Thank you for explaining why the 5.1 out of my flatscreen will stutter and cough, but only during commercials. Audio will flow normally during a show, but once the ads get going, it stutters (sometimes) like a bad webstream.

Many stations have two settings for the Dolby encoder, one that's used for network material at 5.1 surround sound and a second setting for local programming plus commercials for stereo.

If your TV does the same thing on multiple channels, it's likely a problem in the stereo portion of your TV set. If it does it on a single channel, suspect the Dolby encoder settings on that one channel.

DTV Notes
Nielsen: 2.8 Million DTV Homes Still Unready
Final survey of over-the-air-only households before June 12 analog shutoff
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/10/2009 8:12:32 AM MT

The DTV Countdown: Complete Coverage of the DTV Transition (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/channel/DTV_Countdown.php)

In its last update before the majority of TV stations pull the plug on analog June 12--joining the rest who already have--Nielsen says there are approximately 2.8 million homes still unready for the transition.

By that, it means that according to their in-home survey of Nielsen's metered households, those are over-the-air-only households without a digital TV, cable or satellite service or a converter box.

But Nielsen says it is expecting most of the rest to get ready once stations make the switch.

Minorities and lower-income families are the least ready, while seniors, one of the target populations of DTV education efforts, continues to defy predictions by being the most ready group.

The good news is that unreadiness figure has been cut in half since February, when all full-power stations were initially mandated to shut off their analog signals.

In raw numbers, Los Angeles has the most unprepared homes, at 252,180 (4.46%), while Albuquerque, N.M., has the highest percentage of unready homes, at 7.58% (52,235 homes).

Acting FCC Chairman Micheal Copps is in Los Angeles on Wednesday to publicize the transition and urge viewers to take steps to keep their TV signals.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/278991-Nielsen_2_8_Million_DTV_Homes_Still_Unready.php

But Nielsen says it is expecting most of the rest to get ready once stations make the switch.

Nielsen gets it. Many people just can't be bothered to be prepared for something in advance, and will only do so when they stop seeing a picture (or get nothing but a nightlight).

... while seniors, one of the target populations of DTV education efforts, continues to defy predictions by being the most ready group.



Interesting. Seniors make up a very high proportion of those calling the DTV Hotline at our station. (70% or more)

I suppose, however, that could simply mean that younger viewers are using the Web to answer their DTV questions, rather than the telephone.

Interesting. Seniors make up a very high proportion of those calling the DTV Hotline at our station. (70% or more)
This, combined with the apparent higher state of readiness in senior households, seems to indicate to me that seniors are simply more proactive about getting ready for the transition before it occurs.

Nielsen gets it. Many people just can't be bothered to be prepared for something in advance, and will only do so when they stop seeing a picture (or get nothing but a nightlight).
I bet we will see stories on people watching the nightlight broadcasts with the looping digital TV conversion info program for a few days before they realize that the doggone guvmint meant it this time. Or they will call up the station after a week of nightlight programming demanding to know what happened to their soap or daytime talk show. :D

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and suggest that Canada said no to WABI's petition to relocate to channel 12, because they've now asked to move to channel 13.

=====

I just posted about my 16 hours at WDBJ yesterday, and finally uploaded all my pictures. http://www.rabbitears.info/jobblog/index.php?

Enjoy. :)

- Trip

DTV Notes
Nielsen: 2.8 Million DTV Homes Still Unready
Final survey of over-the-air-only households before June 12 analog shutoff
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/10/2009 8:12:32 AM MT

...while seniors, one of the target populations of DTV education efforts, continues to defy predictions by being the most ready group.
Seniors "defy predictions"?

Perhaps that's because the "predictions" were based on silly age-related bias, rather than on any (gasp) actual data. What's remarkable isn't that seniors are by-and-large ready, but that supposedly intelligent people continue to profess to be surprised by this - and continue to re-assert their own blind prejudice.

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and suggest that Canada said no to WABI's petition to relocate to channel 12, because they've now asked to move to channel 13.
I wouldn't doubt it. CTV affiliate CFCF in Montreal is on channel 12. We had a family trip through that region in the early 90s (in fact, it was to WABI's city of license, Bangor, ME -- yet another beautiful part of the country), and apparently CFCF is close enough to Burlington, VT that it was on the cable system in Burlington. Bangor may be a bit too close for comfort for CFCF.

I wouldn't doubt it. CTV affiliate CFCF in Montreal is on channel 12. We had a family trip through that region in the early 90s (in fact, it was to WABI's city of license, Bangor, ME -- yet another beautiful part of the country), and apparently CFCF is close enough to Burlington, VT that it was on the cable system in Burlington. Bangor may be a bit too close for comfort for CFCF.

It's surprising because WMEB-DT 9 had its analog signal on 12.

- Trip

DTV Notes
Nielsen: 2.8 Million DTV Homes Still Unready
Final survey of over-the-air-only households before June 12 analog shutoff
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/10/2009 8:12:32 AM MT


In raw numbers, Los Angeles has the most unprepared homes, at 252,180 (4.46%), while Albuquerque, N.M., has the highest percentage of unready homes, at 7.58% (52,235 homes).



That leads me to believe that Hispanic people are the group most not ready.

Is Albuquerque really that unready? Remember that a large area of the market is served by analog translators that are not flash-cutting.

- Trip

Nielsen gets it. Many people just can't be bothered to be prepared for something in advance, and will only do so when they stop seeing a picture (or get nothing but a nightlight).

The ultimate PSA will be snow. and that is what they are waiting to see. You can't help many of them.

This, combined with the apparent higher state of readiness in senior households, seems to indicate to me that seniors are simply more proactive about getting ready for the transition before it occurs.

Approaching my senior years rapidly, I think we learn procrastination is a waste of time, as simple as that statement sounds.

Seniors "defy predictions"?

Perhaps that's because the "predictions" were based on silly age-related bias, rather than on any (gasp) actual data. What's remarkable isn't that seniors are by-and-large ready, but that supposedly intelligent people continue to profess to be surprised by this - and continue to re-assert their own blind prejudice.

exactly. Seniors are on of the groups in society that prejudice against is not only allowed but encouraged.

Thought it's obvious now, I just had to post

ONE DAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In less than 24 hours the final round of analog shut downs will begin.
May all go well --- especially for those who are doing more than pushing a button.

Amen!

exactly. Seniors are on of the groups in society that prejudice against is not only allowed but encouraged.

And yet, in an article in this morning's Charlotte Observer on the DTV transition, the reporter again stated that "seniors" were the least prepared for the flip on Friday---with absolutely no atribution!!!! He came to this conclusion even though the article featured several "seniors," all who were completely prepared for OTA digital reception. The article also stated that only 1.8 % in the Charlotte DMA were completely unprepared. I'd bet it's higher than that--but almost entirely in deep fringe rural areas. Mountainous areas along the VA border and 80 or more miles from Charlotte, and in the Charlotte DMA, will be almost impossible to reach with digital signals. Hint: doesn't Dish Network still offer a "locals only" package for about $9.95 a month? This would be great for limited-income people in far flung rural areas....

DTV Notes
Markey Says Push For Digital Standard Was Game-Changer
Former House telecom chairman says drive in late ‘80s was "key moment" for transition
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/11/2009 10:25:11 AM MT

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), former Chairman of the House Telecommunications (now Communications) Subcommittee, reminded folks Thursday of his 20-year association with the digital transition in an e-mail statement, saying his push for a digital standard in the late 1980's was a "key moment" for the transition.

"When I held the first Congressional hearing on then-high definition TV (HDTV) in the early fall of 1987, " he said, "I never imagined that it would take almost 22 years to reach this moment." Markey relinquished his communications gavel this session to focus on energy policy as chairman of a select committee.

Markey said he expected there to be some "confusion and dislocation" in the switchover June 12, but added that it could and would have been much worse had not Acting FCC Chairman Michael Copps appeared on the scene to quarterback the late-game comeback drive to digital. He also said the Obama administration was right to move the date, pointing to the over 3.5 million households that were able to prepare for the switch.

The game-changing moment, he said, came when the FCC decided to go with a digital rather than an analog standard--the first digital switch, as it were--and said that came after he "aggressively advocated for such a switch and successfully convinced the FCC in 1990 to begin pursuing a digital standard."

Markey cited what he called the setbacks of not requiring DTV tuners in sets earlier than the government did, and that it was "regrettable" that the FCC did not establish a multicast-must carry "opportunity" for broadcasters airing "enhanced local programming of importance to the local community."

The FCC several times declined to extend must-carry to digital beyond the replicated primary signal.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/279100-Markey_Says_Push_For_Digital_Standard_Was_Game_Changer.php

I'm surprised nobody noticed the flaw in this headline ...

DTV Notes
Nielsen: 2.8 Million DTV Homes Still Unready
Final survey of over-the-air-only households before June 12 analog shutoff
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/10/2009 8:12:32 AM MT
So how can a DTV home not be ready for DTV? What's next? "Millions of Dish Network Homes Subscribe to Satellite"? :rolleyes:

DTV Notes
FCC Preps Transition Eve Alert
NTIA, FCC focused on DTV at-risk populations
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/11/2009 11:30:56 AM MT

In an alert it will send out Thursday, one day before the June 12 hard date for switching to digital TV, the FCC says both it and the National Telecommunications & Information Administration are now focused on the DTV at-risk populations. That comes after two days of alerts focusing on the benefits to those who make or have made the transition.

The commission said the transition, which began over two decades ago, had the goal of better pictures and sound, more channels, and more spectrum for other uses. But it also said a policy goal was minimizing disruption. "That’s why the Federal Communications Commission and the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration are intently focused on making sure as few people as possible lose access to the valuable news, information and entertainment programming they count on," the FCC said.

The National Association of Broadcasters puts the number of DTV unready households at 1.75 million, excluding those that have taken steps to get ready--applying for a coupon not yet received or ordering and receiving a converter box not yet hooked up. Not excluding those, NAB estimates the unready figure at about 2.2 million. Nielsen puts the number at 2.8 million, though it does not exclude those with boxes not hooked up yet or subsidy coupons in hand or applied for.

"[D]espite our best efforts, some will lose television service tomorrow," said NTIA acting administrator Anna Gomez.

NTIA and the FCC detailed the outreach it has undertaken, and is still undertaking, to minimize those unready numbers and assist those who still have not made the switch by midnight Friday (1159:59 technically), when all full-power TV stations must pull the plug on analog, save for 100-plus stations that will keep on an analog nightlight service to guide viewers to DTV transition help.

NTIA is putting out the identical alert to its e-mail list.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/279132-FCC_Preps_Transition_Eve_Alert.php

I'm surprised nobody noticed the flaw in this headline ...

