:D

Awesome.

For those who would like to know, I've added a new feature to RabbitEars, though you'll miss it if you're not looking for it! Under Technical Data, I now display the antenna polarization, if available. So if you see:

1987' 460 kW ND (H)

Then you know that the antenna is horizontally polarized. Similarly, an (E) means it's elliptical.

I sincerely doubt you'll see any (V) vertical stations.

EDIT: Heh, I just stumbled on it; you might also rarely see (C) circular polarization.

- Trip


Vertical is used by LPs usually (running two way antennas cut for their channel; cheaper that way)....full service TV stations run horizontal OR CP (Elliptical is just another word for Circular..they are used interchangably)...
IIRC, Part 73 requires Horizontal but allows CP on full power/service stations.

I think we are discussing semantics.

Field strength of an FM station is measured in the horizontal plane hence power from a circular or elliptical antenna in the vertical plane doesn't count (well it will 20db down in theory).

The other restriction I can find is a station can't run more power vertically than horizontally.


FS of an FM station is measured according to its antenna...either horizontal or vertical depending on whether it has a horizontal component........the power in the vertical plane DOES count in noncomm matters. IF a Non Comm is licensed for Vertical only, then how does it measure horizontal FS since there is none?? :cool:

To mile stones in one day! A link from the Washington Post. Which I followed and found a page with whole bunch of us from AVS on!

And post 3000....

I looked in the FCC info and they don't list power except in the hori-slantal plane. This probably goes back to the old FM "trick" of running double the power circular but being 100% legal in the horizontal (or is it slantal?) plane.


No "trick" about it...you obviously dont know antenna fundamentals or radiation characteristics of a CP antenna (or the old Horiz and Vertical models of the 1970s!)..A CP antenna always splits ERP between planes....thus a two bay CP antenna has gain in any LINEAR mode of 0db...
but 3db in the CP mode...(but few if any listeners run CP antennas! Pity, for multipath, etc could be reduced/eliminated vs. a normal vertical whip on a car....sure would look funky though ;)

Vertical is used by LPs usually (running two way antennas cut for their channel; cheaper that way)....full service TV stations run horizontal OR CP (Elliptical is just another word for Circular..they are used interchangably)...
IIRC, Part 73 requires Horizontal or CP on full power/service stations.

I always took circular to mean the horizontal and vertical were the same power, whereas elliptical meant there was a vertical component weaker than the analog component. Or something. Is that inaccurate?

- Trip

I always took circular to mean the horizontal and vertical were the same power, whereas elliptical meant there was a vertical component weaker than the analog component. Or something. Is that inaccurate?

- Trip

That is right Trip.

An ellipse and circle are not the same thing, except in the special case of the of when an ellipse's two foci converge into a single focus or center.

In an EM wave you could look at say just the E-plane. Circular the x and y (vertical or horizontal) are equal power. If you have a stronger horizontal than vertical then it's an ellipse.

So technically even if the horizontal and vertical are equal it's still elliptical polarization where x and y diameters of the ellipse are equal.

..you obviously dont know antenna fundamentals or radiation characteristics ........

Sorry dude, I try and remain peaceful and nice in forums. When I am wrong I admit I am wrong if you have seen my posts.

But telling someone what they do or don't know over a period of three posts in a row starts looking personal.

If I were to want to flame back I could say you don't under geometry that a circle is a special case of an ellipse and not the same thing.

I always took circular to mean the horizontal and vertical were the same power, whereas elliptical meant there was a vertical component weaker than the analog component. Or something. Is that inaccurate?

- Trip

I understand them to be spiral (non-linear) polarizations, vs. linear polarization, such as slant polarization, horizontal or vertical. Ellipitcal, not being a circular spiral, will be more squashed in the vertical plane.

At least that is how I understand it, but I don't know if (typical) FM radio is horizontal + vertical or circular.

Wikipedia might give some insight...unless the waves pass right through:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_of_classical_electromagnetic_waves

Non-comm stations in 88 and 89 have to protect TV6 operations by not running horizontal power that interferes. You'll find a lot of vertical only stations because of this ... and in recent filings you'll find non-comm FMs that have huge vertical patterns and limited horizontal patterns to protect a TV6 operation.
Huh??? If a station runs 50 kW vertical and 50 kW horizontal, that is 100 kW, and is double the power.

I've never heard of a station having to transmit vertical-only, or "limited horizontal patterns." Can you cite any instances?

Vertical is used by LPs usually (running two way antennas cut for their channel; cheaper that way)....full service TV stations run horizontal OR CP (Elliptical is just another word for Circular..they are used interchangably)...
IIRC, Part 73 requires Horizontal or CP on full power/service stations.
Doc, how is whatever you mentioned cheaper? And elliptical is not circular.
I always took circular to mean the horizontal and vertical were the same power, whereas elliptical meant there was a vertical component weaker than the analog component. Or something. Is that inaccurate?

- Trip

Circular polarization is not just equal H and V. Both are linear. For circular polarization, the phase needs to be shifted 90 degrees between polarizations. The choice of which is shifted determines whether it is right- or left-hand circular polarization.

I understand them to be spiral (non-linear) polarizations, vs. linear polarization, such as slant polarization, horizontal or vertical. Ellipitcal, not being a circular spiral, will be more squashed in the vertical plane.

At least that is how I understand it, but I don't know if (typical) FM radio is horizontal + vertical or circular.

There is so much bad science in this thread...

I've never heard of a station having to transmit vertical-only, or "limited horizontal patterns." Can you cite any instances?

http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WRIH
http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WPEB
http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WELH
http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WFHL
http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WJJJ
http://www.recnet.com/cdbs/fmq.php?facid=&call=WFHL

Circular polarization is not just equal H and V. Both are linear. For circular polarization, the phase needs to be shifted 90 degrees between polarizations. The choice of which is shifted determines whether it is right- or left-hand circular polarization.

You know, I knew that, and yet didn't think of it (I'm sick today).

I got mixed up because there was a station that I had been told was doing 1000 kW horizontal and 250 kW vertical (or something along those lines) that was listed as elliptical, or so said the FCC. So I don't know, maybe the person telling me was mistaken or something.

There is so much bad science in this thread...

That's what it's here for, to learn things from those who know better. :D

- Trip

Non-comm stations in 88 and 89 have to protect TV6 operations by not running horizontal power that interferes. You'll find a lot of vertical only stations because of this ... and in recent filings you'll find non-comm FMs that have huge vertical patterns and limited horizontal patterns to protect a TV6 operation.Huh??? If a station runs 50 kW vertical and 50 kW horizontal, that is 100 kW, and is double the power.We are talking about effective radiated power. Running circular allows a station to hit vertical antennas (typically cars) and horizontal antennas (typically homes) but doesn't double the ERP of the station.

For example, look at this nice website the FCC has set up explaining FM Station Classes:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/fmclasses.html
Also look at 47CFR73.211, the code that regulates maximum and minimum power for a class of FM station.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=47&PART=73&SECTION=211&TYPE=TEXT
Note that the ERP stated isn't horizontal or vertical ... now (your homework) go lookup some stations in your area on the FCC's FM query:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/fmq.html
Note the class of the station and the ERP being used by that station.

Note that these are reference maximums. A Class B 50.0 kW / 150 meters may be built as 25.0 kW / 214 meters or 12.5 kW / 300 meters. These are effectively the same output.
There is a nice calculator for that function on the FCC website here:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/fmpower.html

It will cost you about twice the TPO (transmitter power output) to transmit both vertical and horizontal or a circular signal, but it isn't considered twice the ERP. You're not turning the station into a 100 kW station (at 150 meters) by transmitting using a circular antenna. It is still just 50 kW.

I've never heard of a station having to transmit vertical-only, or "limited horizontal patterns." Can you cite any instances?Here is a specific example: WEDM Indianapolis
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=41402
Note the zeros in the horizontal column. A vertical only station.
Check for non-comms in your area on the FMQ ... you should find them.

For a station with limited horizontal check out WSPM:
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=93486

Such stations exist.

Vertical is used by LPs usually (running two way antennas cut for their channel; cheaper that way)....full service TV stations run horizontal OR CP (Elliptical is just another word for Circular..they are used interchangably)...
IIRC, Part 73 requires Horizontal or CP on full power/service stations.Doc, how is whatever you mentioned cheaper? And elliptical is not circular.It is cheaper to not have to power both polarities and cheaper to buy a "two way antenna" cut for the frequency than engineering and building a circular antenna (a much more complex design).

There is so much bad science in this thread...Thanks for contributing yours! :)

At least that is how I understand it, but I don't know if (typical) FM radio is horizontal + vertical or circular.

FM is almost always elliptical or slant, primarily because of car antennas which are vertically polarized. FCC rules require the energy in the horizontal plane to be equal or greater. A lot of stations run 1/3 to 1/2 energy in the vertical for vehicle reception.
(circular being a special case of elliptical)

I worked for a car manufacturer, and we certainly tried to remind radio stations of our need, and suggested half the power. However, it must be said the antenna-on-glass patterns which are becoming popular are horizontally polarized fm elements.

Note that if the horizontal and vertical E-wave components are in phase, it is simple linear polarization on a slant. Elliptical or circular polarization requires 90° phase shift between horizontal and vertical components; thus wideband, circularly polarized receiving antennas are entirely impractical.

I think the confusion in circular/elliptical polarization is coming from the way the FCC is specifying it; i.e., horizontal power and vertical power. Coming from the ham radio world, we look at it in a different way, circular polarization with an ellipticity spec. An ellipticity of 3 db would mean the power in the short axis of the ellipse is 3 db less than the power in the long axis and does not necessarily apply to the horizontal and vertical planes. The FCC's way of saying 3dB ellipticity for example is 100KW in the horizontal plane and 50KW in the vertical plane.

To me this is confusing because it makes it sound like the station is transmitting 150KW. That's not the case. It is transmitting 100KW elliptically polarized with the long axis of the ellipse oriented horizontal.

Another type of polarization is what I think of as cross polarization, where, using the example above, 100KW is applied to a horizontal radiator and 50KW is applied to a vertical radiator. In this case the total power would be 150KW.... but that's not elliptical polarization.

The way I think of elliptical polarization is that each RF cycle rotates through 360 degrees of polarization with varying amplitude. So for channel 14 the polarization rotates 360 degrees some 470 million times per second, clockwise or counter clockwise.

Let's look at a circular polarized transmitter for a moment, and a horizontal receiving antenna, again using the 100KW transmitter. For every RF cycle there is an instant in time when the wave is exactly in phase with the receive antenna and instant where it is 90 degrees out of phase. The result of this is as though the transmitter power is only 50KW, hence the 3dB loss you here about when using a uni-polarized antenna to receive a circular polarized signal. To receive the maximum signal from the 100KW transmitter, you need a circular polarized receive antenna.

When you have an elliptically polarized transmitting antenna and a uni-polarized receiving antenna, it's more complicated to calculate the actual loss, a formula I can't lay my hands on ATTM. Maybe one of the more math oriented types out there has that.

My personal experience using vertical and circular polarized antennas at 146 MHz and 450MHz is that circular polarization is a big advantage with non line-of-sight paths and no advantage at all for true line-of-sight paths when the transmitter is vertically polarized. TV stations using elliptical polarization are doing their own version of this trying to overcome some of the disadvantage of horizontal transmit to horizontal receive for their non line-of-sight viewers at the expense of losing a few dB for line-of-sight viewers. A circular polarized receive antenna would likely be a few dB better with an elliptically polarized transmit antenna, and in some circumstances, many dB better with a uni-polarized transmit antenna.

The ideal situation is circular to circular because it doesn't matter how the transmit wave gets rotated by obstructions along the path as the wave is constantly rotating anyway.

Note that if the horizontal and vertical E-wave components are in phase, it is simple linear polarization on a slant. Elliptical or circular polarization requires 90° phase shift between horizontal and vertical components; thus wideband, circularly polarized receiving antennas are entirely impractical.

Help me understand what you're saying. Isn't elliptical polarization generated by using a phase shift other than 90 degrees when we're talking about crossed elements? Perfect 90 degree phase shift is impossible except at one frequency and further constrained by the ability to make a perfect phase shift line.

Then there's the helix antenna. Wade makes a UHF TV helix. I had my doubts that it was possible to make a circular polarized antenna for such a wide band but I ran the numbers from the ARRL antenna book and indeed it is possible to make a helix to cover channels 14 - 51 and have the antenna radiate in the axial mode over that frequency range. For a helix 75" in length, I calculated a gain of 14.6 dBic at channel 14 to 19.8dBic at channel 51. The impedance would vary from 112 ohms to 167 ohms.

Calaveras:
What does it mean to say a circularly polarized signal has a 100kW horizontal component? That is specifying a linear polarization component of a circularly polarized signal. But to receive all the energy in a circularly polarized signal you need a circularly polarized receive antenna, a linearly polarized antenna would receive only half the signal energy. To me it doesn't make sense to say a circularly polarized 100kW transmission has a 100kW horizontal component when a horizontally polarized receive antenna would see the same signal as a 50kW horizontal linearly polarized transmission.

In non-circular elliptical polarized signals the received signal of a crossed antenna aligned with the major and minor axis still has 90 degree phase shift between the components but different magnitudes corresponding to the axis lengths.

FM is almost always elliptical or slant, primarily because of car antennas which are vertically polarized. FCC rules require the energy in the horizontal plane to be equal or greater. A lot of stations run 1/3 to 1/2 energy in the vertical for vehicle reception.
(circular being a special case of elliptical)So ... are the stations linked in this thread licensed with vertical only broadcast violating FCC rules? I think not.
Please link the regulation you claim exists.

What does it mean to say a circularly polarized signal has a 100kW horizontal component? That is specifying a linear polarization component of a circularly polarized signal. But to receive all the energy in a circularly polarized signal you need a circularly polarized receive antenna, a linearly polarized antenna would receive only half the signal energy. To me it doesn't make sense to say a circularly polarized 100kW transmission has a 100kW horizontal component when a horizontally polarized receive antenna would see the same signal as a 50kW horizontal linearly polarized transmission.

I don't know the history of why it's specified as it is. I think using the ellipicity spec removes the confusion factor. :) To me it would be a lot less confusing to say the transmitter is 100KW elliptically polarized with an ellipticity of 3 dB and with the ellipse long axis oriented horizontal. Beyond that you just have to know that there will be some loss when the polarization of the receive and transmit antennas don't match.

In non-circular elliptical polarized signals the received signal of a crossed antenna aligned with the major and minor axis still has 90 degree phase shift between the components but different magnitudes corresponding to the axis lengths.

I answered before you got your edit in.

I looked in the ARRL Antenna Book and they talk about using crossed yagis fed 90 degrees out of phase to make a circular polarized antenna. I was thinking of in-phase fed before. We're getting pretty OT here. :)

FM stations are licensed for power in the horizontal and vertical planes. It isn't that they are running double power, most are running full power in each plane.

Non-comm stations in 88 and 89 have to protect TV6 operations by not running horizontal power that interferes. You'll find a lot of vertical only stations because of this ... and in recent filings you'll find non-comm FMs that have huge vertical patterns and limited horizontal patterns to protect a TV6 operation.


Just thought I'd throw this in to muddy things up a bit.

FWIW:

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=13618

Note that WNPR-FM has no vertical component. And, it's been living on the hairy edge of WLNE-TV6's Grade B contour for 20 years. :D

I somehow doubt any of you have been Chief Engineer of FM stations...much less in a Top 10 market...I have; several times.......(and of AMs as well)

100KW ERP CP is a 100KW in the vertical and 100kw in the Horiz plane if the antenna pattern is pure and clean...sometmes down tilt is involved and there is 100KW at the point where the signal hits the ground, not at the horizon where it would be with no downtilt...(97KW there)

MOST FM antennas will do elliptical because they are sidemounted...thus distorting the CP pattern; especially the horizontal because of the cross section of the tower; the vertical usually see a 3db or more increase in its forward lobe. BTW here is the actual wording from Part 73 for commercial stations (this does NOT include the Noncomm exceptions):
--------------------------------------------
Sec. 73.316 FM antenna systems.

(a) It shall be standard to employ horizontal polarization; however,
circular or elliptical polarization may be employed if desired.
Clockwise or counterclockwise rotation may be used. The supplemental
vertically polarized effective radiated power required for circular or
elliptical polarization shall in no event exceed the effective radiated
power authorized.
-----------------------------------------

As you can see, elliptical and circular is considered the same thing in the rules (and basically it is).

So ... are the stations linked in this thread licensed with vertical only broadcast violating FCC rules? I think not.
Please link the regulation you claim exists.


He is wrong wrong wrong (well, being WAY too broad)......Noncomms in the 88-92 range are often required to be vertical only in a TV6 area...in fact I live 15 miles from one on 88.1....vertical only.....because of a local 6 (KFDM). FM stations in the 92-108 or non reserved band must have a horizontal component....but NOT ALL FMs fall under that criteria ;)

I somehow doubt any of you have been Chief Engineer of FM stations...much less in a Top 10 market...I have; several times.......(and of AMs as well)You can be anyone you want on the internet ... :D

I don't claim to be the president of Clear Channel or the night janitor at Walmart. So you'll just have to read what I write and decide if it is worth reading on it's own merit. :)

You can be anyone you want on the internet ... :D

I don't claim to be the president of Clear Channel or the night janitor at Walmart. So you'll just have to read what I write and decide if it is worth reading on it's own merit. :)


I can back it up with my signature on the station logs...as chief operator :)

I can back it up with my signature on the station logs...as chief operator :)I don't care. Just post good stuff ... people will decide your value based on what you say, not on a job title.

You could probably say the same about some of the management you have worked under. :eek:

Just thought I'd throw this in to muddy things up a bit.

FWIW:

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=13618

Note that WNPR-FM has no vertical component. And, it's been living on the hairy edge of WLNE-TV6's Grade B contour for 20 years. :D

And to steer this back to the regularly scheduled OT mode, this reminds me of the case of a junker Iowa FM in the 80s that a friend of mine was relocating for its owner. 93 kW, 200' HAAT (maybe) Horizontal only. It was lucky to be able to cover only its own county with car radios with vertical whips.

Anyway, in most areas in the state, the other co-channel station dominated. My friend was visiting his folks in southern Iowa about midway bbtwn the two stations. Of course, his station was MIA on his car radio.

Mind you, I was/still am just an educated layman, but I said, "Let me bend your antenna over a bit." W/ some horizontal plane, there came his station.

It's really hard to imagine horizontal only FM in this day and age. We guesstimated that Junker FM still had a little bit of V-pol, after all, those old halo bays were several inches thick, or apx .05 wavelength tall.

DTV Transition
Relatively Smooth Digital Transition Creates Optimism for June
421 Stations Made the Switch, With Few Difficulties Reported By Andrew Krukowski, TV Week February 22, 2009 7:50 PM

For television executives, the early rush by 421 stations to switch to digital-only signals last week was an I-told-you-so moment, even if their public statements were more gracious.

Despite a push for postponement, a majority of stations that made the transition to digital-only signals on Tuesday had a relatively problem-free move.

For TVWeek's comprehensive coverage of the digital television transition, visit the DTV Switch Navigator page.

On the other side of the ledger, politicians and bureaucrats who supported pushing back the official switch to June 12 from its original Feb. 17 date took the relative ease of the transition as an opportunity to claim the delay had been needed.

Both station executives and government officials now will prepare for the final transition in June, which will usher in a new era in TV broadcasting.

With questions resolved over how to manage the DTV switch, executives will be left to figure out how to use the subchannels they gain with the activation of digital signals.

The uncertainty comes as a downturn in local advertising and a once-in-a-generation recession drives some station groups to bankruptcy and has all outlets cutting costs.

The National Association of Broadcasters said the stations that made the transition Tuesday received an average of 50 to 200 calls from viewers looking for DTV advice. However, stations in some markets, including Oklahoma City and Cincinnati, reported nearly 1,000 calls from viewers.

The relative smoothness of the transition confirmed the opinions of general managers who said they believed their expensive and time-consuming public education efforts had adequately prepared viewers.

“Early reports indicate the DTV transition by 421 stations on Tuesday was successful, which is good news for both viewers and TV stations,” Jonathan Collegio, NAB’s VP for the digital television transition, said in a statement. “According to the FCC and stations that made the switch, the volume of viewer calls received following the transition paled in comparison to the 12.4 million over-the-air-only households that were in affected markets.”

That interpretation of the Feb. 17 fallout buttresses the position of station managers who opposed the delay, citing massive unbudgeted electricity costs to run analog and digital signals concurrently, as well as the potential for audience confusion.

The failure of a DTV disaster to materialize last week makes it appear that the government underestimated audience knowledge and preparedness about the switch. That bodes well for June, particularly if the coupon program funding consumer purchases of analog-to-digital converter boxes gets back off the ground before June.

“I’ve got to believe it’ll get easier [to transition in June],” said KGTV General Manager Jeff Block. “The biggest issue is probably in the last week the folks that contacted us who needed converter boxes and didn’t have their coupons.”

Advocacy groups who supported the switch said the dearth of massive problems last week justified the delay.

“We’re glad the Congress acted swiftly to put a better plan for the DTV switch, a phased transition,” said Consumers Union policy analyst Joel Kelsey. “Thanks to tougher FCC rules, in many or most early markets only one or two stations switched, which means that consumers were inconvenienced, rather than completely disconnected.”

In San Diego, the 27th largest market in the country, Mr. Block said his station fielded 125 calls on Wednesday, out of 1.66 million households in the area.

“Most of them needed guidance on how to scan, and most of them were solved through walking them through how to re-scan,” he said, referring to the process of setting up the converter boxes that allow digital signals to play on analog sets.

Other stations reported similar results.

In the 84th largest market of Springfield, Ill., WRSP General Manager Peter O’Brien called last week’s challenges “minimal,” with the station logging only a dozen calls from consumers needing help.

Some markets did report a deluge of phone calls. In Oklahoma City, stations handled hundreds of calls.

John Rossi, general manager of the city’s KOCB and KOKH, said his stations tackled around 900 calls over Tuesday and Wednesday.

He said a majority of the calls dealt with re-scanning issues, after the market’s CBS and PBS affiliates switched their analog signal to digital midday.

A partial explanation for the rise in calls in Oklahoma City is that the CBS and PBS affiliates in the area “flash cut” their analog signals, Mr. Rossi said.

At 1 p.m. on Tuesday, the CBS and PBS stations stopped transmitting their analog signals, then moved their digital signals to the channels of the former analog signals. Viewers had to re-scan for channels with their converter boxes in order to receive the digital signals on the new channels, which led to phone calls seeking advice.

The Cincinnati Enquirer reported that the market’s MyNetworkTV affiliate, WSTR-TV, received 1,000 calls from viewers. The MyNet affiliate was the only station to transition in Cincinnati on Tuesday.

(Ira Teinowitz contributed to this report.)

http://www.tvweek.com/news/2009/02/relatively_smooth_digital_tran.php

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA. Changed station WHMB-DT's DTV channel from 16 to 20. Terminated the Proceeding. (Dkt No. RM-11440, 08-122). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 02/19/2009 by R&O. (DA No. 09-411). MB DA-09-411A1.doc DA-09-411A1.pdf DA-09-411A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), WACO, TEXAS. Dismissed the Petition for Rulemaking to change station KWKT-DT's DTV channel from 44 to 25 withdrawn at request of Petitioner. Terminated the Proceeding. (Dkt No. 08-233, RM-11505). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 02/17/2009 by ORDER. (DA No. 09-409). MB DA-09-409A1.doc DA-09-409A1.pdf DA-09-409A1.txt

Wow, this place should be an educational learning experience.

Grating comments are what you put up with at work to keep you job.

People come here for enjoyment and education.

I would strongly suggest using terms that personally attack other posters or comments they don't know what they are talking about only makes a poster look more like a bully than the expert.

There are plenty of ways to correct someone's post.

Constructive corrections are what we need.

We don't need phrases that start flame wars with degrading comments.

The other side of the coin is if I am wrong or someone is wrong they need to correct and thank the poster that set them straight. That is learning.

Flaming doesn't have to be cussing at each other. It can be much more subtle in the exchanges of who is the expert and who is not. Same for anyone that posts a lot of bad facts but never admits they had something wrong in their concepts.

Hence I strongly suggest we stick to learning dialogue and no one having to prove who is the expert and who doesn't have a clue.

After all at some point back in all our lives we didn't have a clue about anything.

Onward and upward.

Thanks for your time.

Piggie :@)

He is wrong wrong wrong (well, being WAY too broad)......Noncomms in the 88-92 range are often required to be vertical only in a TV6 area...in fact I live 15 miles from one on 88.1....vertical only.....because of a local 6 (KFDM). FM stations in the 92-108 or non reserved band must have a horizontal component....but NOT ALL FMs fall under that criteria ;)

Admittedly, I forgot about the special rules for non-commercial stations. Sorry.

For a commercial station, the authorized power is the horizontal, and the vertical power may not exceed it. Thanks for finding the rule as I was having trouble finding it.

As a car receiver guy, not a broadcaster, my interest was encouraging stations to have as large a vertical component as possible (and legal).

For a commercial station, the authorized power is the horizontal, and the vertical power may not exceed it. Thanks for finding the rule as I was having trouble finding it.I see no rule posted, just an opinion that you now agree with. It would be nice to see the rule.

