.

Extending this logic, since TPW gets KMGH's signal, why not move every transmitter to the top of KMGH's building? We have to throw out TPW's data (sorry, man) since his location is so abnormal.

That leaves only 3 reports of Squaw being better than Lookout.

3.

It doesn't even pass the laugh test.I want to thank everyone here for all the information and tips that have been posted.
I have been lurking and reading posts from you knowledgeable folks and gleaning whatever I could in order to figure out the best way to get the best possible OTA HD signal at my location (39.634266 -104.806316) in SE Aurora.

Based on what I had read here, I replaced an old VHF/UHF radio shack antenna with a ChannelMaster 4228 and aimed it at 298 magnetic about 17 feet AGL.
My results are as follows:
KWGN-DT IND 90%
KCNC-DT CBS 80%
KRMA-DT PBS 90%
KMGH-DT ABC 70%
KUSA-DT NBC 100%
KBDI-DT PBS 100%
KDEN-DT IND 70%
KDVR-DT FOX 90%

Thanks again for being here.Let's see, that would be 3 people reporting better results from Squaw out of about 100 (??). We should add up the number for Al so he can run a clarification in the paper and state something to the effect that 'as many as 3% (insert the correct number) AVS members in the metropolitan Denver area consistently report better reception from Squaw than from Lookout'. This might be more accurate than his implication that the majority of AVS posters get better reception from Squaw. I know Al is a very concerned about getting the 'real facts' out there for people to judge, it would be great if we can help him get his facts straight.
As one of the AVS Forum members with a post which has been cited by Al Hislop, I want to make a few comments.

First, let me say I resent Mr. Hislop using anything I have posted on this forum without my permission.

Second, when comparing signal strengths of 90% vs. 100% as shown by my ATSC STB, it should be noted that 10% difference is moot as far as picture quality.

Third, my location in the metro area should be noted in relation to the posted signal strength. I am in the approximate vicinity of Quincy and Chambers. My house is relatively high in elevation compared to surrounding terrain and if it were not for trees, I would be very close to having LOS to RP, as well as Lookout, and probably to Squaw as well, though I am not sure about Squaw since I cannot single it out by sight. Certainly my location is not typical of the majority of metro-area residents as I am not in the shadow of the front range as described by so many others here.

To summarize: Using the signal strength numbers I posted as so-called evidence that the Squaw Mountain location would be as effective for DTV transmission as Lookout Mountain is pure hogwash, and for Al Hislop to cite it as such only demonstrates how ludicrous the (S)CARE arguments are.

LXIX

12-04-05, 12:54 AM

WOW, I leave for a few hours and look at the words fly. I am glad to see Al H. come into the forum and reply to the inquires we've sent. Thank you. Now for my $.02

TODAY I personally do not care if LCG builds on Squaw or Lookout. I live in Centennial and receive signals from both locations without any problems.

The reason that I prefer Lookout is that I am moving in 6 months to Golden/Wheatridge/Applewood and I realize that Squaw represents a death sentence for my HD reception.

I also prefer Lookout because it allows me to stick it to those puppeteers from CARE who are deceiving Golden Residence for their own greed and self interest (Mr. Hislop as much as said so in his post concerning interference from the towers).

I am quickly leaning toward the hope that CARE wins their battle against the towers so that the stations retro-in ATSC gear. This will stick you people with the old towers forever.

One last little rant before I watch some more HDTV. I was recently in City of Industry California. The 3 story industrial building that I conducted a training in had several transmition towers mounted DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THE BUILDING! These towers must have been over 100 feet tall and if they were to collapse in the manner that CARE outlined for the BCC, my rental car would have been destroyed (along with me if I were in the car). Now I know that most of you wouldn't shed any tears for my demise but if this tower collapse issue were REAL, could you mount a tower on top of a 3 story building?

-Matt

dr_mal

12-04-05, 01:10 AM

One last little rant before I watch some more HDTV. I was recently in City of Industry California. The 3 story industrial building that I conducted a training in had several transmition towers mounted DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THE BUILDING! These towers must have been over 100 feet tall and if they were to collapse in the manner that CARE outlined for the BCC, my rental car would have been destroyed (along with me if I were in the car). Now I know that most of you wouldn't shed any tears for my demise but if this tower collapse issue were REAL, could you mount a tower on top of a 3 story building?

-Matt
If you ever go back there for training, make sure to bring along a toaster. I hear talking toasters are all the rage on eBay these days. :p

Al h

12-04-05, 01:01 PM

First, let me say I resent Mr. Hislop using anything I have posted on this forum without my permission.

Second, when comparing signal strengths of 90% vs. 100% as shown by my ATSC STB, it should be noted that 10% difference is moot as far as picture quality.

Third, my location in the metro area should be noted in relation to the posted signal strength. I am in the approximate vicinity of Quincy and Chambers. My house is relatively high in elevation compared to surrounding terrain and if it were not for trees, I would be very close to having LOS to RP, as well as Lookout, and probably to Squaw as well, though I am not sure about Squaw since I cannot single it out by sight. Certainly my location is not typical of the majority of metro-area residents as I am not in the shadow of the front range as described by so many others here.
You seem to miss, or perhaps would like to deny (and certainly resent the fact that it has been pointed out), the fact that KBDI, transmitting from Squaw Mountain at power less than 10% of what KWGN is using, results a stronger signal at your position in Aurora. Contrary to your assertion, your position IS typical of the majority of metro-area residents.

The point of my letter to the RMN was to show that LCG member stations deliberately placed their temporary transmitters in a poor location. Honestly, how many of you believe that the current coverage of the LCG digital stations is better than that of KBDI?

My letter to the RMN caused quite a flurry of response from this forum, but there has been no response to my question of post # 13228.

Whether or not LCG is holding DTV hostage to their zoning request really isn’t dependent upon public opinion, it is dependent upon the engineering numbers. After careful consideration, the FCC concluded that a signal level of 48 dBu (48 dB above 1 microvolt/meter) is adequate DTV reception. Received signal strength (at a given height above ground) is determined by transmitter effective radiated power, antenna pattern, transmit antenna elevation and terrain obstructions. The number of people living within the area having signal level greater than 48 dBu (the 48 dBu contour) can then be counted using demographics. LCG has the capability to perform these calculations, but you won’t see the 48 dBu coverage comparison from LCG, and you know why. The posted complaints about the current LCG coverage, the posted requests for terrain profiles, and the lack of response to my question show that you are intimately aware of the poor coverage of the LCG temporary transmitters.

I have seen references to “no DTV reception west of Wadsworth Blvd” due to shadowing if the transmitters are put on Squaw Mountain. I put my DTV in the back of a Suburban, and drove over 1000 miles throughout the Denver Metro area, testing over 180 points. I had expected poor reception west of Wadsworth, and NO reception in Golden from our test transmitter on Squaw Mountain. I WAS WRONG! In Golden, more than half the places we tested had reception, and our low-power transmitter was operating at only 2.4% of the recommended power. This came as a great surprise to me, and I can understand your disbelief in the results. You can sit back now and say “he’s lying,” or you can now do your own tests with a mobile DTV. While we had use of a borrowed transmitter for only a few weeks, KBDI is now on the air with a whopping 4.2% recommended power. Don’t trust me: Do your own test.

Mbuchana was correct in his post # 13241 when he stated that use of Squaw Mountain would open a can of worms regarding alternate sites. LCG just could not risk that.

Jetlag

12-04-05, 02:41 PM

Hey, how do I put Al on my "ignore list"?

Never mnd, I figured it out.

I refuse to listen to anyone who uses crying little girls dressed up in Brownie uniforms to testify on their behalf. Publicly asking the local TV stations "Why are you trying to kill me?" Pathetic!

Smuuth

12-04-05, 03:43 PM

You seem to miss, or perhaps would like to deny (and certainly resent the fact that it has been pointed out), the fact that KBDI, transmitting from Squaw Mountain at power less than 10% of what KWGN is using, results a stronger signal at your position in Aurora. Contrary to your assertion, your position IS typical of the majority of metro-area residents.You stating it (and repeating it ad infinitum) does not make it so. As I stated, 10% difference in a digital signal is negligible. I dispute again that my location is typical of most metro-area residents, either in elevation or LOS achievable to Squaw mountain. And, finally, all your arguments in favor of Squaw Mountain vs. Lookout Mountain are typical of the repetitive NIMBY whining we have heard from (S)CARE since the beginning.

TotallyPreWired

12-04-05, 04:05 PM

My letter to the RMN caused quite a flurry of response from this forum, but there has been no response to my question of post # 13228.

This question?
Honestly, how many of you believe that the current coverage of the LCG digital stations is better than that of KBDI?
I assume that you are talking about KCNC, KRMA & KUSA located on top of Republic Plaza?

Let's bring the facts into the equation:

ERP from these stations:

KCNC = 11.0 kW
KRMA = 13.8 kW
KUSA = 10.9 kW
KBDI = 42.0 kW

So, it's easy to see that KBDI is broadcasting with at least 3 times the power of the other stations.

Distance from my location:

Republic Plaza = 54.119 Miles
KBDI = 54.485 Miles

So Republic Plaza and KBDI are almost equidistant from my location.

Transmitter Radiation Pattern:

KCNC = 95%
KRMA = 100%
KUSA = 95%
KBDI = 100%

This is an estimate of the power available based on the path between my location and the transmitter.

Reception at my location:

KCNC = 33% of the time
KRMA = 100% of the time
KUSA = 0% of the time
KBDI = 100% of the time

Even the signal from KUSA is strong at my location. This station will not lock due to multipath.

So, what would my reception of KCNC & KUSA be if they were broadcasting at KBDI's ERP? Since we wouldn't know unless these stations were broadcasting at 42.0 kW, we'd need to estimate. I'd have to say that I'd have no problem in locking solid on all of the Republic Plaza stations.

So, what does this prove?
Not much. However, it does cast doubt on which transmitter location would provide me with the best reception at my location. I think that I could easily say, that it wouldn't matter.
....jc

Geof

12-04-05, 04:23 PM

Yawn, more of the same hyperbole. Didn't try my house Al. Or my neighborhood evidently. You could drive 120 million miles and test 100000 locations but if you only count the ones that work the data is useless. You babble on with useless trivia as far as I am concerned - I really don't believe anything you say. You're biased.

Phil T

12-04-05, 05:32 PM

Al and his CARE supporters still ignore the win/win situation that LCG is proposing for the entire front range.

Less towers and better coverage is a win for everyone, except for those who want no towers, which will never happen on Lookout.

KDVR and the other (non LCG) towers will be there forever. Existing LCG towers will also remain with no LCGII.

If I was a County Commissioner, I would approve LCGII and then work to consolidate the other towers on Lookout. Isn't fewer towers good for everyone?

Oh I guess I forgot, life is about what is good for me (CARE) and not what is good for the entire region.

CEB II

12-04-05, 10:57 PM

All,

I noticed a quote in the Rocky Mountain News that stated "DTV enthusiasts on the AVSforum Web site consistently report better reception from KBDI than from much higher-power digital transmitters on Lookout Mountain." Since we have one of the mentioned "higher-power digital transmitters", I was wondering if people are having problems receiving WB2 Colorado on 2-1. Perhaps I have missed some postings in the forum regarding our reception. Perhaps people could verify their signal strength with the various channels received to dispel any discrepancies.

Thanks!

Dave Martinez
WB2 Colorado
KWGN-TV
HDTV 2-1

I'm about 10 miles from RP and from the Lookout Mountain towers. I'm using only attic mounted antennas (WAF issues), so a strong DTV signal can cause multi-path problems for me. The following is based on Dish 811 readings.

With an XG91 and CM pre-amp pointed just off RP's azimuth of 115 degrees, I get the readings noted in this post
#197 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6165152&&#post6165197). Surprise, KUSA from RP is my strongest station. My problem w/ KWGN is multi-path, likely due to their high DTV signal output.