So how can a DTV home not be ready for DTV? What's next? "Millions of Dish Network Homes Subscribe to Satellite"? :rolleyes:
I agree it's a stupid headline, but….

In answer to your question…

If some channel you watch is moving it’s digital signal from UHF to VHF tomorrow, but you have only a UHF antenna, then you might not be ready.

I doubt that scenario applies to millions of people, but I guess we'll soon find out....

I'm surprised nobody noticed the flaw in this headline ...

It isn't the first sloppy editing I've noticed in a B&C article posted here.

Other news media got it right: "2.8 million not ready for DTV transition"; "Millions Of US Homes Still Unprepared For Digital-TV Switch."


Patty

2.8 million doesn't say if it's households or people, though. Survey after survey, Nielsen used to say something like "More viewers are ready for the digital transition than ever before." While it's not impossible, nationally they never had to report that fewer viewers were ready.

2.8 million doesn't say if it's households or people, though.

"In its last update before the majority of TV stations pull the plug on analog June 12--joining the rest who already have--Nielsen says there are approximately 2.8 million homes still unready for the transition.

By that, it means that according to their in-home survey of Nielsen's metered households, those are over-the-air-only households without a digital TV, cable or satellite service or a converter box."

"In its last update before the majority of TV stations pull the plug on analog June 12--joining the rest who already have--Nielsen says there are approximately 2.8 million homes still unready for the transition.

By that, it means that according to their in-home survey of Nielsen's metered households, those are over-the-air-only households without a digital TV, cable or satellite service or a converter box."

Yes, I know how Nielsen counts. It's the news media that garbles homes vs people. And the headline you said got it right said "2.8 million not ready" -- which is ambiguous as to people vs. homes.

Yes, I know how Nielsen counts. It's the news media that garbles homes vs people.

Those quotes were directly from the B&C article. Their headline also had the word "homes," so they were clear about the counting method.

If you were referring to the other articles I quoted, one included the word "homes" in the headline. The CNET article made that clear in the first sentence of the article, so I don't fault them for not having a longer headline.


Patty

Other news media got it right: "2.8 million not ready for DTV transition"; "Millions Of US Homes Still Unprepared For Digital-TV Switch."


Patty

It's your quoted heading I'm referring to

Other news media got it right: "2.8 million not ready for DTV transition"; "Millions Of US Homes Still Unprepared For Digital-TV Switch."

It's your quoted heading I'm referring to

Yes, as I noted, CNET didn't make the mistake of calling them "DTV Homes" as B&C did, and they mentioned "homes" in the first sentence of the article. So that article seemed fine to me.

Patty

I'm not a mindreader here. Based on the info you first provided, the news media did not get it right. You have since provided more detail, but it is personal opinion whether saying "millions" in the headline, and then defining it as houses in the text gets the point across. Some people, especially online, read headlines. There's so much information, the headline is what is memorable. And when someone says millions, the common interpretation is that they are talking about people. Even the FCC has slipped back and forth between people and houses in their live TV appearances. But three hours before my first station flash cuts, how the media got it, or didn't, is all water under the bridge. It is what it is, and they deal with what they get tomorrow.

More fill-in translators:

WQPX wants one.
WPXI wants three.

- Trip

As expected, WHBF made the switch to RF4 this morning. My rescan won't lock it in. I called 1 888 CALL FCC. The lady said the digital signal should be as strong as the old analog. She then transferred my call to a Tier2 tech, who dropped my call. I called back and talked to a lady in Pakistan or India, LOL. She & I could not understand each other. She took my name & number & said I would receive a callback...............

As expected, WHBF made the switch to RF4 this morning. My rescan won't lock it in. I called 1 888 CALL FCC. The lady said the digital signal should be as strong as the old analog. She then transferred my call to a Tier2 tech, who dropped my call. I called back and talked to a lady in Pakistan or India, LOL. She & I could not understand each other. She took my name & number & said I would receive a callback...............

What is your antenna?

I installed a CM4221 on the roof when I bought my new tv a couple of years ago. I know it is UHF only, but that was what a local merchant recommended. Until I joined this forum I did not know that WHBF ch4 was going to leave UHF some day.
I dug out an amplified set of rabbit ears this morning. It won't pull in RF4 either. I will need a different mounting bracket on the roof if I install a large antenna. I'm unhappy that Ch4 decided to be different than all the other local stations.

I installed a CM4221 on the roof when I bought my new tv a couple of years ago. I know it is UHF only, but that was what a local merchant recommended. Until I joined this forum I did not know that WHBF ch4 was going to leave UHF some day.
I dug out an amplified set of rabbit ears this morning. It won't pull in RF4 either. I will need a different mounting bracket on the roof if I install a large antenna. I'm unhappy that Ch4 decided to be different that all the other local stations.

Oh ok, unless you are like right next to the tower, you are not going to get the VHF-LO signal on the 4221.... A VHF-LO antenna is not bad online, price wise...

Lots of complaints coming in about WWBT-DT's 6 kW channel 12 signal in the Richmond thread...

- Trip

Lots of complaints coming in about WWBT-DT's 6 kW channel 12 signal in the Richmond thread...

- Trip

I see that, lots of UHF only antennas, not cutting it at 20 miles...

This is just the very beginning of what I predict is going to be a very bumpy road.

Buckle up!!!!

Lots of complaints coming in about WWBT-DT's 6 kW channel 12 signal in the Richmond thread...

- Trip

Let's see;

2 UHF only antennas
1 In an analog 12 interference area
plus
Transmitter problems

That plus the enhanced tropo conditions in the Southeast makes for an interesting transition. http://www.dxinfocentre.com/tropo.html

Let's see;

2 UHF only antennas
1 In an analog 12 interference area
plus
Transmitter problems

That plus the enhanced tropo conditions in the Southeast makes for an interesting transition. http://www.dxinfocentre.com/tropo.html

I hate tropo, when trying to gauge reliable results... It is fun for DXing, but not today:)

Attention:

To all who haven't noticed, there's apparently huge amounts of e-skip going on today. This is excellent news, as it means stations like WRGB and WPVI will be received under the worst possible conditions. Here's hoping the MUF gets up to the FM band!

- Trip

It's been thru the top of the FM band in some locales, and hints that 144-MHz may be hit with it as well http://www.mountainlake.k12.mn.us/ham/aprs/path.cgi?map=na
Anyone for hi-VHF Es ?

And now even some reports of NJ getting 162-MHz NOAA wx station(s) via Es.
http://dxworld.com/tvfmlog.html

Why am I stuck here answering calls!? :(

- Trip

Why am I stuck here answering calls!? :(

- Trip

Uhhhhh, intern duty, that would SUCK!

What's your number? :-D

Uhhhhh, intern duty, that would SUCK!

Whoa!

There are so many who would give so much to be an intern at a network affiliate.

Please don't demean the position that he fought so hard to get!

Perhaps then he shouldn't complain, eh?

Please don't feed the trolls.

Congrats to everyone on the shutdown.

Whoa!

There are so many who would give so much to be an intern at a network affiliate.

Please don't demean the position that he fought so hard to get!

I only meant today, dealing with all the people complaining, the rest of the intern stuff is a great deal for Trip!

I'll answer posts in here tomorrow.

Having woken at 3:45, been on my feet and pacing while answering calls all day, and it now being almost 1:30, I am going to bed, even though my work on the website is not yet finished. Many apologies to any e-mails I've yet to read/respond to.

- Trip

I'll answer posts in here tomorrow.

Having woken at 3:45, been on my feet and pacing while answering calls all day, and it now being almost 1:30, I am going to bed, even though my work on the website is not yet finished. Many apologies to any e-mails I've yet to read/respond to.

- Trip

Sounds good, rest up!

In Washington, DC, WJLA-DT ABC 7 and WUSA-DT CBS 9 moved from UHF to VHF. The inability of a LOT of OTA viewers to get those 2 specific stations is now news on WTOP radio. The anchors were just discussing this on the air, playing several complaints from people who called in. See http://www.wtop.com/?sid=1695872&nid=792. Someone from the FCC was due to be on after the commercial break to answer the questions, but from the webpage, I wonder if he/she addressed the specific issue of VHF reception. Doubt it.

The complaints for no longer getting WBAL-DT 11 at 5 kW and WJZ-DT 13 at 9.8 kW STA in Baltimore are even greater as far as I can tell. I have been unable to get WBAL-DT at all and got WJZ-DT with constant dropouts last night with Winegard upper VHF antenna at 43 miles. But I still have a lot experiments to do with antenna locations, trying to block WWPX-DT 60 on VHF 12, and taking out a pre-amp to see if I can fix the reception.

Followup on the WTOP radio interview with Bill Lake, the DTV coordinator for the FCC. The audio clip is currently available at http://www.wtop.com/?sid=595567&nid=92. Please do not slam your head into the table or the wall while listening to his explanation of it is due to converter boxes not clearing out the channel assignment. I wonder if he even knows the difference between VHF and UHF. :eek:

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=6863745

- Trip

Anyone find that video as interesting and entertaining as I did?

Anyway, I decided that I wanted to cross-post this from the Roanoke thread:

"A lot of the calls I took were people who had boxes but had VHF-only antennas and couldn't figure out why it didn't work for them. I was amazed at how many people got 15-1 and nothing else, considering I'm intentionally trying to get 15-1 and fail.

There were a few people who hadn't realized they had to use the channel button on the box instead of on the TV.

The depressing ones were people who were terrain-shadowed from the UHF signals. I had two people in West Virginia call who I ended up helping get WVNS-DT 59-1 instead."

That was, of course, me talking about WDBJ. (I need to write another blog post about Friday, actually...)

And despite what people here were arguing, most of the people who I spoke to WERE elderly. "I've had this antenna on my house since the 50's and it's worked until today, why doesn't it work now?"

- Trip

I went from 36 analog station down to 6 digital station, even with a new outdoor antenna on a 30' tower and an amp, most of my analog were clear, I think they need to look at the power levels and readjust there maximum power.

I went from 36 analog station down to 6 digital station, even with a new outdoor antenna on a 30' tower and an amp, most of my analog were clear, I think they need to look at the power levels and readjust there maximum power.

It makes absolutely no sense to go from 36 clear analogs to just 6 digitals. There's something wrong there. I'd suggest starting by trying it without the amp, just in case you're overloading the box/tuner.

By any chance are you waaaay out in the boonies, or in the mountains or something? It could be you were getting your signals from translators, and a lot of those didn't transition. They might still be there.

I'm 50+ from most transmitters. I get nothing without the amp. I get a signal just not enough to lock onto. Most of the transmitter are over a mountain range 1200' I get a VHF 7 from 70 miles most of the time. I never had a problem with the analog vhf at 100kw to 300kw or the UHF at 2500kw to 3500kw.