I see no rule posted, just an opinion that you now agree with. It would be nice to see the rule.

Yeah, tell the judge the Code of Federal Regulations is just some opinion. Good luck with that:
http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/73-316-antenna-systems-19854368
47 CFR 73.316 - FM antenna systems.
Code of Federal Regulations - Title 47: Telecommunication (December 2005)
Text:
TITLE 47 - TELECOMMUNICATION

CHAPTER I - FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

SUBCHAPTER C - BROADCAST RADIO SERVICES

PART 73 - RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

subpart b - FM BROADCAST STATIONS

73.316 - FM antenna systems.

(a) It shall be standard to employ horizontal polarization; however, circular or elliptical polarization may be employed if desired.

Clockwise or counterclockwise rotation may be used. The supplemental vertically polarized effective radiated power required for circular or elliptical polarization shall in no event exceed the effective radiated power authorized.

Yeah, tell the judge the Code of Federal Regulations is just some opinion. Good luck with that:
http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/73-316-antenna-systems-19854368Thank you for FINALLY providing a link to a rule. :rolleyes:

(Although that rule would NOT prohibit a vertical only or vertical dominant antenna. It would only prevent a vertical signal greater than the maximum ERP permitted. And while it is "standard" to employ horizontal polarization and vertical is not mentioned, it is not specifically banned.)

Thank you for FINALLY providing a link to a rule. :rolleyes:

(Although that rule would NOT prohibit a vertical only or vertical dominant antenna. It would only prevent a vertical signal greater than the maximum ERP permitted. And while it is "standard" to employ horizontal polarization and vertical is not mentioned, it is not specifically banned.)

Wrong. Your horizontal erp is the basis of allocation. The vertical may not exceed it (I don't know where the special rules are for non commercials below 92 MHz, but I think the people who have mentioned them are correct).
http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/73-310-technical-definitions-19854333
47 CFR 73.310 - FM technical definitions.
Code of Federal Regulations - Title 47: Telecommunication (December 2005)

Effective radiated power. The term effective radiated power means the product of the antenna power (transmitter output power less transmission line loss) times: (1) The antenna power gain, or (2) the antenna field gain squared. Where circular or elliptical polarization is employed, the term effective radiated power is applied separately to the horizontal and vertical components of radiation. For allocation purposes, the effective radiated power authorized is the horizontally polarized component of radiation only.

Based on this definition, (there must be special rules elsewhere) if your horizontal is zero, your allocation is zero, and the vertical may not exceed it.

If you have chapter and verse saying vertically dominant is OK, please provide it.

Alright folks, let's keep it civil. I like all of you guys and don't like all the fighting. :D

The rule JohnS-MI noted is pretty clear about commercial FM stations (those on 92-108). For anyone who doesn't know, there's a table of allocations for commercial FM stations (those above 92 MHz) only, and below 92 MHz is non-commercial and licensed based on interference levels and whatnot.

- Trip

Alright folks, let's keep it civil. I like all of you guys and don't like all the fighting. :D


It makes me sorry that I asked the question, especially since this is the channel change thread and not an FM thread after all.

It makes me sorry that I asked the question, especially since this is the channel change thread and not an FM thread after all.With apologies ... at least we FINALLY got an accurate link to what JohnS-MI was claiming, even though he was dead wrong on the non-comms. Sorry it took so many posts.

Back to topic ... which should be the channel change requests (and not the transition?). Seems we have an awful lot of drift in this thread. :)

I see no rule posted, just an opinion that you now agree with. It would be nice to see the rule.

I posted the rule from the FCC web site...was not an opinion:
The link to the FCC R&Rs is:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.html

35+ years in broadcast, I dont misquote the FCC......:D

Wrong. Your horizontal erp is the basis of allocation. The vertical may not exceed it (I don't know where the special rules are for non commercials below 92 MHz, but I think the people who have mentioned them are correct).
http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/73-310-technical-definitions-19854333


Based on this definition, (there must be special rules elsewhere) if your horizontal is zero, your allocation is zero, and the vertical may not exceed it.

If you have chapter and verse saying vertically dominant is OK, please provide it.


May I suggest you look at Part 73 and search the following subpart:

Subpart C -- Noncommercial Educational FM Broadcast Stations

Specifically: Sec. 73.525 TV Channel 6 protection.

There, you will find the requirements for the vertical use near Channel 6 stations.

Dr. Touchtone, please, civil. :D

With apologies ... at least we FINALLY got an accurate link to what JohnS-MI was claiming, even though he was dead wrong on the non-comms. Sorry it took so many posts.

Back to topic ... which should be the channel change requests (and not the transition?). Seems we have an awful lot of drift in this thread. :)

Some would disagree, but I find this thread to be good for discussing all kinds of FCC-related matters when there's a shortage of allocations to discuss, as has happened now that the FCC is focusing fully on the transition and less so on making sure the stations have enough power once they transition.

- Trip

Alright folks, let's keep it civil. I like all of you guys and don't like all the fighting. :D

The rule JohnS-MI noted is pretty clear about commercial FM stations (those on 92-108). For anyone who doesn't know, there's a table of allocations for commercial FM stations (those above 92 MHz) only, and below 92 MHz is non-commercial and licensed based on interference levels and whatnot.

- Trip

AND stations above 92 MHz are spaced on the allocations....if a stations is allocated a Class C, it is PROTECTED for the Class C limits EVEN if it is not at Class C max height or ERP (IE the station may be at 1400ft but protected as if it were at 2000ft) .....YET, in the noncomm band, stations are spaced on ACTUAL contour operational levels....thus you find stations spaced closer for the same class in the non comm band than in the commercial band....That's the way the rules are...(and it causes consulting engineers all sorts of headaches! :)

Dr. Touchtone, please, civil. :D


- Trip

Ok, edited it down and even gave the link to the rules..cant miss! :)

If you're asking whether I know how much vertical power is going into it, it's not in the FCC database as far as I can tell. I looked for it because I wanted to include it, but I couldn't find a field in my database that had that information.


Yes, there's only one field in the tv_eng_data table for ERP for TV stations. (effective_erp) The fm_eng_data table has two fields, one for horizontal and one for vertical. (I forget the field names)

As you found, for TV there is a field (ant_mode if I remember properly) which indicates whether it's horizontal, elliptical, or circular. But it only lists a number for the horizontal component.

My (strong) suspicion is that (for TV) any amount of vertical-plane power is permitted as long as it's equal to or less than the horizontal-plane power.

In any case, circular and elliptical TV stations are fairly rare. (as opposed to FM stations, the vast majority of which are circular)

I posted the rule from the FCC web site...was not an opinion:
The link to the FCC R&Rs is:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.htmlAlready taken care of in the thread, but thanks for throwing in your two bits. :)
(BTW: Throwing the entire rulebook as an answer is arrogant.)
35+ years in broadcast, I dont misquote the FCC......:DI can believe that. You have the social skills of an engineer. :eek:

Anyways ... Thanks to John for eventually finding the reference for his initial claim and to Trip an everyone else who has put up with this mess. We'll find the topic soon ... even if it isn't the one in the thread title.

I can believe that. You have the social skills of an engineer. :eek:


You say that like it's a bad thing !

As one who relates that way also ....

Enough. Or else.

DTV Transition
Republicans Reps Say Feb. 17 Switch Was Relatively Painless
Some of those who opposed date-change praise smooth transition on original date
By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 2/24/2009 11:29:39 AM MT

A hearing on reauthorizing the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act briefly turned into a shout-out for the relative ease of the DTV transition.

During a hearing in the House Communications, Technology and Internet Subcommittee, a number of the Republicans who opposed moving the DTV date pointed out how smoothly the transition had gone for the hundreds of stations who went ahead and pulled the plug on analog on the original Feb. 17 date.

Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), himself a former broadcaster, said that his office had received no calls on the issue-"and we are in the phone book," he said.

He said that the GM's in his district got "a couple hundred calls" mostly about plugging in boxes or re-scanning for channels. He suggested that, given that relative dearth of outcry, Congress should consider rethinking the $90 million it was planning to spend on DTV outreach, or the $650 million in the economic stimulus package that is going to jump-start the DTV-to-analog converter box coupon program.

Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois said he thought his office had only gotten one complaint, and applauded the relative smoothness of the transition.

Adding his voice to the DTV mutual admiration society was Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska. He said that the two stations out of five in his district that made the switch Feb. 17 received about 550 calls, mostly about set-up and channel scanning, and only 10 calls from people who had not converter box or coupons. He said all those folks were able to get a converter within a day.

No Democrats on the committee expressed similar sentiments, however. Republicans in the House overwhelmingly opposed moving the date or setting aside millions for more education or coupons.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/179781-Republicans_Reps_Say_Feb_17_Switch_Was_Relatively_Painless.p hp

It still bothers me I totally agree with the Republicans on this issue, but dang it they had, have and got it right.

It still bothers me I totally agree with the Republicans on this issue, but dang it they had, have and got it right.

The thing that bothers me is the NAB who didnt come out with stronger wording on their objection to the delay......markets like 134-SETX (Beaumont area) still must maximize their DTV after they switch off their analogs...and that may take another six months! Meanwhile viewers to the north who are in the nulls of the current digital antennas sidemounted are screwed until that time....the faster the Digitals are up on top of the towers and maximized, the faster the viewers can get back to watching OTA...inbetween the time the analogs go off and the digitals maximize, the viewers will have NO OTA period...converter box or no..and this will put it right in the middle of hurricane season!! Not a good time along the Gulf Coast! Houston is ready since they have their digitals pretty well maxed or will flash cut back to their current analog channels at 2000ft....ehhh not a problem! But the markets around Houston are the losers thanks to the delay pushed through...and the consumer is the utlimate loser.....

The thing that bothers me is the NAB who didnt come out with stronger wording on their objection to the delay......markets like 134-SETX (Beaumont area) still must maximize their DTV after they switch off their analogs...and that may take another six months! Meanwhile viewers to the north who are in the nulls of the current digital antennas sidemounted are screwed until that time....the faster the Digitals are up on top of the towers and maximized, the faster the viewers can get back to watching OTA...inbetween the time the analogs go off and the digitals maximize, the viewers will have NO OTA period...converter box or no..and this will put it right in the middle of hurricane season!! Not a good time along the Gulf Coast! Houston is ready since they have their digitals pretty well maxed or will flash cut back to their current analog channels at 2000ft....ehhh not a problem! But the markets around Houston are the losers thanks to the delay pushed through...and the consumer is the utlimate loser.....

I am one of the consumers that has been messed up by this. I have a Analog 9 that is staying on the air. We have a digital 9 (WNBW)locally that must protect the old analog 9 (WFTV). A good part of their main market is also in the null of the protection. Their ERP in there non nulled is 4.9KW, but most of the city of Gainesville, their main market for WNBW is only getting about 2 KW of signal. Where I live I only see a 860 watt ERP station. Most of there main lobe is out into the country side.

They can't take out the null and go omni until WFTV goes silent on analog 9. Then no telling how long it will be before they have the budget to get someone up the tower to take out the null. I don't think they can do it from the ground. The chief told me it's a 4 panel array and the panel facing me is out of phase.

In the mean time I don't have NBC, unless I want to watch WESH analog.

It was all political, in that honey moon, with zero thought. As much brains went into this as a crowd cheering an actor or football team.

DTV Notes
DTV Oversight Hearing On House Docket
Next up is March 12 hearing on universal service reform
By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 2/24/2009 4:51:15 PM MT

Rep. Rick Boucher, chairman of the House Communications, Tech & Internet Subcommittee, said Tuesday that he would hold an oversight hearing on the DTV transition in the spring, "well before" the new June 12 hard date for pulling the plug on analog signals.

The committee's next hearing will be of great interest to the cable industry, however. Boucher said next up will be a
March 12 hearing on universal service reform. Boucher said he hoped to have a bill reforming universal service done in
the next several months.

Boucher said the reason DTV was not "the most immediate" thing on the agenda was that he wanted to wait until the $650 in the economic stimulus package to jump start the converter box coupon program had been freed up and the program "reenergized."

The National Telecommuniations & Information Administration can't start taking millions of coupon requests off the
waiting list until the Office of Management and Budget gives it the OK, which is supposed to happen any time.

Boucher announced that hearing after Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) suggested the committee should look into the need for spending that $650 million, including $90 million for outreach and education, given the fact that the switch by
hundreds of stations on the original date of Feb. 17 had gone so smoothly.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/179817-DTV_Oversight_Hearing_On_House_Docket.php

We have another PRM.

Entravision-owned KDCU-DT, a construction permit for DT-46 in Derby/Wichita, KS, has requested to move to channel 31. It's the latest chapter in an upcoming game of musical chairs in the market.

KWCH-DT 19 is moving to 12.

KWCH bought CW affiliate KSCW and decided to use the channel 19 stuff for it so the stations can be co-located. So they got their post-transition digital moved from 31 to 19.

So now, KDCU wants buy the channel 31 gear that KSCW is abandoning, so they want to relocate their digital to channel 31.

Anyone confused yet? :D

- Trip

I have a question that relates to channel changing. I'm sure Trip or someone else will know the answer.

Is it legal for two different stations to use different sub-channels of the same transmitter? I know this has happened on a temporary basis but I'm wondering if it can be done on a permanent basis?

The reason I'm asking this is because I want to drop an e-mail to KAZV, a low power station out of Modesto, complaining that their plan to put a low power digital transmitter on channel 36 is going to result in mutual obliteration of them and KICU at my location. KAZV was originally going to be digital on their analog channel 14 until KTNC received approval for a full power station on Mt. Diablo on channel 14 which will completely blanket their coverage area.

The problem is that KAZV really has no place to go. But I have an idea for them if it's legal. The next town over from Modesto is Ceres, the home of KBSV with a new digital low power transmitter on channel 15. It's a very clear channel out in the valley because 15 can't be used in the Bay Area. KBSV and KAZV have transmitter sites very close together. Both stations have a single 480i channel. At least I'm assuming KAZV is not going hi-def. It would seem like an ideal situation for KAZV to rent a sub-channel from KBSV if the parties could come to an agreement. Seems like the cost would be less for both stations and KAZV would get a much larger coverage area and their interference problems would be gone.

I've attached an image showing the two coverage areas properly scaled on the same FCC map.

Chuck

I have a question that relates to channel changing. I'm sure Trip or someone else will know the answer.

Is it legal for two different stations to use different sub-channels of the same transmitter? I know this has happened on a temporary basis but I'm wondering if it can be done on a permanent basis?

Chuck
I think it's legal. Isn't KEMS on KICU (36-2) permanent?

Ron

I have a question that relates to channel changing. I'm sure Trip or someone else will know the answer.

Is it legal for two different stations to use different sub-channels of the same transmitter? I know this has happened on a temporary basis but I'm wondering if it can be done on a permanent basis?

The reason I'm asking this is because I want to drop an e-mail to KAZV, a low power station out of Modesto, complaining that their plan to put a low power digital transmitter on channel 36 is going to result in mutual obliteration of them and KICU at my location. KAZV was originally going to be digital on their analog channel 14 until KTNC received approval for a full power station on Mt. Diablo on channel 14 which will completely blanket their coverage area.

The problem is that KAZV really has no place to go. But I have an idea for them if it's legal. The next town over from Modesto is Ceres, the home of KBSV with a new digital low power transmitter on channel 15. It's a very clear channel out in the valley because 15 can't be used in the Bay Area. KBSV and KAZV have transmitter sites very close together. Both stations have a single 480i channel. At least I'm assuming KAZV is not going hi-def. It would seem like an ideal situation for KAZV to rent a sub-channel from KBSV if the parties could come to an agreement. Seems like the cost would be less for both stations and KAZV would get a much larger coverage area and their interference problems would be gone.

I've attached an image showing the two coverage areas properly scaled on the same FCC map.

Chuck

In my market - we have one fullpower Spanish station, (that is doing a single 480i channel), who is carrying a digital of another Spanish station (LP) on a second channel - so I guess it's legal.

I think it's legal. Isn't KEMS on KICU (36-2) permanent?

Ron

In the LA market we have KXLA, KJLA and KVMD all carrying each other on subchannels.

In most cases, it would be legal. However KBSV is licensed as a non-commercial station. I don't know what the regulations are about subchannels on non-commercial allotment.

- Trip

Thanks guys! I wanted to make sure I didn't sound like a complete idiot when I make that suggestion to them. They probably will ignore me but it's worth a try.

I forgot about 36.2 although the FCC doesn't show anything for KEMS so I don't know what's going there.

Chuck

I am one of the consumers that has been messed up by this. I have a Analog 9 that is staying on the air. We have a digital 9 (WNBW)locally that must protect the old analog 9 (WFTV). A good part of their main market is also in the null of the protection. Their ERP in there non nulled is 4.9KW, but most of the city of Gainesville, their main market for WNBW is only getting about 2 KW of signal. Where I live I only see a 860 watt ERP station. Most of there main lobe is out into the country side.

They can't take out the null and go omni until WFTV goes silent on analog 9. Then no telling how long it will be before they have the budget to get someone up the tower to take out the null. I don't think they can do it from the ground. The chief told me it's a 4 panel array and the panel facing me is out of phase.

In the mean time I don't have NBC, unless I want to watch WESH analog.

It was all political, in that honey moon, with zero thought. As much brains went into this as a crowd cheering an actor or football team.


They (WNBW) wont go omni anyway....they have a CP for directional that matches their analog signal......with nulls to the south.....but if they arent covering Gainesville NOW, that sucks.....You can look them up on the FCC web site and see their final coverage pattern....
Yep, this delay and let some go digital NOW was a total trainwreck!!! DUH!!!
(see we engineers do care about the viewers! :)

We have another PRM.

Entravision-owned KDCU-DT, a construction permit for DT-46 in Derby/Wichita, KS, has requested to move to channel 31. It's the latest chapter in an upcoming game of musical chairs in the market.

KWCH-DT 19 is moving to 12.

KWCH bought CW affiliate KSCW and decided to use the channel 19 stuff for it so the stations can be co-located. So they got their post-transition digital moved from 31 to 19.

So now, KDCU wants buy the channel 31 gear that KSCW is abandoning, so they want to relocate their digital to channel 31.

Anyone confused yet? :D

- Trip


I hate to admit it, but it all made sense!!! :eek:

We have lots of this in Bakersfield. KERO-DT RF 10 carries ABC on subchannel 1 which maps to 23-1. Their co-owned Azteca low power station is on subchannel 2 which maps to 42-2. KUVI-DT RF 55 carries MYTV on a subchannel which maps to 45-1. Their co-owned Univision low power station is on a subchannel which maps to 39-1 and their co-owned Telefutura low power station is on a subchannel which maps to 31-1. KBAK-DT RF 33 carries CBS on subchannel 1 which maps to 29-1 and their co-owned FOX low power station on subchannel 2 which maps to 58-2.

I don't think there's a legal issue, but network contracts may not allow one major network station to carry another network on a subchannel.

I don't think there's a legal issue, but network contracts may not allow one major network station to carry another network on a subchannel.There are a few subchannel is another network stations out there ... I don't believe the networks care as long as their programs are carried.

Is it legal for two different stations to use different sub-channels of the same transmitter? I know this has happened on a temporary basis but I'm wondering if it can be done on a permanent basis?
Chuck

I don't know how permanent it is, but KQED 9-1 from Sutro has KTEH on 9-2, while KTEH 54-1 from the South Bay has KQED on 54-2. KFSF 66-1 transmitting from Sutro has KDTV on 66-2. (They don't reciprocate. KFSF is not on 14-2.) Down in the Salinas-Monterey DMA KQET 25-1 has KTEH on 25-2 and KSMS 67-1 has low power KDJT analog on 67-2. (KDJT doesn't have digital and they haven't applied for it.)

Larry
SF

I don't think there's a legal issue, but network contracts may not allow one major network station to carry another network on a subchannel.
It's pretty common once you start getting into the 100+ DMAs that don't have enough full-power stations to cover all the networks. One of the best examples is the Sherman, TX/Ada, OK DMA. The DMA only has 2 full-power stations, and prior to digital, only CBS and NBC were available locally. Now thanks to DTV's multicasting abilities, KXII carries CBS HD on 12.1, MNT SD on 12.2, and Fox HD on 12.3. KTEN carries NBC HD on 10.1 and CW SD on 10.2.

I don't think there's a legal issue, but network contracts may not allow one major network station to carry another network on a subchannel.I cannot imagine why not. In some areas, in the past, two national networks shared an affiliate (one primary, the programming for which was aired in prime time, and the other secondary, the programming for which was aired at other times).

There are a few subchannel is another network stations out there ... I don't believe the networks care as long as their programs are carried.

Here in Gainesville both the CW and MyTV channels are only available as SD subchannels of other networks.

- Tom

DTV Notes
Converter Box Program Still Backed Up
NTIA still doesn't have money needed to free up growing waiting list
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 2/26/2009 7:53:33 AM MT

More than a third of TV stations have pulled the plug on full-power analog, and more could start to do so within the next two-and-a-half-weeks, but the coupon program remains backed up.

At press time, the National Telecommunications & Information Administration's DTV-to-analog converter box coupon program still did not have the money it needed to free up its growing waiting list-4.3 million applications at last count-though it was still looking for word to come any time.

"We still do not have access to the funding," said NTIA spokesman Bart Forbes. "There is nothing new to report at this time."

Just last week on C-SPAN's Communicators series, FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein said that the coupon program "is up and running again."

The program has been running, but at a snail's pace, with coupons sent out only when other coupons expire. NTIA can't start sending out the coupons en masse until it get's access to the $650 million set aside for that purpose in the economic stimulus package, and it can't get that access until the Office of Management and Budget gives it the go-ahead. The OMB press office had not returned several calls for comment on the status of that go-ahead.

Getting the waiting list cleared up was a driving force behind moving the DTV hard date from Feb. 17 to June 12.

President Barack Obama signed the bill into law on, appropriately enough, Feb. 17, with NTIA expecting OMB to sign off in about a week.

NTIA has said it will prioritize coupon requests for analog-only households if, once the money is freed up, there is any further slowdown in distribution due to the volume of requests. NTIA has said it will take two-three weeks to clear up the current backlog.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/179935-Converter_Box_Program_Still_Backed_Up.php

While I am not yet caught up on all the analog ends, I have uploaded an updated spreadsheet to RE.

# 1115: operating Post-Transition facilities
# 165: with maximized Construction Permits but otherwise ready (included above)
# 695: to end analog operations early (before 6/12/09)
# 554: have already ended (or will not commence) analog operations (included above)*

There are about 130 stations that I still need to confirm ended analog operations.

From the FCC Daily Digest:

WE2XXI ADAPTRUM, INC. 0460-EX-PL-2008
New experimental to operate in 174 – 216 MHz, 470 – 608 MHz and 614 – 698 MHz for testing of white space devices.
Mobile: Within State of CA

--------------------------------
Funny, I thought WSD were limited to UHF only....why are they getting experimental in the VHF range?? There goes any DX of DTV as we know it.

In the R&O adopted by FCC on Nov 4th on the White Space devices(see paragraphs 35~51), FCC decided to implement the WSD's on an unlicensed rather than licensed basis. I do not know if they are going to allow, or have yet developed any specific rules for any higher power Licensed White Space devices ---

However :

Section 15.707 "Permissible Channels of operation", (a) and (b) of The new rules for Unlicensed White space polluters(which go into effect march 19, 2009), now called "TVBDs" (TV Band devices) in FCC speak says :


(a) All TVBDs are permitted to operate in the frequency bands 512–608 MHz and 614–698 MHz, except that in the 13 metropolitan areas listed § 90.303(a) of this chapter and nearby areas where private land mobile services and commercial land mobile services are authorized by waiver, operation of TVBDs is prohibited on the first channel on each side of TV channel 37 (608–614MHz) that is available at all locations within the protection range of the coordinates of each such area as set forth in § 15.712(d). These channels will be listed in the TV bands database.

(b) Operation in the bands 54–60 MHz, 76–88 MHz, 174–216 MHz, and 470–512 MHz is permitted only for fixed TVBDs that communicate only with other fixed TVBDs.


More info on the rules and links to the Documents involved can be found in The white space threads in Technical area at AVSforum ....

Here in Gainesville both the CW and MyTV channels are only available as SD subchannels of other networks.

- Tom

Exactly, and maybe ironically, Fox owns MyNet but it's a sub channel on a CBS station here even though we have a FOX station without real programming on their sub channel.

From the FCC Daily Digest:

WE2XXI ADAPTRUM, INC. 0460-EX-PL-2008
New experimental to operate in 174 – 216 MHz, 470 – 608 MHz and 614 – 698 MHz for testing of white space devices.
Mobile: Within State of CA

--------------------------------
Funny, I thought WSD were limited to UHF only....why are they getting experimental in the VHF range?? There goes any DX of DTV as we know it.

I think this is as crazy as the Citzen's Band of the 1960s. Start with loose rules, go to no rules (unlicensed in this case).

Because how long will it take if white space takes off for devices to end up in the wrong areas on a channel that should be protected? No long I guess.

It could not only end DXing, but it could end fringe reception within a stations contour.

I wonder how long it will take before all this market regulated non-sense is put to rest? One time bomb after another keeps going off from previous administrations.