My old 70" UHF/VHF combo, w/ CM pre-amp on the UHF side, is pointed at Lookout Mountain, 211 degree azimuth (KBDI is at 233 degrees). I get a strong signal from a KWGN, KDVR, and KBDI and little or nothing from the other low power DTV broadcasts. KWGN, at best, comes in in the low 80's and the other two in the high 80's. Can't explain that.

With the analog broadcasts, channels 2 and 4 are the cleanest, strongest analog signals that I receive. Channel 12 is my weakest VHF signal by far. I don't amplify the VHF signal and split it 5 ways internally. Without the splitters, I'd probably have to use an attenuator to avoid tuner overload w/ 2, 4, 7 and 9. Analog Channels 2 and 4 are so overwhelmingly strong and clear here that I can clearly receive them on a Winegard PR-8800, UHF antenna that isn't supposed to be able to receive them (at least according to the HDTVPrimer).

Maybe the dichotomy between my reception of KWGN's analog and digital signal is a result of differing types of broadcast antennas being used.

The foregoing was provided for the technical use of KWGN and other broadcasters and is not an endorsement of any existing DTV broadcasting configuration or location.

weldon

12-04-05, 11:07 PM

Apologies to all with our delivery of last night's episode of Gilmore Girls . There was an issue with preparation of the content to air and it caused the program to be skipped to the next segment inadvertantely.
Was there a similar problem with the delivery of the American Girl movie on Tuesday? We watched that program on the DVR tonight with my daughters and it looked like we lost 20 minutes or more in the second half of the movie where it repeated a segment. There was a very obvious video and audio "hiccup" when the show jumped back to the correct spot.

kucharsk

12-05-05, 02:40 AM

Come on out to Louisville sometime and see how much signal you see from Squaw.

Gee, no shadowing in Golden, how shocking.

milehighmike

12-05-05, 03:00 AM

Al h,

I have several questions for you.

1: What was the actual ERP of your test transmitter and on what channel were you transmitting your test signal?

2: The strongest signal I receive, typically around 90% on my Dish 811, is from the lowest powered STA, KMGH. That fact indicates to me that I have a great line of sight to the KMGH tramsmitter and my reception has little to do with ERP. Your claim regarding reception in over half of the areas in Golden, based on my reception of KMGH, indicates to me that line of sight is more important than ERP. Are you claiming/implying that increasing power from your test site, such as that from a 1 mW full power UHF DT station, will provide 100% coverage to Golden? If so, how are the line of sight issues resolved by merely increasing ERP? And are you and your CARE cohorts satisfied with the potential situation that a good part of Golden will not be able to receive free, OTA DT at analog shutoff if transmitters are located on Squaw Mtn?

3: Please go to the FCC TV Query page and read KDBI's application to request changing their channel assignment from channel 38 to channel 13. After you read that application, please comment on who is going to pay for non-tube/solid state transmitting equipment that is required to operate a full power DT UHF station at high altitude? Is CARE going to reimburse KCNC and KTVD for this added expense?

4: WHY do you believe you have a valid legal position regarding interference from Lookout transmitters affecting your electronics business since (I assume) the transmitters were there well before you established your business? (The same holds true for the School of Mines laser lab.) Hint: That's why American Indian reservations still exist.

5: Could you please admit, on behalf of CARE, that the ONLY reason you object to the Lookout site is aesthetics?

6: Does your home electronics business meet JeffCo zoning requirements?

santellavision

12-05-05, 08:58 AM

You could drive 120 million miles and test 100000 locations but if you only count the ones that work the data is useless. You babble on with useless trivia as far as I am concerned - I really don't believe anything you say. You're biased.
Geof's post is the most on point of all this discussion, I think it needs repeating. If you only count the sites that can receive a signal and blatantly discard the bad locations, then of course sCARE (with their blatant disreguard for the truth) can say Squaw is perfect and there are no shadow problems.

Always remember... Graphs don't lie, but liers Graph!
See my demonstration below. Same data, but which one looks more impressive?

http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/graph1.jpg
http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/graph2.jpg

KWGN-TV

12-05-05, 11:25 AM

Weldon,

Apologies to you and your family as well as all other viewers. We did have a similar problem with the repeating of a segment during "Felicity". An entry was missing into our automation system and caused the segment error. The show was switched to our upconversion but the error was made none the less.

We do try to keep our air signal as clean as possible and with the impact of HD becoming greater we are constantly looking for improvements in the way we monitor and double check our content.

Dave Martinez
WB2 Colorado
KWGN-TV
HDTV 2-1

Al h

12-05-05, 11:52 AM

I assume that you are talking about KCNC, KRMA & KUSA located on top of Republic Plaza?

Let's bring the facts into the equation:

ERP from these stations:

KCNC = 11.0 kW
KRMA = 13.8 kW
KUSA = 10.9 kW
KBDI = 42.0 kW

So, it's easy to see that KBDI is broadcasting with at least 3 times the power of the other stations.
Your numbers prove my point exactly that LCG has held DTV hostage. The site and technical parameters of LCG’s STA transmitters were the decision of LCG. Low ERP may be due to their choice of RP, but again it was LCG’s decision.

milehighmike
Our test transmitter ERP was 24kW on channel 38 (borrowed with permission of FCC & KBDI). I am not claiming that there was no shadowing in Golden, only that we had reception in more than ½ of the places we checked. I agree that LOS is very helpful in obtaining a useable signal. If LOS were available to all viewers, it is clear that 1 MW ERP would not be necessary to cover the Denver Metro area. In order to lock, a receiver needs to have about 15 dB signal-to-noise ratio, and for the older generation receivers, a reasonably flat frequency response across the 6 MHz spectrum (no severe multipath). Increasing ERP will not cure multipath problems, but it can increase the S/N ratio. In post # 12387, even Ernie agrees that LOS “is not an absolute” I would not expect 100% coverage anywhere from any station. My first DTV tests when only KDVR and KCNC were on the air showed that even FOX DT had some problems in Golden, but could be received nicely way out in Agate (on the way out I 70 near Limon. No, I don’t suppose CARE would reimburse KCNC or KTVD for the added expense of transmitters, even though we realize they are really strapped for cash. Given the news of post # 12988 (page 650), if significant holes in coverage occur (which would most definitely be true in Boulder), solutions exist. I’m not claiming any legal position with respect to interference either with respect to existing or proposed transmitters. The FCC has stated that it is the traditional role of local government to determine the placement of transmitters. Once facilities have been built, interference is the exclusive venue of the FCC. It is clear that prudent placement of broadcast facilities is the key to reducing RF interference, and this is stated in the Jefferson County Telecommunications Land Use Plan. Some people object to the placement of towers on Lookout based solely on aesthetics, some on potential health effects, some on interference and some on economic impact, such as driving off hi-tech industries or reduced property values, or a combination of all. My home business is allowed by JeffCo zoning regulations.

I have made reasonable attempts to answer questions members have asked, but I have not had one substantive reply to the question asked in post # 13228, and repeated in post # 13248. I have the feeling that you agree with me, but cannot publicly bring yourselves to say so. A funny thing happened on the way to the forum. A couple of posts appeared briefly, and then were yanked without a trace. What was said was that divergent opinions (or at least mine) were not welcome on the forum. It does appear that the majority opinion on the forum is that you must march in lock-step as LCG apologists. If what you want is good DTV coverage, I’m not sure that is the best way to go about it.

ByH2O

12-05-05, 12:13 PM

Honestly, how many of you believe that the current coverage of the LCG digital stations is better than that of KBDI?

OK Al, since you really wanted someone to repsond to your comparison question...

The ~current~ LCG coverage isn't a valid comparison, since broadcasting from Republic Plaza is solely a bandaid due to thier inability to use thier Lookout tower locataion. As I understand it, they are limited in broadcast power availability at Republic.

If the LCG stations were able to broadcast at thier requested levels from Lookout, then we would see a true comparison to what is broadcast from Squaw.

As for me, I'm just East of Wadsworth, and my reception of the Republic stations is better than KBDI. My equipment includes a CM 4228 (w/ rotor) mounted on a 15 foot mast above the second story. My reception of the Lookout stations by far exceeds that from Republic.

Our test transmitter ERP was 24kW <snip>

Oh - and your transmitter - 24kW??? And just ~how~ is that supposed to compare to RP's averages? If that's correct, then were you testing signal coverages comparing to signals at approximately 1/2 that strength? Hmm...

dr_mal

12-05-05, 12:22 PM

Honestly, how many of you believe that the current coverage of the LCG digital stations is better than that of KBDI?
I can't say. I get signal from both locations from my house in Brighton.

What I do know with certainty is that Lookout Mountain provides better coverage of the Denver area than RP or Squaw. It's simply the best site. Has been for 50 years.

It does appear that the majority opinion on the forum is that you must march in lock-step as LCG apologists. If what you want is good DTV coverage, I’m not sure that is the best way to go about it.
Given that our only agenda here is to get full power DTV in Denver, it's logical to align ourselves with those trying to provide full power DTV, not those trying to fight those trying to provide full power DTV.

But we do have a growing number of posters here that, after the years of attempting to help LCG, feel like LCG has used CARE as a convenient excuse to not have to put up full power transmitters. We've even got one member that is convinced the LCG stations don't even put out HD on their current transmitters (do a search for "roller11" ;) )

Al, you know I disagree with you on the best place for the transmitters. I do appreciate your guts to come on here and talk, though.

Ernie - we can beat Al with facts. As long as he's playing nice, I welcome opposing views. I think we've gotten away with a lot in this thread, I'd hate for Al to get all pissy and have the mods shut this thread down.

santellavision

12-05-05, 12:31 PM

What pisses me off so much, is that they are dead wrong in their information and have convinced people of it!

whtevr77

12-05-05, 12:43 PM

Geof

12-05-05, 12:51 PM

RF levels will go up in some places and down in other places no matter where the tower is built. The reality is though that unless you have some RF level at your antenna you will get no reception......clearly some amount of RF level is necessary. Increasing RF levels isn't necessarily bad though - do any of the areas where RF levels will increase fall outside of the FCC rules? Uh-huh, I thought not. Certainly with the existing towers there are some areas close to the FCC limits on RF levels.....will those areas see a decrease in level with the new tower? Uh-huh, I though so.

The fact is these towers have to go somewhere (and will go somewhere). What SCARE is doing is crying wolf and using scare tactics in trying to achieve their goal of having the mountain rid of towers. If SCARE had solid engineering facts to argue with (rather than a campaign of confusion, befuddlement, and half truths) I (personally) would support your efforts.

Al, I don't have anything against you personally. You're welcome to your opinion and as far as I'm concerned can speak freely here. My comments are not directed towards you (the person) but rather towards the overall stance of SCARE. I detest their tactics and see little real factual data to suggest they have a case. Falling towers is just another example of the "sky is falling" scare tactic that is beyond the realm of reason. If those residents are afraid of falling towers why are they not afraid of falling power-line towers or even falling rocks? Maybe they should go to court and see if the Judge will issue an injunction against Mother Nature. Gimme a break.

TheBert

12-05-05, 12:52 PM

This is much more interesting than trying to get the first post on the top.

patrickjherbert

12-05-05, 12:53 PM

Just wondering how those with a 4228 are fairing with the wind today. I left this morning and all was well but I'm not sure my setup can withstand a 90 mph gust. I guess I'll find out when I get home tonight....
Mine was listing to starboard. I wouldn't be surprised to find it at 45 degrees, or worse, when I get home (Green Mountain - Lakewood)

CEBII warned me of the high wind load on the 4228, and he surely knew of what he spoke. I'm probably just biding my time until I can get HD locals with Dish or Direct at this point.

mbuchana

12-05-05, 01:04 PM

I think it is difficult to argue that RP is better than Squaw. I do not know all of the reasons why the LCG did not put their temporary transmitters there, but I suspect cost was a big factor. I wouldn't doubt though, that LCG would be reluctant to put anything there since it might suggest that it is workable as an alternative site. That is too bad, because even though it is inferior to Lookout, it would have served many more people more effectively than RP.