I'm 50+ from most transmitters. I get nothing without the amp. I get a signal just not enough to lock onto. Most of the transmitter are over a mountain range 1200' I get a VHF 7 from 70 miles most of the time. I never had a problem with the analog vhf at 100kw to 300kw or the UHF at 2500kw to 3500kw.
Can you go to TVfool.com and post your Post Transition results? I would like to see your signal stats!

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=6863745


What, no mention of UHF vs. VHF antennas? sheesh!

Can you go to TVfool.com and post your Post Transition results? I would like to see your signal stats!

Here they are

Here they are

What antenna and amp do you have currently? And which stations are you currently getting?

What antenna and amp do you have currently? And which stations are you currently getting?

Have a Winegard 7084 with CM7777 and rotor. It was put up two weeks ago and replaced a RS VU160 with CM0064 (made a huge difference on analog)
Stations I receive all the time
Call|Virtual|RF
WJAL|68|39
WHAG|25|26
WWPB|31|44
WWPX|60|12
WHTM|27|10
WTAJ|10|32

Stations hit and miss mostly at night
Call|Virtual|RF
WHP|21|21
WITF|33|36
WLYH|15|23
WBFF|45|46
WJLA|7|7
WDCA|20|35

On analog I reveived 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31, 32, 33, 43, 45, 49, 50, 54, 60, 62, 66, 67, 68, and a few WV PBS translators. Not all were crystal clear but were watchable.

Not all were crystal clear but were watchable.

The magic words. "Watchable" does not give you digital.

I'd be interested in seeing your post-transition ANALOG TV-Fool scan. You won't get any digital on a physical channel that still has an analog parked on it.

One more thing ... would I be correct in guessing from your analog channel list that you are at an unusually high elevation? If so, a highly directional antenna with a rotator might help. Multiple signals from multiple directions + tons of multipath = poor digital results. You should also look into notch filtering out those close-by beasties, as they may be overwhelming your tuner's ability to pull in the dx.

Have a Winegard 7084 with CM7777 and rotor. It was put up two weeks ago and replaced a RS VU160 with CM0064 (made a huge difference on analog)
Stations I receive all the time
Call|Virtual|RF
WJAL|68|39
WHAG|25|26
WWPB|31|44
WWPX|60|12
WHTM|27|10
WTAJ|10|32

Stations hit and miss mostly at night
Call|Virtual|RF
WHP|21|21
WITF|33|36
WLYH|15|23
WBFF|45|46
WJLA|7|7
WDCA|20|35

On analog I reveived 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31, 32, 33, 43, 45, 49, 50, 54, 60, 62, 66, 67, 68, and a few WV PBS translators. Not all were crystal clear but were watchable.

I hate to say it, but I think you just need more UHF gain. adding a 91XG into the UHF input on that 7777 amp and hook your 7084 up to the VHF port would work well. I do not have much data on the 7084's UHF gain. I would guess that it is less then 10dBd, whereas the 91XG is close to 14dBd on most channels in the upper frequencies... The thing, the same stations that you got on analog are pretty weak on digital, just because digital cannot degrade like analog, it is all or nothing...

. You should also look into notch filtering out those close-by beasties, as they may be overwhelming your tuner's ability to pull in the dx.Don't you think the 7777 is just way too much to begin with. Notch filtering channel 39 will erase any chance of ever receiving 38, 40, or 41.

Don't you think the 7777 is just way too much to begin with. Notch filtering channel 39 will erase any chance of ever receiving 38, 40, or 41.

I don't think there IS any chance of his ever receiving 38, 40 and 41.

Elevation is 560'. Watchable was some snow mostly on the higher UHF, the VHF and Major network UHF's were clear, didn't have ghosting or double images.

Have tried bothe the DTT901 and DTV-Pal Plus The Pal Plus holds a more stable signal, on the DTT901 I can see a signal just not enough to lock onto.

Attached my analog post also, only 4 and 5 are nightlights that i know of have translators on 50 and 41 that are still on that i know of.

Don't you think the 7777 is just way too much to begin with. Notch filtering channel 39 will erase any chance of ever receiving 38, 40, or 41.

Opps, yes that is too much amp.. A Winegard HDP-269 would be better.

If the amp was overloading would it still allow the high power stations to be received or would it wipe them out also, Just asking since I still get the 3 close by UHF's ok

I don't think there IS any chance of his ever receiving 38, 40 and 41.He said he was getting 38 before, but I agree that it is a long shot.

I don't think there IS any chance of his ever receiving 38, 40 and 41.
I use to get 38 when WJZ was on it but only late at night

If the amp was overloading would it still allow the high power stations to be received or would it wipe them out also, Just asking since I still get the 3 close by UHF's okYou'll loose the weak, fragile stations, but the strong ones will remain. I get the same thing here. No pre-amp will work for my particular area, but the "right" one will definitely help you. It's a delicate balancing act in your situation.

You'll loose the weak, fragile stations, but the strong ones will remain. I get the same thing here. No pre-amp will work for my particular area, but the "right" one will definitely help you. It's a delicate balancing act in your situation.

WJAL-DT kind of forces the amp choices to a lite gain pre-amp that has no issues dealing with strong signals, that is the perfect fit for the HDP-269 from Winegard, it will not overload at -17dBm (maybe even lower)

If the amp was overloading would it still allow the high power stations to be received or would it wipe them out also, Just asking since I still get the 3 close by UHF's ok

Usually, it would lower their SNR (signal to noise ratio) hence a lower signal strength, or completely wipe all channels out.

EDIT: Opps, did not read the time, but Digital Rules also posted on this issue.

Well I called the FCC toll free help line. They are showing that i have (3) obtainable stations in there database. NBC, PBS and ION. I asked to speak to someone technical and explained what I had received in analog and was told that I had received in analog would be DC, Baltimore and Harrisburg. He said they would send me a form to fill out Listing what stations I had received and lost, that they were keeping a list of areas with problems.

So I'm guessing I am not the oly one that has had a major loss.

Usually, it would lower their SNR (signal to noise ratio) hence a lower signal strength, or completely wipe all channels out.

EDIT: Opps, did not read the time, but Digital Rules also posted on this issue.

I will see if I can get a HDP-269 and give it a try.

Notch filtering channel 39 will erase any chance of ever receiving 38, 40, or 41.
Not necessarily. I used a CM7206 Hi-Q for a while when 39 was in DC, so that I could bring 38 and 40 up to distributable levels.

Insertion loss is a problem if the desired signal is weak, but if the desired is moderate and simply overwhelmed by the adjacent, then a trap might help.

Not necessarily. I used a CM7206 Hi-Q for a while when 39 was in DC, so that I could bring 38 and 40 up to distributable levels.

Insertion loss is a problem if the desired signal is weak, but if the desired is moderate and simply overwhelmed by the adjacent, then a trap might help.Agreed, but 38 & 40 are strong inside the Beltway. Dewster 1977 doesn't have much to work with.

Well I called the FCC toll free help line. They are showing that i have (3) obtainable stations in there database. NBC, PBS and ION. I asked to speak to someone technical and explained what I had received in analog and was told that I had received in analog would be DC, Baltimore and Harrisburg. He said they would send me a form to fill out Listing what stations I had received and lost, that they were keeping a list of areas with problems.

So I'm guessing I am not the oly one that has had a major loss.

That's actually good to hear that they're doing this. It sounds like they're paying more than lip service to those who really did lose signals. It's eerily reminiscent of how government would function in Happy Perfect World.

Yeah, I called about WBRA-DT and am having two formal complaint forms sent to me about it. It sounds like they're going to put pressure on these stations with serious issues to fix them; I sure hope they do.

- Trip

That's actually good to hear that they're doing this. It sounds like they're paying more than lip service to those who really did lose signals. It's eerily reminiscent of how government would function in Happy Perfect World.

Well I called the FCC toll free help line. They are showing that i have (3) obtainable stations in there database. NBC, PBS and ION. I asked to speak to someone technical and explained what I had received in analog and was told that I had received in analog would be DC, Baltimore and Harrisburg. He said they would send me a form to fill out Listing what stations I had received and lost, that they were keeping a list of areas with problems.

So I'm guessing I am not the oly one that has had a major loss.

I posted this addition in the DC Baltimore thread also.

I was answered with in 5 minutes.

I would suggest that anyone with reception issues or losses call The FCC Call Centre. There is no reason that someone with the proper antenna VHF & UHF or a combo should have to replace it if they received a good analog signal.

When do LPTV analog stations need to vacate channels 52-69 ?????

When do LPTV analog stations need to vacate channels 52-69 ?????

When the spectrum owner gives them notice to get off the band.

- Trip

When the spectrum owner gives them notice to get off the band.

- Trip

I wonder how the spectrum owner finds some of them? ;)

Their address is on file with the FCC.

- Trip

When the spectrum owner gives them notice to get off the band.

- Trip

Sounds "messy". How much notice must be given? We have four or five +51 LPTV stations still active. I think they all have DirecTV receivers as their input source. I've seen a lot of bouncing logos and "searching for satellite signal" screens over the years. The HSN on channel 58 had a frozen screen for over a year !!!!!

I'm pretty sure it's 30 days, but I'm not certain.

They either have to move or they have to go silent.

- Trip

We have four or five +51 LPTV stations still active.
...
The HSN on channel 58 had a frozen screen for over a year !!!!!
Where is this?

Where is this?

Raleigh, NC

WJAL-DT kind of forces the amp choices to a lite gain pre-amp that has no issues dealing with strong signals, that is the perfect fit for the HDP-269 from Winegard, it will not overload at -17dBm (maybe even lower)

I couldn't get my hands on a HDP-269, but I did have a UVSJ laying around, so I ran the antenna into the VHF input. It blocked out all the UHF channels, but didn't help the VHF any still about the same reading on the meter, just below being able to lock onto the signal.

I couldn't get my hands on a HDP-269, but I did have a UVSJ laying around, so I ran the antenna into the VHF input. It blocked out all the UHF channels, but didn't help the VHF any still about the same reading on the meter, just below being able to lock onto the signal.

You may need a really high gain antenna, aimed slightly off of the offending signal to get the rest with decent signal strength. My favorite is the 91XG.

You may need a really high gain antenna, aimed slightly off of the offending signal to get the rest with decent signal strength. My favorite is the 91XG.

Yes that would help my UHF but I would still not have the VHF. The funny thing is my best distant station is WTAJ on RF32 60 miles out, at 341* and my power house station at 6 miles is on RF39 at 333* all the other stations I'm tring for are between 66*and 220*.

I found out tonight I'm not the only one around here that has lost most of their stations. I tell everyone that says the've lost channels to call the FCC and ask for a complaint form.

As a side note the humidity is up tonight and I have about 15 channels compaired to my usual 6, so the signal is there. I really think my only hope is the FCC allows power increases.