By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 2/26/2009 7:53:33 AM MT

More than a third of TV stations have pulled the plug on full-power analog, and more could start to do so within the next two-and-a-half-weeks, but the coupon program remains backed up.Actually no more shutdowns until April (unless some station snuck in a 30 day notice before the 20th and presses the legal issue). The rules changed (again).

We have another PRM.

Entravision-owned KDCU-DT, a construction permit for DT-46 in Derby/Wichita, KS, has requested to move to channel 31. It's the latest chapter in an upcoming game of musical chairs in the market.

KWCH-DT 19 is moving to 12.

KWCH bought CW affiliate KSCW and decided to use the channel 19 stuff for it so the stations can be co-located. So they got their post-transition digital moved from 31 to 19.

So now, KDCU wants buy the channel 31 gear that KSCW is abandoning, so they want to relocate their digital to channel 31.

Anyone confused yet? :D

- Trip
Makes perfect sense to me, and it will give KDCU a better facility than their DT-46 permit is for, including a top-mounted instead of side-mounted antenna.

Thank you, Trip, for keeping us up on what's happening.

TV Technology article about channel 6.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/75206

Ron

Thanks for that link, Dr1394. Very interesting. I especially liked this:

"We're in an area where there are a lot of mountains and the predictions indicate that we'll get better coverage as a V. Low-band signals tend to bend over the horizon."

Emphasis mine. Predictions mean nothing. Real world experience shows the predictions are crap.

Oh well, they'll learn the hard way.

- Trip

TV Technology article about channel 6.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/75206

Ron


I love how WRGB thinks they can break the rules with a vertical pol. FM signal on 87.75 (which is not an exact FM freq)...they wont hold a license for it and will get fined by the FCC for doing that.....DUH!!!

WRGB's Lass may have found a solution.

"We have a plan to continue operating on 87.7 after we go digital," he said. "We think that it's possible to operate with a vertically polarized analog FM audio carrier when we go back to ch. 6 for DTV. That signal will be horizontally polarized, of course, and there should be enough cross pol isolation to make it work."

Madness...

Also, that FCC map for WPVI is a joke. Low-VHF looks great on modeling software, but the real world is very different. WPVI is likely to lose many areas closer in, especially for current rabbit ear users. Low-VHF and rabbit ears don't mix, it's bad enough with a full low-bander.

"Our original allocation was for 3.81 kW ERP," Volpe said. "We went up as far as we could without causing interference problems—to 7.56 kW ERP. Right now I'm putting a shade under 4 kW from the transmitter into a standby antenna. When we make the switch to the main antenna I'll only need 1.7 kW. I'm not operating a transmitter; I'm running a hair dryer."

Just don't try running a hair dryer when you are trying to watch TV.

I love how WRGB thinks they can break the rules with a vertical pol. FM signal on 87.75 (which is not an exact FM freq)...they wont hold a license for it and will get fined by the FCC for doing that.....DUH!!!

From the article:


"We're really interested in proving this concept and are thinking of applying for an experimental license," Lass said.


Good luck with that, WRGB!

This is the very same situation Trip and I brought up in this very thread earlier this month.

Quote:
WRGB's Lass may have found a solution.

"We have a plan to continue operating on 87.7 after we go digital," he said. "We think that it's possible to operate with a vertically polarized analog FM audio carrier when we go back to ch. 6 for DTV. That signal will be horizontally polarized, of course, and there should be enough cross pol isolation to make it work."

Madness...

Also, that FCC map for WPVI is a joke. Low-VHF looks great on modeling software, but the real world is very different. WPVI is likely to lose many areas closer in, especially for current rabbit ear users. Low-VHF and rabbit ears don't mix, it's bad enough with a full low-bander.

Madness indeed.....not to mention illegal.....when they shut down analog, they no longer have the legal right to xmit any FM carrier on 87.75 period....
HOW STUPID can they be!!!!!

You know it might work if they are careful about the amount of power they run. I am sure the FCC could issue an experimental license for them to try it out. If it worked on channel 6, it would also work on any channel. TV sound only receivers are available in a few forms now. It might actually help in an occasional drop out situation to preserve sound reception. This has always been the most annoying aspect to short drop outs for me.
The trouble they might find is that people using using rabbitears might pick up both polarizations. This would make the digital reception difficult.
John

The trouble they might find is that people using using rabbitears might pick up both polarizations. This would make the digital reception difficult.
John

This is the big problem. Polarization shifts and antennas receiving both polarizations. In my last apartment, I was on the wrong side of the building, and had to receive my signals from a reflection off the hill out my window. It had a polarization shift that caused me to have to vertically polarize my antenna to eliminate dropouts.

If there had been some foreign invader in the vertical component, I would likely have gotten nothing.

This idea will not work.

- Trip

I had an analog channel 10 before Feb 17 that came with only slight snow. In a different direction I had a digital channel 10 that was solid about 75% of the time. When aimed at the digital 10 I could still hear the analog 10 audio on an FM receiver with a little noise. If this works the channel 6 audio should be OK since the receivers will not have the stronger analog video to deal with.
John

The idea of broadcasting a polarized audio only signal on 87.7 MHz is an uninteresting one, but I can see where it would result in fringe range viewers losing the digital lock or closer range viewers losing reception in the polarization bounce scenarios such as Trip posted. But if WRGB wants to test it, assuming the FCC will grant them an experimental license and the FCC might do just that, they should first get the DT 6 broadcast up and establish who can get it. Then try the experimental 87.7 MHz audio signal with public announcements so anyone who loses DT 6 reception can contact the station. Can't test this with just 1 or 2 different ATSC tuners and 1 or 2 antennas at only a couple of locations. So many variables here where, for example, some ATSC tuners may be ok, but other brands will choke with a FM signal buried in the ATSC broadcast.

However, what do people hear on a analog FM radio for the frequencies that fall into the DT 6 frequency range? Increase in white noise? Falcon_77's spreadsheet shows only ONE pre-transition DT 6 station, WDTV-DT CBS 5 in WV with a 0.1 kW DT 6 signal. But even that does not show up in FCC database. There are a few DT stations on VHF 5, but almost none on VHF 6. So there is very little real world experience with DT 6 broadcasting. So we (and the industry) really don't know how well WPVI-DT on 6 is going to work. Brief trial broadcasts late at night when the noise environment is lowest really don't prove much. June 13 will be an interesting day. :cool:

The FCC granted WNEP-DT's request to relocate from channel 49 to 50 today.

- Trip

FCC announces rules are now in effect allowing for distributed transmission systems (DTS)

Stations wishing to apply for such a system can now do so by filing for a single construction permit.

From the public notice:

"DTS transmitters will not be separately licensed, but will be part of a linked group that will be covered by one construction permit and license. Stations must request authority to construct DTS facilities by filing a single application that includes either (1) a main transmitter and one or more additional transmitters that will collectively use the DTS technology, or (2) two or more smaller DTS transmitters. In addition, a station may add to its DTS network of transmitters using a minor change application for a construction permit to change a licensed DTV facility, or for a modified construction permit to change a DTV facility authorized by a construction permit. Stations that received Special Temporary Authority to use DTS under the interim policy are reminded to obtain permanent authorization now that the final rules are in effect."

Source: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-528A1.pdf

I was wondering why we had seen so few DTS apps as yet.

However, the no cherry-picking provisions may greatly limit the potential of DTS. Considering how few channels are available for digital translators in major markets, DTS would probably be the preferred gap-fillers.

Also, I remember reading that digital translators have to prove that they cannot operate on 2-6 before they can use 52-59. Is that correct?

Not sure what cherry picking applies to. If the on channel DTS stuff works stations don't need to find another channel.
John

As I understand it, Cherry Picking means that stations can't just up DTS transmitters where they want to improve coverage. They need to cover the entire contour.

Is something going on with the FCC TV Query Database? I'm finding some records that have simply vanished, such as KSFV-CA and KDUH's licensed records. Those are the first two I've looked up tonight and they are both missing records.

Is something going on with the FCC TV Query Database? I'm finding some records that have simply vanished, such as KSFV-CA and KDUH's licensed records. Those are the first two I've looked up tonight and they are both missing records.

Same here. I put in call letters of one station. It didn't come up at all. Then I tried another station and the information popped up, but the information for the post transition channel is not with that station. I have no idea what is going on.

NashDigie signing off.

Not sure what cherry picking applies to. If the on channel DTS stuff works stations don't need to find another channel.
John

Well I guess if it worked, then all CBS for example could be on channel 20, NBC 22, etc.

Or it will create such a mulitipath mess, only receivers within 5 miles or less of a transmitter will receive a signal.

Talk about the difference in receiver differences. I have a Toshiba built in 2006 model that has a very mediocre receiver. My off brand, dissed and bad mouthed in my most forums Ölevia will lock digital at much higher noise and lower levels. I think 90% of it is not name brand, but the Ölevia was designed about 12 to 18 months later than the Toshiba? I don't really know. I do know I can watch some channels on the Ölevia that are trash on the Toshiba.

I am after having OTA up and running now over the last 2 years that ATSC was not a "finished" product. Some lab in the top of some ivory tower, where they didn't even know mulitpath or impulse noise and still don't understand those concepts.

Maybe I am on of lousy I want to rant modes. If so ignore this post :@)

This is the big problem. Polarization shifts and antennas receiving both polarizations. In my last apartment, I was on the wrong side of the building, and had to receive my signals from a reflection off the hill out my window. It had a polarization shift that caused me to have to vertically polarize my antenna to eliminate dropouts.

If there had been some foreign invader in the vertical component, I would likely have gotten nothing.

This idea will not work.

- Trip

Trip and all, doesn't this beg in a way to give FM more room?

As I understand it, Cherry Picking means that stations can't just up DTS transmitters where they want to improve coverage. They need to cover the entire contour.

Exactly. You can't just put in transmitters in the middle of the big cities in your market and leave the intervening rural areas unserved.

I don't have the document handy but as I recall, they were going to require that the coverage areas of all DTS transmitters touch. You couldn't have a three-transmitter DTS in Tennessee with one 500-watt rig in downtown Nashville, one in downtown Clarksville, and one in downtown Franklin - as there would be big gaps between their coverage areas.

Is something going on with the FCC TV Query Database? I'm finding some records that have simply vanished, such as KSFV-CA and KDUH's licensed records. Those are the first two I've looked up tonight and they are both missing records.
I noticed something was wrong with the FCC database earlier today when I searched for DT 6 stations for my post on digital DT 6. Doing a random search of some local stations, the post-transition DT allotments are missing for all the stations I looked at. Hope this gets fixed soon.

Same here. I put in call letters of one station. It didn't come up at all. Then I tried another station and the information popped up, but the information for the post transition channel is not with that station. I have no idea what is going on.

NashDigie signing off.

A couple of us noticed that this morning. K31IQ-D in Sterling, Colorado vanished. It was in the database on Thursday morning but it wasn't coming up on TV Query this morning.

The missing station showed up on a CDBS Application Search.

I'm going to wild-guess the missing stations disappeared from either the 'facility' or 'tv_eng_data' tables. (I'll find out in a couple of hours when I'm able to look at a downloaded copy of those tables)

Either that, or they put in some expiration dates & got them wrong.

I think the process terminated early in the update to the TV Query. It bases the update off the CDBS stuff, which I think is fine.

- Trip

I think the process terminated early in the update to the TV Query. It bases the update off the CDBS stuff, which I think is fine.

- Trip

I was lurking the Orlando Thread and went to look up WRDQ in TV Query and both their temp and permanent DTV records are missing. It only shows their analog, which now is just a nightlight.

"We're in an area where there are a lot of mountains and the predictions indicate that we'll get better coverage as a V. Low-band signals tend to bend over the horizon."

Emphasis mine. Predictions mean nothing. Real world experience shows the predictions are crap.


It's certianly been my real world experience, that indeed, lo-VHF signals will provide adequate reception in certian recieve locations where there are severe terrain obstructions(such as hills or mountains) involved when signals on higher frequencies do not.

So, I must say, I do not quite understand what you find wrong with that particular quote from the article ....

Now, do understaind I am not saying I think DTV operation of WRGB on channel 6 with their current 4.4KW ERP post-transition CP would be best. As I don't, but then again, I'd think they probably understand their situation better than I or anyone else here does ....


Oh well, they'll learn the hard way.


We'll see, but do note some of the info currently on WRGB Website at below link seems to suggest WRGB understands a bit about the issues with lo-VHF DTV operation. And, they also seem to be promoting to some extent the possibility of viewers "dropping cable" and using OTA as it involves the multicast services of several stations in their area, such that they do not seem to me to be one of those stations who really doesn't "care" about providing a useable OTA service other than as a means for carriage of their signal by cable/sat providers. "appearances" can be deceiving though of course :

http://www.cbs6albany.com/sections/dtv/


I have heard that Low Band is bad for DTV. Is that right?
Sometimes it is. Low band TV is more prone to electrical interference caused by electric mixers or similar products with motors that use brushes. The best way to avoid electrical interference is to mount your antenna on the roof, far away from any possible source of interference. Primarily in June, sporadic-E skip will cause distant channel 6 stations to interfere with WRGB. There are not many DTV stations on channel 6 and they will run less power than existing analog stations, so we expect the problem to be extremely small.

How do I find out if interference is caused by the power company?
Use your AM car radio to listen for loud buzzing. Tune to an unused frequency near the bottom of the dial such as 570 or 610. This is best done during the day when the distant stations cannot be heard. Drive up and down the street near your house. If you hear loud buzzing when you are close to a power pole, you have discovered power line interference.

What if the interference is caused by the power company?
The power company is required to repair lines when they interfere with TV or radio reception. You must call them directly. It may take several phone calls to get full attention. Here is a list of cases where the FCC responded after the local utility did not fix an electrical interference problem.

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/FCC_enforcement/FCC_Enforcement_Letters.html

It's certianly been my real world experience, that indeed, lo-VHF signals will provide adequate reception in certian recieve locations where there are severe terrain obstructions(such as hills or mountains) involved when signals on higher frequencies do not.

So, I must say, I do not quite understand what you find wrong with that particular quote from the article ....

The quote suggests they're relying on predictions which are known to be severely flawed to suggest that going against ALL conventional wisdom is a good idea. Predictions which do not take into account the increased noise floor.

I don't disagree that low-VHF provides excellent coverage--on analog. On digital, it just does not work. I could give you a laundry list of experiences and links to threads where others have similar experiences to me on this matter. I'm going on 6 years of not having access to a reliable digital signal on any PBS now, even after throwing hundreds of dollars at gear attempting to improve it.

I envy that gigantic VHF antenna I remember you showing me. :D

Now, do understaind I am not saying I think DTV operation of WRGB on channel 6 with their current 4.4KW ERP post-transition CP would be best. As I don't, but then again, I'd think they probably understand their situation better than I or anyone else here does ....

Of course, I understand what you're saying. However I don't think they understand it as well as they think they do.

Why do they think that they will succeed where basically every other station in the United States that has tried has failed? Low-VHF is impossible to receive on an indoor antenna, and even upper-VHF is tricky. If they decide to get into mobile DTV... they can't. (I laughed when WBRA said they wanted to give it a try on channel 3; I might be willing to carry around a huge whip on my HT but most people won't put up with it on their cell phones.) People will have to invest in massive low-VHF roof antennas to receive the signal, because that's the only way to get low-VHF signals; that or do without WRGB (and don't think some people won't).

What do people in apartments do? They don't get to put up roof antennas.

If WRGB wanted a VHF channel, they should have gone for channel 8. At least then they'd be on the same boat as WXXA/WNYT/WNYA.

- Trip

I sent a note to the FCC and they advised to have another look at the TV Query. While some of the missing records have returned, I am finding some records that are all 0 now for ERP and heights (KDUH-TV for instance). I sent them another note.

I think that WRGB is placing too much emphasis on the hope that they will be allowed to keep an analog FM signal on 87.7(5).

What will happen to WRGB's audio on 87.7 FM?

We hope that the FCC will allow us to continue to operate on 87.7. We are building a unique transmitter for 87.7 that can operate simultaneously with our DTV signal on channel 6. TV transmissions always use horizontal antennas. Our new 87.7 transmitter will be vertically polarized. The use of vertical polarization for 87.7 will allow reception of our audio in a car radio or any other FM radio with a whip type antenna.

I think I should save this webpage and check back with them in a few months, with comments like these:

I have looked on the Internet and discovered that WRGB will be running lower power than the other stations. Why is that?

Channel 6 works so much better than other channels that we don't need as much power. Right now WRGB analog runs less power than any other station and can be seen in more places.

4.64kW? Granted, on paper Low-VHF should need less power to cover the same area, but I don't remember those in the Lexington, KY area doing that well in areas that received less than 8kW with WDKY.

WRGB analog 6 is running at 93.3kW, at least when the FCC database is working. :eek:

It looks like WNYT (also in Albany, NY) is having some problems with running only 9.1kW on 12. from the latest Form 387:


FURTHER, WNYT'S REDUCED ANALOG POWER WILL GREATLY SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. FIRST, IT WILL HELP MINIMIZE THE CONTINUED ADJACENT CHANNEL INTERFERENCE TO WNYT'S CHANNEL 12 PRE-TRANSITION DIGITAL SIGNAL CAUSE BY WNYT'S CONTINUED ANALOG OPERATIONS, AND THEREBY ALLOW ADDITIONAL VIEWERS TO RECEIVE WNYT'S PRE-TRANSITION DIGITAL SIGNAL. SECOND, THE REDUCTION IN ANALOG POWER WILL HELP WNYT EXTEND THE LIFE OF ITS DAMAGED ANALOG TRANSMITTER SYSTEM, AND THEREBY PERMIT WNYT TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ANALOG SERVICE TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF ITS CURRENT ANALOG VIEWERS THROUGH THE NEW NATIONWIDE TRANSITION DEADLINE OF JUNE 12, 2009.

I wonder how many existing viewers of UHF WRGB/39 will be less than pleased when they move to 6. The delay may only serve to increase complaints, especially when the switch happens in June (when Low-VHF stations tend to go on "vacation") vs. February.

It may be less of an issue for viewers that hold onto analog 6 until the bitter end as they won't have known what they could have had.

I think that WRGB is placing too much emphasis on the hope that they will be allowed to keep an analog FM signal on 87.7(5).



I think I should save this webpage and check back with them in a few months, with comments like these:



4.64kW? Granted, on paper Low-VHF should need less power to cover the same area, but I don't remember those in the Lexington, KY area doing that well in areas that received less than 8kW with WDKY.

WRGB analog 6 is running at 93.3kW, at least when the FCC database is working. :eek:

Besides, IF they really wanted to be heard PROPERLY on a FM radio, it needs to be on 87.70 not 87.75 (+/-) as their CURRENT Aural is...AND at 75 kHz devation and not 25 kHz...but there again, the FCC rules will NOT allow ANALOG after the transition......that's why ALL analog is being terminated...IF they COULD run analog audio along with the DTV signal, dont you think ALL stations would be pushing for it?? (for IFB as well as consumer use on portable AM/FM/TV rcvrs??)....OH this is going to get interesting...

and WHY do the 6s think they deserve to KEEP their analog audio anyway???? just because the FM radios tuned down to them?? (they never should have in the 1st place!!!) 87.9 is the first FM channel, #200....but is never used except in ONE rare case....88.1, Channel 201 is the normal start of the FM band...107.9 is Channel 300 btw.

Predictions which do not take into account the increased noise floor.


Nor should they, because such an increase in noise is due to local RFI, which is specific to receive location involved, and is not present everywhere.

If your neighbor someday fires up a WSD on UHF channel you are using, and disrupts your reception, that's an increase in noise, not a change in a stations signal coverage ....


I envy that gigantic VHF antenna I remember you showing me. :D


I believe you are probably referring to a HF (For HAM use) antenna for 20,15 and 10 Meters (14,21,28 MHZ) I had up, not a VHF or TV antenna.

I did have a Winegard CH-5200 up for a while for VHF TV Dx'ing that was among the largest commercial broadband VHF antennas I'm aware of, which is still small compared to a HF Tri-bander. But, I only experimented with it/used it for about a month or so.

I use(and have used for about 4 years) a Winegard a PR5030 at 32 feet for VHF TV reception. it's about 10 feet long, about the same boom length as the XG91 I use for UHF. Here's some info on it (The specs say 5dBd gain on Channel 4) :

http://www.hdtvantennalabs.com/antennas/Winegard-PR-5030.html


I don't disagree that low-VHF provides excellent coverage--on analog. On digital, it just does not work.


Someone who hooked up antenna to his receiver, did an autoscan which found no channels might say "DTV doesn't work". Or, someone who can receive VHF stations but not UHF stations might say "UHF doesn't work" .... Would they be right?

I'm not going to argue with you about this, and I certianly understand why you and many on this forum have that opinion. And, I believe we've been through this all before.

Howeever, given *my* reception results of weak, distant lo-VHF DTV signal, and that some have had similar experiences, there is no way I could say, or agree that DTV on Lo-VHF "just does not work", or "does not provide excellent coverage". And I don't think it is known at this point for how many it would be likely to work for vs not work for in any particular situation, such as when large numbers of viewers in terrain obstructed locations are involved vs. say a UHF allocation .....

Attached below are screenshots as a bit of a demonstration of my reception of WDKY-DT 4, Danville(Lexington), KY -- They are 118 Miles distant - I'm about 60 miles outside their 28dBu predicted contour. Sorry about the quality, I took these with a digital camera, display used is CRT. One pic taken this afternoon during their 2PM EST TOH ID, another from last night around midnight, and a pic from around midnight of their analog on 56 for a bit of a comparision - XG91 for UHF is at 37 FT.

I think of WDKY-DT as a semi-local, not really a "dx" reception, although certianly changes in diffraction/refraction(and changes in "noise", such as regarding co-channel signals) has something to do with it. It's really pretty much as I expected from them(maybe a little better, actually), and quite similar to my reception of 100 KW Lexington FM WBUL on 98.1MHZ.

TVfool predicts -97.2dBm (tropo) for my location+antenna height for WDKY ..... It's almost allways the case that their signal moves my receivers "signal quality" meters to some extent. It's the station beyond the locals (all which are within 39 Miles, there are no stations between 39 and 65 miles distant) I see most often(much more often than any other more distant station), and often decode perfectly, often on a daily basis for hours on end, including when folks are switching on/off "hairdryers" or the oil burner or blower on the furnace is kicking off or on ....

I don't know if there has ever been a case in the 4 years since they began operating their current facility that they are not decodable for at least some short period daily, I don't know, as I don't monitor them continously.

This afternoon, I began monitoring WDKY-DT at about 1:50pm using Zenith HDV420 receiver. I think you have one of those as well, and it doesn't perform as well as say, a DTT900 I have that's currently in use in the laundry room. As is fairly common, the WDKY-DT signal is on average, no more than a few dB or so above threshold. It's a bit windy, cold, 29F, and cars are driving by(antenna is about 50 feet from road and from power lines/at same level as power lines, with a transformer also in nearly same direction) in direction antenna is aimed.

I haven't had it happen today, but sometimes a car drives by which has arc'ing going on in it's ignition system and I'll get a "dropout" on even stronger local Hi-VHF or even not exactly strong UHF signals, and obvious interference from it on analog stations(including weaker UHF). The oil burner and blower on my furnace also cause "RFI" to show up on weak VHF analog signals when they kick on and off, which it's done a couple of times during this period I've been monitoring WDKY today.

Anyway, It's 3:45pm as I type this paragraph, and there has not been a single "glitch" in decoding WDKY-DT since 12:50pm, unless there was one when I stepped out of the room a couple of times for a few minutes. Furthermore, while I have on occasion seen impulse noise cause an infrequent dropout for WDKY-DT when I'm receiving them, I can't say the problem is as bad(especially given the signal involved is usually just barely above threshold) as many folks seem to experience, nor does it seem to occur much, if any more frequntly than for a local on 10. I've also seen this issue happen for 24(my weakest UHF digital local), but somewhat less frequently.

Now, as I think you should know, I'm well aware of the problem issues with LO-VHF and DTV. And generally, I do not think it's likely Lo-VHF for DTV is a good idea for MOST stations, especially perhaps stations with a majority of their viewers being in urban, or even suburaban locations, or in cases when severe terrain obstructions aren't a particular issue of concern for most viewers within the coverage area.

Nevertheless, If I were to go solely by my "real world" experience(which I don't) concerning how well it works 118 miles from WDKY-DT(25KW ERP), I'd have to say DTV on lo-VHF seems to work VERY, very well .... Would I be "wrong"? Overall, probably, but not in this specific case, and I wonder what your opinon would be if your experience with WBRA was a successful one .......

While my results involve only one particular situation, which certianly doesn't prove anything --- Nevertheless, I think it's one interesting data point. And, there is no way after seeing with my own eyes how well it can work, that I could definitively say I think "lo-VHF doesn't work well" for DTV, or that I think a lo-VHF DTV station's coverage prediction should take "increased noise" from local RFI into account ... Now, that's not to say I think a lo-VHF station shouldn't consider increasing power to help a bit with that issue, as where possible, generally I think that would often be a good idea, and I think the power limits FCC has set in most cases for lo-VHF DTV could be higher ....