Recap of Squaw problems that I know of:
- Access is poor, especially in winter.
- Shadowing is a much bigger problem than Lookout. I think this is also an issue for their remote news uplinks, so other equipment would have to remain on Lookout.
- Does not replicate analog coverage well.
- Results in a proliferation of sites requiring residents to constantly re-orient antennas (Lookout/Morisson for some stations, Squaw for others)

I suppose CARE could donate a full-power transmitter to KBDI and we could better evaluate the coverage. However, I think any potential LCG site on Squaw is lower than KBDI's current location, and so the coverage would be somewhat less than KBDI's.

Mark

P.S. Let me add that I think Al's participation should be welcomed here and personal attacks should be avoided. Fair rebuttal is of course encouraged!

ByH2O

12-05-05, 01:23 PM

My 4228 is fairing just fine in the wind (even if the evap cooler isn't...).

The antenna is tethered with four guy wires.

What's funny is that we had a pretty healthy hail storm a year and a half ago, and the hailstones actually unscrewed the turnbuckles.

OK, resume party...

:)

santellavision

12-05-05, 01:31 PM

Mark,

Not just the difficult access in winter to Squaw Mt., but what about the tremendous Fire Danger due to limited and the lengthy response time to get a fire truck way up there on those tiny dangerous icy-coverered dirt roads? They could lose the whole mountain, wait, the entire front range, and and hundreds of familes and babies, don't forget the babies, would DIE on Squaw Mt. (Hey, it's fun to use SCARE logic!)

If you guys want Al to participate, then fine with me.

Dave6833

12-05-05, 01:53 PM

P.S. Let me add that I think Al's participation should be welcomed here and personal attacks should be avoided. Fair rebuttal is of course encouraged!

Hear hear! I commend him for willingly joining in the fray, let's treat him with respect.

santellavision

12-05-05, 01:57 PM

Hear hear! I commend him for willingly joining in the fray, let's treat him with respect.
Dave, Before you can treat someone with respect, they have to earn respect.

Geof

12-05-05, 01:59 PM

Dave, Before you can treat someone with respect, they have to earn respect.I don't know about the man but I certainly don't respect the arguments made by most SCAREy folks.

santellavision

12-05-05, 02:07 PM

Let's lay it out there...

Either they deliberately lied giving their stastictics during the JeffCo hearings, or they're just completely incompetent and made high-school math mistakes. Which is it?

Geof

12-05-05, 02:15 PM

Since I wasn't there I'll refrain from commenting but I will say that I have read a LOT of crap that is innacurate, misleading or flat out wrong. I'd say SCARE on the whole deceives and lies. Unfortunately factual and true statements are diluted/rebutted with those "innacuracies". I think their motto is "honor be damned...all's fair in love and war".

Phil T

12-05-05, 02:20 PM

Does anybody even watch KBDI enough to notice how often both analog and digital are off the air?

It seems to me that every snowstorm they are off for a day or two. I would be willing to bet they are blown off today, but I don't have access to a TV right now to check.

LXIX

12-05-05, 02:51 PM

dr_mal

12-05-05, 02:53 PM

Isn't the Squaw site where KBDI is located part of a National Forest? Something triggered in my mind in one of these recent posts where it was mentioned that any potential broadcast area on Squaw isn't even where KBDI is right now, and IIRC, that's because KBDI is on national forest land and is grandfathered in.

So there hasn't yet even been a broadcast test from any potential site on Squaw that could accomodate LCG, in even a temporary capacity.

GWWaterBufalo

12-05-05, 03:00 PM

TotallyPreWired

12-05-05, 03:07 PM

Second, I live out near Parker (on Parker Road and Broncos Parkway) where we have covenants that prohibit exterior antennas.
I guess you've got your very own sCARE out there. Tell the 'Covenent Police' to shove it, they can't stop you. An outdoor antenna would likely help a lot.
....jc

JackinThornton

12-05-05, 03:11 PM

mbuchana

12-05-05, 03:14 PM

I don't know about the man but I certainly don't respect the arguments made by most SCAREy folks.

And I think one of the things that gets people so heated up about it is that sCARE will pick any and every argument to get the towers off Lookout & Morrison. It's health effects! No, wait, it's visual impact/mountain backdrop! No, wait, it's interference! No? How about ice falling from the tower? Maybe it's noise from generators (that are only turned on during brief power outages). No, wait, it's towers falling down the mountain! There are probably half a dozen other arguments they have used.

It does begin to sound like obstruction at all costs, regardless of what LCG does to address some of the early concerns that may have been somewhat legitimate. So, the arguments start to sound silly and we all tend to get rather angry about it.

Mark

gkanders

12-05-05, 03:17 PM

Hi Al,

I can't answer your question because I haven't done tests across the metro area. I can say that for ME, in Lafayette, there is a clear pattern... I have 2 antennas. One (Yagi/Log outdoor in the rafters over my garage) pointed at Squaw, and one (RS-double bow tie indoor antenna) pointed at RP. I (of course) get all of the high-power lookout stations on both antennas (well, the UHF ones on the RS-DBT). I can get KDBI-TV (channel 12) on the yagi, but not the RD-DBT. I can get all RP stations on the RS-DBT. I can get GWYN and KDVR on both antennas. I can get 46 from Castle Rock on the RS-DBT. As for KDBI-DT...nope, nada, zilch (although I'd have to admit I would have a better chance at KDBI-DT than KMGH-DT, but twice nothing is still nothing).

So for ME, it seems clear that TODAY, given current ERP, lookout is by far the best. Castle Rock and RP are second best, and Squaw and KMGH's building are not acceptable.

BTW, I'm not an LCG shrill. I personally don't care if they get the new tower or not. I'd be just as happy to see them start DT transmissions from their old towers. I just want to be able to get OTA DT as soon as possible, and I want to get rid of the indoor RS-DBT antenna. From everything I can see at this point, Lookout is best for me, so I'm fine whether they use a new tower or their old ones.

Now if I lived in Golden, I'd want them to get a new tower and remove the old towers and the double-doppler, get more open space, and get RF monitoring. All of which I believe LCG agreed to. But that's just me.

Thanks, Greg

milehighmike

12-05-05, 03:41 PM

Al h,

I thank you for your response to my questions. While there may some people who, in their own mind, believe, for instance, that RF levels will be too high, I think most people on this forum, including you, know that the real reason for opposing placement of the tower on Lookout is aesthetics and only aesthetics. Except for the pending position regarding the "falling tower", CARE has lost every issue it has raised, as so stated in Judge Jackson's last order remanding the falling tower issue back to the JeffCo Commissioners. And IF Judge Jackson looks at the facts, CARE will lose that issue also.

In the near term, the next few years, it probably won't matter how Judge Jackson rules. If he rules in favor of LCG, Golden's threat of condemnation via eminent domain will preclude the broadcasters from making any meaningful investment on Lookout due to risk of loss. And CARE will probably appeal to higher courts. If Judge Jackson rules in favor of CARE, LCG is back to square one - find another site or appeal to a higher court. Bottom line is that full power OTA DT is years away in Denver. And Castle Rock. And Greeley. And Ft. Collins. And this situation is not the result of any valid concerns, it's about NIMBY's who don't mind looking at the Coors industrial complex but do mind looking at one transmission tower.

Personally, this situation does not affect me in the least. In fact, I receive the low power RP stations better than both Squaw/KDBI and Lookout/KDVR & KWGN. I even receive the 50 kW KFCT from Ft Collins stronger than KDVR. So I don't care if the RP transmitters are ever moved to the foothills. But many others do. CARE's frivolous arguments that have held the tower placement hostage have denied many people the opportunity the receive free OTA DT and HDTV. Once analog is shut off, and if this issue is not resolved by that point in time, something's got to give. The stations will not stand for loss of advertising revenue due to limited signal penetration/coverage.

I also find it reprehensible that you are purporting a position that LCG chose the least favorable site for their STA's. The issue isn't about STA's. The issue is about Lookout. Why would the stations build STA's on Squaw at added expense when they should have been full power on Lookout by now? Would you have made such a decision?

Finally, if I was a meaningful player in LCG's decision making process, if Lookout eventually became a no-go, I would set a high priority of locating an alternate site that completely shadowed Golden from DT reception. I could fill in shadow gaps elsewhere, such as what KXKL radio does with an auxiliary transmitter to cover Boulder, but I would not consider that option for Golden. If Golden can't accept the fact that it should bite the bullet for the public good, then Golden doesn't deserve to have OTA DT.

TotallyPreWired

12-05-05, 03:57 PM

As far as I'm concerned the damage has been done. A bunch of nefarious a$$holes are trying to embellish their bank accounts by spinning lies and deception.

Their goal is to rid Lookout Mtn of towers. Therefore, since their acts have caused damage to me and 1000's of others, the obvious recourse is to desire their failure. That failure would be to have the existing towers remain for a long, long time.

Even if the new tower was approved today, it would probably be 2007 before it became operational. And even then, it probably wouldn't be at high power until the analog shutoff.

D*'s HD LIL will probably be active in Denver in a matter of months. Also, on 04/30/06, the FCC(SHREVA) gives us the right to a Digital Signal Test. So, we will soon have options to the miserable state of OTA HD broadcasts.

They've pissed me off, and I want sCARE to fail. Long Live The Existing Towers!
....jc

santellavision

12-05-05, 04:05 PM

Second, I live out near Parker (on Parker Road and Broncos Parkway) where we have covenants that prohibit exterior antennas. The FCC law overides any HOA covenants. You are allowed by law to put up an antenna or dish on your controlled property, they cannot stop you. (Townhomes/Condos are bit different as most roofs are public area, but controlled decks are OK)

Don't forget everybody, sCARE is all about increasing property values. Period!

dr_mal

12-05-05, 04:13 PM

oxothuk

12-05-05, 04:25 PM

Hey everyone. I have a couple of questions:

First, what is going on with the Lake Cedar tower? I have been trying to keep up, but it is a difficult thing to follow. Last I heard it was cleared by JEFCO following the CDC RF study, and was supposed to break-ground in Oct. of 2005 -- but now it seems tied up again (for reasons unknown to me). Does anyone know if/when things are supposed to progress?

Second, I live out near Parker (on Parker Road and Broncos Parkway) where we have covenants that prohibit exterior antennas. So, I purchased the big $59 exterior HD antenna from Radio Shack and installed it up in my attic. I ran the antenna straight into a Samsung HD receiver in my family room. My dilemma is this: I have found one near-perfect orientation for my antenna that allows me to get all the analog stations, as well as 2HD, 6HD, 9.1 & 9.2HD, 31HD, 38.1, 38.2, & 38.3 HD -- but, I can’t get 4HD unless I point my antenna directly downtown, which causes me to loose most analog stations, as well as 2HD and 31HD. I e-mailed channel 4 about this and they said “since they broadcast HD from the same location as channel 6 and 9 I should receive their signal as well”, but “I might be experiencing attenuation problems” -- whatever that means. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might be able to keep all my other stations and still be able to tune in Broncos games in HD without climbing into my attic every Sunday? And, is there even a remote possibility of receiving 7HD at my location?

Thanks for any advice you might be able to offer…KCNC is harder to receive than KRMA and KUSA because KCNC broadcasts on a higher UHF frequency than the other two and the higher frequencies don't carry as well.