Andy,

I'm wondering if would be possible to integrate some FMFool and TVFool functionality. Specifically, for VHF-Hi stations, could you mark a warning (like the co-channel and adjacent channel warnings) when there is danger of FM broadcast second harmonic interference to a VHF-High station.
This is especially important in fringe areas with a local FM high power station, as the user may be pointing a pre-amped antenna at a distant VHF-High station, and generate interfering second harmonics from a nearby FM station. (For example, WWNY-DT 7 viewers near Potsdam, NY's 89.5.)

Andy,

I'm wondering if would be possible to integrate some FMFool and TVFool functionality. Specifically, for VHF-Hi stations, could you mark a warning (like the co-channel and adjacent channel warnings) when there is danger of FM broadcast second harmonic interference to a VHF-High station.
This is especially important in fringe areas with a local FM high power station, as the user may be pointing a pre-amped antenna at a distant VHF-High station, and generate interfering second harmonics from a nearby FM station. (For example, WWNY-DT 7 viewers near Potsdam, NY's 89.5.)

I assume you wanted to put this in the TV Fool forum?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=841787

Yes that would help my UHF but I would still not have the VHF. The funny thing is my best distant station is WTAJ on RF32 60 miles out, at 341* and my power house station at 6 miles is on RF39 at 333* all the other stations I'm tring for are between 66*and 220*.

I would actually recommend a rotator for your site, simply because the stations are all over the dial and you have strong local stations as well. I think 91XG with a YA-1713 (for VHF) with a VHF/UHF joiner and HDP-269 preamp (or try your 7777, but I cannot promise that it will not overload) The 91XG has tons of gain in the 40s and 50s, where you have quite a few stations, so that works out well.... With your lowest channel in UHF on 21, the 91XG is perfect!

Yes that would help my UHF but I would still not have the VHF. You've got one of the best VHF antennas out there already. Have you tried running a piece of coax straight to 1 TV and see what you get. (You must bypass the mast mounted pre-amp) The pre-amp doesn't really do much for VHF anyway for runs of 100 feet or less. If this doesn't yield any VHF stations then you are truly SOL with the current power levels of your surrounding stations.

You've got one of the best VHF antennas out there already. Have you tried running a piece of coax straight to 1 TV and see what you get. (You must bypass the mast mounted pre-amp) The pre-amp doesn't really do much for VHF anyway for runs of 100 feet or less. If this doesn't yield any VHF stations then you are truly SOL with the current power levels of your surrounding stations.

Thanks, DR, I completely forgot about his existing antenna!

I assume you wanted to put this in the TV Fool forum?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=841787
oops - yes, I'll move it. Thanks for the heads up.

It appears that WHDH (NBC Boston) is operational on 42 again under an STA, due to overwhelming complaints with VHF 7:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16662137#post16662137

Will they petition to make it permanent?

It appears that WHDH (NBC Boston) is operational on 42 again under an STA, due to overwhelming complaints with VHF 7:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16662137#post16662137

Will they petition to make it permanent?

WOW, that was FAST. I wonder how many VHF-LO stations will get sick of the complaints and switch back to VHF-HI or UHF... (kind of the same with VHF-HI too, with so many people having UHF only antennas)

WOW, that was FAST. I wonder how many VHF-LO stations will get sick of the complaints and switch back to VHF-HI or UHF... (kind of the same with VHF-HI too, with so many people having UHF only antennas)
Actually, even a lot of people with what should be sufficient VHF antennas are having difficulties getting decent VHF reception in many markets. In some cases (such as here in the Austin area) that may be largely due to temporary operation under reduced power. But in other cases the station may be operating at the full power authorized by the FCC and still be having trouble in many areas.

And WJZ has applied to boost their power from 9.8 kW to 27.5 kW on the omni antenna, under STA. They're saying they'd use it until the directional antenna is put up, but quite honestly, I'd like to see them keep the omni.

- Trip

It appears that WHDH (NBC Boston) is operational on 42 again under an STA, due to overwhelming complaints with VHF 7:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16662137#post16662137

Will they petition to make it permanent?

That's exactly what WVUE tried to do (go back to their pre-transition channel 29 from their post transition channel 8) via an STA.

The FCC denied it and made them petition for a new channel allocation.

I wonder what the difference is in this case?

WVUE asked to stay on 29 permanently, when they should have filed a PRM (which they did). WHDH asked to do so temporarily.

- Trip

And WJZ has applied to boost their power from 9.8 kW to 27.5 kW on the omni antenna, under STA. They're saying they'd use it until the directional antenna is put up, but quite honestly, I'd like to see them keep the omni.
+1. Trip, I just saw the STA. Put me down for WJZ CBS 13 keeping the omni-directional at 27.5 kW. I have only intermittently got WJZ 13 since they switched on Friday to 9.8 kW STA with a Winegard upper VHF antenna. (Their 1000 kW UHF 38 signal was solid and easy to get). The STA would cause 1.46% interference with WWPX-DT Ion 60 on VHF 12, but I have wondered just how reliable are those interference projections for 5th and 6th generation ATSC tuners and directional antennas? If WJZ puts up the specified directional antenna at 28.8 kW, I'm back to around 10 kW from WJZ.

Just when you've thought you've seen the stupidest thing on the planet, this comes along: http://www.fhhlaw.com/memo_clients/2009/PMCM%20Uses%20Section%20331%20for%20New%20VHFs%20in%20NJ&DEL.pdf

- Trip

Just when you've thought you've seen the stupidest thing on the planet, this comes along: http://www.fhhlaw.com/memo_clients/2009/PMCM%20Uses%20Section%20331%20for%20New%20VHFs%20in%20NJ&DEL.pdf

- Trip

oye vay!

They will get on technical merit alone. No one else to interfere with. This just short circuits the comparative hears and channel auctions that come with a "new" station and pretty much guarantees they get it. It is a legal maneuver. Two more cable only channels.

And WOR-TV was a COMPLETELY different situation that dealt with legal proceedings of illegal activities of the license holder (RKO) and shedding of assets to comply with the judgment. New Jersey got lucky on channel 9.

Yeah, sneaky snooper first showed it to me, I thought there was no way it would work. Then I read the filing and I think this will be approved. And it uses that stupid law that was passed just for WOR. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

- Trip

So, they want 3 from 4TS at 10kW and 2 from Roxborough at 10kW, and are using the excuse to that certain states don't have any VHF stations? NJ certainly does and will remain so, even with WNJB/8's move to 4TS.

Where did this VHF rule come from? It must go back to the old days of broadcasting, just like license fees for VHF being higher.

What is the WOR law? Let me see what I can find on it...

Another reason 2-6 should have been discarded. How many more stations are going to try pulling this stunt to get must carry in the biggest markets, which dropped 2-6 in the public interest.

Just when you've thought you've seen the stupidest thing on the planet, this comes along: http://www.fhhlaw.com/memo_clients/2009/PMCM%20Uses%20Section%20331%20for%20New%20VHFs%20in%20NJ&DEL.pdf

- Trip

For us uncool kids who aren't in the loop and have no idea of the geography involved ... could you give us some background on what is going on here?

Where did this VHF rule come from? It must go back to the old days of broadcasting, just like license fees for VHF being higher.

What is the WOR law? Let me see what I can find on it...

The FCC wanted to pull RKO's license for then-WOR in New York, but they talked to their people in DC and got Congress to write a law that allowed them to relicense to Secaucus, NJ without discussion and then forbid the FCC from canceling the last VHF license in a state. This is the law being exploited now.

I fully expect this to work, even if it is the sleaziest thing I've ever seen.

For us uncool kids who aren't in the loop and have no idea of the geography involved ... could you give us some background on what is going on here?

They want to move KJWY from Jackson, WY to the main Philadelphia tower site. They want to move KVNV from Ely, NV to the site in New York City that is mostly used for backup facilities.

They're exploiting an old law written in the last 70's or early 80's to save WOR's license from deletion. It was literally an act of Congress.

- Trip

They want to move KJWY from Jackson, WY to the main Philadelphia tower site. They want to move KVNV from Ely, NV to the site in New York City that is mostly used for backup facilities.
Interesting. So they want to relocate their VHF 3 broadcast from Ely, NV to NJ?? What do they do - load up the truck with the VHF 3 transmitter and broadcast gear and yell, "ROAD TRIP!"? KVNV has a population coverage of 4000 people and will take steps to convert a translator to a low power stations so the, what 40 or 50 people out of that who are watching NBC over the air can continue to get coverage? I spent some time in the remote parts of Nevada some 15+ years ago and I was struck even back then how many houses had big C-band satellite dishes (this was before digital K-band got going).

Just a minor relocation of a broadcast license. :D

The Washington Post today has a story on the problems with the reception for WJLA 7 and WUSA 9 since they switched to VHF on Friday. The media coverage is finally getting around to discussing that the stations moved to VHF and that many people may not have a good enough VHF antenna for their location. The FCC is still pushing the double scan, but that is not going to fix the problem for most people. Freda posted the article in the HOTP thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16667460#post16667460. Just above that are news stories on the problems with WPVI, in Chicago and others.

The biggest failure of the education effort for the analog shutdown was the failure to make it clear that many people would need to make sure they had VHF antennas for stations moving from UHF to VHF. They kept talking about converter boxes and such, but rarely mentioned that people who had only a UHF antenna might lose some channels.

The biggest failure of the education effort for the analog shutdown was the failure to make it clear that many people would need to make sure they had VHF antennas for stations moving from UHF to VHF. They kept talking about converter boxes and such, but rarely mentioned that people who had only a UHF antenna might lose some channels.

That's now somewhat of a public relations nightmare. Many feel they have been betrayed after passing the readiness 'soft tests'.

--- CHAS

This is the Hidden Transition (UHF > VHF for DTV).

However, will rabbit ears be sufficient for many of these viewers that lost their UHF signals for VHF? I have not found rabbit ears to be very effective and they have none of the gain that an indoor UHF antenna can have.

The soft tests didn't prepare viewers for what would be, but only to confirm that they had "digital ready" equipment and even that was flawed for areas that didn't have VHF at all. I suppose they didn't want to confuse viewers by pointing out this simple fact.

Interesting. So they want to relocate their VHF 3 broadcast from Ely, NV to NJ?? What do they do - load up the truck with the VHF 3 transmitter and broadcast gear and yell, "ROAD TRIP!"? KVNV has a population coverage of 4000 people and will take steps to convert a translator to a low power stations so the, what 40 or 50 people out of that who are watching NBC over the air can continue to get coverage? I spent some time in the remote parts of Nevada some 15+ years ago and I was struck even back then how many houses had big C-band satellite dishes (this was before digital K-band got going).