While there have been some earlier field tests/studies regarding suitablity(or lack of it) for lo-VHF for DTV, I haven't seen anything comprehensive yet, and it's certianly something I'd be interested in seeing. I don't think I can base my overall opinion on the suitablity of Lo-VHF for DTV for any particular station or circumstance on my results with it, or the results of others reports (successful or unsuccesful) on an internet forum ... I have thought for some time WDKY's situation would be an excellent one for extensive field testing of reception on Lo-VHF DTV, given their ERP, and that portions of their coverage areas are rural, and quite "terrain challenged", and other portions are relatively flat, as well as urban and suburban ....



I could give you a laundry list of experiences and links to threads where others have similar experiences to me on this matter. I'm going on 6 years of not having access to a reliable digital signal on any PBS now, even after throwing hundreds of dollars at gear attempting to improve it.


I'm familiar with many of those reports, including the old WBBM threads .... typically, I think you hear more from folks who are having problems rather than folks who are not having problems.

And there are many who experience issues with DTV reception on higher frequencies as well. Follows is one example. At my location, due to various issues, I have to get a antenna with a high degree of directivity outdoors, and higher than 30 Feet above ground, otherwise severe dynamic multipath issues (and apparently, fading issues involving Receiver AGC) occur which ONLY are a problem for 3 stations (13 miles away) on channels 50,51,58.

I'm not talking about just a "dropout" every now and then, under certian conditions, I'm talking about only being able to decode for a few seconds every minute or so, although, the newer receivers(such as with 6th generation LG chipset) do a much better job with this issue than older receivers, it's still a significant problem.

What happens is easily seen on a analog on 45 transmitting from same location -- Horrible dynamic ghosting as the wind blows the tree limbs around/etc. It isn't an issue at all for reception(even with simple indoor antenna) for DTV Stations on lower frequencies(ch 18,30,41), or analogs on lower frequencies(2,7,16,22,26) transmitting from the same location.

It's a problem, because I use/want to use a 2nd antenna setup(with seperate feedline+A/B switch before receiver) to receive those stations from that direction, so I don't have to use rotor for them on my main antenna setup, and, I do not have room on mast to put the 2nd antenna setup above 30 feet. So, I can't get it higher than about 28 feet without erecting another tower, or replacing the current one I use for TV antennas with a higher tower, which isn't going to happen because of the distance to power lines and where the tower is/has to be would mean much higher and the thing could fall on the lines in a disaster ....

And, I'm not going to mess with doing that, either, instead, I just "live with it", and just typically don't watch those stations when the problem is occuring .... unless, in certain cases the programming is of particular interest and not available on other stations in another market(the market I'm actually "in", for which the stations are actually more distant), in which case on occasion I use the rotor -- No problem with this whatsoever with the XG91 at 37 Feet ... at 28 feet though is another story entirely ...

But, you don't see me saying I don't think higher UHF frequencies are "any good" for DTV, even though that's been my experience given the particular circumstances involved, unless I get a "huge UHF" antenna up outdoors above 30 feet ..... Should I whine and complain and groan about how (as is likely) I wouldn't be having this problem if the stations on 50+51 would move to lower frequencies(58 will be moving to 16 post transition, though, and chances are It will work fine), such as VHF -- I'm SURE I'd rather even have WDTN digital on their analog allocation of 2 than on 50 due to this issue, and you would not believe the amount of time and effort I've spend and everything I've tried to get something that works for them with antenna lower than 28 feet in air ... indoors, outdoors, H-stack of a couple of Yagi's, CM4228 or 4 bay vs. 25 element yagi , moving antenna down side of tower 6" at a time, trying a different location on a 20ft pole temporarily at different spots around the house/yard/etc .....

That sort of thing(DTV reception problems on UHF) isn't "uncommon", either. Just because I see a lot of folks having problems with lo-VHF DTV reception(or hi-VHF for that matter) who post about it on forums such as these does not mean there are not a lot of folks who don't have issues.

Frankly, although I have done so on occasion, I don't typically "jump in" and provide my results with lo-VHF DTV reception because given the overexaggeration of the problem issues involved with it here, I have no reason to want to "jump into the snake pit" so to speak, and for the most part, I could care less WHAT channel stations decide to use .... I also suspect it's likely many who read it won't believe it, but that doesn't really matter, as I know it's true ...

Also, if you look "hard enough", even on this forum you will find success stories for lo-VHF DTV reception. Somewhat recently I recall seeing a couple in one of your local threads regarding WBRA, and another I think you are familiar with is kycubsfan situation in E KY ....


Why do they think that they will succeed where basically every other station in the United States that has tried has failed?


Every other station which has operated on lo-VHF has "failed"? Really? How have they failed ?

There are a few stations which have been operating on lo-VHF for some time, which have decided to continue operations on lo-VHF post-transition. Besides WBRA, KOTA is another example I can think of.


Low-VHF is impossible to receive on an indoor antenna, and even upper-VHF is tricky.


Really? I can stick a pair of rabbit ears near a 2nd story window, and can receive a upper VHF DTV local(32 miles away) just fine with it. Near a window facing the towers are the only spots in my house I can get decent digital ,or somewhat passable(well not really, except perhaps for really small screens)analog reception. But, Obviously, for me, that sort of thing is not going to work well for WDKY-DT.

I also believe I've read some succesful reports of WDKY-DT reception with simple indoor antennas in the Lexington thread.

Certianly though, RFI being picked up by antenna from electrical wiring/nearby applicances can be a mess with antenna indoors on VHF, lo-VHF particularly, perhaps. I certainly have that problem trying to use an antenna "in the attic" or in certain other spots in my own house regarding analog VHF reception.


People will have to invest in massive low-VHF roof antennas to receive the signal, because that's the only way to get low-VHF signals;


Massive? I don't think my VHF antenna(PR5030) is "massive", and I suspect many within a stations' coverage area would do just fine with smaller antennas than that, such as typical, relatively inexpensive small~medium sized VHF/UHF combos - Such as RS VU90, CM3016/etc.


that or do without WRGB (and don't think some people won't).


I suspect a LOT of people who decide to use OTA, including in the settop antenna crowd will just "live with" whatever is found via an "autoscan" for channels. And in a lot of cases, they're going to be missing many channels, including UHF stations ......

Others of course, who have issues with receiving stations in their area, whom aren't interested(or can't from their apartment) in outdoor antennas, or professional antenna installations if they don't want/don't know/can't do it themselves, who knows, perhaps many others will just "get cable" I suppose ...


What do people in apartments do? They don't get to put up roof antennas.


The planning factors for DTV reception specify outdoor antennas -- It's great when indoor antennas work for folks, but our system for DTV in U.S. (or analog for that matter) was not really designed, nor specifically intended for use with indoor antennas.

Anyway, a viable OTA solution for apartment dwellers is a MATV system. They're still used in some cases (see AntaltMike's posts), but were more common before cable/sat took over as the primary means most receive local TV stations ...

4.64kW? Granted, on paper Low-VHF should need less power to cover the same area, but I don't remember those in the Lexington, KY area doing that well in areas that received less than 8kW with WDKY.


I'm assuming you are referring to WDKY-DT's Old STA. They went to 26.4KW ERP, with a new stick/different location(used by analog+digital) 4 Years ago. Specifically 1/30/05 around 10pm, I think I was the first or among the first to recieve them via their new full power operation. See the posts in lexington thread at the time, at first they were doing testing sending random data - a big null packet stream in other words ....

If it still shows up at TVquery (whenever TVquery gets straigtened out), check out the Directional pattern for the WDKY-DT's 7 or was it 7.5KW STA ... "less than" 7.5KW meant as little as 1.5 WATTS or so towards areas of Lexington. I don't have it handy currently, but as I recall, I think most if not all of the population of Lexington Mtro area was getting less than 200 watts or so squirted their way .... The main lobe was towards the COL (Danville, KY), and was the only direction they squirted 7.5 KW towards .....

I'm only aware of 2 DTV viewers who ever received them with the STA, one of those was a Dx'er in Lexington(with the largest delhi-jerrold broadband VHF antenna 40 feet up or so) in or near the biggest null, and only had a couple of watts squirted his way from them, the other was AVSforum member HDTVChallenged ....

In the years when they were running their STA, I did on a couple of occasions see my DTV receivers "signal meter" move(but I didn't achieve a lock), and indicate a DTV signal on 4 from the South, but on those occasions it was impossible to say whether it was via short E-skip or tropo, (or whether it was from WMAZ or WDKY) ....

One thing I've found to be interesting as far as receiving somewhat distant stations is concerned is the difference between analog and digital from the same transmitter location. The Walnut Grove transmitter site for the Sacramento/Stockton stations is 62 miles from me. There's a 1500 mountain/high hill range in between them and my home in San Francisco.

I've only been able to receive one analog VHF station from Walnut Grove using a 10 element high-VHF antenna, KOVR 13, and one UHF station, KTXL 40, using a CM4228. Both are very snowy. Sometimes there's color, sometimes not.

Along comes digital and I can receive several stations from the same transmitter site using the same antennas. At present all are on UHF - 21, 25, 35, 46, 53, 55, 61. KMAX 21 is solid 99% of the time and KQCA 46, KVIE 53 and KTXL 55 are often viewable for long periods of time. The others are there occasionally.

Can anyone explain why I do so much better receiving the digital stations than I have the analog?

On June 12 KVIE is moving to 9, KXTV is moving to 10 and KTXL is moving to 40. It's going to be interesting to see how well I get the two VHF channels. There is no hope of getting KTXL as there is now a low power station five miles away from us on 40.

Larry
SF

How is channel 5 working out for digital for KOBI in Medford Oregon? Not much info on the Medford local thread. The bosses at channel 5 in Nashville Tennessee should be very interested in how digital RF5 is working for another station.

One of my neighbors has a weed whacker that generates impulse noise that even makes UHF digital channels an unwatchable pixellated mess. Even way up on channel 55.

Can anyone explain why I do so much better receiving the digital stations than I have the analog?


Could be a lot of things involved I think, and I don't know the specifics for that situation(such as any nearby co-channel digitals that might be covering up/noising up some of the analogs/etc).

But generally and (very)non-technically, at least one of the issues that is probably involved regarding (depending on station facilities/ERP/Directional antenna pattern used for the stations your comparing), comparing analog vs. DTV signals transmitted from the same location on the same band/nearby frequencies is that It takes significantly more signal to acheive "non-snowy" analog reception than it does to achieve perfect DTV reception.

That's one of the reasons why when the centris study came out and they said things in the press about it like "Digital signals don't travel as far as analog", it sounded really, really silly to some of us ....

I'm assuming you are referring to WDKY-DT's Old STA. They went to 26.4KW ERP, with a new stick/different location(used by analog+digital) 4 Years ago.

I am referring to the 26.4kW facility. It is fairly directional and loses a fair amount in many areas to the West. It varies from 9% to 27% ERP from 220-320 degrees, which includes parts of Lexington and Danville.

I am referring to the 26.4kW facility. It is fairly directional and loses a fair amount in many areas to the West. It varies from 9% to 27% ERP from 220-320 degrees, which includes parts of Lexington and Danville.

Indeed, the biggest nulls(according to the DA pattern info on FCC site, if it actually matches the real world installation) are in that area. .374 relative field value at 230 and 310 degrees being the biggest nulls = 3.7KW ERP ... Which At most is about 8dB or so less than the main lobe (26.4KW ERP) ... Most folks would gain more signal than that by moving "rabbit ears" outdoors ...


but I don't remember those in the Lexington, KY area doing that well in areas that received less than 8kW with WDKY.


Perhaps you've seen some reports which I haven't, but to be honest, I've only heard a few reports from that area regarding WDKY reception which I'd call very useful, as many times, the type of antenna is used isn't given(or whether it's located indoors or outdoors) with the report, and it's difficult to know whether or not even a VHF antenna is being utilized .... OTOH, There was at least one report I recall from that area which reported good results with WDKY with a UHF 4 bay bowtie .....

Anyhow, I've never thought the VHF 4 allocation was a good idea for Lexington(nor 13 for WKYT for that matter), and still don't. And I think overall, it's good thing they're moving to 31 ...

Simply because, it is a all UHF analog market, and many of the OTA folks there have been using UHF Only antennas for quite some time .... Also, while they do have portions of their service area(especially some of the more "fringe" areas to the East and SE - and that's part of why I think it would have been a great place for lo-VHF field tests, given their ERP) which involve issues with Terrain obstructions, most of the population served is in an area that is relatively flat -- even quite flat in much of Lexington itself ....

Unfortunetly though, there are going to be some folks who are getting good reception from WDKY digital on 4(but not analog) from "in between the hills" in some of those terrain obstructed areas to the East/SE, which will likely not be able to acheive reliable reception of the DTV signal when they move to 31 (such as kycubsfan) ... The good news there is that unlike in other areas of that region(farther NE, where you have VHF's like WSAZ 3 Charleston/Huntington) there are probably very few of those folks who have "discovered" they can recieve a OTA DTV signal where they couldn't before, in some cases, it's probably even the ONLY receivable OTA signal .... In other cases, there are KET signals (such as from Hazard) they'll be able to receive, and/or WYMT Or WLJC ... And for that reason as well, perhaps it might be a good thing if they can get moved to 31 as soon as possible post-transition and after WKRC Cincinnati gets off 31 ...

Jeff,

Would you mind sharing your TV Fool plot? Analog WDKY seems to be weaker than it should be for Middletown (using a general plot it is at a -2.8 noise margin). It looks to be at least 20dB weaker than that.

Edit: oops, I used KY vs. OH. It shows -24.5dB as a noise margin for Middletown, OH.

edit : Oops, LOL -- I responded before I saw your "oops" ;) ... Oh well ... No problem ... figured I'd leave this so you could see my actual plot if you want ...

Jeff,

Would you mind sharing your TV Fool plot? Analog WDKY seems to be weaker than it should be for Middletown (using a general plot it is at a -2.8 noise margin). It looks to be at least 20dB weaker than that.

Maybe with about a 300 Foot tower, otherwise, Not quite sure what you mean, it generally shouldn't be "receiable" at all from Middletown -- Ohio, Not KY, that's near Louisville, I'm about 35 Miles North of Cincinnati, Ohio.

I plugged in 45042(Middletown Zip which I'm in), and didn't specify an antenna height and it's showing 'tropo' and -22.9 NM (-103.9 dBm) ... There are in fact stations which are co-channel to the Lexington stations to my SW(WKOI-DT 39/WLEX-DT 39) and S(W36DG Cincinnati, WTVQ 36 - Now off air).

Do note the pic I attached of analog 56 involved a bit of tropo scatter enancement. With no noticable enhancement involved, It's usually just popping up every now and then above the snow via normal everyday troposcatter, like other stations on "clean" channels within 200 Miles or so.

But, Sure. Current analog+digital TV fool posts attached for my exact antenna location and (UHF antenna) height. I'm not in Middletown, BTW, but it's as close as any other town. I'm in a hilly area(in a small, steep valley in fact, but it's somewhat open to the South and NE due to the way the stream course runs) about 6 Miles North of Middletown(not the part by I-75, downtown Middetown, near Great Miami River) Between Germantown+Middletown, about 1000FT south of Montgomery/Butler County line(I'm in Cincy DMA, but would be in Dayton DMA if I was about 1000FT north). "Poasttown Heights" may be on some maps, it's about 2 1/2 miles to my ESE, and is not actually a town ....

The bosses at channel 5 in Nashville Tennessee should be very interested in how digital RF5 is working for another station.

They have done late night tests of digital 5. I live about 60 miles east of Nashville, and when they did the tests, it was not a problem at all. Let me first say this. There is a hill right behind my house blocking Nashville and my outdoor vhf antenna is about 5 feet off the ground around the hill facing a clear shot towards Nashville. During the tests, I tried all I could think of electrically (light switches, computers, etc.) but it stayed solid at 100% on my tv's meter. The last test they did, I tried the plain old rabbit ears in my house, and for awhile I couldn't lock it in, but I didn't give up and in one spot, I got a lock and a picture popped in, and that was with a hill blocking Nashville. I believe that last test was at there maximized power of 22kw. That was my experience with digital 5.

NashDigie signing off.

About low band VHF digital, guess time will tell if the "contrarian" b-castrs were right, or if they'll be applying for new UHF channels. Hope that at least channel 6 can be cleared for radio.

Perusing the DTS rules, it brings up a glaring discrepancy in general for UHF coverage in zones II and III. While there are different mileage separations specified in 73.623...

UHF Channels:
Co-channel, DTV to DTV
Zone I: 196.3 km.
Zone II & III: 223.7 km.

the power limits for UHF stations from 73.622...

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ERP AND ANTENNA
HEIGHT FOR DTV STATIONS ON CHANNELS
14–59, ALL ZONES (my emphasis)
Antenna HAAT (meters) ERP (kW)
610 ............................................................ ......... 316
580 ............................................................ ......... 350
550 ............................................................ ......... 400
520 ............................................................ ......... 460
490 ............................................................ ......... 540
460 ............................................................ ......... 630
425 ............................................................ ......... 750
395 ............................................................ ......... 900
365 ............................................................ ......... 1000

...is the same for all zones.

So does 41 dB (50,90) not travel as far in Zone I as in II & III? I'd like to know the justification for this. U stations in II/III should be able to achieve the same max. coverage radii as the Vs, and they don't with these rules. Post-transition, I can't help but believe that there would be room for all U's in II and III to operate with 1000 kW/610 meters.

You type a lot. I love reading your posts but responding to them... wow. I'm going to have to pick and choose just because I want to get to bed at some point. :D

I hate giving so much first-hand knowledge rather than being able to cite things, but I just don't have access to that kind of data anywhere else. This is where I live and where my interests lie...

I did have a Winegard CH-5200 up for a while for VHF TV Dx'ing that was among the largest commercial broadband VHF antennas I'm aware of, which is still small compared to a HF Tri-bander. But, I only experimented with it/used it for about a month or so.

This might be what you showed me... I'm not certain anymore.

Someone who hooked up antenna to his receiver, did an autoscan which found no channels might say "DTV doesn't work". Or, someone who can receive VHF stations but not UHF stations might say "UHF doesn't work" .... Would they be right?

No. Given a proper setup of antenna, UHF works better than low-VHF. Granted, people in poor terrain conditions will receive better signal on low-VHF, but even then, thunderstorms will trash it as will local noise.

In my area, there are a non-zero number of people with VHF-only antennas. Their digital receivers will scan in WBRA-DT and none of the UHFs, but even for them WBRA-DT isn't watchable, breaking up on a regular basis.

I'm not going to argue with you about this, and I certianly understand why you and many on this forum have that opinion. And, I believe we've been through this all before.

Fair enough.

This afternoon, I began monitoring WDKY-DT at about 1:50pm using Zenith HDV420 receiver.

Anyway, It's 3:45pm as I type this paragraph, and there has not been a single "glitch" in decoding WDKY-DT since 12:50pm, unless there was one when I stepped out of the room a couple of times for a few minutes. Furthermore, while I have on occasion seen impulse noise cause an infrequent dropout for WDKY-DT when I'm receiving them, I can't say the problem is as bad(especially given the signal involved is usually just barely above threshold) as many folks seem to experience, nor does it seem to occur much, if any more frequntly than for a local on 10. I've also seen this issue happen for 24(my weakest UHF digital local), but somewhat less frequently.

In the winter, I can go for hours without a drop in the signal too assuming nobody touches an electrical device, but it proves nothing because in the summer e-skip and lightning destroy it. Unwatchable is the word I would use.

The fact that I'm one of three people I know personally in my county who can receive anything out of it, while at the same time many more are successfully watching UHF DTV, says more to me. Being in a rural area with low population density, I end up knowing lots of people over a large area. It's not just one data point.

WBRA-DT has a form letter that they kick back anytime someone sends a signal complaint. I heard they get at least 30 e-mails per day, and that was when I called last May. The signal is "non-existent" in Lynchburg I was told, a major population center.

And that's just one station, I'm not including WSKY or any other stations. While people may not complain, ask them what their channel lineup is and many times you'll find these stations missing.

I'm familiar with many of those reports, including the old WBBM threads .... typically, I think you hear more from folks who are having problems rather than folks who are not having problems.

Of course you do, but that doesn't mean that nobody's complaining. I don't hear daily about WBRA-DT on the Roanoke thread but I was told they were getting 30 e-mails per day 9 months ago. I've encountered plenty of people in my area who just assume it will be fixed after the digital transition takes place and aren't calling.

And there are many who experience issues with DTV reception on higher frequencies as well.

But, you don't see me saying I don't think higher UHF frequencies are "any good" for DTV, even though that's been my experience given the particular circumstances involved, unless I get a "huge UHF" antenna up outdoors above 30 feet ..... Should I whine and complain and groan about how (as is likely) I wouldn't be having this problem if the stations on 50+51 would move to lower frequencies(58 will be moving to 16 post transition, though, and chances are It will work fine), such as VHF -- I'm SURE I'd rather even have WDTN digital on their analog allocation of 2 than on 50 due to this issue, and you would not believe the amount of time and effort I've spend and everything I've tried to get something that works for them with antenna lower than 28 feet in air ... indoors, outdoors, H-stack of a couple of Yagi's, CM4228 or 4 bay vs. 25 element yagi , moving antenna down side of tower 6" at a time, trying a different location on a 20ft pole temporarily at different spots around the house/yard/etc .....

That sort of thing(DTV reception problems on UHF) isn't "uncommon", either. Just because I see a lot of folks having problems with lo-VHF DTV reception(or hi-VHF for that matter) who post about it on forums such as these does not mean there are not a lot of folks who don't have issues.

There are actions that can be taken to correct UHF issues. I have yet to find a way to eliminate lightning.

I'm not saying such issues don't occur; my WinTV-D just plain doesn't work in Charlottesville due to multipath (though the newer receivers handle it without issue), but UHF problems are much easier to deal with overall. My dropout issues early in the year were resolved with a more-directional antenna which cut down on multipath.

I'm perfectly content to "whine and complain and groan" about low-VHF. :D

Also, if you look "hard enough", even on this forum you will find success stories for lo-VHF DTV reception. Somewhat recently I recall seeing a couple in one of your local threads regarding WBRA, and another I think you are familiar with is kycubsfan situation in E KY ....

And many of these "success stories" have "but"s in them. kycubsfan admitted to having issues with lightning and electrical noise, but considered it "better than nothing" which is a fair assessment I think. As much as I feel for him, I don't think that justifies the many people who are not terrain blocked but are having issues with electrical noise. I think we agree on this point, actually.

Every other station which has operated on lo-VHF has "failed"? Really? How have they failed ?

There are a few stations which have been operating on lo-VHF for some time, which have decided to continue operations on lo-VHF post-transition. Besides WBRA, KOTA is another example I can think of.

I didn't say every, I said "basically every" (and I should have said "many").

Okay, counting only stations known to be operating:

Channel 2: (3 staying, 4 moving, 1 staying with a note)
KREX - Staying
WTWC - Moving to 40
WWMT - Moving to 8
KVBC - Staying
WETM - Moving to 18
WKYC - Moving to 17
KDLO - Staying on low-VHF (2 to 3)
KOTA - Staying, but I've heard rumors they're investigating a move.

Channel 3: (2 moving, 2 staying with notes)
WSBS - Staying, but repeated in Miami on UHF.
WBBM - Moving to 12
KCBU - Moving to 11
WBRA - Staying, but having MANY issues, "backup" petition pending to move to UHF.

Channel 4: (6 moving)
WMAZ - Moving to 13
WDKY - Moving to 31
WSKY - Moving to 9
WIVT - Moving to 34
KPXG - Moved to 22
WHP - Moving to 21

Channel 5: (3 staying, 6 moving)
WCFT - Moving to 33
KETS - Moving to 7
KNSO - Moving to 11
WGVK - Staying
KXLF - Staying
WLMB - Staying
KTVR - Moving to 13
KPXB - Moving to 32

Channel 6: (0 stations known to be operating)

Total: 6 staying, 18 moving, 3 staying with notes

That's half that gave up on low-VHF, plus three more that have additional notes showing it's not so clear cut.

Really? I can stick a pair of rabbit ears near a 2nd story window, and can receive a upper VHF DTV local(32 miles away) just fine with it. Near a window facing the towers are the only spots in my house I can get decent digital ,or somewhat passable(well not really, except perhaps for really small screens)analog reception. But, Obviously, for me, that sort of thing is not going to work well for WDKY-DT.

You should go check out the threads for Rockford, Lansing, Wausau, Rochester, etc. Many people, including some with outdoor upper-VHF antennas with 15 dB gain, have lost significant strength on VHF stations. Even with rabbit ears, people are getting better UHF reception than upper-VHF.

I also believe I've read some succesful reports of WDKY-DT reception with simple indoor antennas in the Lexington thread.

It's certainly possible, just unreliable, given the electrical noise inherent in using an indoor antenna.

Certianly though, RFI being picked up by antenna from electrical wiring/nearby applicances can be a mess with antenna indoors on VHF, lo-VHF particularly, perhaps. I certainly have that problem trying to use an antenna "in the attic" or in certain other spots in my own house regarding analog VHF reception.

I always hear that "getting it outside" will fix electrical noise problems, but my experience doesn't match that. I'm keeping a running list of devices and actions which cause WBRA-DT to drop out, using the Antennacraft Y5-2-6 mounted outdoors at the top of the pole (above the UHF antennas).

I'm not sure what the reasoning for that would be. Would the amps cause it maybe?