Not an elegant solution, but I would suggest that you try a good indoor UHF antenna like the Zenith Silver Sensor, and see if you can pick up KDVR and KWGN with it. If so, then leave your attic antenna optimized for the downtown stations (KCNC, KUSA, KRMA). Use an A/B switch between these feeds (Radio Shack sells such a switch which can be remote controlled, if you want to get fancy). In a month or so KMGH will be moving to Republic Plaza also (so they say); at that point you may not care any more about getting the analog stations (Pax?).

CEB II

12-05-05, 05:04 PM

And I think one of the things that gets people so heated up about it is that sCARE will pick any and every argument to get the towers off Lookout & Morrison. It's health effects! No, wait, it's visual impact/mountain backdrop! No, wait, it's interference! No? How about ice falling from the tower? Maybe it's noise from generators (that are only turned on during brief power outages). No, wait, it's towers falling down the mountain! There are probably half a dozen other arguments they have used.

Mark

Except they never forward their true motivation, their expected windfall gains in property values, because they wouldn't glean much sympathy from the courts or the general public with that argument. This is about greed, pure and simple. These folks don't give a RF electron about safety or health effects, just that those issues present more palatable arguments for their cause. If they did have those as concerns, they wouldn't have moved there in the first place or continue to stay there in the second.

Al's issue regarding the location of temporary DTV broadcasting sites is a red herring. He's trying to deflect the focus from the fact that metro-Denver doesn't have and isn't on its way to having full-power DTV because of he and his ilk. They blocked the broadcasters from setting up their temporary DTV broadcasts from their current Lookout Mountain facilities and from proceeding with the development of full-power DTV from Lookout Mountain. They are selfish obstructionists and should be so viewed. An appropriate disclosure for any sCARE letter or post writer should be their estimate of their expected financial gain should they be successful in their quest to get the TV towers off of Lookout Mountain.

The best location for TV towers serving metro-Denver was determined over 50 years ago. The facts haven't changed, that's why TV broadcasts should continue from Lookout Mountain into the digital age.

I also wonder if any of sCARE's financial support comes from Comcast, one way or another. Always follow the money to get to the root of an event like this. Whoever stands to gain financially from the current obstruction of progress are probably in bed together. The LCG does not stand to gain financially from a new tower. The new tower would simply avoid other additional costs. If it wasn't for the federal mandate, broadcasters would have been happy to stay with analog, because DTV just costs them more money w/o any clear additional revenue generating potential.

As I've stated in a couple of posts over the past year or so, I truly believe that come the analog shutoff date, the major Denver DTV stations will all be broadcasting from their existing towers. The federal court precedents for siding with tower users versus local governments under the Telecommunications Act bodes poorly for sCARE in the long run (i.e., when the FCC tires of the no progress situation in Denver). I hope Al and his buddies like the existing towers because they are likely to be there long after Al's lifetime.

Dave6833

12-05-05, 05:05 PM

Dave, Before you can treat someone with respect, they have to earn respect.

Ernie, my point is that calling someone a liar is an attack on the person. Saying that he is wrong is an attack on his beliefs. I'm just saying that we should respect the person but argue against his position.

Don't think for a minute that I'm actually siding with (s)CARE or Al. I, like most everyone here, think their arguements are unsubstantiated. Only idiots cannot see the wisdom of replacing multiple towers with one. For me in Longmont, short of spending more money for an antenna outside my house or paying a monthly fee to Comcast or one of the satellite providers, my DTV future rests with the Denver stations getting towers up and higher-power transmitters on line.

(Dang, top of the page!)

Geof

12-05-05, 05:30 PM

There have been several excellent and eloquent posts about SCARE and I couldn't agree more. I find it sad that this sort of injustice and insanity is allowed to persist. I've long believed Washington is broke but if the Judge rules in favor of SCARE then I will have lost respect for our legal system in addition to our legislative system.

On the other hand all the frivolous arguments put forth by SCARE just makes me want to see someone stick it to 'em. Like they say, payback is a bitch and what comes around goes around so I expect all the disingenuous arguments put forth by SCARE will come back to haunt them. Long live the towers.

kcosby

12-05-05, 06:54 PM

Hey everyone. I have a couple of questions:

Second, I live out near Parker (on Parker Road and Broncos Parkway) where we have covenants that prohibit exterior antennas. So, I purchased the big $59 exterior HD antenna from Radio Shack and installed it up in my attic. I ran the antenna straight into a Samsung HD receiver in my family room. My dilemma is this: I have found one near-perfect orientation for my antenna that allows me to get all the analog stations, as well as 2HD, 6HD, 9.1 & 9.2HD, 31HD, 38.1, 38.2, & 38.3 HD -- but, I can’t get 4HD unless I point my antenna directly downtown, which causes me to loose most analog stations, as well as 2HD and 31HD. I e-mailed channel 4 about this and they said “since they broadcast HD from the same location as channel 6 and 9 I should receive their signal as well”, but “I might be experiencing attenuation problems” -- whatever that means. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might be able to keep all my other stations and still be able to tune in Broncos games in HD without climbing into my attic every Sunday? And, is there even a remote possibility of receiving 7HD at my location?

Thanks for any advice you might be able to offer…

Hey GWWaterBufalo, I live pretty close to you at Arapahoe and Waco. I'm using a Channelmaster 4228 mounted outside, and can receive all the Denver HD channels, including channel 7. I'm no antenna expert, but I believe a bowtie style antenna, like the 4228 has a wider field of reception, and may help. If you haven't already, you should check out antennaweb to figure out the best orientation for your antenna. Trying a different antenna might be a little easier than climbing up in your attic every Sunday. ;) I picked up mine from Solid Signal for a pretty reasonable price.

darth_speed

12-05-05, 07:03 PM

Hey Guys (and Gals),

I live in Firestone in a 2 story house, just got my HDTivo and I'm loving loving it. Unfortunately, the tool at Ultimate Electronics (formerly SoundTrack) sold me a weak indoor antenna. I have returned said antenna and am looking to fix my situation. So, my concerns are as follows:

1) What is the best type of antenna that I should buy? (it will be going into the attic)
2) Is Terk a decent brand of antenna?
3) What kind of channels can we expect up here?

I'm in a new development across the street from the new King Soopers at Hwy 119 (if it went east past I-25) and Colorado Blvd.

My wife would rather it be in the attic as opposed to the roof, and I'm not too keen on climbing up on the roof to install it... :)

Also, if there are any sites or links that you can point me to, I would be greatly appreciative...

-Todd

TotallyPreWired

12-05-05, 07:22 PM

1) What is the best type of antenna that I should buy? (it will be going into the attic)
Todd,
Since it's going to be in the attic, don't mess around! I'd try a CM 4228(hangs vertical). A CM 4221A might work, but you've got the attic working against you, so buy big.

Check out Antennaweb.org. It will help you see what the stations look like at your location.
....jc

whtevr77

12-05-05, 08:02 PM

Hey Guys (and Gals),

I'm in a new development across the street from the new King Soopers at Hwy 119 (if it went east past I-25) and Colorado Blvd.

-Todd

I agree the 4228 would be a good choice. You are about the same distance from the transmitters as I am but you are a few miles east of me (I'm just north of 119, about 3 mi. west of 25). I have a 4228 outside on a 20ft mast and get all all but the unmentionable one. I did have some luck mounting inside with a signal amp (through only one wall) but the outside mount is better, and without any amp.

I'd try the attic first then outside.

CEB II

12-05-05, 08:53 PM

I'm no antenna expert, but I believe a bowtie style antenna, like the 4228 has a wider field of reception, and may help.

Generally speaking, the higher the gain of an antenna, the narrower the beamwidth, which aids in rejecting multi-path signals. Also, generally speaking, the bow-tie/bay antennas have a narrower beamwidth than similar gain Yagi-type antenna.

The exception to the foregoing is the CM 4221 (4-bay version of the 8-bay 4228), which has a fairly wide beamwidth and medium high gain. So if the reason for not locking KCNC-DT is that the antenna doesn't provide sufficient gain and/or beamwidth to capture channel 35 when pointed to lock all the other DTV channels, then something like the CM 4221 or a medium sized Yagi should do the trick. If the reason for not be able to lock channel 35 is due to multi-path problems (possible w/ an attic install, but not likely) then the CM 4228 may be the better upgrade.

Beamwidth information for antennas is available on the web. Compare that to the span of azimuths that you are trying to encompass to see how much beamwidth you need for your situation.

Alternatively, if beamwidth is a problem w/ a higher gain antenna, you should consider a pre-amp. Many of the web antenna vendors strongly recommend a pre-amp for attic installations because the roof attenuates from 10 to 20 db of the available signal.

Phil T

12-05-05, 09:43 PM

Well the wind did me in today. My free (thanks to DP-1 a few years ago) Radio Shack yagi is only partially there and pointing due east (Maybe I can get Sterling :) ).

At the time the (temporary) antenna was going to get me by until LCG was up and running (2004).

I may hold out until Spring and see if DirecTV comes through with Denver HD via satellite.

darth_speed

12-06-05, 12:54 AM

I agree the 4228 would be a good choice. You are about the same distance from the transmitters as I am but you are a few miles east of me (I'm just north of 119, about 3 mi. west of 25). I have a 4228 outside on a 20ft mast and get all all but the unmentionable one. I did have some luck mounting inside with a signal amp (through only one wall) but the outside mount is better, and without any amp.

I'd try the attic first then outside.

Thanks whtevr77!! Another question for you (or anyone else in the area):

Do you need the rotator, or can you get most stations without repositioning your antenna? I'm going to put it in the attic, and also have an amp as well... Looks like solidsignal has the best pricing and their return policy isn't bad either.

Any other recomendations?

-Todd

ADent

12-06-05, 02:22 AM

Jetlag, you say that the new tower will have lower RF levels. Can you point to a study that shows lower levels in populated areas from the proposed LCG tower, or are you relying on the claims of Marv Rockford? Have you seen the proposed antenna patterns? LCG gave them to me to perform analysis. Id did, and the results showed RF increases in the most populated areas to the south of the tower. JeffCo’s consultant performed the analysis, and came to the same conclusion. Even better, LCG’s own RF expert’s report showed the same increases. Only LCG’s non-technical spokespersons maintained that RF would go down in residential neighborhoods.

How far south? What levels (say as a percentage of FCC max)?

From my limited info I thought the LCG tower was going to reduce levels in the immediate vicinity of the tower by trying to limit beam propagation downward to an extent. That was the area where the current levels were really close to FCC levels.

Mgibsoj

12-06-05, 06:04 AM

Are there any updates to the LCG consolidation plan to take into account that the analog shutdown occurs in about 40 months maximum? By the time the tower is approved, built, and made operational there will probably be less than a year's life left on the analog frequencies anyway, so why bother moving the analog transmitters to the new site? Were the RF studies pre-shutdown, post-shutdown, or both?

oxothuk

12-06-05, 08:48 AM

Thanks whtevr77!! Looks like solidsignal has the best pricing and their return policy isn't bad either.

Any other recomendations? Warren Electronics (www.warrenelectronics.com) has the CM4228 for $39.50 + shipping. Best price I've seen.

santellavision

12-06-05, 09:34 AM

Dave,
My feelings toward sCARE and their so-called 'expert' members are not groundless attacks. They were caught 'cooking-the-books' at the JeffCo hearings. And after being caught, red-handed, How can you respect any of them? I will never believe another post, word, graph, chart... nothing, any of them have to say.