Just a minor relocation of a broadcast license. :D

Freakin' brilliant on their part! This is even better than the Spanish-language "full power" stations that have popped up in Key West because they're entitled to cable carriage in Miami...

Add another to WHDH. WGHP is hoping to sign 35 back on until 8 is figured out.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=16671655&postcount=7197

- Trip

Holy hell! WPVI just applied to boost power to 30.2 kW!

- Trip

We all said we needed the transition to happen so issues could start being worked on - look what we're getting !

Add to it KWCH and KSCW want to flip facilities.

- Trip

Add to it KWCH and KSCW want to flip facilities.

- Trip

That's out in Wichita -Hutchinson KS... hmmm.

And in the filing, it appears they want to make it permanent.

- Trip

Apparently, the boost of WPVI has been coordinated with WRGB, who will boost to 18.56 kW. WEDY will also get permission to boost to 1.6 kW but may not do so right away.

- Trip

I just received a call back from a Level 2 Technician, in regards to my call on sunday to the FCC DTV call centre. Had a 45 minute conversation with the technician. Very understanding and helpful. Explained my situtiation, he himself is in a similar one, he was served by a network of translators that received an over the air analog signal, and also has suffered a loss of staions, since the translators now broadcast snow.

It was never the intent for people to have to upgrade or replace their outdoor antennas unless they were the incorrect band. If you received an analog channel you should be able to receive the digital signal.

They need people to report their problems to the DTV call centre and ask for a complaint form, fill it out and return it. They need to see what areas are having problems, so like WPVI they can examin and try and solve the problems.

Holy hell! WPVI just applied to boost power to 30.2 kW!
If WPVI 6 gets the 30.2 kW approved, maybe I should add a dipole antenna length optimized for VHF 6 to see if I can get the station at night when conditions are right. WPVI could be booming across much of the greater mid-Atlantic area at that power. :D ABC should offer to help WEDY relocate to another channel. ABC probably has unused transmitters and hardware for their stations that vacated a pre-transition in-core UHF channel.

There is a analog WDCN-LP 6 in Arlington, VA that has been broadcasting audio only, Spanish language music, that of course can be found on FM radio at 87.7 MHz. Their filings refer to interference with WTTG Fox 5 (now a nightlight station) as their reason for no video broadcast. Don't know if the station intends to become a proper LP TV station or got a LP 6 license as a back door way to be a FM radio station. WPVI-DT is pretty far away, but it would be interesting if the increased power WPVI digital signal caused problems for WDCN-LP at night.

WPVI-DT is pretty far away, but it would be interesting if the increased power WPVI digital signal caused problems for WDCN-LP at night.

Or WNYZ-LP (aka Pulse 87) in NYC.

We all said we needed the transition to happen so issues could start being worked on - look what we're getting !

I wonder if the FCC is actually going to approve any power increases?

KGO 7 on the Sutro tower has had an application in for sometime now to increase power on their low mounted auxiliary antenna from 24KW to 72KW so they can come close to replicating their high mounted antenna coverage. They're supposed to switch to the aux antenna tonight so they can begin the big Sutro construction project. KGO will be stuck with this low antenna only for 4 weeks and then during further daylight construction for another 3 months.

Why would the FCC not have approved what seems like a completely reasonable request?

Chuck

There is a analog WDCN-LP 6 in Arlington, VA that has been broadcasting audio only, Spanish language music, that of course can be found on FM radio at 87.7 MHz.

Sounds like what KFLZ-CA-6 is doing here when they moved from KFLZ-LP-7 last October. The trouble is they also simulcast it on 102.3 as K272EK. http://www.qsl.net/wa5iyx/ra/k272ek_08.ra

Those wishing for a power boost from KNMD in Santa Fe, those wishes might just come true. KNMD has petitioned the FCC to relocate from channel 9 to channel 8. I have yet to see any paperwork, just the channel number.

- Trip

Apparently, the boost of WPVI has been coordinated with WRGB, who will boost to 18.56 kW. WEDY will also get permission to boost to 1.6 kW but may not do so right away.

- Trip

Two of these would be in excess of the Zone I cap (10kW), but perhaps the FCC will allow waivers considering the circumstances. I am skeptical that this will be sufficient for the long-term, however.

WPVI was already at the cap at 7.56 kW at whatever their height was. I doubt the FCC will say no.

- Trip

Remember a couple months back I was trying to get the FCC interference analysis software to compile so I could run one? Well, during today's lull in activity, I've been picking at it again. Here's what I've got.

I've downloaded a few packages:

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Software/
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/dtv/dtv_apps.html

I've got a few different things set up. I've got the TV_Process, FLR Files, and Check_AppB at the very least. I feel like it's mostly Fortran 77 or later.

Now, I've gone and gotten the Intel Fortran Compiler and installed that. I attempted to just run "ifort *" which is probably wrong, but it does appear to try to compile, but doesn't output a file. (Probably some errors I'm not able to interpret since I don't know anything about Fortran.)

Any ideas? I can give the output upon request.

- Trip

Remember a couple months back I was trying to get the FCC interference analysis software to compile so I could run one? Well, during today's lull in activity, I've been picking at it again. Here's what I've got.

I've downloaded a few packages:

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Software/
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/dtv/dtv_apps.html

I've got a few different things set up. I've got the TV_Process, FLR Files, and Check_AppB at the very least. I feel like it's mostly Fortran 77 or later.

Now, I've gone and gotten the Intel Fortran Compiler and installed that. I attempted to just run "ifort *" which is probably wrong, but it does appear to try to compile, but doesn't output a file. (Probably some errors I'm not able to interpret since I don't know anything about Fortran.)

Any ideas? I can give the output upon request.

- TripWow, Fortran? So ancient. :)

Yeah. And they give no instructions on how to make the stupid software work. I just want to run a couple dozen interference analyses, that's all! :D

- Trip

Yeah. And they give no instructions on how to make the stupid software work. I just want to run a couple dozen interference analyses, that's all! :DHeh, I almost took Fortran 15 years ago, but it wasn't required so I have no idea how to use this program. You would think they would update to something newer with this digital stuff! :P

WJZ's emergency request to boost power to 27.5 kW on the omni was granted today. Wonder how long it will take to go on the air.

- Trip

My FORTRAN knowledge is even more ancient - 1964-1969. The days of punched cards and IBM1620 with 20k core memory and electric typewriter output. It had to create a set of cards (object deck) in machine language to be re-read into it. UT Austin did have a then-new CDC6600 which batch proceessed with a 24-hr turnaround. Talk about slow debugging.

UT Austin did have a then-new CDC6600 which batch proceessed with a 24-hr turnaround.
Ah, yes, good ole NOS/BE. UVa had a CDC until sometime in the 80s, iirc.

WJZ's emergency request to boost power to 27.5 kW on the omni was granted today. Wonder how long it will take to go on the air.
Already done. afiggatt reported in the DC thread they had announced it in an on-air scroll.

I do see a stronger signal in northern Virginia, although I don't know how much of that is the power increase and how much is weather related, as all the signals are up a bit this evening.

If WPVI 6 gets the 30.2 kW approved, maybe I should add a dipole antenna length optimized for VHF 6 to see if I can get the station at night when conditions are right.

What does your tvfool data look like for WPVI? The tvfool data for WPVI now shows the 30.2 KW application. The FCC has granted an STA. The increase was scheduled to be done last night.

My FORTRAN knowledge is even more ancient - 1964-1969. The days of punched cards and IBM1620 with 20k core memory and electric typewriter output. It had to create a set of cards (object deck) in machine language to be re-read into it. UT Austin did have a then-new CDC6600 which batch proceessed with a 24-hr turnaround. Talk about slow debugging.

I did my Fortran on a DEC PDP-11/70 at the local Community College in the late 70's (78 - 79)...

There is a analog WDCN-LP 6 in Arlington, VA that has been broadcasting audio only, Spanish language music, that of course can be found on FM radio at 87.7 MHz. Their filings refer to interference with WTTG Fox 5 (now a nightlight station) as their reason for no video broadcast. Don't know if the station intends to become a proper LP TV station or got a LP 6 license as a back door way to be a FM radio station. WPVI-DT is pretty far away, but it would be interesting if the increased power WPVI digital signal caused problems for WDCN-LP at night.I believe LPTV is classified as a secondary service anyway, so it's possible it may not be able to claim protection from a full-power in Philly. Even without that issue, WDCN is obviously not using the TV band as intended, which could make for an interesting argument.

(Although I admit, I miss being able to drive around eastern Iowa listening to Davenport's channel 6.)

Well, as a TV station, they should be transmitting audio at 87.75 MHz (or possibly 87.74 or 87.76) with 25 KHz deviation, which would put the signal just outside the envelope where most of the digital energy is.

But WDCN is transmitting in FM-style stereo, and they certainly sound like they are running 75KHz deviation, so maybe they are at 87.70 MHz.

In any case, I think they are way too weak to infringe on WPVI's coverage, and whatever damage WPVI does to them, if any, they'll just have to take.

Well, as a TV station, they should be transmitting audio at 87.75 MHz with 25 KHz deviation, which would put the signal just outside the envelope where most of the digital energy is.

WNYZ in New York actually had a special narrow-band ATSC compatible modulation exciter built to make extra room for 87.7.

And WSVN now asks for 158 kW on a new elliptical antenna.

WLOX lights up DT-39. "Permanently" if it works.

- Trip

So, the want 3 from 4TS at 10kW and 2 from Roxborough at 10kW, and are using the excuse to that certain states don't have any VHF stations? NJ certainly does and will remain so, even with WNJB/8's move to 4TS.
WNJB New Brunswick is operating under a STA and is not yet licensed to NJ as a VHF. WNET Newark is licensed to NJ as a VHF. Both stations are NCE (non-commercial educational) if that makes a difference.

Delaware has WHYY 12 in Wilmington. It appears they are operating under a STA (if they are operating) but are also an NCE station.

Harry Cole and FHH are decent FCC lawyers. I'm sure that they have a better understanding of the law than I do, but I agree that these moves from far far away are not what Congress intended when they wrote the law being used.

There were a couple of cross country hops in the last NCE FM application window as well ... applicants hoping to get approved as a simple move of existing services instead of as a new station.

Personally I believe the community of license tricks used in broadcasting are shameful. These stations are being moved to serve the bigger markets, not the communities named. The FCC needs to get more honest with "community of licenses", use markets not points as references and stop giving preference to one station over another simply because they choose to name a suburb as their "city". Get real.

Personally I believe the community of license tricks used in broadcasting are shameful. These stations are being moved to serve the bigger markets, not the communities named. The FCC needs to get more honest with "community of licenses", use markets not points as references and stop giving preference to one station over another simply because they choose to name a suburb as their "city". Get real.