The planning factors for DTV reception specify outdoor antennas -- It's great when indoor antennas work for folks, but our system for DTV in U.S. (or analog for that matter) was not really designed, nor specifically intended for use with indoor antennas.

Anyway, a viable OTA solution for apartment dwellers is a MATV system. They're still used in some cases (see AntaltMike's posts), but were more common before cable/sat took over as the primary means most receive local TV stations ...

While I don't disagree with either point, that doesn't keep people from using indoor antennas. A number of apartment-dwellers who do not want to pay the cable company will end up on an indoor antenna. In a decent-sized city with lots of apartment-dwellers, you want to be receivable on an indoor antenna.

I apologize if anything in my post sounds "fierce" or some other adjective, I am not attempting to sound mean-spirited or anything like that with my post. I've been told that sometimes I come across that way even when I don't mean to, so I'll just disclaim myself now. :)

I'm so tired, that took me about an hour... if anything's completely incomprehensible, blame that. :p I'm going to bed.

- Trip

So does 41 dB (50,90) not travel as far in Zone I as in II & III? I'd like to know the justification for this. U stations in II/III should be able to achieve the same max. coverage radii as the Vs, and they don't with these rules. Post-transition, I can't help but believe that there would be room for all U's in II and III to operate with 1000 kW/610 meters.

In practice, I don't see much enforcement of this, mostly due to the exception to match the largest coverage area in the market. On Mt. Wilson (LA area) there are several 1000kW UHF stations, despite having HAAT's over 850m.

If probably easy to see why I like UHF so much. It would have been smart for LA to stay all UHF, but there aren't enough channels, post-transition. We have 7 DTV stations above 51, including the only ones on 60, 65 & 68, in the entire country.

For posterity, in case anyone is wondering, UHF 60 works great for DTV! :D

65 is poor, but has believed to have been under-running for years. 68 is good.

Looking at a few other markets with mountainous/tall tower UHF transmitters:

Salt Lake City (~1250 HAAT) has several 400-550kW stations.
Portland, OR (~520m) - mostly 750-1000kW
San Francisco (~510m) - several above 400kW, with some 1000kW
Dallas (~500-550m) - several at 1000kW
Houston (500-590) - almost all at 1000kW

They have done late night tests of digital 5. I live about 60 miles east of Nashville, and when they did the tests, it was not a problem at all.

Can you post a picture of your typical analog 5 reception? How does it compare with 2 and 4? 5 is a bit better than 3 and the extra 6-7x power probably helps (thinking of WBRA in Trip's location).

In the LA area, 4 looks the worst for me (bad multi-path) on my Y5-2-6, but 2 and 5 are respectable, even though plenty of noise is always apparent in the background. The attached pictures are about as good as they get, when I don't flip a light switch, etc.

For comparative purposes, attached are pictures from the ground floor, using a rabbit ear/loop combo (un-amped). I have attached an upper VHF picture (KABC 7) to compare. These are all at 51 miles, at the same location.

Also of note is that WTVF/5 will be circularly polarized vs. horizontal for WBRA/3.

For comparative purposes, attached are pictures from the ground floor, using a rabbit ear/loop combo (un-amped). I have attached an upper VHF picture (KABC 7) to compare. These are all at 51 miles, at the same location.

Also of note is that WTVF/5 will be circularly polarized vs. horizontal for WBRA/3.

Your experience certainly jibes with mine.

Even in the days of analog cable, I found that channels 2 - 6 on cable were far more prone to electrical interference than any other cable channel.

Can you post a picture of your typical analog 5 reception? How does it compare with 2 and 4?

I can't right now. As far as comparison goes, 5 is the best for me, then it is 2, and 4 is not bad, but it is worse than 2. With rabbit ears, 5 is not a problem, just a hint of 4, and absolutely nothing of 2. The reason for 2 is because the hill that is behind my house is between me and 2. Both the desktop and my laptop does in fact cause lines in all three, but it doesn't bother 5 as much as 2 and 4. That is the most interference I get on those channels. I'll post a picture tomorrow.

NashDigie signing off.

There is no doubt impulse noise is more of an issue on lower frequencies(there is a big roll-off around 72~76MHZ - right in the "space" between channel 4 and 5) --- such that it is much more of an issue on channel 2~4 than it is on channel 5~6. Nor is there doubt there are certian other sorts of interference which are more of a problem on VHF, or are exclusively an issue on VHF.

There is probably also no doubt, perhaps depending upon how frequently it occurs, most folks likely consider such RFI(or anything else - such as uncorrectable multipath) to be more disruptive to DTV viewing vs. analog OTA viewing when it causes SNR to drop below the minimum threshold(15dB SNR) required to decode DTV.


You type a lot. love reading your posts but responding to them... wow. I'm going to have to pick and choose just because I want to get to bed at some point.


I did my best to report and describe my experience with Lo-VHF DTV reception, including some of the details involved I felt were necessary to accurately do that, which apparently wasn't enough.

I also did my best to pass along a bit more of my thoughts and knowledge about the issue, which was probably pointless, and probably a mistake and waste of my time.

As was agreed, I'm not going to argue, or debate the issue. I think response to many of your comments in last post would take us there, but I will however comment on the below portions of your last post :


In the winter, I can go for hours without a drop in the signal too assuming nobody touches an electrical device, but it proves nothing because in the summer e-skip and lightning destroy it. Unwatchable is the word I would use.


I generally receive WDKY-DT 4 more often, and more often with a stronger signal in warmer/wetter spring/summer/fall Months. Just as is the case in winter, including often solidly, for hours on end with no "dropouts". Generally more often and often stronger because enhancement of tropo scatter in my region is more common in Spring/summer/fall than winter.

And Yes, I've had nearby lightning cause occasional "dropout" to WDKY-DT reception, and again, the same is true occasionally for stronger local DTV signals on higher frequencies, including hi-VHF and UHF. It's infrequent enough that it isn't really a problem issue. It is also the case there have been storms in the area/electrical activity, and still decoded WDKY-DT perfectly for hours on end.

But yes, intense/frequent lightning on rare occasions from storms with a lot of electrical activity have made things worse, especially on lo-VHF, such that even lo-VHF analogs(even WDTN 2 on one occasion I can recall) were unwatchable and even one particular case the audio(FM) for WAVE 3 was effected such that it was "unuseable".

As for E-skip(or more distant tropo for that matter), WDKY-DT is more of a bit of a pest for me than anything else, and "DX wise", for that reason I'll be glad when they get off 4.

Before they increased power, with blow-Torch local WDTN on 2, and WAVE on 3 -- 4 was my best channel to monitor for Weak signals Via Es from the South/SSW (Es from South FL, Texas and Mexico is quite common here). Difficult to know if weak anlaog Es is occuring, or whether a weak signal from say, XHMEN 4, Merida Yucatan, or Cuba, or WFOR 4/etc/etc is present with WDKY-DT's "snow" covering it up.

It has happened(WCMH blasting in at times off side-lobe probably being biggest/most common issue when WDKY is weak), and in some cases it's a bit difficult to tell what is happening, but it has generally been rare that I've seen DX cause problems or "dropouts" to WDKY-DT. That's probably because, Depending to some degree upon receiver, DTV signals are relatively immune to analog CCI, D/U ratio for co-channel NTSC analog to DTV interference is +2dB.


Kycubsfan admitted to having issues with lightning and electrical noise ...

I believe he said dropouts on WDKY-DT because of lightning strikes occured infrequently at his location. How I read it was, it didn't occur often enough to be a problem issue for him.


I always hear that "getting it outside" will fix electrical noise problems


Depends on where/what the noise is coming from, and whether or not it is reaching the antenna(or feedline, or even into the tuner can if it's not well shielded) at a sufficient strength to raise the noise level enough.

Outdoors, directional(above and aimed away from what is causing the problem)+ farther away from indoor devices/applicances is certianly usually better, but sure, outdoor antenna can still pick up noise being generated by something indoors .....

OF course, getting the antenna outdoors isn't going to help the noise bursts from lightning strikes coming from same direction as station(or from arc'ing in power lines/neighbor's weed whacker/etc if the antenna is aimed towards it) -

But, the more directivity the antenna has, the less RFI(including impulse noise) it will pick up from other directions than it's aimed, and getting antenna outdoors will usually mean a significant increase in the desired signal strength, therefore increasing SNR when RFI from behind/to the side or below/above antenna are also received.

DTV Notes
NTIA: Coupon Waiting List Shrinks, But Only Slightly
Over a million households still on waiting list.
By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 3/2/2009 7:55:16 AM MT

Over a million households who say they rely on analog television remain on the waiting list for DTV-to-analog converter box coupons, with over 600 TV stations having already pulled the plug on analog.

That's according to the latest figures from the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, which is overseeing the converter box coupon subsidy program. NTIA is still waiting for the Office of Management and Budget to free up $650 million in converter box coupon funding so it can get 2.3 million households off the waiting list.

The good news is that the list is no longer growing. NTIA said Monday that the list shrunk by about 144,000 applications over the past three days.

Once the $650 million allocated for coupons and DTV education in the economic stimulus package is freed up, it will still take two or three weeks to get get those requests off the waiting list. That list was the driving force behind the Obama administration's push to move the DTV hard date from Feb. 17 to June 12.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/189319-NTIA_Coupon_Waiting_List_Shrinks_But_Only_Slightly.php

Yes, because of course it was reasonable to expect that millions of applications would be processed within a very short period of time, because it made a lot more sense to spend all the extra money on additional clerical workers instead of actually using the additional funding to fund more coupons. :rolleyes:

The NTIA is still waiting on the money, and they must not have the extra clerks either -- not that they ever will, since it's an IBM outsourced deal. The latest "weekly" statistics are stuck on Feb 18th.

Nitewatchman:

In reply to:

I did my best to report and describe my experience with Lo-VHF DTV reception, including some of the details involved I felt were necessary to accurately do that, which apparently wasn't enough.

You did a great job, man, I read your post with interest. It is one of the best and most accurate posts I've seen. It had actual information and not "gut feel" or speculation.

Also in response to:

I also did my best to pass along a bit more of my thoughts and knowledge about the issue, which was probably pointless, and probably a mistake and waste of my time.

Not at all a waste of time. As I said, I enjoyed reading it and I'm sure many others did as well.

Finally in response to:

As was agreed, I'm not going to argue, or debate the issue. I think response to many of your comments in last post would take us there,

Yes, now that would be a waste of your time.

Cheers,

Dave.

Trip has advised that his power is out and the Internet connection is down and may not be back up for several days.

Here is a link to the outage map, which may be of interest:

http://www.dom.com/news/southva.jsp

I've heard some nasty storms have been pounding the East.

Trip has advised that his power is out and the Internet connection is down and may not be back up for several days.

Here is a link to the outage map, which may be of interest:

http://www.dom.com/news/southva.jsp

I've heard some nasty storms have been pounding the East.

When the storm came through North Central Florida (that means to others I live above the I-4 Tampa/Orlando/Daytona corridor), it reminded me of the Storm of the Century (March 13, 1993 I think) the way the wind howled for hours.

That storm would have been even worse had it dipped into the Gulf of Mexico before heading up the eastern seaboard. March can be brutal. Good luck for those people in that area! Being cold right now might be a bigger problem than no internet without power.

Thank you nitewatchman & trip for your discussion about VHF-LO. My WHBF is returning to RF4 while all others will stay on UHF. WHBF management seemed to be centered on a lower power bill. Based on my own observations, many homeowners are spending a lot of money on very large VHF antenna installations that could have been avoided if WHBF would have selected RF17 that was available for post-transition.
EDIT: Piggie. I remember that storm. NASCAR was concerned about the snow drift in turn 4 that weekend at Atlanta. They rescheduled.

I hope this isn't off topic..

What site I could find out what stations turned off analog in Sacramento & SF?? ..Both KICU & KOFY in the Bay Area turned analog off....I thought all go off by June 12th

I hope this isn't off topic..

What site I could find out what stations turned off analog in Sacramento & SF?? ..Both KICU & KOFY in the Bay Area turned analog off....I thought all go off by June 12th

http://www.choisser.com/sfonair2.html

KCNS, KION, KCBA, & KFTY are also off and KFTY has moved to 32. No stations in Sacramento have turned off analog. All are on through June 12th.

WBFF-TV Fox 45 and WNUV-TV CW 54 in Baltimore ended their nightlight broadcast tonight at midnight and turned off the analog. Cut to playing an national anthem sign-off video followed by several minutes of a test pattern with a Indian chief head on it. One by one the analog lights go out.

Will we see the FCC return to processing and granting or rejecting the maximization applications soon? Quite a lot of them still listed as applications. What about the channel change petitions they have not acted on yet? With Feb. 17 behind them and things pretty much frozen up until mid-April, maybe the staff can get back to processing the applications.

I hope this isn't off topic..

What site I could find out what stations turned off analog in Sacramento & SF?? ..Both KICU & KOFY in the Bay Area turned analog off....I thought all go off by June 12th

Also http://www.rabbitears.info/dtr.php

This is a more technical site. But if see a link with a date, they are most likely off. The link goes to the FCC filing of them telling the FCC they were going off the air, rather applying to go off the air to be specific.

WBFF-TV Fox 45 and WNUV-TV CW 54 in Baltimore ended their nightlight broadcast tonight at midnight and turned off the analog. Cut to playing an national anthem sign-off video followed by several minutes of a test pattern with a Indian chief head on it. One by one the analog lights go out.

Will we see the FCC return to processing and granting or rejecting the maximization applications soon? Quite a lot of them still listed as applications. What about the channel change petitions they have not acted on yet? With Feb. 17 behind them and things pretty much frozen up until mid-April, maybe the staff can get back to processing the applications.

They did jump on WJXX and WTLV in Jacksonville FL to raise power and granted them construction permits on Feb 20, 2009. I didn't look when they applied. But that did go through.

Lets hope yes they are looking at requests. There are going to be a lot in VHF band. I still predict along with others, after June 12, a few if not a lot of VHF stations are going to say oops, nope 12 to 25 KW range was not enough power (or lower). I am just not seeing complains in towns from stations that did go up into the 50 KW range, but rather people amazed how far out rabbit ears work, and not one rant after another.

I don't know when they ended their Nightlight Service, but I just noticed that KOFY 20 in San Francisco is off the air. I'm seeing snow.

KICU 36 in San Jose is still showing Nightlight Service.

Larry
SF

WXLV Winston-Salem, WMYV Greensboro, WLFL Raleigh and WRDC Durham all NC and Sinclair stations have also turned out the nightlight.

In Augusta GA, WAGT-26 will shut down tonight. Their loop specifically says it will end on March 4, and it's still on this morning.

In Greenville SC, WMYA-40 shut down last night. I didn't watch for it because I was figuring they might do it tonight like WAGT. WYCW-62 is still going this morning.

WLFL and WRDC in Raleigh have ceased nightlight operations (at least I'm not receiving them any more) .

DTV Notes
FCC Releases Agenda For Second DTV Update Meeting
Meeting will be divided into panels
By John Eggerton,Broadcasting & Cable 3/3/2009 4:47:33 PM MT

The FCC has released the agenda for its next public meeting (March 5), which, like the February meeting, will be an update on the DTV transition.

Also like the February gathering, the meeting will be divided into panels, and feature many of the same people. One panel will feature status reports from the FCC and NTIA, and a second with industry representatives including NCTA President Kyle McSlarrow, NAB President David Rehr, and MSTV President David Donovan.

On the government panel will be Dr. Bernadette McGuire-Rivera of NTIA, who is overseeing the DTV-to-analog converter box coupon program. By Thursday, NTIA is certainly hoping that the Office of Management and Budget has freed up the $650 million in the economic stimulus package that will allow it to clear up the 4 million-plus coupon applications on the NTIA waiting list.

For a list of all the participants, click here. (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/common/jumplink.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fhraunfoss.fcc.gov%2Fedocs_p ublic%2Fattachmatch%2FDOC-288992A1.pdf)

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/189425-FCC_Releases_Agenda_For_Second_DTV_Update_Meeting.php

KXLT analog is off the air as of yesterday (at least, that is when I noticed that it was missing)

KICU 36 in San Jose went off the air at 12:04 pm today.

Larry
SF

Also, three Nashville, TN and Sinclair stations, WZTV(Fox), WUXP(MyTV), and WNAB(CW) turned their analog channels off last night just past midnight.

NashDigie signing off.

WUHF/Rochester also shut off nightlight last night.

Wonderful memories of those call letters - WUHF!

Here in New York City, it was the FCC/Government/NYC experimental channel using Ultra High Frequency in a metropolitan area.

I can remember having to buy a small, indoor UHF antenna - a gold colored thing that looked, in retrospect, very much like my current Silver Sensor. I also had to get a Blonder Tongue UHF to VHF converter box - I'd set my TV's tuner to channel 6 to receive UHF - 31.

KDNL (Analog 30, Sinclair) ceased nightlighting here in STL today. RF 30 Analog unwatchable at my location, due to the RF 31 KDNL-DT less than three miles away at 1 MW ERP.

The good news is that I can try some DX'ing on RF 29, now. 2+ MW of front-end overload, gone.

Whew! Finally, I'm back. Power came back around 10AM but I was down in NC visiting UNC-TV.

Seeing Piggie link to my pathetically incomplete DTR/ATR page, due to lack of time and will to put in effort which will prove to be wasted, makes me think I should just pull the whole page for the time being. I dunno what to do with it.

I'm going to decline to continue the low-VHF discussion. It certainly isn't a waste of time to continue discussion of it, but we're going to get nowhere on it. I already know it. :D

- Trip

Whew! Finally, I'm back. Power came back around 10AM but I was down in NC visiting UNC-TV.

Seeing Piggie link to my pathetically incomplete DTR/ATR page, due to lack of time and will to put in effort which will prove to be wasted, makes me think I should just pull the whole page for the time being. I dunno what to do with it.

I'm going to decline to continue the low-VHF discussion. It certainly isn't a waste of time to continue discussion of it, but we're going to get nowhere on it. I already know it. :D

- Trip

It won't hurt my feeling if that page is gone. Really with this one or two a day analogs turning off now it will be tough to keep it up to date. Even those like me relying on FCC site won't be as current as those that live in the towns where they see them wink out (which WINK did wink out, lol).

Ok, the end of low band discussion. Until there is a motion on the table to give the hams 4 to 6 megs of that range to play with sporadic-E and tropo.

Just by coincedence, others may have seen this article as its not new, but I found it very interesting and goes hand in hand with my statements from emphical experience that high band stations would server best being around 50 to 60 KW range. That in most markets going under 30KW just is not enough power. It varies from market to market but my point of the 15 to 25 KW station being enough to me has been wrong.

This article doesn't take sides as much as it provides some fact. It's old and many of us have as much or more experience decoding high band than at the time the author wrote.

http://www.rwonline.com/article/60648

After all 2 years ago I only had WESH at 81 miles away (near DX on flat ground like here in FL), but they ran 54KW, and sure enough I could lock them 80% of the time but that is not watchable unless you get lucky and the whole show stays locked, which was rare.

Then a 4.9KW station which on a direction antenna only provides me 0.860 KW to my house. Providing me with an experiment in really really low power.

And Note to Trip.
Last week WJXX and WTLV in Jacksonville FL, went on temp antennas at very reduced power to take down their old burn up antenna they were using. Then this weekend the brand new antler was hoisted to the top on the candlelobra and fired up Sunday I believe. They ran half power until some time Monday afternoon and turned up the heat. Not to their construction permit levels but the previous levels of 11.1 and 25.0 KW respectively in the order above. WTLV analog 12 is also on the feedline and antenna. I noticed them scanning Monday early evening in some mild early evening tropo. I said wow oh wow, I have never even seen them in INTENSE tropo. I figured it was more ducting than tropo. The next day at noon I tried and low and behold I have 2 new VHF stations to play with now!

I called them right away and they were thrilled I could see them at all at my distance. Also found out they are not going to their now apparently approved (2/20/09) higher power until they shut off 12 analog in June. Two reasons, they just don't want to push the feedline and antenna any harder than they are now. Plus once they shut off their analog it will chop their electric bill by a huge factor.

Now more interesting this is another one of those perfect "natural" test environments. I am 61 miles from their tower, 2 Edge. They are at 300 meters, I am about 8 meters off the ground with the top antenna of a stacked pair of YA-1713s at 40 inches. But it's above a metal roof so my system is only about 3 wavelengths above a significant ground plane.

Both stations stay nice and locked at night. During the peak of the day WJXX at 11.1 KW drops enough to be unwatchable. However with fine tuning of my direction WTLV at 25KW almost never drops. Both fade and as fast as I can change channels fade at the same times. WTLV with it's higher power though doesn't fade deep enough to loose lock! Frequencies are very close so I would call this a valid test even considering my antenna spacing does change their pattern from channel to channel a little bit as does their antenna. On both channels their arrays give me about 98% of their full power. (as will WJCT when they switch, see below).


Also I am right at the edge of the contour for WJXX but 5 miles inside the higher powered WTLV. This shows without a doubt 3.5 db more power achieves on high band.

If they go with what now looks like granted permission to go to 29.5 and 53.3 KW respectively I would think my wows of NBC (the 53.3 KW station) are finally over. Pointing my UHF at Gainesville and VHF at Jacksonville, FL. Also this gives me hope that once WJCT goes back to 7 in June with 18KW (since that is 2 db more than WJXX is now at 11.1KW) I might just get 3 VHFs out of Jacksonville, (WJCT at evenings and nights).

It won't hurt my feeling if that page is gone. Really with this one or two a day analogs turning off now it will be tough to keep it up to date. Even those like me relying on FCC site won't be as current as those that live in the towns where they see them wink out (which WINK did wink out, lol).

I'm still thinking about what to do. I have a project I still need to finish on RabbitEars, another I want to start, plus school once my "Spring" break is over, etc.

And Note to Trip.
Last week WJXX and WTLV in Jacksonville FL, went on temp antennas at very reduced power to take down their old burn up antenna they were using. Then this weekend the brand new antler was hoisted to the top on the candlelobra and fired up Sunday I believe. They ran half power until some time Monday afternoon and turned up the heat. Not to their construction permit levels but the previous levels of 11.1 and 25.0 KW respectively in the order above. WTLV analog 12 is also on the feedline and antenna. I noticed them scanning Monday early evening in some mild early evening tropo. I said wow oh wow, I have never even seen them in INTENSE tropo. I figured it was more ducting than tropo. The next day at noon I tried and low and behold I have 2 new VHF stations to play with now!

I called them right away and they were thrilled I could see them at all at my distance. Also found out they are not going to their now apparently approved (2/20/09) higher power until they shut off 12 analog in June. Two reasons, they just don't want to push the feedline and antenna any harder than they are now. Plus once they shut off their analog it will chop their electric bill by a huge factor.

Now more interesting this is another one of those perfect "natural" test environments. I am 61 miles from their tower, 2 Edge. They are at 300 meters, I am about 8 meters off the ground with the top antenna of a stacked pair of YA-1713s at 40 inches. But it's above a metal roof so my system is only about 3 wavelengths above a significant ground plane.

Both stations stay nice and locked at night. During the peak of the day WJXX at 11.1 KW drops enough to be unwatchable. However with fine tuning of my direction WTLV at 25KW almost never drops. Both fade and as fast as I can change channels fade at the same times. WTLV with it's higher power though doesn't fade deep enough to loose lock! Frequencies are very close so I would call this a valid test even considering my antenna spacing does change their pattern from channel to channel a little bit as does their antenna. On both channels their arrays give me about 98% of their full power. (as will WJCT when they switch, see below).


Also I am right at the edge of the contour for WJXX but 5 miles inside the higher powered WTLV. This shows without a doubt 3.5 db more power achieves on high band.

If they go with what now looks like granted permission to go to 29.5 and 53.3 KW respectively I would think my wows of NBC (the 53.3 KW station) are finally over. Pointing my UHF at Gainesville and VHF at Jacksonville, FL. Also this gives me hope that once WJCT goes back to 7 in June with 18KW (since that is 2 db more than WJXX is now at 11.1KW) I might just get 3 VHFs out of Jacksonville, (WJCT at evenings and nights).

Excellent news. Glad to hear it. Any chance of some data on WJXX and WTLV? :D

And if you happen to catch WKCF-DT via tropo again, they've added a subchannel for This TV.

Finally, see my post in the Gainesville thread about W40CQ-D.

- Trip

I'm still thinking about what to do. I have a project I still need to finish on RabbitEars, another I want to start, plus school once my "Spring" break is over, etc.



Excellent news. Glad to hear it. Any chance of some data on WJXX and WTLV? :D

And if you happen to catch WKCF-DT via tropo again, they've added a subchannel for This TV.

Finally, see my post in the Gainesville thread about W40CQ-D.

- Trip

My eyes are closing, but actually right now would be a good time to get data, as WJXX breaks up in the day (which is ok, because I get WCJB, my old workplace, via CH16 which is also ABC).

WKentuckyChickenFried is not available. Skip is good enough but no dice. Same thing happened last time. There is an active 17 in Jacksonville I think is the problem. a 4221 is not real good at rejecting off the back. It's forte is a wide beam width with a lot of gain over it.

I did scan Jax. Got everything I could lock. WAWS was not too strong so you can trash it if you like. Best I could do on it. It's never very strong even in skip for some reason.