After all the years of sCARE BS that many of us have been through, it really gets to you. You're fairly new, just give it a little while. Here's a quick example from the sCARE website of the type of information they spew out over and over. And that the residents who aren't technical, believe. That's how they got the huge support they have.The FCC allows digital TV broadcasters to radiate any part of Jefferson County with more than four thousand times more radiation than the FCC blanketing interference radiation threshold. Four-thousand times!!!! And the FCC allows that! Whew, that has to be bad.
--------------------
Adent,
I do remember from the testimony at the hearings that the tower's RF pattern did have one location south of the tower that would have been over the FCC limit. But, and I repeat but, that was with both the analog and digital transmitters operating at full power together. I'm sure they could have lowered the analog x-mitters to bring it under the limit.
------------
Todd,
One thing to consider when deciding on an antenna/location is... will it drive you and your wife crazy when the signal drops out during an important part of the show you're watching. There is nothing worse than when, in the middle of CSI when we lose the picture or it breaks up. I'm on the very fringe of reception and we get drop-outs now and again due to atmospheric conditions. My wife get's pretty mad. So, it might be worth convincing her that a roof antenna will be better for your relationship in the long run!

whtevr77

12-06-05, 11:34 AM

Thanks whtevr77!! Another question for you (or anyone else in the area):

Do you need the rotator, or can you get most stations without repositioning your antenna? I'm going to put it in the attic, and also have an amp as well... Looks like solidsignal has the best pricing and their return policy isn't bad either.

Any other recomendations?

-Todd

I should clarify that the amp I was using with the indoor setup was a cheap signal amp (got mine at Kmart...$10) and not a pre-amp. Not the usual setup but it did work. I have a couple of them if interested.

I do have a rotator only for fine tuning which is needed from time to time for the RP stations if it has moved a bit. However, with the antenna pointed toward RP I have no problem with getting KWGN, KDVR and KBDI. If you have any questions feel free to PM me. Good luck!

Al h

12-06-05, 12:03 PM

How far south? What levels (say as a percentage of FCC max)?

From my limited info I thought the LCG tower was going to reduce levels in the immediate vicinity of the tower by trying to limit beam propagation downward to an extent. That was the area where the current levels were really close to FCC levels.

First, let me quote from hdtvcolorado.com: “The Lake Cedar stations currently contribute less than five percent of the radio frequency (RF) on Lookout Mountain.” This claim is correct. The high levels around the base of the current antennas are due to FM stations on other towers, and would not be significantly changed by LCG’s tower plan. The only FM station on a LCG tower is KRFX, and is not a significant contributor on the ground below the towers. Perhaps the reason you thought that the RF below the towers would decrease significantly is because LCG incorrectly claimed that their proposal would reduce maximum RF levels from about 100% maximum permissible exposure (MPE) to about 67% MPE. It is impossible for LCG to reduce RF any more than it contributes, which is less than 5% MPE.

Figures 6 & 7 of LCG’s last RF report listed RF increases at 5 places to the west, southwest and south of the proposed tower. Typical predicted exposure levels were 12% MPE in neighborhoods 1 to 2 miles away. To the casual observer, it would appear that RF would approximately double in these areas, but the numbers were given in % MPE, not power densities. The major new proposed contributions to RF were at UHF frequencies, where higher exposure power densities (approaching 400 uW/cm^2) are allowed. Actual RF power densities increased by more than a factor of 2.

Although the FCC does not have interference regulations for TV, the FCC considers blanketing interference conditions to exist for AM and FM stations when the RF power density exceeds about .08 uW/cm^2. This is about 1/4000 the exposure level allowed (for typical UHF TV) for health purposes. This is the 4000 X figure Ernie is referring to

santellavision

12-06-05, 12:58 PM

This is about 1/4000 the exposure level allowed (for typical UHF TV) for health purposes.It's the fact they you 'spin' everything using the numbers that sCARE everyone. 1/4000 doesn't sound too bad at all, in fact, it sounds harmless. But then using language like "4000 times MORE radiation" sure does to a family with small, children!

Who does the spinning? Do you write that or does Ms Carney? (You have a chance to redeem yourself in our eyes a bit here Al.)

milehighmike

12-06-05, 01:56 PM

Al h,

Since I'm not familiar with the reports you cite, are the numbers you refer to in your latest post based upon 1 mW ERP for UHF channels 16, 17, & 18 or do they take into account the fact that these three transmissions will revert back to VHF channels 6, 7, & 9 at analog shutoff at much reduced ERP levels? Current full power VHF DT signals (WOIO Cleveland, WCPO Cincinnati, WFAA Dallas, WBBM Chicago, etc.) have ERP of less that 50 kW. Also, just to clarify, are you citing statistics for joint analog/digital coexistence, or only digital after analog shutoff? Thanks.

thepolz

12-06-05, 02:05 PM

I went to Antennaweb and they informed me that I needed a medium directional antenna based on my location (central denver, 6th and Colorado). Would the CM 4228a work for my situation?

Regards,

TotallyPreWired

12-06-05, 02:13 PM

I went to Antennaweb and they informed me that I needed a medium directional antenna based on my location (central denver, 6th and Colorado). Would the CM 4228a work for my situation?
By specification, easily, in reality, you won't know until you try.
....jc
ps. Yes, it's a very good antenna! :cool:

Al h

12-06-05, 06:07 PM

milehighmike,

The numbers came from the LCG report, and were for combined analog/digital. The proposed LCG tower would have capacity and approval for eight full power TV stations. After analog cutoff, it is asumed that the capacity for the four other stations would be leased to others. These most likely would be UHF.

santellavision

12-06-05, 06:11 PM

After analog cutoff, it is asumed that the capacity for the four other stations would be leased to others.Assumption is not fact. Engineer's work with facts.

Geof

12-06-05, 08:13 PM

Assumption is not fact. Engineer's work with facts.Most Engineers work with facts. Unfortunately (as we know all too well) SCARE doesn't mind making assumptions and then playing them up to the hilt.

milehighmike

12-07-05, 01:36 PM

Al h,

Thanks for the response to my post. In my prior post, I errored by including KRMA as a reference to going back to channel 6 after analog shutoff regarding the Lookout tower since it is my understanding they are not part of the LCG consortium. Also, in your post #13259, you stated that a 15 dB S/N ratio was the minimum for DTV reception. My experience with my Accurian receivers is that I need about an 18 dB S/N ratio for reception. While I don't have an S/N meter on my Dish 811 receiver, it is slightly less sensitive than the Accurians.

If I understand your response, the combined analog and digital ERP of the LCG stations causes the RF limits to be slightly exceeded in the limited locations cited in the LCG report. ERP's for analog for the 4 LCG stations total 5732 kW, made up of KCNC at 100 kW, KMGH and KUSA each at 316 kw, and KTVD at 5 mW. The corresponding digital ERP for the four stations, assuming KMGH and KUSA will not exceed 50 kw, is 2100 kw, with KCNC and KTVD both at 1 mW, the maximum allowable digital power. That is total ERP for both analog and digital of 7832 kW, assuming all four stations operate at full digital power. While I don't know if it has been proposed or contemplated by LCG, it seems the ERP of KCNC and KTVD could be reduced somewhat, just like KWGN and KDVR have done, to mitigate the exceeding of allowable RF levels until analog shutoff.

After analog shutoff, assuming 4 additional digital UHF stations lease space on the tower and are at full power, 1 mW, the total ERP for digital only would be 6100 kW. That's 1832 kW below joint analog/digital transmissions so, unless I missed some point you were trying to make regarding adding 4 more UHF stations to the tower, RF apparently is a moot point after analog shutoff. In addition, referring to their analog station numbers, channels 2, 6, 12, 14, 25, 31, 41, 50, 53, and 59 appear to have planned or already secured transmission facitilites independent of the LCG tower. So, except for LP stations, which probably would not locate on Lookout since they need to transmit within their small coverage areas, the addition of 4 more UHF stations to the LCG tower doesn't appear to me to be even a remote possibility. So I don't see how RF levels were ever a valid issue and it appears that there is no possibility they will ever be an issue after analog cutoff.

thepolz

12-07-05, 05:22 PM

I went to Antennaweb.com and they informed me that I needed a medium directional antenna based on my location (central denver, 6th and Colorado). Would the CM 4228a work for my situation?

Regards,

TotallyPreWired

12-07-05, 05:53 PM

I went to Antennaweb.com and they informed me that I needed a medium directional antenna based on my location (central denver, 6th and Colorado). Would the CM 4228a work for my situation?
Didn't I already answer that?

Yes. And, it maybe overkill, but always buy large.
....jc

oxothuk

12-07-05, 06:17 PM

Thanks for the response to my post. In my prior post, I errored by including KRMA as a reference to going back to channel 6 after analog shutoff regarding the Lookout tower since it is my understanding they are not part of the LCG consortium. Also, in your post #13259, you stated that a 15 dB S/N ratio was the minimum for DTV reception. KRMA was originally part of the LCG consortium, but dropped out a couple of years ago.

15db S/N is probably the minimum if your definition is "lowest S/N at which any receiver has achieved lock". But in my experience with HD tuner cards that provide a S/N measurement, you need 20dB for RELIABLE reception; by reliable, I mean you could invite guests over to watch and be sure of having it.

ADent

12-07-05, 06:45 PM

milehighmike,

Al indicates the TV is a not very significant soruce of energy (5% currently, less with LCG) towards exceeding maximum permissible exposure (MPE) directly near the towers.

Other places (to the south) are not near the MPE (12%), but predicted to be higher than current levels.

So when you are talking about "exceeding of allowable RF levels" are you talking FCC MPE in the local vicinity of the tower?

Al h

12-07-05, 07:41 PM

milehigh mike,
The proposed LCG tower would make no significant contribution at the places where RF is close to the exposure limits, even if it had eight 1 megawatt stations. ADent is correct.

gkanders

12-08-05, 12:32 AM

milehigh mike,
The proposed LCG tower would make no significant contribution at the places where RF is close to the exposure limits, even if it had eight 1 megawatt stations. ADent is correct.

I've been following this with interest, but now this confuses me. I'm not sure where the problem is. The areas of increased RF are going to increase to about 12% MPE.

If the federally set MPE is set too high for safety reasons, I'd think the issue should be contested at the federal level and not with this fight against LCG.

If the RF on Lookout Mtn (close to 100% MPE) is the problem and LCG doesn't contribute significantly to that issue, wouldn't CARE be better off spending time working WITH broadcasters, Golden, and Jeffco to get those facilities upgraded/updated in the way LCG is trying to do (directional antennas, etc) to mitigate that problem?

I guess if I lived near Lookout I'd be a little upset at all the effort that seems to be being spent "protecting" those whose levels would raise to 12% while there seemed to be little done about mitigating the exposure that is close to 100%. :rolleyes:

milehighmike

12-08-05, 01:42 AM

I agree with gkanders in the sense that I thought one of the issues raised by CARE in their opposition to the LCG tower was RF, which is why I wrote my last post. If that's not the case, is this really nothing more than a contrived issue by CARE, or am I missing something?

I also had the same thought about why CARE didn't try to work with broadcasters but I concluded that CARE doesn't want the LCG tower or any tower for that matter. Otherwise, the whole tower issue could have been amicably resolved long time ago. Apparently there is no win-win in the eyes of CARE.

Does anyone know if Judge Jackson has scheduled a date to announce his ruling?

santellavision

12-08-05, 08:03 AM

JMartinko

12-08-05, 10:15 AM

OK Class, let's repeat...
It's always been about Property Values and not any RF danger. If the towers go away, it means millions to residents on Lookout.

That's why they flip-flop so much on their mesages. For years it was... "Build no towers near people". Well, that's gone from their manifesto. Now it's ok, but as long as the tower is on some other county's mountain, like Squaw.

OK class, one more time for emphasis until you all get it memorized........."It's always been about Property Values and not any RF danger. If the towers go away, it means millions to residents on Lookout."