I agree. The COL system is deeply flawed and bears little resemblance to reality. Does one station constitute adequate coverage to a community? How many people would only watch 1 TV station these days?

A great example of this is KVMD, which has Twenty-Nine Palms as a COL (~15,000 people). They have been trying to get better coverage into the LA area (12M+ people) for some time. KBEH was finally able to do that this year (from Oxnard).

Co-located stations on Mt. Wilson/Mt. Harvard have 13 different cities of License:

Los Angeles, Long Beach, San Bernardino, Santa Ana, Rancho Palos Verdes, Ontario, Huntington Beach, Corona, Avalon, Anaheim, Ventura, Riverside, Oxnard.

The current COL system should be scrapped to promote improved co-location. If Mt. Wilson didn't happen to reach these cities (at least by contour), our towers may be all over the place as well, which would not be in the public interest.

It would be better to leave behind translators if the FCC believes that small communities are losing representation. Most of these stations seem to have very little local programming, however. Do local ads count?

No interesting filings last night...

Is everyone okay with it if I remove the "Correspondence" link from RabbitEars?

- Trip

No interesting filings last night...

Is everyone okay with it if I remove the "Correspondence" link from RabbitEars?

- Trip

If all that folder contains is analog shut off, I think that is now past. Though still hard to believe it actually happened, honestly.

I have been in email contact with Citadel Communications concerning WHBF in Davenport IA. Would one of you fellas do a search for me? I would like to know what RF frequencies are available should WHBF return to UHF frequency. I'm thinking 1000ERP at 409m HAAT. Thanks

doing a quick perusal near the WHBF site using TV query, the following may be good candidates:
17, 45 (assuming KIIN Iowa City goes back to 12), 48, 50...the latter two would need to be within 24 km of KLJB, RF 49 near Orion IL. WHBF's Bettendorf tower misses that mark by about 4 km.

KIIN is, in fact, going back to 12, and I believe it has already.

I have been in email contact with Citadel Communications concerning WHBF in Davenport IA. Would one of you fellas do a search for me? I would like to know what RF frequencies are available should WHBF return to UHF frequency. I'm thinking 1000ERP at 409m HAAT. Thanks

Here are the results from a RE search:

http://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=channel&latitude=41.547&longitude=-90.476

2, 3, 6, 14, 17, 18, 29, 31, 45

WLS-DT 7 Chicago applied for a 9.5 kw test to see if it improves their 4.75 kw signal. We'll see what happens.

How is WBBM doing at 8kW on 12? That is quite a bit less than most of the upper VHF stations that are having problems, such as WHDH.

Perhaps it's simply a case of managing expectations. Since WBBM was on Low-VHF for all these years anything on upper VHF probably seems like a great improvement.

Another VHF to jump ship, add KKTV to the list. The station has been on DT-10 since it signed on, but now has requested a relocation to channel 49.

- Trip

Thanks for the update. Any news on WSYX?

With the VHF news since the transition, I would imagine that their request to move to UHF should be easier to obtain at this point, unless there is a problem with Canada.

I just noticed how crowded 13 is there as well:

13 WSYX COLUMBUS, OH 0
13 WOWK-TV HUNTINGTON, WV 108
13 WTVG TOLEDO, OH 122
13 WKYT-TV LEXINGTON, KY 150
13 WQED PITTSBURGH, PA 165
13 WTHR INDIANAPOLIS, IN 167

I'm sure most of the other nearby 13's wouldn't mind seeing them move.

WSYX is still pending. They filed an amendment a while ago but apparently the FCC still doesn't want to go for it.

- Trip

Well, as a TV station, they should be transmitting audio at 87.75 MHz (or possibly 87.74 or 87.76) with 25 KHz deviation, which would put the signal just outside the envelope where most of the digital energy is.

WNYZ in New York actually had a special narrow-band ATSC compatible modulation exciter built to make extra room for 87.7.

Tower Guy, or anyone else, can you point me to more info about this? I looked into it when I first read your post a few days ago, but didn't find anything. I thought I came across a press release, but now can't find it again. I mentioned this to someone last night and they didn't believe me :)

Is that correct that they are fitting the ATSC digital carrier right next to the FM analog carrier? Or perhaps the FM is in the skirt of the ATSC. Is each just contributing noise to the other and they're both barely holding on?

Is the FCC mostly concerned about the loss of service area as compared to analog 6? Comparing to VHF 13 would be more valuable at this point.

I have not seen many Low-VHF (analog) to UHF (DTV) complaints since the transition, but granted most viewers with these problems are in rural, deep-fringe areas that probably don't draw too many reporters.

KIIN is, in fact, going back to 12, and I believe it has already.

Yup, it flash cut on the morning of the 12th. IPTV looking good, just needs DT translators.

Is the FCC mostly concerned about the loss of service area as compared to analog 6? Comparing to VHF 13 would be more valuable at this point.

I'm pretty sure it is a comparison to VHF-13. Because of its 59 kW signal, I think it looks pretty big on a map, and the 1000 kW proposed 48 can't match it.

In reality, the 1000 kW channel 48 would do better, but don't let facts get in the way of the FCC!

- Trip

Thanks for your help, fellas. I rescanned on the 13th and picked up KIIN at RF 12, using modified Youtube antennas.

I have been in email contact with Citadel Communications concerning WHBF in Davenport IA. Would one of you fellas do a search for me? I would like to know what RF frequencies are available should WHBF return to UHF frequency. I'm thinking 1000ERP at 409m HAAT. Thanks

I had forgotten to comment on this.

If they want to keep the current tower site, channels 17 or 18 are probably the best bet, whichever can get more power.

Co-located with the other Quad Cities stations, 48 or 50 look sensible.

- Trip

Another VHF: KTVB-DT in Boise wants 31.6 kW immediately with an application to boost to 63.2 kW.

And WUOA-DT 6 wants to go from 26-ish kW to 32-ish kW. "THE POWER LEVEL REQUESTED HEREIN WILL ALLOW WUOA TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE ADDITIONAL POWER WILL BE HELPFUL IN RESOLVING THE RECEPTION ISSUES WHICH AROSE AT THE TIME OF TRANSITION."

- Trip

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc20090622_614261.htm

Yes, that's me. And that's an FCC guy who clearly didn't look into the situation for more than 5 seconds.

- Trip

Tower Guy, or anyone else, can you point me to more info about this? I looked into it when I first read your post a few days ago, but didn't find anything. I thought I came across a press release, but now can't find it again. I mentioned this to someone last night and they didn't believe me :)

Is that correct that they are fitting the ATSC digital carrier right next to the FM analog carrier? Or perhaps the FM is in the skirt of the ATSC. Is each just contributing noise to the other and they're both barely holding on?

www.axcera.com/downloads/technotes-whitepapers/bet_paper.pdf

Another VHF: KTVB-DT in Boise wants 31.6 kW immediately with an application to boost to 63.2 kW.

This comment is surprising, since Boise already had 2 upper VHF DTV stations, at lower power:

Within hours of moving from its pre-transition UHF channel to its post-transition VHF channel, KTVB began to receive a deluge of calls from viewers that could no longer receive the station’s digital signal via their indoor antennas. Despite attempts to walk callers through the process of resetting and/or re-scanning their equipment, station personnel were unable to resolve many indoor reception issues. Moreover, the majority of callers to KTVB’s call center were either unwilling or unable to install roof-top VHF antennas.

In my case, the CM4221 is performing much better on 9-13 at the office (Tustin, CA) vs. KABC/7.

The old 4221 has a significant drop-off in gain at the bottom of the upper VHF band and I confirmed this on analog before the transition.

I have not performed tests on the 4221HD, with the reflector in its proper position to compare. Now that KTTV/11 and KCOP/13 appear to be operating on their main facilities, I will try this.

It seems plausible that 7-8 is giving people with UHF only antennas more problems than 9-13.

Perhaps WSVN/7 vs. WPLG/10 in Miami is suffering from the same problem.

At home, on my YA1713, 7/9/11/13 are all relatively close now.

As for WUOA, I recall that they wanted 6 badly as they were strapped for cash. How is that decision looking to them now? I'd take 50kW (ERP) on UHF with a solid state transmitter any day over 6.

Did WCFT get off of 5 yet?

WCFT is still on 5 at the moment. They'll be moving to 33 around October or something, last I heard.

Who knows what WUOA was thinking.

- Trip

Also, perhaps KTVB can turn 26 back on and dual-run for now, like WHDH did?

We'll have to see. They might choose to do so if the complaints are bad enough.

I wonder if this is making KBCI rethink their channel 9 petition?

- Trip

See the KKTV PRM? http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520223002

It's an interesting read. (54% interference on 10, ouch!) I wonder how quick the FCC works on this one.

- Trip

Do we have a clear count at this point of TV stations who's pre-transition channel was UHF, and who went to their VHF-Hi previously-analog channel post-transition, and who now want either a power increase or their UHF pre-transition channel back?

Reading these forums I see that there are quite a few.

WVUE, my local FOX affiliate transitioned from 29 to 8 for digital last December and now want 29 back.

The FCC has allowed WVUE to simulcast on both 8 and 29 for the last few days and the results are very enlightening. MANY viewers who could not receive 8 can receive 29 with no problem. So far the station has received zero reports of the other-way-around (could receive 8 but not 29).

Also, the New Orleans DMA has quite possibly the flattest terrain of any DMA in the US. So, propagation models should be extremely simple.

If the models for VHF-Hi ATSC propagation were so far off in totally flat terrain, heaven help the VHF-Hi stations in hilly or mountainous areas!

FCC needs to keep a freeze on new applications and run computer models for each market to show which UHF frequencys may still be open. Any station that had pre-transtion UHF like WHDH in Boston would be wise to go back there. Do not know if there could be any help for stations that had out of core UHF pre-transtion that are back on VHF-Hi Somewhat unrelated, wish that the FCC would consider using Ch 5 and 6 for expaned FM to move AM stations to FM.

FCC needs to keep a freeze on new applications and run computer models for each market to show which UHF frequencys may still be open. Any station that had pre-transtion UHF like WHDH in Boston would be wise to go back there. Do not know if there could be any help for stations that had out of core UHF pre-transtion that are back on VHF-Hi Somewhat unrelated, wish that the FCC would consider using Ch 5 and 6 for expaned FM to move AM stations to FM.

Freeze new applications?

You want us, who cannot receive reception properly, when we did
pre-transition to wait until the inept FCC runs the models you suggest and until we are able to get what we once had?

Also, what makes you think that previous UHF frequencies, in core, are still available?

Do some homework.

What we need now is some reality based on firm knowledge and professionalism!

I would once again like to submit my candidacy to run the FCC. :D

- Trip

Commissioner of the FCC should be an elected position. Anyone else willing to put Trip as a write-in candidate? :D
You heard it here first! ;)

WPLG now also asks to go to 60 kW.