But I got great capture of WTLV and WJXX

At the last minute I decided to try WXGA in Waycross, 125 miles. I think that is my best digital DX so far considering 8 is a clear channel around here to the north. It had errors, but shoot me. It's as good as it will get. Even when out 3 times to play with the antenna. did upteen captures.
Take it or trash it. But I see you don't have it yet! hmmmm,, compromise dude!

Wish I could pull them out all the time. They have an interesting channel called Knowledge channel and a kids channel. Dang PBS in FL on their main channel from 6 am to 6 pm is now all cartoons, what a waste for those home. The good stuff is on the grainy sub channels. Since the National PBS feed went away, I spend little time on PBS out of Gainesville. WMFE out of Orlando has shut down 12 pm to 6 am. Looking forward to getting WJCT I hope as they are not grainy (give subchannels bandwidth and keep HD at 720P). Plus they show main PBS, Create, World and FKN all day. Gainesville had FKN 6 am to 6 pm, then World at night. And World on WUFT is 1.2 Mb, terrible considering they give their bandwidth to cartoons on the main channel. They would be better to compress their HD a little give World at least 2 mb. crazy.

Well it's attached, take it or leave it. Time for bed on the east coast !

Since the National PBS feed went away, I spend little time on PBS out of Gainesville.

Huh? No it hasn't. There is a 24/7 PBS-HD East/Central national feed and a 24/7 PBS-HD West national feed.

It isn't the old PBS-HD loop, which is what you probably talking about, but these feeds are the ones used by the PBS affiliates for their HD programming. Depending on the station, the primetime programming will be in-pattern.

DTV Notes
Copps: National Media Have Under-Covered Transition Date Move
Acting FCC chairman praises trade press, bashes mainstream coverage of DTV move
By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 3/5/2009 8:27:03 AM MT

FCC acting Chairman Michael Copps praised the trade press reporting of the move of the DTV hard date to June 12, but said he had found the national media coverage "more than a little wanting."

That came in the FCC's second open meeting under acting Chairman Michael Copps Thursday, which provided an update on the status of the DTV transition from government and industry, marking 100 days until the June 12 cut-off.

Copps said he had run into a lot of people who said that nothing was happening "transitionwise," saying that most Americans heard a "small snippet" of information, but "precious little" else. He said he was happy C-CSPAN was covering it, but asked other national media to follow suit.

Going forward, Copps emphasized that viewers needed to be informed. He said the two guiding principles will be putting the consumer first and telling them the truth. That truth is that the transition isn't over by a long shot and there will still be problems.

They don't want their information sugar coated, he said, or alarmist. He warned against creating a false sense of security that the transition will be less disruptive than it is, pointing out that while a third of the stations had pulled the plug on analog Feb. 17, those were smaller markets and only represented about 15% of the population.

Some will need new antennas. Let them know, said Copps. If some won't get a signal whatever they do, let them know, he said. With apologies to Jack Nicholson, he said, "they can handle the truth.

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell agreed that the transition still had a ways to go. He said that the Feb. 17 date won't live in infamy, but he added that it was not necessarily a harbinger of things to come.

He pointed out that even in the markets where analog had been pulled, most viewers could still get some analog signals via an enhanced analog nightlight signal. Most major markets won't be transitioning until June 12, he said. "We're still grappling with some unknowns....when it comes, it will still be messy in some places.

Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein made it unanimous, saying that the Feb. 17 move had been the down payment on the transition, and that June 12 would be the balloon payment, at the least intimating and at the most invoking the economic turmoil resulting from the mortgage crisis.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/189501-Copps_National_Media_Have_Under_Covered_Transition_Date_Move .php

Huh? No it hasn't. There is a 24/7 PBS-HD East/Central national feed and a 24/7 PBS-HD West national feed.

It isn't the old PBS-HD loop, which is what you probably talking about, but these feeds are the ones used by the PBS affiliates for their HD programming. Depending on the station, the primetime programming will be in-pattern.

It's a matter of how you interpret it. My interpretation is that the PBS-HD feed ended on 12/21/2008 and was replaced with a national PBS feed that happens to be in HD sometimes. Since it has so much SD content on it, I generally would call it the "PBS National" feed rather than "PBS-HD."

- Trip

My eyes are closing, but actually right now would be a good time to get data, as WJXX breaks up in the day (which is ok, because I get WCJB, my old workplace, via CH16 which is also ABC).

WKentuckyChickenFried is not available. Skip is good enough but no dice. Same thing happened last time. There is an active 17 in Jacksonville I think is the problem. a 4221 is not real good at rejecting off the back. It's forte is a wide beam width with a lot of gain over it.

No sweat, just whenever you happen to see it again. :)

I did scan Jax. Got everything I could lock. WAWS was not too strong so you can trash it if you like. Best I could do on it. It's never very strong even in skip for some reason.

But I got great capture of WTLV and WJXX

At the last minute I decided to try WXGA in Waycross, 125 miles. I think that is my best digital DX so far considering 8 is a clear channel around here to the north. It had errors, but shoot me. It's as good as it will get. Even when out 3 times to play with the antenna. did upteen captures.
Take it or trash it. But I see you don't have it yet! hmmmm,, compromise dude!

Thanks! WXGA-DT has errors but it's few enough that I'll take it as it is. :D

They look excellent, thanks for all of them. :)

Wish I could pull them out all the time. They have an interesting channel called Knowledge channel and a kids channel. Dang PBS in FL on their main channel from 6 am to 6 pm is now all cartoons, what a waste for those home. The good stuff is on the grainy sub channels. Since the National PBS feed went away, I spend little time on PBS out of Gainesville. WMFE out of Orlando has shut down 12 pm to 6 am. Looking forward to getting WJCT I hope as they are not grainy (give subchannels bandwidth and keep HD at 720P). Plus they show main PBS, Create, World and FKN all day. Gainesville had FKN 6 am to 6 pm, then World at night. And World on WUFT is 1.2 Mb, terrible considering they give their bandwidth to cartoons on the main channel. They would be better to compress their HD a little give World at least 2 mb. crazy.

Well it's attached, take it or leave it. Time for bed on the east coast !

I toured UNC-TV yesterday, and they're actually doing something worse than WUFT. They not only show kids programming on the UNC-HD feed from 6a-6p or so, but they also have a 24/7 kids channel (UNC-KD) on -2. They bumped their World-like subchannel, UNC-ED, to cable-only last September.

I was told, though, that if they could secure a deal with Dish to carry UNC-KD, then they'd have deals with all the major cable/satellite companies and would move a lot of UNC-ED programming to UNC-HD, thus replacing the kids programming.

It would be nice, though, if WUFT would bump the bitrate on the World subchannel up to at least 2 Mbps, because 1.25 Mbps just is not enough. I can't stand looking at 1.5 Mbps with a stat mux as WVIR-DT does with CW+. 2 Mbps isn't great either, but it's at least watchable.

I would hope that GPB will do the same thing.

- Trip

WKentuckyChickenFried is not available. Skip is good enough but no dice.

I need clarification as to what some people here mean by skip, tropo, and ducting.

I've been a ham for almost 40 years and I've never heard anyone use the term "skip" to mean anything other than ionospheric propagation. For low VHF the mode of propagation is almost always Es (Sporadic E). Single hop Es at low VHF mostly propagates signals in the 300 - 1000 mile range. Es very rarely occurs at high VHF. Es is completely useless for DTV except for DXing purposes as it's extremely unstable.

To me, tropo and ducting are the same thing. I most often hear the the term "tropospheric ducting" used to describe differing temperature layers in the lower atmosphere that bend signals past the usual horizon and permit reception at greater distances than normally expected. This mode of propagation can be very stable at times. Tropo is almost always wiped out during storms which is often why people complain about poorer reception during rain.

AMENDMENT OF SECTION 73.622(I), POST-TRANSITION TABLE OF DTV ALLOTMENTS, TELEVISION BROADCAST STATIONS, DES MOINES, IOWA. Proposed channel substitution for station KDMI-DT to change its post-transition DTV channel from 31 to 19. (Dkt No. 09-22, RM-11516). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 03/04/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-552). MB DA-09-552A1.doc DA-09-552A1.pdf DA-09-552A1.txt

DTV Notes
Rehr: Feb. 17 Analog Cut-Offs Essentially A 'Nonevent'
Challenges such as rebranding June 12 DTV date, DMA leadership remain
By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 3/5/2009 11:48:41 AM MT

National Association of Broadcasters President David Rehr told the FCC Thursday that the Feb. 17 transition of over 400 stations to digital was essentially a "nonevent," where "viewer confusion and calls were relatively low" and "awareness of the DTV transition was virtually saturated across the country."

Rehr, speaking at an FCC meeting on the DTV transition Thursday, said that was primarily thanks to the industry's $1.2
billion education campaign that "saturated" awareness of the transition.

Rehr conceded challenges remain, however, and said those include rebranding that message for the new June 12 DTV hard date and ensuring DMA leadership--he said NAB had taken the suggestion of FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell to heart and was compiling a list of point people in each TV market. At last month's DTV transition update meeting, McDowell suggested there needed to be transition point people in each market.

Rehr said other challenges included scanning and rescanning for digital channels, which the FCC and others have identified as one of the key viewer quesions/problems. Rehr said that NAB had produced PSA's encouraging viewers to test their equipment early, and had produced a new, 30-minute video dealing with the scanning and re-scanning issue. But he also said the FCC needed to step up, perhaps including in-person visits by FCC call center personnell.

Other challenges, he said, include dealing with antenna issues, saying the new 30-minute program covers that as well, and adding that stations are also talking about it in newscasts and other long-form programming. FCC Chairman Michael Copps couldn't stress enough the need for letting consumers know when they might have reception issues related to the DTV switch.

Rehr said that in the cast of reception issues due to changes in TV station coverage areas, the NAB was encouraging stations that will lose more than 25 of their analog coverage areas to provide that general information to the public, as well as more specific information like pointing them to AntennaWeb.org and the FCC's new DTV reception maps, both of which help viewers determine what signals they should be getting and what they may need to do to better receive them.

Summarizing NAB's official comments on the FCC's implementation of the DTV date move to June 12, Rehr said broadcasters wand the commission to:

• Extend flexibility to stations. Some stations will need to terminate analog service prior to June 12. All stations should be empowered to tailor their DTV messages for their individual station’s circumstances.
• Use FCC money wisely – and do not duplicate industry efforts on messaging or research.
• Bolster the FCC call center and train operators. The $90 million the FCC will receive via NTIA and from the economic stimulus package should fund this effort.
• Expedite the grant process to get funds to grass roots organizations quickly to spread the word and help viewers upgrade. Commissioner Adelstein, you have been a long-time champion of this cause and we wholeheartedly support it.
• Eliminate consumer education requirements for stations that have already transitioned. They confuse viewers who are not the target audience.
• Substantially reduce the final week of [DTV education] crawls for stations transitioning early to eliminate viewer fatigue and hostility.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/189516-Rehr_Feb_17_Analog_Cut_Offs_Essentially_A_Nonevent_.php

I've been a ham for almost 40 years ..


It'll Be 31 years for me this summer ...


Single hop Es at low VHF mostly propagates signals in the 300 - 1000 mile range.


300 Miles is pretty short for Es on Lo-VHF TV band.

About 800~1200 Miles or so seems most typical for Lo-VHF Single hop Es.


Es is completely useless for DTV except for DXing purposes as it's extremely unstable.


Not quite sure what you mean, but it doesn't work any differently for analog than it does for DTV, and it is DX either way .... Signals via Es at times *CAN* sometimes be quite stable for certian periods of time (even lengthly periods of time), OTOH, on other occasions, you might see one station one second and another one the next, if you can make anything out of the mess that occurs sometimes ....

Anyway, Dx'ers who I have heard from who have had success with DTV Es receptions have reported on some occasions the signals to be quite robust and stable ....

I suspect Intense co-channel interference involving NTSC analog signals, along with few DTV stations on lo-VHF has likely been the main reasons why there haven't been a lot of DTV Es receptions reported ....


To me, tropo and ducting are the same thing. I most often hear the the term "tropospheric ducting" used to describe differing temperature layers in the lower atmosphere that bend signals past the usual horizon and permit reception at greater distances than normally expected. This mode of propagation can be very stable at times.


They are the same thing.

But, many if not most TV Dx'ers differentiate between Tropo scatter and Ducting -- Personally, I don't typically refer to "Tropo ducting" specifically unless it's apparent true ducting(as is explained in article at following link) is occuring ....

I think there is excellent explanation of Tropo scatter, ducting and Es here :

http://www.dxfm.com/Content/propagation.htm

It's a matter of how you interpret it. My interpretation is that the PBS-HD feed ended on 12/21/2008 and was replaced with a national PBS feed that happens to be in HD sometimes. Since it has so much SD content on it, I generally would call it the "PBS National" feed rather than "PBS-HD."

It is indeed true that the old PBS-HD loop is gone, but even that had upconverted anamorphic widescreen material.

The current PBS national HD feeds are no different than any network feed in that there is many shows that are upconverted 4:3 analog. But, they are the only one, that I know of, that has no problems with feeding upconverted anamorphic widescreen SD material. I do not get cable/DBS, so I have no idea if any of those channels do much in the way of anamorphic widescreen upconverts.

Having 100% HD material isn't going to happen for quite a while, so by definition, PBS does indeed have a PBS-HD feed. And, as mentioned, it is the only way, right now, that PBS stations get their HD programming.

300 Miles is pretty short for Es on Lo-VHF TV band.

Yes, that is short but I've seen it occasionally.

Not quite sure what you mean, but it doesn't work any differently for analog than it does for DTV, and it is DX either way .... Signals via Es at times *CAN* sometimes be quite stable for certian periods of time (even lengthly periods of time), OTOH, on other occasions, you might see one station one second and another one the next, if you can make anything out of the mess that occurs sometimes ....

I see you're in Ohio. I think you get better Es than we do in California. I don't think I've ever seen it stable enough to actually be able to watch a program. Usually I'm lucky just to be able to identify the station. Another problem is that the whole 6 MHz bandwidth doesn't always propagate the same. Some portion may be strong enough to decode and some part not which won't work for digital but might be enough for analog.

I think there is excellent explanation of Tropo scatter, ducting and Es here :

http://www.dxfm.com/Content/propagation.htm

Good link! What we get all the time here are very strong inversions. They can really mess me up when they form above the transmitters (2000') and below me (2650') and the signals become highly attenuated.

Huh? No it hasn't. There is a 24/7 PBS-HD East/Central national feed and a 24/7 PBS-HD West national feed.

It isn't the old PBS-HD loop, which is what you probably talking about, but these feeds are the ones used by the PBS affiliates for their HD programming. Depending on the station, the primetime programming will be in-pattern.

Well I don't have access to those feeds and only what my local PBS station shows which in Florida has become cartoons and kid shows from 6am to 6 pm. My local has gone to showing the HD version of their HD shows to one and maybe a rerun later in the week. But most of the reruns are show on their blockly sub channels OTA which is below SD standards. Other states may be better off. I can see Georgia PBS here sometimes and I like their system better. They put the cartoons on the bandwidth limited subchannels where they look just as good. Keeping the main HD programming for the adult programming.

I am sure it varies state by state on OTA PBS channels.

It's a matter of how you interpret it. My interpretation is that the PBS-HD feed ended on 12/21/2008 and was replaced with a national PBS feed that happens to be in HD sometimes. Since it has so much SD content on it, I generally would call it the "PBS National" feed rather than "PBS-HD."

- Trip

Ok, this is also what I mean. My local PBS dropped a lot of the shows or PBS dropped shows that were on their HD Feed that were tremendous. I never missed Desert Speaks and now that is gone. There are a few other nature type shows that now I only see on 1.26 Mbps subchannel. That is not even SD.

It's no wonder PBS stations in Florida are in trouble. Between satellite and OTA is receive 5 of them, with about the same all day cartoons and now limited programing at night. They get money from the government, now advertisements and then they want me to give to them besides taxes with too many stations and a declining programming. I really hope they pull out of it. You have to figure something when I did watch about 1/3 PBS over OTA and now I would say they barely get 1/10 of my viewing, just in the last 3 months.

Well I don't have access to those feeds and only what my local PBS station shows which in Florida has become cartoons and kid shows from 6am to 6 pm.

Here is the national HD schedule: http://www.pbs.org/tvschedules/satellite.html?display_format=fullday&display_feed=10926&feeds=10926&station=&zipcode=&transport=&provider=&supersite=&display_date=2009-03-05

Unfortunately, at the moment the web page is not working. There appears to be a database access problem, as none of the times are filled it.

I need clarification as to what some people here mean by skip, tropo, and ducting.

I've been a ham for almost 40 years and I've never heard anyone use the term "skip" to mean anything other than ionospheric propagation. For low VHF the mode of propagation is almost always Es (Sporadic E). Single hop Es at low VHF mostly propagates signals in the 300 - 1000 mile range. Es very rarely occurs at high VHF. Es is completely useless for DTV except for DXing purposes as it's extremely unstable.

To me, tropo and ducting are the same thing. I most often hear the the term "tropospheric ducting" used to describe differing temperature layers in the lower atmosphere that bend signals past the usual horizon and permit reception at greater distances than normally expected. This mode of propagation can be very stable at times. Tropo is almost always wiped out during storms which is often why people complain about poorer reception during rain.

I have only been licensed for 32 years, upgrading from Novice to Advanced within a couple of months my first year licensed. I have played on about every band and mode.

I believe we are discussing nomenclature here. To me skip is anything phenomenon that extends RF range beyond normal conditions. Including F Layer, Sporadic E, Tropo/Ducting.

I have used ducting to mean a form of Tropo where the Tropo is very directional. Acting like appears to be a duct from point A to point B. Yeah, it probably is a bad term, as most of the time that means you are on the edge of a larger Tropo opening and can only see propagation into the center of the Tropo area. More likely weather phenomenon than an actual "duct" from point A to B.

Seems most TV type and I too use the word skip loosely compared to the way I used it back in the 1970's. Actually back then there was not even that many people on high VHF bands and most of us spent our time on HF, and mostly the 20 meters and down. That was the popular thing to do then, and where you actually got contacts if you weren't in a big town with a lot of people playing on VHF, much less UHF.

As far as terms go, I remember early on since I preferred 20, 15 and 10 meters to 40 and 80, someone saying hey why don't you operate more on the Low Bands. I said which "low bands?" They said 40 and 80, your know and 75 phone? I said oh! I said I like the range better on the higher bands when they are open, just who I am. I don't get on every night just to talk to the same people over and over like I do now on the internet! :@)

Just terms. But yes, there is often a lack of understanding of different types of "enhanced propagation". Heck I found that true even back in the harder tests and Morse code in front of the FCC days.

Speaking of what kind of skip, F layer back in the peaks of the 70's and 80's pushed up to 6 meters and even Ch2 TV. Reports of Ch2 and Ch3 skipping thousands of miles were coming in. You know back when you tuned WWV to listen to the hourly MUF reports? The good ole days?

73 Old man, thanks for the comments!

It'll Be 31 years for me this summer ...

300 Miles is pretty short for Es on Lo-VHF TV band.

About 800~1200 Miles or so seems most typical for Lo-VHF Single hop Es.


I think there is excellent explanation of Tropo scatter, ducting and Es here :

http://www.dxfm.com/Content/propagation.htm

I have seen the MUF on F skip go so high (not sure where it was) I worked Jacksonville FL from Gainesville FL on F layer or about 70 miles. It didn't last more than 10 minutes. We both had 3 element tribanders and were in contact long enough to determine the only path was pointed right at each other. It was an odd night. Had been working western Europe when it very quickly (over 15 minutes) shortened to NE US, then all the way down until I could talk to a guy I heard working Europe 20 mintues earlier in Jacksonville, called him, and we were both amazed. All we could figure was suddenly the F skip had shot sky high in MUF or some other really weird situation. One of those nights you remember forever, like the first time you work 1000 miles plus on 2 meters.

So "skip" can do weird stuff!

======

Hey that might be the best signal article on various propagation I have ever seen in one place. I skimmed it and I think everything I have ever read my whole life was at least summarized in that article.

An interesting aside. I worked down in Clearwater for a company called Digital Radio Service, an off shot of the old Paccom in Tampa. We did more commercial stuff and set up a 56 baud packet in the oil field of Oklahoma with a 300 mile path back to the home office from an oil field. It was all we needed for the tiny bit of data they needed. We did it 150Mhz channel they had with a lot of antennas on each end. They normally got at least one reading a day via the path which we always called atmospheric scatter. Even though the experiment worked, in the end it was less data than they wanted. We at DRS considered it a success as we knew how hard this would be to pull off.

I posted this on the Boston thread, but according to the latest Form 387 for WFXT, their analog signal is down again. I get the feeling it's going to stay that way this time:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15982562#post15982562

It's no wonder PBS stations in Florida are in trouble. Between satellite and OTA is receive 5 of them, with about the same all day cartoons and now limited programing at night. They get money from the government, now advertisements and then they want me to give to them besides taxes with too many stations and a declining programming. I really hope they pull out of it.

It's likely that lack of funding is causing the poor programming quality. PBS isn't like the commercial networks. Stations have to put up money for each show.

We're probably OT with this, and boring some folks to tears - Sure is fun to talk about though ;)

Yes, that is short but I've seen it occasionally.


Indeed, and quite interesting perhaps given your location and the general results with low-VHF Es you've reported -- As Such 'short' receptions via Es would indicate intense activity is occuring and a relatively high MUF -- Here, on lo-VHF when that happens, it often means a jumbled mess on lo-VHF TV, and MUF into the FM broadcast band, if not a bit higher. But of course, if there weren't many stations in area on the other side of the Es "cloud", then there may not be as much of a jumble ....

300 miles(or just a bit under that) should be about the minimum possible distance for reception via Es on LO-VHF - Of course, Es on lower frequencies can be much shorter :

http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/Es_distances.html

My shortest TV Es log here is WWAY 3, Wilmington, NC (510 Miles) ...

I have a blow-torch local analog (12 miles) on 2, So I obviously haven't had much success with DX on 2 ...


I see you're in Ohio. I think you get better Es than we do in California. I don't think I've ever seen it stable enough to actually be able to watch a program.


I haven't researched that part of it much, other than as it is specific to my location --- but I wonder -- Do you think that may involve where the ionization is occuring (Es clouds) doesn't occur as much in a useable fashion for your location, or is it moreso the case there aren't signals/stations in the "right places" on the other sides of the Es clouds? Obviously, you aren't going to see much if the Es is happening to your West !

One of the things I enjoy is watching local news coverage(sometimes just bits of it from various stations) via Es.

Anyway, we get quite a bit of it around here -- Anything you could probably imagine happening with it, really. That includes, on occasion, stable (and watchable) signals for lengthy periods -- Most typically perhaps that occurs when receptions via Es are "long" and MUF isn't too high -- I'd almost say typically involves somewhat weak signals as well, but typically would be going a bit far, as they sometimes aren't weak when this happens. As one example, One afternoon, after I thought the Es was gone, I can recall seeing KHMT 4 (Hardin, MT - 1272 Miles)with a weak(but mostly stable) signal in for about 2 hours afterwards, than "poof" it was gone/ no more Es for a while .....

XHMEN 4, Merida, Yucatan, KIII 3 in S Tx, WFOR 4, WEDU 3 Tampa, KHMT in MT, WOAI 4 San Antonio, and a few Canadian(especially Nova Scotia) and Cuban stations(often un-Id'd) have been several of the stations I see most often via Es....

It's going to be quite different here after all the full service analogs shut off, that's for sure, although, it's actually something I'm looking forward to ..

Also, I think whether or not It's likely I have watchable signals via Es for some period of time depends upon where the bits of "enhanced" ionization in E-Layer (Es "clouds") are occuring, how big they are and how fast they are moving ....

For example, if the only signals coming in on Lo-VHF via Es are from South Florida, then it hasn't been uncommon to be able to watch, say, the entire local News from WFOR 4 , Miami. well at least until WDKY-DT increased power in early 2005 - I've still seen WFOR since then, but it often isn't as "pretty" with the DTV signal in same direction noising it up .... But, It also isn't necessarily uncommon for WFOR, Cuba, WTVY Dothan, AL, and WWL to be "trading places" every few seconds, or for it to just be a jumbled mess ....

Anyway, Attached are a few (analog) Es Screenshots from here ... Top Left WRGB 6 (581 Miles), top Right KENW 3(1142 Miles), Bottom Left, KCNC 4(1104 Miles), Bottom Right, WFOR 4(971 Miles) ...


Another problem is that the whole 6 MHz bandwidth doesn't always propagate the same. Some portion may be strong enough to decode and some part not which won't work for digital but might be enough for analog.


So far, I haven't heard of that being a significant issue. And of course before anyone had success with DTV via Es, there were those who said it wouldn't work for various reasons -- Such as because the regions of enhanced ionization ("Es Clouds") move ....

Know what you are saying though --- For example, with analog, of course if MUF is above the video carrier, and below the audio carrier(at top of the 6MHZ channel), you'd be able to get video but no audio ...