Remember, (S)CARE had no problem with locating the towers on Eldorado Mt. and now has no problem with locating them on Squaw. There are people living in those areas as well, so it is NOT about the people, it is about property values. Selling towers as 'harmful to kids' is used because it sells better with the uninformed public. Remember this is the same group that had no problem putting a letters in the paper saying that AVS members consistently report higher signal strengths from alternative sites such as Squaw even though only 3 members out of maybe 100 (?) actually report that. The implication and obvious distortion that the majority of us report better reception from Squaw was not accidental. There is a constant drumbeat of the increased power levels during the transition, while leaving out the fact the levels would still be within FCC accepted safety guidelines. Just in case you want to argue the calculations, the LCG has even agreed to pay ($$) to have the levels continually tested to insure compliance with FCC regulations and to correct any excessive levels that might be found. That doesn't sound to me like the offer from a group trying to 'distort' the calculated levels to get their towers built. This is a campaign of distortion if not outright lies to increase the property values of those near Lookout, nothing more, nothing less.

One more time now, let's all sing this together, one, two, three......."It's always been about Property Values and not any RF danger. If the towers go away, it means millions to residents on Lookout."

Thanks for keeping things in perspective here Ernie.

santellavision

12-08-05, 10:23 AM

There's another pro-tower letter in the RMN today from Michael Lambdin. Michael are you a poster here?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/letters/article/0,2777,DRMN_23966_4297625,00.html

LXIX

12-08-05, 03:03 PM

I agree with both John and Ernie that the puppeteers at CARE (Deb and possibly Al) are only concerned with their property values. If I am not mistaken, CARE is a consortium of Home Owners Associations, whose job it is to protect property values.

I do believe that many of the citizens of Golden are genuinely sCAREed for their lives (I have heard the anger/fear in their voices at the tower meetings).

It is amazing to me that a small, special interest group could be sooo good at manipulating the general public. I wish that we could get as organized as they are, so that we could enlighten the citizens of Golden.

Even if we could organize, I feel that our efforts would be all for not. It is much easier to fear the unknown than it is to trust what we know. Many people fear shark attacks and bird flu even though we know that we are much more likely to die in a car crash than be confronted by either of these things.

What I find laughable is the number of tower antagonists who preach the fear of brain cancer/toomers (a belief that RF can cause brain cancer has not been proven and may not be rational), then go outside the court house and suck-down an entire cancer stick in under 5 minutes. The carcinogens in cigarettes are well documented as is the effect second hand smoke has on children. Can you say HYPOCRITES kids? I knew ya could.

-Matt

LXIX

12-08-05, 03:08 PM

Has anyone else lost Channel 29.1 (remap to 25.1) from their ATSC tuners or is just me? I realize that it is nothing but infomercials and home shopping but I still wonder were it went.

I was also curious if anyone has more info about UPN, ABC and their RP transmitters. Are there any updates or do I need to keep checking for channels 19.1 and 17.1 every day?

-Matt

sunshinedawg

12-08-05, 04:19 PM

I'm not picking 25-1 up anymore either.

dr_mal

12-08-05, 06:05 PM

KTVD (UPN) update, from an impeccable source:

All the bits and pieces for their temporary digital transmitter are here. They're looking at installation at Republic Plaza hopefully this week with a test pattern coming soon thereafter. Actual content (cross your fingers) still expected this calendar year. All estimates are pending weather - they depend on window-washing scaffolding for part of the install and we all know how much fun that is on a windy day. :)

Other questions I had on file, with my paraphrasing of their answers:

Q) Why is the temporary transmitter going on Republic instead of on the existing channel 20 site on Mt. Morrison?

A) Couple of reasons. Looking long-term, having the "temporary" transmitter downtown provides a backup broadcast location for them in a completely different part of town. Also, their lease on the tower on Mt. Morrison is almost up (they own the building, but not the tower) so Morrison isn't a good long-term solution. They seem satisfied, in the short-term, with the coverage available from Republic Plaza.

Q) Why the *&($ will it take Comcast 60 days to get KTVD-DT on cable after the OTA signal is available?

A) That is the timeline provided by Comcast. Once KTVD-DT is on the air, they'll notify Comcast that they're live and the rest is in Comcast's hands.

Q) Is there any chance of UPN and Altitude working together to make Altitude-HD Avs games available on UPN-DT?

A) Don't hold our breath. While UPN-DT coverage of Altitude-HD games would give Altitude more viewers, it would weaken Altitude's negotiating strength with Comcast. Why would Comcast continue to pay Altitude $1.00 per customer (number made up) per month when they could just carry KTVD-DT and satisfy their customers' demand for HD Avalanche games? I got the sense that KTVD is open to the idea, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon.

LXIX

12-08-05, 06:26 PM

Dr_Mal, you are awesome. Thanks for the update.

By the way, does your "contact" ever visit this forum? Have they considered using us to help them test their PSIP data and other "problem" areas that we have run into in the past?

-Matt

TotallyPreWired

12-08-05, 06:37 PM

I'm sure that this has been discussed before, but let's 'refresh' the topic. What are the drawbacks for the stations broadcasting from Republic Plaza, to increasing their power? Let's say that they all increase their output from 10-13kW to 30kW. This would give a total output at around 150kW from that location(KCNC, KRMA, KUSA, and coming KMGH & KTVD).

This would allow those stations to reach a larger audience, and provide a better 'temporary' solution to our low power woes.

I do not know what issues this would pose for the broadcasters. Would they need new transmitters, or could they just modify the existing ones?

Since we are facing the likelyhood that we won't see high power broadcasts until at least 2009, this boost would make it possible(easier) for many of us to obtain these broadcasts.

Do you think that this would help you?
....jc

dr_mal

12-08-05, 06:39 PM

Dr_Mal, you are awesome. Thanks for the update.
All credit should go to my contact who, for some reason, keeps returning my calls :)

By the way, does your "contact" ever visit this forum? Have they considered using us to help them test their PSIP data and other "problem" areas that we have run into in the past?
I gave my contact the URL for the forum, and directions to get to this thread. AFAIK, nobody from KTVD has been on the forum before. Hopefully they'll maintain a presence here after they go live, a la KWGN. I'll put that in my notes for the next time we speak.

I've been promised a heads-up call with a launch date before they actually go live. I hope that comes to pass, but in the meantime I can tell you for sure there's no point in doing a channel scan tonight.

dr_mal

12-08-05, 06:47 PM

I'm sure that this has been discussed before, but let's 'refresh' the topic. What are the drawbacks for the stations broadcasting from Republic Plaza, to increasing their power? Let's say that they all increase their output from 10-13kW to 30kW. This would give a total output at around 150kW from that location(KCNC, KRMA, KUSA, and coming KMGH & KTVD).
AFAIK, their power is limited by Denver County. (We had at one point believed there were power issues at RP, but with KTVD and KMGH announcing plans to broadcast from there, that can't be an issue). In order to boost their power and make RP a permanent broadcast location, they have to prove no alternative sites exist. Sound familiar? :rolleyes:

GWWaterBufalo

12-08-05, 06:54 PM

This might be reaching, but if Lookout Mountain was acquired by the state under eminent domain, sCARE problems would cease to exist. I would GLADLY pay my share of an extra $5.00 or whatever in taxes so the state could 'buy-out' the homeowners on the hill to ensure that the Denver metropolitan and outlying areas have adequate broadcast resources to meet their needs. We built a football stadium for about $2.50 per household right... why can't we buy sCARE homes for the same? More people watch and listen to OTA broadcasts than purchase seats at Invesco. Is this at all feasible?

-The Great White Water Buffalo

dr_mal

12-08-05, 06:58 PM

GWWaterBufalo

12-08-05, 07:06 PM

They'd have to beat Golden to the punch, since they're already trying to seize the land :(

Which reminds me...

BOYCOTT GOLDEN

What's that all about? Why is Golden trying to seize it - and what are the implications for broadcasters?

TotallyPreWired

12-08-05, 07:06 PM

In order to boost their power and make RP a permanent broadcast location, they have to prove no alternative sites exist. Sound familiar? :rolleyes:
Hopefully not permanent, just until high power! :p

Ok, another question: What determines each station's broadcast power? On RP alone they vary from 10-13kW.
....jc

dr_mal

12-08-05, 07:20 PM

Hopefully not permanent, just until high power! :p
Sorry, usually the question about RP power is raised in conjunction with RP being their permanent home instead of Lookout. Yes, a temporary power boost from RP would be nice, but unfortunately they're limited by Denver County

Ok, another question: What determines each station's broadcast power? On RP alone they vary from 10-13kW.
Compared to their licensed full power of 1000kW, the difference between 10 and 13 is negligible.

In the context of low power, however, 10-13 kW could well make or break reception for certain people. I honestly have no idea why each station has a different power output up there.

dr_mal

12-08-05, 07:23 PM

What's that all about? Why is Golden trying to seize it - and what are the implications for broadcasters?
Sorry - didn't quite notice how new you were here :)

At the last round of BCC (Board of County Commissioner) hearings in Golden, when it became obvious that LCG had eliminated any possible tower fall issues, the city of BoycottGolden announced that they were going to offer LCG fair market value for their property on Lookout and if LCG declined, that BoycottGolden would seize the land under eminent domain to be used as open space :rolleyes: At one point, it appeared that BoycottGolden was looking to seize the current LCG broadcast location property, effectively blacking out the entire Denver DMA. I'm not sure if that's their current plan right now.

Oh - the impact. Right.

If it goes through, LCG is back to square one in terms of finding a place to broadcast HD. It took them about 6 years to get to this point, so you do the math. Those of us with any optimism left after all this time hope the FCC won't let a bunch of local loons (and make no mistake about it, the nuts running BoycottGolden have absolutely no grasp of reality at this point) prevent a whole city from not having DTV. Unfortunately, the FCC is being very hands-off throughout this whole transition.

TotallyPreWired

12-08-05, 07:31 PM

In the context of low power, however, 10-13 kW could well make or break reception for certain people.
That's why they call ya Doc? You are indeed a wise man! ;)

Give the other stations the same characteristics(power, antenna, elevation) and I've got all 3. Right now I've got about 1.3! :rolleyes:
....jc

UHForever

12-08-05, 07:37 PM

dr_mal

12-08-05, 07:37 PM

That's why they call ya Doc? You are indeed a wise man! ;)
Oh that is so going in my signature!

donyoop

12-08-05, 07:45 PM

Those of us with any optimism left after all this time...

That would not be me. Bring on analog shutoff.

Don

dr_mal

12-08-05, 08:49 PM

Let me thank you as well for the detailed update, dr_mal, regarding KTVD. Your source is far more specific than mine.

One quick question, which I think you addressed in the past, but can you still verify that KTVD will be broadcasting UPN Network programming in HD? I'm pretty sure that's what my source had told me, but your source seems to be far more reliable.
I'd be VERY surprised if they didn't. Their argument against having a temporary digital signal was that they had no content. UPN's network HD programming must've been a factor in them deciding to go HD. The next time we speak, I'll ask specifically, just to be 100% sure. Right now I'm only about 99% sure :)

I wonder if KTVD's license is up for renewal like so many other Denver stations? If that's the case, I can assure you that they will do everything possible to get on-air from RP before the end of the year so they can report to the FCC that they have been broadcasting a Digital signal "since 2005" ;)
No clue, but didn't KCNC-DT go on the air 12/30? If everything goes according to plan, KTVD-DT will beat that date (although, obviously, just barely).

Regardless, it will be great to finally have KTVD-DT joining the OTA Digital world...a nice X-mas gift. Again, thanks for the info.
Agreed! I didn't watch any KWGN before they launched their DTV signal. Now I'm hooked on a couple of their shows. I've been hearing good things about Veronica Mars on UPN, but alas, I've become an HD snob and don't watch SD anymore. I'm looking forward to another source of HD.

santellavision

12-08-05, 10:01 PM

If KTVD goes on-the-air before Dec 31st, they can write-off the entire year to the IRS. Same thing with me, if I buy some equipment and put it into service (if only for a day) I can take the tax depreciation for the entire year!

Also to note, RP isn't the best place to put transmitters. With the foothills acting a huge reflector, there is severe multi-path issues.