- Trip

A work in progress, still much to be done. I will gladly accept suggestions:

http://www.rabbitears.info/vhf.php

- Trip

I would once again like to submit my candidacy to run the FCC. :D
Don't you think you should graduate first? :)

Don't you think you should graduate first? :)

I wouldn't mind putting off school to fix the issues of the day. :)

- Trip

What we need now is some reality based on firm knowledge and professionalism!

I agree.

Here's one person who feels that VHF reception is hampered by converter boxes and HDTVs that lack FM filters.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/82716

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc20090622_614261.htm

Yes, that's me. And that's an FCC guy who clearly didn't look into the situation for more than 5 seconds.

- Trip

His problem? His home in Charlotte County, Va., is 80 miles from the Roanoke station that beams the signal. "He probably should never have been getting that station anyway," says FCC spokesman Rick Kaplan. "If he was getting it [before the transition], he was lucky."

Hmmm, how many times were you "lucky" with respect to the UHF stations which aren't supposed to go as far, Trip? :D

What about all the other "lucky" viewers who will have to compete with WSD's outside the contours pretty soon?

Hmmm, how many times were you "lucky" with respect to the UHF stations which aren't supposed to go as far, Trip? :D

Oh, only for the last 15 years, on both analog and digital.

What about all the other "lucky" viewers who will have to compete with WSD's outside the contours pretty soon?

I'm wondering if the DTV transition might change some minds on the WSD issue. I shouldn't get too hopeful.

- Trip

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc20090622_614261.htm

Yes, that's me. And that's an FCC guy who clearly didn't look into the situation for more than 5 seconds.

- Trip

I wouldn't give him THAT much credit. Sure, if you're flat as a pancake in the landscape, fine. But, that flat dismissal without doing any homework is one reason why we're seeing what we're seeing with the DTV transition on VHF stations.

"Saving power" just turned into "saving viewers". When you pinch pennies too much, they come back and gobble you up...

If the models for VHF-Hi ATSC propagation were so far off in totally flat terrain, heaven help the VHF-Hi stations in hilly or mountainous areas!

Although I'm well aware that many people are experiencing reception problems on stations that switched to hi VHF, I'm not convinced it's due to not enough power in many cases. From some reports I've read and from my own experience, it seems as though multipath is a bigger problem on VHF than it was on UHF. Without the proper test equipment or adequate diagnostics in the TV, it's impossible to tell if non reception is from too weak of a signal or too much multipath.

I'm going to list the 6 stations I have received and some comments on them. The ERP listed is the power that the FCC antenna patterns show is headed in my direction. The channel is the RF channel.

KGO 7 - Mt. Sutro - 24KW - 110 miles - 2 Edge path - 50% reception - Better reception than any UHF from Sutro

KSBW 8 - Fremont Peak - 400W - 115 miles - 1 Edge path - 100% reception - I have an exceptional shot in this direction - essentially no multipath - No good UHF station to compare with.

KVIE 9 - Walnut Grove - 33KW - 54 miles - 2 edge path - 100% reception but multipath can be a problem - Signal strength as measured on a spectrum analyzer is in the same range as the 1000KW UHF stations from this location

KXTV 10 - Walnut Grove - 22KW - 54 miles - 2 edge path - 100% reception but multipath can be a problem - Signal strength as measured on a spectrum analyzer is in the same range as the 1000KW UHF stations from this location

KNTV 12 - Mt. San Bruno - 26KW - 110 miles - 2 edge path - Not often received here. Their analog signal on 11 was also poor.

KCBA 13 - Fremont Peak - 10W - 115 miles - 1 Edge path - 50% reception - I have an exceptional shot in this direction - essentially no multipath. The very low ERP prevents 100% reception.

FYI, UHF antennas are a pair of 91XGs and VHF antennas are a pair of homemade hi VHF log periodics, both with preamps.

The bottom line for me is when I look a just signal strength and ignore multipath, hi VHF signals are as strong or stronger than the equivalent UHF stations from 4 different transmitter locations.

Chuck

Here's one person who feels that VHF reception is hampered by converter boxes and HDTVs that lack FM filters.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/82716

The lack of FM traps would seem to be a cost saving measure. I tried a FM trap at home and it didn't help upper VHF, but results have since improved for other reasons (moved to the main antenna/towers).

However, the strongest FM signal I have at home is -42dBm per FM Fool. That is probably lower than many are seeing, certainly in urban/sub-urban areas.

Also, how many "all-band" antennas are being used that are feeding strong FM signals into the tuners? Using 7-51 antennas would help mitigate this problem for those using outdoor antennas. Yet another reason to drop 2-6. It's much easier to filter out everything below 7 than trying to trap FM w/o impairing 6.

Although I'm well aware that many people are experiencing reception problems on stations that switched to hi VHF, I'm not convinced it's due to not enough power in many cases. From some reports I've read and from my own experience, it seems as though multipath is a bigger problem on VHF than it was on UHF. Without the proper test equipment or adequate diagnostics in the TV, it's impossible to tell if non reception is from too weak of a signal or too much multipath.

[SNIP]

The bottom line for me is when I look a just signal strength and ignore multipath, hi VHF signals are as strong or stronger than the equivalent UHF stations from 4 different transmitter locations.

Chuck

Indeed. That could certainly be it. My own experience is actually consistent with that theory.

The local channel here that is having "trouble" with VHF-Hi has indicated that many of the viewers that can receive it on 29 and not on 8 are urban viewers, that should have plenty of raw signal strength.

Me, I'm "in the sticks" and can receive 8 just fine (albeit with a noticeable lower signal reading than 29 coming from the same tower).

On the other side of that coin, as many stations seem to be trying to solve the problem by increasing power on VHF as going back to UHF. (http://www.rabbitears.info/vhf.php)

If the problem were simply multipath, I wouldn't expect a power increase to help much, it might even make it worse in some cases.

:D

My page hasn't been posted for even two hours yet and already it's getting cited. That amuses me.

- Trip

A work in progress, still much to be done. I will gladly accept suggestions:

http://www.rabbitears.info/vhf.php

- Trip

An impressive list!

Definitely suggests that something's awry with DTV on VHF. (Of course, some of the stations on that list are VHF-Lo, and most of us agreed that VHF-Lo was gonna be a problem a long time ago.)

Yeah, I went ahead and listed low-VHF stations too since some of those are boosting power and whatnot for the same reasons.

Falcon_77 just e-mailed me to point out that I had KSTU listed as Danville, KY. My copy and paste skills aren't so great, apparently. :D

- Trip

Just added KSAT to the list, they requested a slight power increase. But their filing is very interesting as attached to the end is a 45-page analysis of indoor antenna performance on VHF channels. I plan to skim through it when I get a chance, if I remember.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=765847&formid=911&q_num=5200

- Trip

Trip - anything about stations that are on VHF and haven't filed anything (yet) ? (i.e. WTVD, etc.)

Trip - anything about stations that are on VHF and haven't filed anything (yet) ? (i.e. WTVD, etc.)

I don't have any inside information. What I know is posted on that VHF page, unless I happen to have forgotten something.

I've heard rumors, but nothing I feel confident repeating.

- Trip

A quick look at the KSAT-DT-12 application finds scant mention of KMHZ-LP-11 - and when they do the distance is a big time error - it's downtown NOT 118.9 km away! Well, it survived the KSAT high power NTSC on Ch 12 all this time.

The FCC has stated that it will keep the new station freeze in place until the current DTV issues are resolved. That means that stations on the air now have priority in correcting DTV issues including changing channels. New stations have to wait until the transition issues are sorted out.

A quick look at the KSAT-DT-12 application finds scant mention of KMHZ-LP-11 - and when they do the distance is a big time error - it's downtown NOT 118.9 km away! Well, it survived the KSAT high power NTSC on Ch 12 all this time.

LP's are a secondary service and do not count in interference studies.

Anyway, if they were even going to bother to list it pro forma, it's amusing with the distance snafu. One wonders what effect IT might be creating with KSAT-DT-12 viewers who are now having problems. We have a LPTV on Ch 10 and a "sort of" on Ch 6 (KFLZ-CA-6, raster and Hispanic music // 102.3 xltr). Curiously, in a quick check of UHF NTSC LPTV here in the wee hours this morning it looked as if only the TransGuide Ch 53 was still there! Some DT-20 was trying to decode.

Also, what makes you think that previous UHF frequencies, in core, are still available?

Do some homework.

What we need now is some reality based on firm knowledge and professionalism!
The Rabbit Ears search will help if you want to do the homework. Run for the Sears (Willis?) Tower in Chicago there are available UHFs. There is probably a channel available. A former NTSC is nearly a gimme, unless someone else has snatched it up as part of the transition (in the same or adjacent market).

I've done it for the New York DMA and there doesn't appear to be a way for those stations (7, 11 and 13) that migrated to V to go back to the U band.

"Also Sprach Zarathustra!"

His master's voice has been heard.

Thanks, Trip.

"Also Sprach Zarathustra!"

His master's voice has been heard.

Thanks, Trip.

?

- Trip

Nietzche: - "Thus Spoke Zoroaster"

I'm familiar with the piece, I just don't get what it has to do with me. :D

- Trip

It was meant as a compliment - referring to you as an expert when you pointed out the problems in the Northeast.

There had been the suggestion that stations that had migrated to V from U should simply return to the UHF band. My point is that I used your research trying to find a place for 7, 11 or 13 in NY and I can't find a new home for them in the UHF band.

In the future, I'll just rely on using "His Master's Voice."

Ah, okay. I can be a little slow at times, bear with me. :)

Technically speaking, WABC could move back to 45. Beyond that, someone might be able to shoehorn in a 41 and a 50 and maybe a 25. It'd be a really tight squeeze though...

- Trip

Trip, help me see through my confusion.

According to your site:

25 has - WASA-LD (Although in Port Jervis, NY - Orange County is part of the NY DMA)

41 has W60AI - New York, NY

45 has - WMBQ-LD - Manhattan, NY and WLIG-LD - Mineola, Long Island, NY

50 has - WBQM-LP - Brooklyn, NY

Can a "full-powered" station trump a low-powered one and replace it?

Is this an FCC policy or would it have to be on a case by case basis?

Yes. Low-powered stations are bumped by full-powered stations. Class A stations are protected.

- Trip

Yes. Low-powered stations are bumped by full-powered stations. Class A stations are protected.

And that's the key. Don't look too hard at the secondary services when deciding what to do with a primary service. The LPs will find another home. And if they can't the full power wins.

Thanks.

Just hope that something changes here in the NY DMA with the 3 stations that moved to VHF.

The answer may very well be the use of same frequency, multi-site system - like the one for which WNJU has received FCC approval.