Anyway think you and others might be interested in the DTV Eskip receptions reported at following link, and note Trip has reported decoding KOTA-DT via Es as well :

http://www.tvdxexpo.com/dtvhall.html

Also, since I posted only a link to one section of it earlier, you might also enjoy other sections of the dxfm website as well (including his TV DX Logs/screenshots) :

www.dxfm.com



What we get all the time here are very strong inversions. They can really mess me up when they form above the transmitters (2000') and below me (2650') and the signals become highly attenuated.

I can certianly believe it. Especially given the refraction is occuring in lower layers of atmosphere and that as received, the angles off the horizon are typically pretty low for Tropo, which is happening on the transmission end as well. I do know It is amazing at times how strong signals can be via tropo.

Similar to what Piggie said --- I typically think of the sort of "tropo" I see most often here -- which typically involves stable, but often(but not allways) somewhat weak signals from all, or most/many directions out from about 150 Miles or more ----- As "enhanced" tropo scatter or just run of the mill "tropo" in general vs. the situation with Tropo ducting where you have, in some cases strong signals coming in from particular directions(especially when it's from beyond 200 Miles or so) --- And of course oftentimes when that happens, you may still have "run of the mill" tropo occuring/coming in from all or most directions as well, or vs. "everyday" tropo scatter where you have distant weak, unstable signals(as explained on the dxfm website) out to a maximum of about 500 Miles or so popping up here and there ...

But, perhaps enhanced scatter may not be the best thing to call it, and Tropo ducting used as a general, overall term(as it often is used) may be more accurate. Its certianly caused by the same thing (temp inversions) as the (generally, here) less common situation where you can have quite strong signals via ducting from particular, specific direction(s)/geographic location(s) and also sometimes an observable LUF involved which is apparently specific to the size of the duct. Which indeed when that happens, as explained in the dxfm website propagation section seems to behave much like a open-ended waveguide in the sky ...

In any case, it seems to me useful on occasion to differentiate in some way between run of the mill "tropo" enhancement, and ducting of the sort where strong signals from a particular direction may be present which originate from many 100's or 1'000's of miles away ....

It's likely that lack of funding is causing the poor programming quality. PBS isn't like the commercial networks. Stations have to put up money for each show.

Yes, it's a feed back cycle. Their programming here in FL has gone down. Just last year they had cartoons from 7 am to 10 ro 11, then from 3 to 6 pm but not during the school day. Even if a stay at home mom (or dad) has an infant they don't need TV all day.

Create is nice, neat channel but honestly now we finally have it in Gainesville it's not as robust as I would wish. Most of the shows are organic, which is good, but doesn't appeal to as wide of an audience.

They started to get a wonderful selection of nature type shows but those have waned since the first of the year.

The New Hour is still a good news source. And I like many of their news and political shows. Despite what the right wing news says about them, one would think after the way people voted in the last 2 elections, some of their more left shows would appeal to a great audience than 4 to 8 years ago. I also don't believe their shows are as left as right wind commercial media claims.

But it appears PBS might be in trouble. And it becoming a I don't like the shows so I won't send money, so they have less money, bad cycle.

I really hope PBS doesn't go away, they are a very valuable national resource.

=========

Another problem is they now have so many networks within their PBS umbrella. Many of them have great shows. Most states now also have a PBS network of their own.

My suggestion is for PBS to go to 720p and yes compress it down to 8 some Mbps. We have a local WJCT that does that and a local that is 1080i using 14M of bandwidth. On my 32 inch 720p TV I can't see any difference. Sometimes a tiny bit of facial or foliage detail, but it takes serious looking to see it. WJCT only using 8m for their HD on 720 leaves them 2m each for 3 other programs that appeal to the wider audience, Create, World and Florida Channel. They still have 1.5 m for their FKN (Florida Knowledge Network), where they show stay at home lectures from FL colleges. 1.5M is cutting it tight, but it works for seeing a lecture.

Compare that to my Gainesville that uses 14m for HD then only has 2m for Create and 1.26M for World. World is about not watchable.

My 2 cents. I know a lot disagree with robbing the HD channel of its bandwidth and compressing it, but PBS choose this lifestyle of many networks and needs the variety to stay afloat.

KVPT PBS Fresno (which has a digital translator in Bakersfield) has really went downhill. They used to have the 24 hour "PBS HD Channel" on subchannel -2. When that went away they carried the national feed most of the time on -2. On February 18, when they shut down analog (including the analog translator) they reconfigured their digital signal. Subchannel -1 (now "HD") carries their regular programming, very little of which is in HD, and the picture doesn't even properly fill the screen! There are small black bars around every freaking show! They won't respond to any e-mails about it. Subchannel -2, now SD, is a simulcast of -1 in SD. Why would they feel the need to waste bandwidth on that? I don;t know what Comcast in Fresno does, but Bright House in Bakersfield uses a chop of the HD subchannel for their analog version of KVPT (you can see the "KVPT-H" (with the D cut off) bug). KVPT was my favorite station for almost 2 years, but not anymore.

KVPT PBS Fresno (which has a digital translator in Bakersfield) has really went downhill. They used to have the 24 hour "PBS HD Channel" on subchannel -2. When that went away they carried the national feed most of the time on -2. On February 18, when they shut down analog (including the analog translator) they reconfigured their digital signal. Subchannel -1 (now "HD") carries their regular programming, very little of which is in HD, and the picture doesn't even properly fill the screen! There are small black bars around every freaking show! They won't respond to any e-mails about it. Subchannel -2, now SD, is a simulcast of -1 in SD. Why would they feel the need to waste bandwidth on that? I don;t know what Comcast in Fresno does, but Bright House in Bakersfield uses a chop of the HD subchannel for their analog version of KVPT (you can see the "KVPT-H" (with the D cut off) bug). KVPT was my favorite station for almost 2 years, but not anymore.

Very simialar to what we experienced here, just a few details different. When I first put up my antenna 2 years ago for over a year and a half all I did was watch PBS. Now I watch only a handful of shows.

I in no way wish PBS any trouble but if the economy continues like this for more than a year, we could see stations shutting down. In Orlando, DMA 11, WMFE now turns off from midnight to 6 am, stating they are broke. They did smartly turn off their analog on Feb 17th. And Orlando is no small market.

========

PS: Love your signature! I would assume Boris plays The FCC chairman and Natasha is the rest of the commissioners?

This is a question about low power stations. I know there is currently no time specified for them to switch to digital. Quite a few of the low power stations around here have construction permits for digital stations. I don't believe a single one of them has put a digital station on the air yet. It doesn't seem like any station should be granted a CP and have it valid forever. Is there a time limit for "use it or lose it?"

I was specifically looking at the case of KMMW analog 47. In January 2007 they were granted a CP to change channels to 28. They claimed displacement although I don't see any other stations on 47 whose antenna pattern overlaps with theirs. KTLN-DT is close but not quite there. In August 2008 they were granted a CP for a digital station on 28. Over 2 years have passed and they're still analog only on 47.

3 years.

- Trip

To get more detailed on that, KMMW-LP's permit expires in 01/2010. They received displacement because of KTLN-DT falling within 265 km, as the rules require.

- Trip

I was specifically looking at the case of KMMW analog 47. In January 2007 they were granted a CP to change channels to 28. They claimed displacement although I don't see any other stations on 47 whose antenna pattern overlaps with theirs. KTLN-DT is close but not quite there. In August 2008 they were granted a CP for a digital station on 28. Over 2 years have passed and they're still analog only on 47.

3 years seems to be typical. However, stations can request an extension and I have seen repeated extensions on some stations going back to 2002 for DTV.

This info is available under the "application info" link on the TV Query. The result for the analog 28 application is linked here:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_det.pl?Application_id=1122720

It expires on 1/19/2010, unless extended.

Trip, what you think of this ideas for expanding for 6-meter ham radio band plan?:)

54 MHz to 76 MHz ranges.....

54.000 to 67.000 MHz will be used for Digital Narrow Band TV, not to exceed

2 MHz channels by using MPEG-4 with QSPK or new modes as well too.:cool:

67.000 to 72.000 MHz, will be use for all modes CW, SSB, SSTV, FM simplex not to exceed 25 KHz bandwidth.

72.000 to 72.500 CW, RTTY, PSK-31 and many other narrow band modes not to exceed 3 KHz wide.

72.500 to 76.000 will be use for FM, D-star and P-25 repeater modes bandwidth not to exceed 25 KHz wide.

76.000 to 88.100 MHz will be used for digital radio broadcasting service, by using IBOC or DRM+ modes up to 100+ KW ERP.

Now what you think of this idea of mine?:)

3-8-09

Trip, what you think of this ideas for expanding for 6-meter ham radio band plan?:)Where is the money?

If the FCC isn't collecting huge sums of money why would they reallocate frequencies?

Where is the money?

If the FCC isn't collecting huge sums of money why would they reallocate frequencies?

To serve the public good? :rolleyes:

To serve the public good? :rolleyes:

Hahaha, that's funny.

Trip, what you think of this ideas for expanding for 6-meter ham radio band plan?:)

Well, it's interesting, but I don't know what 72-76 MHz is being used for now. It may not be feasible to reassign that spectrum, and I've always just assumed it to not be available.

As for the rest, I'd love to see some kind of ham band on channel 4. I feel like the priority for the rest of the band should be migrating the C-, D-, and weaker/daytime B-class AM stations to FM, perhaps in a digital mode (I like FMeXtra myself).

Though the narrowband video is interesting and not something I'd thought of. How many people would use that though, I wonder?

- Trip

If memory serves, 72-76 is allocated licensed and unlicensed wireless devices.

Trip, what you think of this ideas for expanding for 6-meter ham radio band plan?:)

54 MHz to 76 MHz ranges.....

54.000 to 67.000 MHz will be used for Digital Narrow Band TV, not to exceed

2 MHz channels by using MPEG-4 with QSPK or new modes as well too.:cool:

67.000 to 72.000 MHz, will be use for all modes CW, SSB, SSTV, FM simplex not to exceed 25 KHz bandwidth.

72.000 to 72.500 CW, RTTY, PSK-31 and many other narrow band modes not to exceed 3 KHz wide.

72.500 to 76.000 will be use for FM, D-star and P-25 repeater modes bandwidth not to exceed 25 KHz wide.

76.000 to 88.100 MHz will be used for digital radio broadcasting service, by using IBOC or DRM+ modes up to 100+ KW ERP.

Now what you think of this idea of mine?:)

3-8-09

I can't imagine any of this ever happening. First off, 72-76 MHz is used for remote control. That's what the model airplanes use.

Secondly, the FCC database shows 103 licenses, construction permits, or applications for license for LD stations on channels 2 - 6. Seems unlikely those are going away.

I haven't heard one word from the ARRL about 6M expansion.

Chuck - AA6G

Calaveras,

You are right on the radio remote controls on 72 to 76 MHz!! I just forgot about that current band plan.

As for LD "Low power digital stations" I just think there no way can they survive on 300 watts ERP.:eek:

At 6 MHz bandwidth, at 300 watts ERP using 8VSB is not going to work IMHO....

However, 2 ways can happen if the FCC allow LD stations power increase up to at least 5 KW ERP, or just reallocated to Ham radio band use since we can go up 1.5 KW PEP with no restriction on antenna gain for digital narrow band TV DXing fun on E-skips!!:D

Besides, we never had a fast scan ham TV being skipped off E-layer and F-2 layer for a long time since the late 1920's 30's and early 40's.....

Now the the big question, is with QSPK or some new modes with using MPEG-4 at broadcast qaulity or less using at 480i 4:3 or 16:9 video format, how narrow we can get at it?:cool:

3-8-09

As for LD "Low power digital stations" I just think there no way can they survive on 300 watts ERP.:eek:

At 6 MHz bandwidth, at 300 watts ERP using 8VSB is not going to work IMHO....

Do you say this because of the RFI problems with low VHF or because 300 watts isn't much power? The RFI I can understand and probably agree with.

Low power really isn't a problem as long as you have LOS. KBSV recently put a 421 watt ERP transmitter on channel 15. They're 69 miles from here LOS. They have a better and more stable signal than any of the Sacramento 1MW stations which are 54 miles away but not LOS.

Now the the big question, is with QSPK or some new modes with using MPEG-4 at broadcast qaulity or less using at 480i 4:3 or 16:9 video format, how narrow we can get at it?:cool:

I've always been an advocate of hams taking advantage of more digital wide band modes on the higher frequencies. If they want to expand 6M I'd be all for it. :)

73, Chuck - AA6G

This is a question about low power stations. I know there is currently no time specified for them to switch to digital. Quite a few of the low power stations around here have construction permits for digital stations. I don't believe a single one of them has put a digital station on the air yet. It doesn't seem like any station should be granted a CP and have it valid forever. Is there a time limit for "use it or lose it?"

I was specifically looking at the case of KMMW analog 47. In January 2007 they were granted a CP to change channels to 28. They claimed displacement although I don't see any other stations on 47 whose antenna pattern overlaps with theirs. KTLN-DT is close but not quite there. In August 2008 they were granted a CP for a digital station on 28. Over 2 years have passed and they're still analog only on 47.

Here in SE TX, we have a LD on the air....it was supposed to be a LPTV but then the owners decided to cancel the analog (especially since it was going to be on 52) and got a LD on 36..15KW at 180m.....originally a FOX HD affil until a high power station down the road stole the FOX affil...now the LD has only SD stuff on it and their analog is still on....WHY? They need to shut down the digital, and wait until they can get a HD network (ION?) and then put the digital back on.....waste of RF right now;..

Calaveras,

You are right on the radio remote controls on 72 to 76 MHz!! I just forgot about that current band plan.

3-8-09

The AMA would have your HIDE for that :eek:

(RC flyer for decades)

76.000 to 88.100 MHz will be used for digital radio broadcasting service, by using IBOC or DRM+ modes up to 100+ KW ERP.



Migrating the most vulnerable AM stations to the 92-108 band should have happened 25 years ago back during the Docket 80-90 expansion. Since that didn't happen, in an ideal world we'd use the whole 76 to 88 chunk to expand digital radio. Who knows, we might even have true IBOC for the first time:p

If low band DTV turns out to work, then Calaveras is right. However I suspect it won't. Sorry for not chiming in earlier on that debate, but if the various brands of skip don't kill low band DTV, lightning crashes will. Spent too many years watching We're Obviously Idiots* and being mildly tolerant of them. The crashes, not the idiots! And that's with an all new in '04 properly aimed outdoor antenna LOS to 100 kW at 1800' less than 20 miles away. 100 kW in DTV at low band isn't going to be enough.

Would agree that low band LPDT is a non-starter. (might work if it's within blanketing range! Better yet, just start up a drive in. You could see it just as far, but watch out for that nasty rain fade:rolleyes:)

Let's say for speculation that the future full power low band DT's end up staying put. With only two or three exceptions, they could all fit on channels 4 or 5. That leaves channel 6.

DRM would work well with 100 kHz spacing, plus allow for a mono analog component that would pass 10 kHz audio. I'd think most of the AMs could fit in that spectrum, even with leaving 3 100 kHz channels for All Hazards WX, 5 200 kHz channels for expanded NCE and perhaps 3 channels for exclusive LPFM use.

If all of 76-88 ends up going to radio, I think at least half will go to current 88-108 occupants in cases where adjacents would prevent stations from increasing digital power. (1% of analog ERP ain't cuttin' it.) Plus current FM station owners have too much vested interest in trying to maintain status quo.

*apologies to the former owners, who gave birth to the station by rubbing a bunch of atoms together during WWII. A bit of its former glory here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1_AuFmDo-I)

Well, it's interesting, but I don't know what 72-76 MHz is being used for now. It may not be feasible to reassign that spectrum, and I've always just assumed it to not be available.

- Trip

I believe besides remote control. There are other unlicensed devices I find on the net to enhanced listening in crowds. Maybe to beam to remote speakers instead of wire?

Also I know in the past some FM stations used it (I think correct me if wrong) for STL. Or for remote truck operations. According to the this chart there seem to be others.

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

Secondly, the FCC database shows 103 licenses, construction permits, or applications for license for LD stations on channels 2 - 6. Seems unlikely those are going away.

I can't see LD stations on 2-6 having many viewers with 300W ERP's. From what I have seen, existing full power stations with less than 8kW ERP in some or all directions have had serious problems with Low-VHF.

An LD on 2 was recently licensed just outside of Juneau, AK. Maybe it will work there, but they are only at 10W (K02QM-D).

Time will tell when the local channel 6 LP decides to construct its 300W LD facility, but they may discover that it will be difficult to brand themselves as a radio station any longer when they do. I may as well keep the Y5-2-6 around for a while just in case KSFV-CA and any other LP stations take a chance with 2-6 locally.

Time will tell when the local channel 6 LP decides to construct its 300W LD facility, but they may discover that it will be difficult to brand themselves as a radio station any longer when they do. I may as well keep the Y5-2-6 around for a while just in case KSFV-CA and any other LP stations take a chance with 2-6 locally.

I have no doubt that KSFV will attempt the vertically polarized analog audio thing when they go digital. They've shown a tendency toward "novel" interpretations of the FCC regs in the past.

I have no doubt that KSFV will attempt the vertically polarized analog audio thing when they go digital. They've shown a tendency toward "novel" interpretations of the FCC regs in the past.I admit I'm a "channel 6 listener" if I'm driving anywhere near the Quad Cities or Omaha (the Omaha station on 6 has since went DT only in the UHF band). But the realist in me wonders if it's fair for the FCC to bend over backwards to let these stations keep an advantage they've received simply because of luck of the draw and a quirk of the band. In fact, the Davenport station almost didn't get that advantage -- WOC-TV (now KWQC) was originally assigned to channel 5 before the "freeze" of the early 1950s, when the FCC re-did the allotments and moved it to 6.

At 6 MHz bandwidth, at 300 watts ERP using 8VSB is not going to work IMHO....


Low band VHF DTV experience seems to vary widely by market -- I'm getting a 300 watt LD on channel 3 just fine, and I'm over 30 miles from their tower.

Good for a chuckle...

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101298587&formid=911&fac_num=65143

IN THE CASE OF WISC-DT, MAINTAINING ANALOG 'ENHANCED NIGHTLIGHT' SERVICE IS ADDING TO VIEWER CONFUSION ABOUT THE DIGITAL TRANSITION DUE TO ANOMALIES ASSOCIATED WITH ANALOG BROADCASTING ON CHANNEL 3. MOST CONVERTER BOXES BY DEFAULT OUTPUT THE SIGNAL FROM THE CONVERTER BOX TO THE VIEWER'S TV SET ON CHANNEL 3, WHICH IS THE SAME CHANNEL AS WISC-DT'S ENHANCED NIGHTLIGHT BROADCASTS. AS A RESULT, WISC-DT'S ENHANCED NIGHTLIGHT SIGNAL INTERFERES WITH THE CONVERTER BOX OUTPUTS, WHICH IN TURN MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR VIEWERS TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE PROBLEM CAN BE ADDRESSED BY TUNING THE CONVERTER BOX OUTPUT TO CHANNEL 4 AND TUNING THE TV SET TO RECEIVE CHANNEL 4; HOWEVER, SUCH CHANGES CAN BE MADE ONLY BY MAKING SELECTIONS ON AN ON-SCREEN MENU PROVIDED BY THE CONVERTER BOX. IN MANY INSTANCES, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE VIEWER TO SEE THE MENU DUE TO THE INTERFERENCE, AND BASED ON THE RESULTING CALLS TO STATION WISC, THIS INTERFERENCE IS CAUSING MUCH CONFUSION IN THE MARKETPLACE. THE 'CHANNEL 3 DEFAULT' PROBLEM ALSO HINDERS VIEWER'S ABILITY TO USE THEIR VCRS TO RECORD PROGRAMMING BECAUSE IN SOME INSTANCES, THE REQUESTED PROGRAMMING HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH WISC-DT'S NIGHTLIGHT STATION PROGRAMMING. THIS IS DUE TO THE CONVERTER BOX'S SLEEP TIMER, WHICH IS SET TO FOUR HOURS BY DEFAULT. IN SOME INSTANCES, THE SLEEP TIMER CAUSES THE BOX TO SHUT OFF AND, ACCORDINGLY, TO PASS THROUGH ANALOG CHANNEL PROGRAMMING (I.E., WISC'S ENHANCED NIGHTLIGHT PROGRAMMING) TO THE VCR. ONCE AGAIN, THIS PROBLEM IS ADDRESSED BY CHANGING CHANNEL 3 INPUTS AND OUTPUTS TO CHANNEL 4, BUT A GREAT DEAL OF CONFUSION HAS RESULTED. AS A RESULT, WISC-DT SUBMITS THAT ITS CONTINUED ANALOG OPERATIONS ON CHANNEL 3 HAVE AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE BECAUSE THEY ARE ACTUALLY INCREASING VIEWER CONFUSION IN THE MARKETPLACE.

In Mad City, RF 3 is actually virtual channel 22.

Just in, WISC mktng has released new advertising catch-phrase: "Catch-22!"

Hate to offer up a rerun of my earlier post from a week ago, but doing so anyway. Am I missing something here?

=======================================================
"Perusing the DTS rules, it brings up a glaring discrepancy in general for UHF coverage in zones II and III. While there are different mileage separations specified in 73.623...

UHF Channels:
Co-channel, DTV to DTV
Zone I: 196.3 km.
Zone II & III: 223.7 km.

the power limits for UHF stations from 73.622...

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ERP AND ANTENNA
HEIGHT FOR DTV STATIONS ON CHANNELS
14–59, ALL ZONES (my emphasis)
Antenna HAAT (meters) ERP (kW)
610 ............................................................ ......... 316
580 ............................................................ ......... 350
550 ............................................................ ......... 400
520 ............................................................ ......... 460
490 ............................................................ ......... 540
460 ............................................................ ......... 630
425 ............................................................ ......... 750
395 ............................................................ ......... 900
365 ............................................................ ......... 1000

...is the same for all zones.

So does 41 dB (50,90) not travel as far in Zone I as in II & III? I'd like to know the justification for this. U stations in II/III should be able to achieve the same max. coverage radii as the Vs, and they don't with these rules. Post-transition, I can't help but believe that there would be room for all U's in II and III to operate with 1000 kW/610 meters."
============================================================ ================

(full pdf links...73.622 (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/octqtr/pdf/47cfr73.622.pdf), 73.623 (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/octqtr/pdf/47cfr73.623.pdf)

Good for a chuckle...

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101298587&formid=911&fac_num=65143

This reminds me of a CECB installation problem I had. The box didn't have an external switch for channel 3/4 and the TV was skipping channel 3. The remote control was broken, so I couldn't manually enter "3." I was also unable to get the CECB remote to work with the TV. Luckily, the TV had a menu button, so was able to do a re-scan of the analog channels and it added 3.

Not having an external switch for 3/4 is not a good idea.

So does 41 dB (50,90) not travel as far in Zone I as in II & III? I'd like to know the justification for this. U stations in II/III should be able to achieve the same max. coverage radii as the Vs, and they don't with these rules. Post-transition, I can't help but believe that there would be room for all U's in II and III to operate with 1000 kW/610 meters."

I am of the opinion that the FCC will be forced to re-evaluate the power level limitations post transition. Many stations the FCC has said can replicate coverage will have to have a power booster to do it. The public will demand they see the stations they have always seen OTA. We saw smatterings of that in Wilmington. I suspect that is just the tip of the iceberg.

This reminds me of a CECB installation problem I had. The box didn't have an external switch for channel 3/4 and the TV was skipping channel 3. The remote control was broken, so I couldn't manually enter "3." I was also unable to get the CECB remote to work with the TV. Luckily, the TV had a menu button, so was able to do a re-scan of the analog channels and it added 3.

Not having an external switch for 3/4 is not a good idea.

I had a similar situation as well, setting up a CECB for a friend.  The TV has only RF input, no A/V, and he and his roommate tuned channels by using the up/down keys on a remote that supported the TV brand which had come with a long-dead VCR.

Since channels 3 and 4 had no analog signals here, the preprogrammed channels included neither 3 nor 4.

He found the TV's own remote, but its 0 key didn't work, and pressing just 3 or 4 alone would not select the single-digit channel; rather it would just time out and stay on the current channel.  I had to go home, take a remote I had for the same brand of TV, go back to their place, and use my remote to key 03 (or maybe it was 04) to change the TV's channel.  From there its own remote worked to add the channel to the list.

Of course, while I was doing that, he was complaining that I was doing it wrong, that the way to select a TV channel is to use the up and down keys on the VCR remote ... appreciative, huh?

Maybe it's not that similar: an external switch for channel 3 or 4 output on the CECB wouldn't have helped.

In Mad City, RF 3 is actually virtual channel 22.

Just in, WISC mktng has released new advertising catch-phrase: "Catch-22!"

Um, WISC-DT is on RF channel 50. No one is on 22, analog or digital.

If low band DTV turns out to work, then Calaveras is right. However I suspect it won't. Sorry for not chiming in earlier on that debate, but if the various brands of skip don't kill low band DTV, lightning crashes will. Spent too many years watching We're Obviously Idiots* and being mildly tolerant of them. The crashes, not the idiots! And that's with an all new in '04 properly aimed outdoor antenna LOS to 100 kW at 1800' less than 20 miles away. 100 kW in DTV at low band isn't going to be enough.