Don't forget, you can order your T-shirts and Bumperstickers at the Denverdtv.info website.

http://www.santellaproductions.com/dtv/Bumper.jpg

TheBert

12-08-05, 10:04 PM

[QUOTE=dr_mal]

No clue, but didn't KCNC-DT go on the air 12/30? If everything goes according to plan, KTVD-DT will beat that date (although, obviously, just barely).

KCNC-DT is on the air? :rolleyes:

TheBert

12-08-05, 10:13 PM

Never mind, Wrong station, Bad joke.

JMartinko

12-08-05, 10:53 PM

One important reason the RP can't be used at higher power is that the transmitters radiate directly into the upper stories of the Qwest building. Transmitters on the RP would never be turned on at higher powers with permission from Denver unless those floors are evacuated. Unlike the (S)CARE folks on Lookout, the upper stories 'really are' in the direct line of the RF (not to mention the blockages created by the Qwest building to the north end of town). The RP is a very poor temporary solution at best, although it is still better than the second story of a local television studio located in the area. I believe that was a major reason that Denver would not allow any higher power from the top of the RP.

dr_mal

12-08-05, 11:44 PM

One important reason the RP can't be used at higher power is that the transmitters radiate directly into the upper stories of the Qwest building.

If only Nacchio was still on the top floor of the Qwest building...we could solve 2 problems at the same time :D

joej

12-09-05, 08:32 AM

Anyone have news on the KMGH move to Republic Plaza? I know they said they would be up and running by the Super Bowl, but I was hoping that they might make it by the end of the year as well. They have a bunch of college bowl games on right after the first of the year.

Thanks
Joe

dr_mal

12-09-05, 10:00 AM

Anyone have news on the KMGH move to Republic Plaza?
K-M-G- who? :rolleyes:

colofan

12-09-05, 10:09 AM

Any plans on KCNC boosting power so they at least have the same coverage area as the other RP stations? I mean that since they are much higher in frequency and thus have a greater loss through the atmosphere they need to boost to compensate.

santellavision

12-09-05, 06:04 PM

Any plans on KCNC boosting power so they at least have the same coverage area as the other RP stations?Nothing we've heard, and I wouldn't put any money on it.

mrdobolina

12-10-05, 01:48 PM

Am I the only one that is getting variable signal from KCNC's HD broadcast of the Duke/Texas College Hoops game? Sometimes it's solid as a rock, other times it's fluctuating between good and choppy. I live in Arvada, and usually get a pretty good signal...that is, until something big comes on, like this or a Broncos game. (or last years NCAA hoops final)

oxothuk

12-10-05, 02:49 PM

I'm not picking 25-1 up anymore either.They seem to be back on the air today. Maybe the winds on Monday knocked them out.

roller11

12-10-05, 03:03 PM

Now that Longmont is finally getting ABC over cable (since Nov.22), I'm trying to
'catch up' with a few shows that look interesting.
I saw "lost" for the first time Dec. 7. How did they get to the island? Why are there various
groups and what is their significance, i.e. the 'hugo' group, the dog group,
the baby group, etc. Any info would be appreciated.
Ditto 'Alias'. Desperate Housewives seems self-explanatory.
Thanks.

cjh404

12-10-05, 04:42 PM

The people on Lost were on a plane that went off course and crashed on that Island. There are 2 main groups. The first consists of 40 some odd people that were on the front/main part of the plain. They have been fortunate and were able to get a lot of the supplies off the plane. The other group consists of people that were on the tail end of the plane. They weren't so fortunate and and some of they were taken hostage by a group of people called "the others". We don't know much about "the others" but they were on the island before the plane crashed there. The front plane survivors and the tail end surviors just found each other.

That is just kinda a basic summary. You can read a lot more on the internet at various fan sites.

http://www.tv.com/lost/show/24313/summary.html?q=lost

The next new episode doesn't air till January 11th and they are showing some re runs until then so you may be able to catch up a little bit. And if you really want to know the story you should be able to rent season 1 at blockbuster

dr_mal

12-10-05, 07:23 PM

The sister forum to AVSForum is TiVoCommunity.com - even if you don't have a TiVo, there's a very active TV Show discussion sub-forum in there. You'll be able to get all your answers there.

Smuuth

12-10-05, 07:51 PM

Anyone have a URL or other source that consistently lists which 3 CBS NFL broadcasts are going to be in HD?

Couch Patato

12-10-05, 08:06 PM

Anyone have a URL or other source that consistently lists which 3 CBS NFL broadcasts are going to be in HD?

Updated every week. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=440744

TotallyPreWired

12-10-05, 08:40 PM

Anyone have a URL or other source that consistently lists which 3 CBS NFL broadcasts are going to be in HD?
Another source is cbssportsline.com. And tomorrow looks like a working day. Denver in SD :mad:
....jc

ND Irishman

12-11-05, 11:17 PM

Hello all. I have been lurking here for a month or so, and I am appreciative of all the information that is posted in here. I can already tell you that I think that Denver must be in the dark ages here with the environmental wackos/NIMBYs holding up the Lookout Mountain tower build. How sad.

Anyway, I have E* and am going to subscribe to their HD package, but I also want to install an antenna for OTA reception. I will probably use one of the Yagi-style antennas but my problem is installation. I live in a tri-level and would like to install on or near the chimney, which is near the top of the highest level. Its about 25 feet (I am guessing), but my ladder rises only 18 feet. I could mount it a bit lower, but I am worried about what effect that may have. It will not be obscured by another house (nor my own), but I'd like to have it up as high as I can, perhaps mounted to one of the eaves.

My question is this. Are there places that install these antennas as part of their business? If so, does anyone know how much it would cost?

Again, thanks for the great information here. Oh, and I live in Westminster just north of Stanley Lake.

dr_mal

12-11-05, 11:43 PM

My question is this. Are there places that install these antennas as part of their business? If so, does anyone know how much it would cost?
Welcome!

Yes, there are companies who will do this. I used Alpine Electronics ( (303) 366-5992 ). Total cost was somewhere around $260, including the $80 antenna they sold me. IIRC, others on the forum who used them after me have had mixed results, so make sure you know what you want them to do and be vocal about your needs.

Good luck!

RonAuger

12-12-05, 04:34 PM

What determines each station's broadcast power? On RP alone they vary from 10-13kW.
....jc

In the context of low power, however, 10-13 kW could well make or break reception for certain people. I honestly have no idea why each station has a different power output up there.AFAIK, they all use a 1kW xmitter (I think KTVD-DT will too). It is the ERP (Effective Radiated Power output) that varies due to antenna size/position, freq, yadda yadda.

RonAuger

12-12-05, 04:58 PM

Sorry for the age of the quotes -- been at DisneyWorld with the fambly for two weeks.

You seem to miss, or perhaps would like to deny (and certainly resent the fact that it has been pointed out), the fact that KBDI, transmitting from Squaw Mountain at power less than 10% of what KWGN is using, results a stronger signal at your position in Aurora. Contrary to your assertion, your position IS typical of the majority of metro-area residents. I'd say his position is typical of half the metro area -- those that are EAST. I'm 46 miles SE of downtown and I receive KBDI just fine also, as well as 2 of the 3 RP stations, but I belong to the same "half" - those that are EAST. The posted complaints about the current LCG coverage, the posted requests for terrain profiles, and the lack of response to my question show that you are intimately aware of the poor coverage of the LCG temporary transmitters.I agree the temp xmitters at RP offer poor coverage. I agree that LCG is nearly as much responsable for the "hostage" situation as sCARE is. I agree that LCG is also trying to manipulate people for their own gain, as sCARE is, making this bad situation even worse. However the subject is Lookout Mtn which is still the best place to broadcast from. I have seen references to “no DTV reception west of Wadsworth Blvd” due to shadowing if the transmitters are put on Squaw Mountain. I put my DTV in the back of a Suburban, and drove over 1000 miles throughout the Denver Metro area, testing over 180 points. I had expected poor reception west of Wadsworth, and NO reception in Golden from our test transmitter on Squaw Mountain. I WAS WRONG! In Golden, more than half the places we tested had reception, and our low-power transmitter was operating at only 2.4% of the recommended power. This came as a great surprise to me, and I can understand your disbelief in the results. You can sit back now and say “he’s lying,” or you can now do your own tests with a mobile DTV. While we had use of a borrowed transmitter for only a few weeks, KBDI is now on the air with a whopping 4.2% recommended power. Don’t trust me: Do your own test.Do our own test?! You must be kidding. People living west of Wadsworth are doing their own test every day -- in their homes, not in a mobile test rig. There is no need to listen to someone's simulation results when you experience the real thing. Shadowing exists and is extremely significant to those west of Wadsworth. The people that live there don't need any of your test results to know what to expect - they turn on their TV!

BTW Al, welcome to the forum! What took you so long? Finally dawning on you that we are not the ones who are zealots?!?!

mbuchana

12-12-05, 07:09 PM

Actually, I think Al participated for awhile before (back in late 2000 or 2001).

Mark

skyview

12-12-05, 08:28 PM

TotallyPreWired

12-12-05, 09:01 PM

IS anyone having luck receiving any of the Colorado Springs HDTV stations here in Denver Metro. Living in Castle Rock at 6500 feet would think I could, but so far absolutely no luck... though I have been getting FOX from Ft Collins of late.
Skyview,
Try asking(begging, $$$ might help :) ) Gakon for a profile to the C/S transmitters. My guess is that the Palmer Divide could be a problem.
Use: 38° 44' 41.00" N 104° 51' 41.00" W - That s/b close enough.

Posted on Colorado Springs forum but got no responses.
Yea, hate to say it, but it's a dud. Just a handful of contributors, and more Cable & Tivo & D* subtopics than OTA.
....jc

Iwanthd

12-12-05, 09:16 PM

IS anyone having luck receiving any of the Colorado Springs HDTV stations here in Denver Metro. Living in Castle Rock at 6500 feet would think I could, but so far absolutely no luck... though I have been getting FOX from Ft Collins of late. Any advice or reports please. Posted on Colorado Springs forum but got no responses.

I was able to receive the CBS station on 11-1 as my strongest station until I added a pre-amp and focused on tuning in KMGH. I have a roof mounted CM 3021 and KKTV came in very strong from the "back" side of the antenna. I havent tried it, but I bet if turned the antenna 180 degrees I could get KKTV easily. I know that FOX is also broadcasting an HD signal from the Springs on 22-1 (I think?)but I have never tried to acqire their signal. ABC and NBC are not broadcasting an HD signal yet and it is uncertain when they will.
I am located in Castle Pines North.

gakon

12-12-05, 11:12 PM

Skyview, Try asking(begging, $$$ might help :) ) Gakon for a profile to the C/S transmitters.
Skyview, no $$$ required. I would be easiest if you provided your coordinates in DD MM SS (vs. decimal DD.DDDDD) although it doesn't take much to convert.

TotallyPreWired

12-12-05, 11:31 PM

Skyview, no $$$ required. I would be easiest if you provided your coordinates in DD MM SS (vs. decimal DD.DDDDD) although it doesn't take much to convert.
He was just kidding. :mad: As an agent of Gakon international, and expecting the normal 25% kickback, please supply a credit card number. :D A conversion from DD.DDDD is another $5. Geez, keeping these corporate types in line is such a pain! :(
....jc

gakon

12-13-05, 12:17 AM

Er, yeah, that's right - it's 20$ per profile, sure... :D

sunshinedawg

12-13-05, 12:37 PM

I'm getting KRMA mapped to 18-4. I didn't have time for a rescan. Anybody else see this?

justinto

12-13-05, 12:53 PM

santellavision

12-13-05, 12:56 PM

justinto,

The FCC allows outside antennas and overides all HOA's stupid rules. You can put up an antenna and they cannot stop you, its the LAW!

dr_mal

12-13-05, 01:14 PM

I have an indoor antenna because the HOC will not allow external. With this one, I can receive, channels 2, 9, 12, and 31 in HD but not 4, sometimes 6, and 7. I wrote to channels 4 and 7 especially 7 where I get no signal and there is a superbowl coming up and asked them to increase the signal levels To this point, I have received no reply. I live at 100th and Wadsworth.