The Richland Towers, which is working with WNJU, experimented in NYC in August 2007 and the results were very promising.

The experiment's findings are on Richland's Web site.

www.axcera.com/downloads/technotes-whitepapers/bet_paper.pdf

(regarding ATSC bandwidth reduction in the context of squeezing in an FM audio carrier on channel 6 to hit 87.7 MHz)

Awesome. Thanks!

Although ... that PDF is dated 2003. I thought there was a report of them applying this to WNYZ in the very recent past.

I note WCTI-DT has asked to increase power from 32.8 kW to 38.7 kW.

- Trip

I note WCTI-DT has asked to increase power from 32.8 kW to 38.7 kW.

- Trip

Should be interesting to see what happens with it... Shocking WTVD hasn't done anything. Maybe they are trying to come up with some way to get on UHF again?

My guess is they can't. The FCC isn't giving blanket approvals. You still have to work within the confines of the rules. We are in the same situation. According to the current rules, we are at the max allowed for our interference contour.

foxeng: Can the FCC be convinced that the interference contour is flawed? How would this be approached?

KGW (NBC Portland, OR) moved to VHF-8 June 12. They have a pending request now over a year old, asking to increase power from 25kW to 45kW. I wonder how long it will take the FCC to start acting on these requests.

KGW (NBC Portland, OR) moved to VHF-8 June 12. They have a pending request now over a year old, asking to increase power from 25kW to 45kW. I wonder how long it will take the FCC to start acting on these requests.
My understanding is that the FCC is monitoring complaint levels market by market. If they get a sufficiently high number of complaints, I would think acting quickly (as they've done in Boston, Philly and elsewhere) would be more likely.

The other thing is that you want to make sure a lot of the complaints are coming from people who actually have VHF antennas. Increasing the power doesn't help much if most of the complaints are from people who only have UHF antennas.

My guess is they can't. The FCC isn't giving blanket approvals. You still have to work within the confines of the rules. We are in the same situation. According to the current rules, we are at the max allowed for our interference contour.

WPVI is operating at 4 times the FCC limit, and in excess of 73.622(f)(5).

- Trip

WPVI is operating at 4 times the FCC limit, and in excess of 73.622(f)(5).

- Trip

:eek:

That's not right. If they can get by with it, then so should all others.

That's not right. If they can get by with it, then so should all others.
Perhaps, but I suspect "size matters" when it comes to markets...

In the case of WPVI, the two other stations on channel 6 consented to the interference, but that's still an exception to the FCC rules.

WGHP would have to get consent from WOLO and WVNS and anyone else that might receive interference.

The maximization permit that WGHP has whose roughly 0.41% interference to WOLO and 0.12% interference to WVNS. The FCC limit is 0.5% without an interference acceptance agreement.

- Trip

In the case of WPVI, the two other stations on channel 6 consented to the interference, but that's still an exception to the FCC rules.

WGHP would have to get consent from WOLO and WVNS and anyone else that might receive interference.

The maximization permit that WGHP has whose roughly 0.41% interference to WOLO and 0.12% interference to WVNS. The FCC limit is 0.5% without an interference acceptance agreement.

- Trip

Is WPVI running 30.2kW ERP?

Is WPVI running 30.2kW ERP?

As far as I know.

- Trip

As far as I know.

- Trip

WOW, that should be a whopper signal! I would like to see if stacked antennas could get one of these VHF-LO stations over 100miles at night on a "reliable" basis...

More for the list.

KECI-13 wants to go from 30 kW to 41.3 kW.
KRCR-7 wants to go from 14.5 kW to 25.2 kW.
KTVM-6 wants to go from 11.2 kW to 19.2 kW.
WCYB-5 wants to go from 7.1 kW to 29.9 kW. (!)

All are owned by Bonten.

- Trip

More for the list.

KECI-13 wants to go from 30 kW to 41.3 kW.
KRCR-7 wants to go from 14.5 kW to 25.2 kW.
KTVM-6 wants to go from 11.2 kW to 19.2 kW.
WCYB-5 wants to go from 7.1 kW to 29.9 kW. (!)

All are owned by Bonten.

- Trip

WCYB really needed to up the power. I don't think they reached half of their coverage area. Although I live 3 miles outside the area (85 miles from the tower with 3 or 4 mountains in the way) and can get them pretty well, I know people who live 20 miles away with outdoor antennas who can't get them at all.

foxeng: Can the FCC be convinced that the interference contour is flawed? How would this be approached?

I hope so but I think at this point, they can see for themselves the flaws and they don't know how to fairly correct it. It looks like pre-transition VHF's were allocated with a different protection contour verses post-transition (I have seen that on UHF already with some of the STAs that stations have gotten where a station was allocated pre-transition no problems, lived happily with their neighbors and now there is an interference issue when trying to go back to that same allocation) and how do you make it fair for all stations? I would hope once the FCC can address that issue, V's will get some relief.

What are the chances that stations like WCYB will get the desired power increases? I really can't envision a scenario in which they're denied, so long as no other stations' rights are compromised.

From the FCC Daily Digest: Possible VHF -> UHF move in Colorado Springs.

"POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO. Proposed substitution of DTV channel 49 for post-transition DTV channel 10 for Station KKTV(TV). (Dkt No. RM-11541 09-111 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/25/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-1432). MB"

Links:
- http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1432A1.doc
- http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1432A1.pdf
- http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1432A1.txt

Trip, still no hope for WJW here? I see Local TV sister WGHP has apparently filed put on 35, from your list...

WJW doesn't seem to give a crap here. It sounds like they're just gonna do nothing.

Could they pretty easily light up 31?

Yeah, I've been watching for something from WJW but so far nothing.

On a related note, did anyone see these?

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520223340
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520223342

- Trip

I just don't think it's worth pouring money down the Low-VHF drain for DTV. Other services, such as FM radio (at least for 5-6), would be far more effective there.

As for Low-VHF ERP's, I noticed this on Doug Lung's RF Report today:

VHF Stations Seek Solutions for Reception Problems

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/83128

The highest power low-band VHF DTV stations in the United States operate at 45.0 kW.

While there has been some concern that higher power at low-band VHF frequencies will lead to receiver overload, one station was granted an ERP of 89 kW on Channel 5 and another Channel 5 operator was granted a 49 kW ERP.

Low VHF spectrum has worked well for FM radio stations, inside and outside buildings. It will be interesting to see if more power will allow low-band VHF to work as well.

89kW on Low-VHF? What will it take? 1:1 compared to analog peak power?

Who actually has those power levels? I don't see them anywhere.

- Trip

Yeah, I've been watching for something from WJW but so far nothing.

On a related note, did anyone see these?

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520223340
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520223342

- Trip
Do you have a docket number for these where supporting comments can be filed?

No docket number yet, that stuff just popped up today. You can find them by searching for PRM09MB, though that's not a place to file supporting comments. Once the FCC processes it further, it will get moved to its docket number(s).

- Trip

Who actually has those power levels? I don't see them anywhere.

- Trip

I don't know. Perhaps they just haven't appeared in the database yet.

49 kW and 89 kW sound like numbers for KWWL-DT 7 and WBPH-DT 9, rather than anything on channel 5...

(BTW, I will likely answer your e-mails tomorrow, I'm too wiped out today.)

- Trip

The author of the article clued me in. The stations that have been granted over 45kW on Low-VHF 5 are in Canada. They are in BC, but I found 49kW and 85kW (vs. 89kW).

I keep reading about the VHF stations asking for power increases and how much or little they are allowed. Falcon has listed 2 stations from my area that asked for and were granted large power increases, but nobody here mentions them.

WAOW channel 9 in Wausau, WI nearly doubled their power from 16.6 to 31.6kW and WSAW channel 7 in Wausau (on the same tower at the same height in a candelabra mount) was granted an increase from 16.9 to 72kW!

WSAW especially seems to me to be a HUGE gain.

Bill

There's an application (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/prefill_and_display.pl?Application_id=1299667&Service=DT&Form_id=301&Facility_id=593) pending to pump our Channel 7 (KWWL) up to 49kW. It's still awaiting action. I was a little skeptical given that KHQA uses channel 7 in the Hannibal-Quincy-Keokuk market, but KWWL's consulting engineers say they've run an analysis and found that the proposed "maximization of Channel 7 meets the post-transition interference protection provisions" of FCC rules.

We shall see ...

The author of the article clued me in. The stations that have been granted over 45kW on Low-VHF 5 are in Canada. They are in BC, but I found 49kW and 85kW (vs. 89kW).

Just because they're allotted that much power, doesn't mean they'll actually run that much power. Those stations are running much less power than that in analog.

- Trip

Yeah, I've been watching for something from WJW but so far nothing.

How frustrating. Unless I've missed something, they refuse to even acknowledge something's wrong. It's not as bad a situation as WOIO, but I feel I have to hold my breath to get them to lock without dropouts, and I'm close enough to the Parma antenna farm that I picked them up with ANYTHING on UHF 31.

I can't believe Local TV is that clueless. They already filed for two stations, but don't seem to care about their largest market station!

Here's a strange one. KBSV has continued to transmit analog on 23 intermittently since the shut down. Their analog license has disappeared from the FCC database along with all the other shutdown analog stations. It looks like they're running reduced power. Did they think no one would notice? I sent them an e-mail suggesting they need to shut it down permanently.

How frustrating. Unless I've missed something, they refuse to even acknowledge something's wrong. It's not as bad a situation as WOIO, but I feel I have to hold my breath to get them to lock without dropouts, and I'm close enough to the Parma antenna farm that I picked them up with ANYTHING on UHF 31.

I can't believe Local TV is that clueless. They already filed for two stations, but don't seem to care about their largest market station!

I could tell you but then I would have to kill you! :D

Hi,

Could one of the "FCC Experts" please look up the type of license for:

KMTP

KQED, KQET

KTEH

KCSM

KRCB

All in Northern California.

The real question is, has KMTP license type changed after they paid the FCC penalty money.

TIA

SHF

How frustrating. Unless I've missed something, they refuse to even acknowledge something's wrong. It's not as bad a situation as WOIO, but I feel I have to hold my breath to get them to lock without dropouts, and I'm close enough to the Parma antenna farm that I picked them up with ANYTHING on UHF 31.

I can't believe Local TV is that clueless. They already filed for two stations, but don't seem to care about their largest market station!

For many stations, their OTA signal is secondary. Since as much as 85 to 90% of their viewers receive their station on cable or via satellite, those are their top priority. Now that many stations no longer have direct feeds for satellite, they might pay more attention to their OTA signal, but as long as the cable headend and the DirecTV and Dish headends are getting a signal, they feel they've got the biggest part of the audience covered. They'll worry about better OTA later.

Larry
SF