Would agree that low band LPDT is a non-starter. (might work if it's within blanketing range! Better yet, just start up a drive in. You could see it just as far, but watch out for that nasty rain fade:rolleyes:)

Let's say for speculation that the future full power low band DT's end up staying put. With only two or three exceptions, they could all fit on channels 4 or 5. That leaves channel 6.


Looks like we're going to get an opportunity to find out if LP Low-VHF works or not here in the SF Bay Area. There are applications in for LP stations on channels 3, 4 and 6, all running 300 watts from anywhere between 1350 to 2200 feet HAAT, plus a 100 watt translator on channel 5 from 1388 feet. Two of the stations are set for the top of Mt. Tamalpais in southern Marin County, just over the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, and another is for the Santa Cruz Mountains west of San Jose.

There are also two LP stations going up in the Sacramento area on channels 5 and 6, both running 300 watts from about 2000 feet HAAT, one for Angels Camp and one on Sutter Buttes.

Since we have very few thunderstorms here, maybe the stations will work. Time will tell.

It's interesting that all of the full power stations in California, except one up in Eureka on channel 3, have deserted Low-VHF. I've heard that the Eureka station decided to stay on channel 3 because of their very mountainous terrain. They felt Low-VHF would work best for them.

Larry
SF

Good for a chuckle...

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101298587&formid=911&fac_num=65143

If early adopters switched to their CECBs before the original cut-off date, if they didn't use channel 4, they would have had the problem from turn-on date.

Of course, at that time, they knew that channel 3 was going away after the 17th. Ya, right, the three stooges took care of that. Now the viewer is stuck with another 60 days of interference.

But it is funny.

Tell the viewer to use the AV outputs :D I know, the TV may be so old that it doesn't even have AV inputs.

If early adopters switched to their CECBs before the original cut-off date, if they didn't use channel 4, they would have had the problem from turn-on date.

Of course, at that time, they knew that channel 3 was going away after the 17th. Ya, right, the three stooges took care of that. Now the viewer is stuck with another 60 days of interference.

But it is funny.

Tell the viewer to use the AV outputs :D I know, the TV may be so old that it doesn't even have AV inputs.

My mother in law has a 19 inch analog about 5 years old and it doesn't have AV inputs.

My mother in law has a 19 inch analog about 5 years old and it doesn't have AV inputs.

My old faithful, a 19in GE Stereo TV (one of their 1st stereo sets) from the 80s only has RF in..NO audio IO or video in.....I always thought about digging into it and adding something...but luckily RS's stereo modulator worked (they dont see it anymore)...wasnt cheap...but it works! NOW I have a DISH 722 coming...with two stereo mods in it.....perfect!

Looks like we're going to get an opportunity to find out if LP Low-VHF works or not here in the SF Bay Area. There are applications in for LP stations on channels 3, 4 and 6, all running 300 watts from anywhere between 1350 to 2200 feet HAAT, plus a 100 watt translator on channel 5 from 1388 feet. Two of the stations are set for the top of Mt. Tamalpais in southern Marin County, just over the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, and another is for the Santa Cruz Mountains west of San Jose.

From what I can tell:

K14MW-D/3 & 5: is getting displaced from 14 by KTNC, but KDTV is already on 14... the location is different as well. I see a 1W translator CP for 5, is that the one you are looking at?

KTVJ-LP/4: is claiming displacement from KICU. The previous request for 20 won't work due to KMAX in Sacramento.

KBKF-LD/6: This application shows a status of "dismissed." They had wanted to move to 6 as they were receiving interference from 3 different stations. I wonder why it was dismissed? Edit: I think I see why. They have an app for analog 6 instead.

This only seems to further confirm that we don't have enough channels left and Land Mobile certainly isn't helping.

From what I can tell:

K14MW-D/3 & 5: is getting displaced from 14 by KTNC, but KDTV is already on 14... the location is different as well. I see a 1W translator CP for 5, is that the one you are looking at?

KTVJ-LP/4: is claiming displacement from KICU. The previous request for 20 won't work due to KMAX in Sacramento.

KBKF-LD/6: This application shows a status of "dismissed." They had wanted to move to 6 as they were receiving interference from 3 different stations. I wonder why it was dismissed? Edit: I think I see why. They have an app for analog 6 instead.

This only seems to further confirm that we don't have enough channels left and Land Mobile certainly isn't helping.

Where do you find all of this interesting information about displacement and interference and applications being dismissed?!? I can't seem to locate any of those special pages.

The translator I was thinking of for channel 5 is K14MW located northeast of Petaluma. I had the decimal point misplaced. It is ONLY 1 watt. WOW!

Speaking of channel 14, KTNC turned off their digital transmitter on channel 63 on January 12th so that they could remove it to make room to install their new channel 14 transmitter to go on the air on February 17th. Well, along came the delay, so they now have a brand new channel 14 transmitter ready to go and they can't turn it on until June since KDTV analog is still on the air. I wonder how many other stations got screwed like that?

Larry
SF

I am getting the info from the applications, using the CDBS application search:

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_sear.htm

The status of an application, (e.g. "dismissed") shows under the TV Query if you check the "Application Info" link.

As for stations that have been hurt by the delay, KETS/PBS out of Little Rock was the most tragic example I'm aware of. They were dark for both analog and digital last I checked since they removed both of the old antennas (for 2 and 5) to go to 7, but KATV/ABC is still broadcasting in analog on 7. I will have to check if they were able to get a sub-channel somewhere.

As for stations that have been hurt by the delay, KETS/PBS out of Little Rock was the most tragic example I'm aware of. They were dark for both analog and digital last I checked since they removed both of the old antennas (for 2 and 5) to go to 7, but KATV/ABC is still broadcasting in analog on 7. I will have to check if they were able to get a sub-channel somewhere.

They weren't.

And add in co-owned KETZ-DT, same problem. An analog blocks their path.

- Trip

They weren't.

And add in co-owned KETZ-DT, same problem. An analog blocks their path.

- Trip

That is much worse than me, 3 of my possible 4 VHF DTV stations can't raise power until June 12. Leaves me with very intermittent NBC.

I am still on the angry side about the delay.

--

Then there are people like my Mother in law that was an early converter. Before any of the CECBs had analog pass through or one that was worth a crude. She tried digital and 2 of her fav stations moved to VHF and won't raise power to post transition. Plus in the mean time she has lost 3 analogs. It really has her ticked off and she 66, not the technical kind at all, but knows the delay was wrong on many levels besides her mess.

I am of the opinion that the FCC will be forced to re-evaluate the power level limitations post transition. Many stations the FCC has said can replicate coverage will have to have a power booster to do it. The public will demand they see the stations they have always seen OTA. We saw smatterings of that in Wilmington. I suspect that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Where can people send it reports that their stations are not running enough power?

This is another one of the problems with the delay. By June had we had the Feb 17th stay, stations would be concentrating on fine tuning things like antennas and power levels. The way it is now, it maybe early 2010 before most stations even get the money to apply for Construction Permits.

Then again this is the same government that did things like suspend the regulations in the Glass Steagall Act that have most of us as broke as we have ever been. No logic, just greed and politics. And it hasn't changed.

Looks like we're going to get an opportunity to find out if LP Low-VHF works or not here in the SF Bay Area. There are applications in for LP stations on channels 3, 4 and 6, all running 300 watts from anywhere between 1350 to 2200 feet HAAT, plus a 100 watt translator on channel 5 from 1388 feet. Two of the stations are set for the top of Mt. Tamalpais in southern Marin County, just over the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, and another is for the Santa Cruz Mountains west of San Jose.

There are also two LP stations going up in the Sacramento area on channels 5 and 6, both running 300 watts from about 2000 feet HAAT, one for Angels Camp and one on Sutter Buttes.

Since we have very few thunderstorms here, maybe the stations will work. Time will tell.

It's interesting that all of the full power stations in California, except one up in Eureka on channel 3, have deserted Low-VHF. I've heard that the Eureka station decided to stay on channel 3 because of their very mountainous terrain. They felt Low-VHF would work best for them.

Larry
SF

Are these LPs analog or digital??? Ive seen LP analog work ok but LDs on lowband?? Thats a whole new ballgame......

That is much worse than me, 3 of my possible 4 VHF DTV stations can't raise power until June 12. Leaves me with very intermittent NBC.

I am still on the angry side about the delay.

--

Then there are people like my Mother in law that was an early converter. Before any of the CECBs had analog pass through or one that was worth a crude. She tried digital and 2 of her fav stations moved to VHF and won't raise power to post transition. Plus in the mean time she has lost 3 analogs. It really has her ticked off and she 66, not the technical kind at all, but knows the delay was wrong on many levels besides her mess.

She at 66 PROBABLY gets "IT" more than the idiots in Congress!!!!! Too bad we dont have more of HER type in there :)

Where can people send it reports that their stations are not running enough power?

You can start with the stations and the FCC.

Are these LPs analog or digital??? Ive seen LP analog work ok but LDs on lowband?? Thats a whole new ballgame......

In the case of the above, 3, 4 & 5 are to be digital. 6 was to be, but they appear to be opting for analog instead.

WYLE(TV), FLORENCE, ALABAMA. Cancelled station's analog license and digital construction permit pursuant to Section 312(g) of the Communications Act, and dismissed pending applications.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-576A1.pdf

Apparently, this station had resumed broadcasts for 24 hours over a year ago, but it was only a test pattern with no actual programming.

In response to the request for a description of the nature or type, and duration of any programming broadcast by the Station during its brief return to the air, the Station responded that “WYLE was broadcasting a test pattern for the entire 24 hour period.”

WYLE(TV), FLORENCE, ALABAMA. Cancelled station's analog license and digital construction permit pursuant to Section 312(g) of the Communications Act, and dismissed pending applications.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-576A1.pdf

Apparently, this station had resumed broadcasts for 24 hours over a year ago, but it was only a test pattern with no actual programming.

They could have at least simulcasted with WHDF, perhaps.

- Trip

Are these LPs analog or digital??? Ive seen LP analog work ok but LDs on lowband?? Thats a whole new ballgame......

They're going to be digital running 300 watts. According to the contour maps in their records on the FCC web site, the two stations that will be atop Mt. Tamalpais at 2188 and 2195 HAAT will be covering about a 40 mile radius from their transmitter sites. (See the records for K14MW and KTVJ.)

As Falcon reported, KBKF on channel 6 had their digital application dismissed and they have applied for 600 watts analog on channel 6 and have a construction permit for 15 kW digital on channel 42, both from the Santa Cruz Mountains west of San Jose.

It's going to be interesting to actually see how well the low VHF LPs do. Since full power stations are now on those low VHF channels, we won't see any of these stations until after June 12th.

Larry
SF

It seems more unlikely that KSFV-CA/6 will flash-cut to digital on 6, unless the crazy hybrid analog 87.75 scheme is tried.

It looks like bigger players are eying FM radio on channel 6 now (linked on LA thread):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16035745#post16035745


Mega Media Group CEO Alex Shvarts said expansion into L.A. and Chicago would make Mega a national radio brand, "covering the three top-billing markets which generate in excess of $1.8 billion dollars of advertising revenue a year."

$1.8B for channel 6 LP FM radio?

It seems more unlikely that KSFV-CA/6 will flash-cut to digital on 6, unless the crazy hybrid analog 87.75 scheme is tried.

It looks like bigger players are eying FM radio on channel 6 now (linked on LA thread):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16035745#post16035745



$1.8B for channel 6 LP FM radio?

The $1.8B represents the total combined billing for all the advertising in all the media in all three markets. You gotta read these press releases real carefully.

Re-Post from the delay thread.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DTV DELAY ACT

Adopted final procedures for analog service termination and revisions to the DTV Consumer Education Initiative implementing the DTV Delay Act. (Dkt No. 05-312, 07-91 , 07-148). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 03/13/2009 by R&O. (FCC No. 09-19).

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-19A1.pdf

The "Executive Summary" is too lengthy to quote here in full:

Stations that notify us by March 17, 2009 may proceed with their planned terminations without specific individual approval, with limited exceptions.

· Stations generally may not terminate analog service before April 16, 2009.
· Noncommercial educational stations may terminate before April 16, but not before March 27, if they certify in their analog termination form that they need to terminate before April 16 due to significant financial hardship.
· Major network affiliates may terminate analog service prior to June 12, 2009, provided at least 90 percent of their analog viewers will receive continuing full analog service from another major network affiliate through June 12, 2009.

Major network affiliates may terminate analog service prior to June 12, 2009, provided at least 90 percent of their analog viewers will receive continuing full analog service from another major network affiliate through June 12, 2009.
So how is this 90% computed? Would it be 90% of the ~4% still not ready, a number that should reduce as 6-12-09 approaches?

Seems like it would be cheaper for the stations to shut off 4-16-09 to save the kilowatts and just buy the remaining procrastinators lifeline cable at ~$10 a month for a couple of months.

So how is this 90% computed? Would it be 90% of the ~4% still not ready, a number that should reduce as 6-12-09 approaches?

Seems like it would be cheaper for the stations to shut off 4-16-09 to save the kilowatts and just buy the remaining procrastinators lifeline cable at ~$10 a month for a couple of months.

Probably read it too fast or I am confused. But it sounds to me, say there are 3 major networks still on analog in a DMA. 2 of those three can shut down as long as the one last network station says it will stay on till the end.

All part of the greening of America.

They should make all DMAs go down to one network station on analog and split the bill with those that get to shut off. This way the procrastinators will be down to one analog channel. They should pick the one with the most range to stay on. Have it run super nightlight service (made that up) just telling people to convert, with the current show in a tiny window, except during the local news when they go full screen.

I think with only one station left running it might get people moving. Then again lets see where the NABs letter to Nielsen will go saying they are over estimating those not ready.

They should make all DMAs go down to one network station on analog and split the bill with those that get to shut off. This way the procrastinators will be down to one analog channel. They should pick the one with the most range to stay on. Have it run super nightlight service (made that up) just telling people to convert, with the current show in a tiny window, except during the local news when they go full screen.

I completely agree with your sentiments here and am astonished at the amount of money being spent on, and everyone else bending over backwards for 4% of the population, most of whom are procrastinators or who just don't care about TV enough to be ready. In my mind 96% ready is an amazing number that everyone should be thrilled with.

Posted by Piggie:
Probably read it too fast or I am confused. But it sounds to me, say there are 3 major networks still on analog in a DMA. 2 of those three can shut down as long as the one last network station says it will stay on till the end.
I understand that at least one major network has to stay analog until 6-12-09. My question refers to how is the "90% of analog viewers that station has to cover" computed?

Let's say the DMA is 1 million so 4% "not ready" as of today is 40,000 or, at 90%, 36,000. A month from now, on April 16, that 40,000/36000 might be 30,000/27000. Would that allow a 100 kW lo-VHF station to reduce power so it would only have to reach the 27,000 not ready on April 16?

IMO, the FCC has gone well beyond the intent of the law to delay mandatory analog shutdown. If Congress wanted at least one major network's analog to remain on the air until June 12, they certainly had the authority and ability to write the law with that provision. They didn't.

IMO, the FCC has gone well beyond the intent of the law to delay mandatory analog shutdown. If Congress wanted at least one major network's analog to remain on the air until June 12, they certainly had the authority and ability to write the law with that provision. They didn't.

I agree with you, except that Congress did give the FCC plenty of rope to hang themselves when they gave the FCC the power, based upon how they saw the "public interest."

It takes lawsuits to go through the courts to get such wide-open wording narrowed down, if the courts feels that it was too broad. With June 12th just around the corner, it ain't gonna happen. So, instead, we get to live with more assnine FCC rulings. :mad:

But -- remember for later -- the FCC is in broadcasters' pockets. :D

But -- remember for later -- the FCC is in broadcasters' pockets. :D

Not THIS FCC. It is in Obama's pocket.

My question refers to how is the "90% of analog viewers that station has to cover" computed?

If I were the FCC, I would base it on the coverage maps supplied in

http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/

and on census data.

Late last week, the first two formal DTS applications came in. WHKY and WSTE have both filed the modified Form 301 to specify full DTS facilities.

Given that, updates had to be made to the structure of RabbitEars to make it work with some of the FCC's database modifications, but now you can see what it looks like if you check out the Technical Data for WHKY and WSTE.

So I ask those here, is it clear and understandable? Should I make changes to the way I'm displaying the data for DTS facilities?

- Trip

If I were the FCC, I would base it on the coverage maps supplied in

http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/

and on census data.I think those maps are intended to show how the new digital coverage areas compare to the old analog ones. That's more useful for the other rule, which will require stations to warn viewers if they expect to lose 2 percent of their coverage after they shut off analog.

The 90 percent rule is more like, say, if WTF-TV (not a real callsign; I checked :D) wants to shut off analog before June 12 and serves 100,000 viewers, then there'd better be another analog station serving at least 90,000 of WTF-TV's viewers, or the immediate answer is "no." The FCC and stations do have data on that, though.

Why does the one remaining major network affiliate have to be a full power station? In Bakersfield our FOX affiliate is a low power station, but it covers at least 90% of the homes that the full power analog stations do. All of our full power stations had planned to shut off analog on 2-17, but changed their minds after being told they would have to comply with the enhanced nightlight crap. If KBFX-CA had counted as one major network affiliate still in analog, 2-17 woudl have been a go for Bakersfield.

But -- remember for later -- the FCC is in broadcasters' pockets. :D


WHAT?????????????? Are you NUTS?? The current and past FCC admins have been in the LAWYERS pockets and noone else's...and they were STAFFED and RAN by Lawyers.....Obama's pick for charman is one of the best Ive seen in a LONG time (from well before Reed Hundt days)..someone WHO KNOWS technology.....

I made more tweaks to RabbitEars today than just what I noted above; would some folks go take a look and let me know what you think? I made a lot of changes in the Technical Data section.

- Trip

Notes column shows "colspan='2'" for everything.

Any chance of getting those lat/lon coordinates turned into a GeoHack link like on Wikipedia?

Notes column shows "colspan='2'" for everything.

I think I've fixed it now. How does that look?

(I have stuck Admin controls in the right-most column, but non-admins see the colspan="2", thus why I missed it.)

Any chance of getting those lat/lon coordinates turned into a GeoHack link like on Wikipedia?

Go look and see. :)

- Trip

I think I've fixed it now. How does that look?

(I have stuck Admin controls in the right-most column, but non-admins see the colspan="2", thus why I missed it.)



Go look and see. :)

- Trip

As far as VHF goes for my NBC wow (rhyming included free)

The REC maps are MUCH more accurate for what I am seeing than those dang FCC over estimated pieces of ................

Looks good. Thanks for the update. I don't even know if this is possible, but is there a way to link each station to its TVFool Online Coverage Map?

Looks good. Thanks for the update. I don't even know if this is possible, but is there a way to link each station to its TVFool Online Coverage Map?

There's no technical reason I couldn't, but I'm not sure that Andy would appreciate it too much. I've been trying to figure out what I could do for coverage maps, but I really don't have any answers...

As far as VHF goes for my NBC wow (rhyming included free)

:confused:

The REC maps are MUCH more accurate for what I am seeing than those dang FCC over estimated pieces of ................

Yes, I love the REC maps. I've wanted to link it like that for a really long time, but I couldn't get in touch with Michelle Eyre to make sure it was alright (REC being non-commercial). I've now given up attempting to contact REC and figure that if there's a problem, I'll hear about it and can remedy it then.

- Trip

Why does the one remaining major network affiliate have to be a full power station? In Bakersfield our FOX affiliate is a low power station, but it covers at least 90% of the homes that the full power analog stations do. All of our full power stations had planned to shut off analog on 2-17, but changed their minds after being told they would have to comply with the enhanced nightlight crap. If KBFX-CA had counted as one major network affiliate still in analog, 2-17 woudl have been a go for Bakersfield.I brought up the Bakersfield stations on FCC TV Query just for kicks and giggles (I guess I'm not quite sleepy yet), and I'm glad I'm not the one making decisions for them. Four stations, four different service areas, but I don't think KBFX-CA (Fox) would have been the station to "save the date" for the rest. If KERO had proposed to stay analog until the new deadline, that may have been a different case.

WHAT?????????????? Are you NUTS?? The current and past FCC admins have been in the LAWYERS pockets and noone else's....Because today, you don't like lawyers. :D :D

Yes, I know what time it is.

I just added another new feature. I will give this smilie :D to the person who can name the feature I just added.

Now bed.

- Trip

I just added another new feature. I will give this smilie :D to the person who can name the feature I just added.

Are the "Mobile DTV" icons new?


Patty

Are the "Mobile DTV" icons new?


Patty

You win one smilie face. :D

Yellow "Mobile DTV" http://www.rabbitears.info/mphsoon.png icons are those announced to be doing it. Once stations start launching Mobile DTV, there are green icons http://www.rabbitears.info/mphicon.png waiting to replace them.

- Trip

You win one smilie face. :D
I will treasure it always!:D

Yellow "Mobile DTV" http://www.rabbitears.info/mphsoon.png icons are those announced to be doing it. Once stations start launching Mobile DTV, there are green icons http://www.rabbitears.info/mphicon.png waiting to replace them.
Ah, that makes more sense. I was wondering why some stations were shown as having it when I hadn't heard anything about it in this area. Where did you run across the announcements, Trip?


Patty

Ah, that makes more sense. I was wondering why some stations were shown as having it when I hadn't heard anything about it in this area. Where did you run across the announcements, Trip?

http://www.openmobilevideo.com/media-relations/press-releases/

I've actually had the data for a while, I just hadn't decided how best to display it. This may still not be the final way I do it, but it's a start.

- Trip

WNYO has apparently changed its mind and now wants DT-49.

- Trip

WHAT?????????????? Are you NUTS?? The current and past FCC admins have been in the LAWYERS pockets and noone else's...and they were STAFFED and RAN by Lawyers.....Obama's pick for charman is one of the best Ive seen in a LONG time (from well before Reed Hundt days)..someone WHO KNOWS technology.....

Yeah, and if he did, he'd know better than to keep analog broadcast TV on and turn this whole thing into a much bigger mess than it was before!

Yeah, and if he did, he'd know better than to keep analog broadcast TV on and turn this whole thing into a much bigger mess than it was before!Unfortunately, the FCC has to base its rules on what Congress tells it to do.

And what Congress essentially told them with the extension act was, "The public needs more time. We're willing to give the broadcasters some flexibility if they've already made their plans for Feb. 17, but what we REALLY want to do is give the public some more time to make the switch." From that, we have what we have.

It may have been colored a little differently had Commissioners Tate and Martin not resigned, but too much straying could have been a problem for the commission.

And what Congress essentially told them with the extension act was, "The public needs more time. We're willing to give the broadcasters some flexibility if they've already made their plans for Feb. 17, but what we REALLY want to do is give the public some more time to make the switch."So what we got instead was more time for the public to sit on their butts without switching.

The FCC issued an NPRM today for KYLE's request to keep DT-28.

- Trip

from the 9news.com site:

"KUSA-TV and KTVD-TV, Denver, Colorado, intends to permanently cease analog television service at 12:01am on April 16, 2009, a date earlier than the nation's new June 12, 2009 DTV transition date, subject to FCC approval. No analog signal will be broadcast beginning April 16, 2009 and KUSA-TV and KTVD-TV will finally be able to increase their digital operations to the full-power digital signal that has been authorized for the benefit of Denver viewers."

A bunch of the new Analog Service Termination Notification form filings have shown up as filed today on March 17 at the FCC site buried in the correspondence folder. Is there an easier way to find these other than using the CDBS Station Search and then clicking on each station?

I have found several stations in my area that filed they will be shutting down between 6 AM and 12 Noon on June 12: WMPB-TV MPT 67, WMPT-TV MPT 22, WWPB-TV MPT 31, WUTB-TV My 24, WETA-TV PBS 26 in the Baltimore-DC area. The last 2 are blocking other stations, so by shutting down in the morning, they give some breathing room for the other stations to fire up before midnight. It is interesting to see what time of day the station plans to shut down, but it does make the form longer. As it is, the form is a mess.

WFPT-TV MPT 62 in Frederick, MD will shut down on the morning of April 16 (MPT = Maryland Public TV). Good, at least some other stations will be going dark before June 12.

A bunch of the new Analog Service Termination Notification form filings have shown up as filed today on March 17 at the FCC site buried in the correspondence folder. Is there an easier way to find these other than using the CDBS Station Search and then clicking on each station?

Trip added a link on Rabbit Ears for this under the technical data section (by call sign). It would have been nice to have a form number that we could track for this, but these are considered "informal" filings.

Another way is to keep the Correspondence Folder page up and change the facility ID in the address bar.

Several LA stations have filed for 6/12 so far. Do all stations need to file this notice, even if they aren't ending early?

Trip added a link on Rabbit Ears for this under the technical data section (by call sign). It would have been nice to have a form number that we could track for this, but these are considered "informal" filings.

Another way is to keep the Correspondence Folder page up and change the facility ID in the address bar.

Several LA stations have filed for 6/12 so far. Do all stations need to file this notice, even if they aren't ending early?

Yes they do. The FCC wants a binding Notice of Analog Termination stating the station's plans.

And on another note -
For Raleigh -
3 off already (WLFL, WRDC, WRAY)
on Jun 12 - WRAL(a), WTVD(a) WRAZ(a) , WRPX(e), WNCN(e), all UNC stations(e), WFPX (e) and WUVC(e). WRAL is providing nightlight until 7/6


(a) = afternoon, (e)=evening