Any suggestions about channels 4 and 7?

I have D*** and know they will transmit signals sometime in 06.
Put up an outdoor antenna. Refer your HOA to this link: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html which outlines your federally-guaranteed right to free OTA TV.

Channel 7 has stated that they'll move their transmitter to Republic Plaza before the Super Bowl. Keep in mind that Channel 7 also had their lawyers affirm to the FCC - what, 2 years ago? - that their full power solution on Lookout Mountain was imminent. This was in response to our letters to the FCC pointing out Channel 7's digital deficiency in Denver. So some of us around here don't hold much stock in what Channel 7 says.

TotallyPreWired

12-13-05, 01:38 PM

I'm getting KRMA mapped to 18-4. I didn't have time for a rescan. Anybody else see this?
I just checked 2 different receivers, and they are both mapping to 6.1.
....jc

TotallyPreWired

12-13-05, 01:42 PM

I have an indoor antenna because the HOC will not allow external. ....I have D*** and know they will transmit signals sometime in 06.
So, where is your dish? :eek:
.....jc

sunshinedawg

12-13-05, 02:45 PM

I just checked 2 different receivers, and they are both mapping to 6.1.
....jc

I'm back to 6-1 now also. It seems like KRMA has been doing weird things in the morning every once in a while. A couple of weeks ago, I wasn't getting any sound in the am. thanks jc

sunshinedawg

12-13-05, 02:53 PM

IS anyone having luck receiving any of the Colorado Springs HDTV stations here in Denver Metro. Living in Castle Rock at 6500 feet would think I could, but so far absolutely no luck... though I have been getting FOX from Ft Collins of late. Any advice or reports please. Posted on Colorado Springs forum but got no responses.

I was hoping to see KRDO-DT when people from the Springs were reporting a surge in their signal. I haven't picked up a blip. I am hoping that they haven't gone to full power yet and it is some other reason I'm getting nothing. I think people up north (Longmont, Loveland, etc) might have a shot if coverage patterns are favorable. Being so far north, it appears that some siganls might have a chance of clearing the shadow that the Palmer Divide casts on Denver. Wishful thinking :o

PS I can pick up channel 8 analog very well up in Longmont but that might not have anything to do with the digital signals

Geof

12-13-05, 03:29 PM

Channel 7 has stated that they'll move their transmitter to Republic Plaza before the Super Bowl. Keep in mind that Channel 7 also had their lawyers affirm to the FCC - what, 2 years ago? - that their full power solution on Lookout Mountain was imminent. This was in response to our letters to the FCC pointing out Channel 7's digital deficiency in Denver. So some of us around here don't hold much stock in what Channel 7 says.Yes, and I'm sure you remember the 400,000 dollar figure as well. I bet they don't end up spending nearly that much when all is said and done. They lie and distort about as well as SCARE.

Smuuth

12-13-05, 03:48 PM

oxothuk

12-13-05, 05:30 PM

I was hoping to see KRDO-DT when people from the Springs were reporting a surge in their signal. I haven't picked up a blip. I am hoping that they haven't gone to full power yet and it is some other reason I'm getting nothing. I think people up north (Longmont, Loveland, etc) might have a shot if coverage patterns are favorable. Being so far north, it appears that some siganls might have a chance of clearing the shadow that the Palmer Divide casts on Denver. Wishful thinking :o

PS I can pick up channel 8 analog very well up in Longmont but that might not have anything to do with the digital signalsI can barely get their analog signal (13), which is already full power - more snow than A-basin. Doesn't give me a lot of reason to be hopeful about their digital signal.

gkanders

12-13-05, 05:36 PM

Of course, I can't get channel 53 at all, but I get 46-DT like a dream, so stranger things have happened. I'm not counting on it, though.

justinto

12-13-05, 08:06 PM

So, where is your dish? :eek:
.....jc

The dish is on the south side of the house

DennisMileHi

12-13-05, 08:23 PM

The dish is on the south side of the house

And just like your dish, your outdoor antenna can be there or on the roof or anywhere you want. Your HOA cannot stop this. Check out the FCC website.

Good luck!

Mad_Breaker

12-14-05, 01:44 AM

So I'm rather new to this forum and wanted to ask what antenna everyone would recommend where I am located. I am at 6th and Emerson fairly close to downtown. Currently I'm using a Terk Indoor Directional antenna and the PoS doesn't pick up ABC unless I point it directly at the transmission tower...then of course I lose all the rest of my stations. :eek: So I'm bascially wondering if I should use a omni-directional antenna. Something like the Winegard MS-1000. Anyone think that will work? I'm within 15 miles of most of the station tranmitters that I would like to watch...except the one on Lookout. What is that Fox? But I think that is a fairly strong trasmitter so I might not have to worry about it too much.

Any thoughts on the subject? Oh and my zip is 80218 in case anyone is wondering.

Thank you all,

MB

santellavision

12-14-05, 08:41 AM

justinto

12-14-05, 12:33 PM

Welcome MB,

First, the transmitters for NBC, CBS, PBS6 are on Republic Plaza, ABC is on their roof at Speer & Lincoln, WB & Fox are on Lookout. And KBDI12 is on Squaw Mt. (But no HD, so who cares) I would recommend a Channelmaster 3021 and put it outside. It has a bit wider pattern than a Yagi type.

I can only get NBC and sometimes PBS6 on my antenna. Is it because CBS's signal is not strong enough from the Plaza? If so, does anyone know when they will increase their signal like that of NBC which I get quite stongly?

jcardona

12-14-05, 12:34 PM

I noticed that NBC is showing the Broncos game on Saturday (Dish guide). Is this just a rebroadcast of the ESPN show? Will it be in HD and will the ESPNHD be blacked out?

dr_mal

12-14-05, 12:35 PM

I can only get NBC and sometimes PBS6 on my antenna. Is it because CBS's signal is not strong enough from the Plaza? If so, does anyone know when they will increase their signal like that of NBC which I get quite stongly?
We're pretty sure that the signal levels for all the RP stations is the same, and is the maximum allowed by Denver County.

They will increase their signal strength when their new tower gets built on Lookout Mountain. Unfortunately, an activist judge is holding the tower construction hostage until next June (!) when he decides whether or not to lift his temporary injunction.

LXIX

12-14-05, 01:04 PM

I noticed that NBC is showing the Broncos game on Saturday (Dish guide). Is this just a rebroadcast of the ESPN show? Will it be in HD and will the ESPNHD be blacked out?

Last year, Don Perez said that ESPN would not allow them to transmit the HD feed. I just sent an email to Mark Cornetta (KUSA GM and President) to ask if the game would be in HD this year. Perhaps if we all drop him a line, he can make the HD feed happen? His email address is mark.cornetta@9news.com .

-Matt

LXIX

12-14-05, 01:45 PM

mark Cornetta has already sent me a reply... No. It appears we will only get an upconvert of the NTSC 4:3 feed. :confused:

TotallyPreWired

12-14-05, 01:53 PM

We're pretty sure that the signal levels for all the RP stations is the same, and is the maximum allowed by Denver County.
They may all use the same rated amplifiers, however when combined with their antennas, their ERP's vary from 10.9 - 13.8.

KCNC's ERP is 11.0.

justinto it may be the radiation pattern from KCNC's antenna that is causing you problems.
....jc

jcardona

12-14-05, 01:57 PM

mark Cornetta has already sent me a reply... No. It appears we will only get an upconvert of the NTSC 4:3 feed. :confused:

Will we still be able to watch it on ESPNHD?

TotallyPreWired

12-14-05, 02:03 PM

Will we still be able to watch it on ESPNHD?
Absolutely!
....jc

RonAuger

12-14-05, 02:34 PM

I didn't realize KWGN-DT (WB) was starting to show ST:Enterpirse episodes. Will they be in HD?!

santellavision

12-14-05, 02:40 PM

justinto it may be the radiation pattern from KCNC's antenna that is causing you problems.
....jcDon't use the word 'radiation'. sCARE will mis-quote you somewhere and turn it into something really bad.

markdl

12-14-05, 02:47 PM

I didn't realize KWGN-DT (WB) was starting to show ST:Enterpirse episodes. Will they be in HD?!

They haven't been yet.

Couch Patato

12-14-05, 02:47 PM

I didn't realize KWGN-DT (WB) was starting to show ST:Enterpirse episodes. Will they be in HD?!

So far they have not been.:(

santellavision

12-14-05, 02:50 PM

You guys post at the exact same time! Geeks! (Just kiddin' I love anything space related) ;)

TotallyPreWired

12-14-05, 03:02 PM

Don't use the word 'radiation'. sCARE will mis-quote you somewhere and turn it into something really bad.
As always you are correct. Here's a version for sCARE advocates:

A transmitter is like a giant snow making machine. It creates billions of microscopic snowballs. These tiny snowballs are sent out from the transmitter in defined patterns. Those within the range of these patterns have the possibility of receiving the transmitted 'signals'(snowballs). To truly receive a transmitted 'signal' these microscopic snowballs must attach themselves to your antenna. A failure to attach means no signal. Very good antennas act like snowball magnets. Any snowball that gets within it's range is drawn toward it. Once a snowball has attached to your antenna you receive the transmitted signal, and the snowball melts away harmlessly.

So, hopefully this explanation of the process will eliminate any fears that you may have.

Smuuth

12-14-05, 03:25 PM

mark Cornetta has already sent me a reply... No. It appears we will only get an upconvert of the NTSC 4:3 feed. :confused:I sent him an email requesting it anyway. Maybe if enough of us request it, they will consider the good will worth it.

GeorgeM

12-14-05, 03:40 PM

Well I've had my Echostar 6000 IRD for about 4 years. It has been a great receiver. I have used it as a secondary IRD for the last couple of years. It just gave up on me.

If any of you who have updated to the latest DVR's have an old 6000 laying around they would like to get rid of, please let know. Don't need the remote or manual.

George M

TotallyPreWired

12-14-05, 03:41 PM

I sent him an email requesting it anyway. Maybe if enough of us request it, they will consider the good will worth it.
I doubt that ESPN wants any competition for their HD broadcast. I think that it's great that KUSA got ESPN to allow them to show their analog broadcast, but I doubt that KUSA gets more than that. Now if KUSA were an ABC affiliate, I could see it happening.
....jc

santellavision

12-14-05, 03:41 PM

They may all use the same rated amplifiers, however when combined with their antennas, their ERP's vary from 10.9 - 13.8.

KCNC's ERP is 11.0.

justinto it may be the radiation pattern from KCNC's antenna that is causing you problems.
....jcActually, here's more the way they would present it at a public hearing...All the stations are spewing-out deadly, cancer-causing radiation to the entire state of Colorado from their current, super-antenna farm, high atop the money-hungry, mega-corporate owned Republic Plaza. Their combined super-transmitters vary the radiation from 10.9 million to 13.8 million times the allowed exposure of current broadcasting levels allowed by the Swiss Sudo-Standards Technical Institute.

KCNC's ERP is at 11.0 million times. Which is equal to the grusome death of 700 children a minute who are anywhere in the state. And contrary to the reports from some amature local video enthusiasts, there is no 'shadowing' of the destruction from this killer radiation.

Dr. Inow Sqat, PhD, MD, DDS, AC/DC has published his results on the dangers of transmitting from any building that is silver. His findings revealed, "It is ten million times more dangerous to broadcast from a silver building than a blue building".

So, Mr. thejustinto, it definitely is the radiation pattern from KCNC's 'Death-star ' antenna that is causing you problems and KILLING YOU!!!!!