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

They are all currently "Educational Digital TV." The earliest reference I could find as KTMP being "Educational" is in the this application:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=100499201&formid=340&fac_num=43095

with a status date in 2001. It's a form 340, "APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR RESERVED CHANNEL NONCOMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL BROADCAST STATION."

I don't know how to find out any earlier history.

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 ...


It's called Quincy Newspapers, Inc.* wants to blow out the crosstown competition!;)

(QNI owns KWWL and WGEM-10 in Quincy)

Although I'm betting,as a layman, that VHF limits will end up being closer to the .2(analog power) = digital power that's used in most instances for UHF

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

Aw, come on, that's no fair. :D

Your sister station up here is getting a lot of heat from in-market viewers who are having difficulty receiving them on VHF 8. No, I'm not talking about "in-market" viewers, I'm talking about viewers in the same county as the transmitter, in the heart of the immediate Cleveland area!

Their public stance at first was to keep talking about what viewers needed to do to get the proper VHF antenna, and they don't seem to acknowledge (unless I've missed it) that there might be a deficiency in their VHF signal.

I have news for WJW - they are very lucky I'm a primary cable viewer. I'm not about to go buy an expensive, rooftop antenna just to get one station that I got before on UHF with absolutely no difficulty. (Technically, two, but I've already written off the CBS affiliate here.)

WJW appears ready to write off at least a chunk of their over-air viewership, who won't bother to rescan if they come up with a solution.

Now, the post I'm about to quote is to the point....

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.

We do have about 90% cable/satellite penetration in this market, so I've come down from this from what I was seething about on the 12th, when I spent about 45 minutes adjusting indoor antennas at two locations trying to get a lock on WJW.

(One of those installations is viewed regularly by me, in a separate room downstairs with no cable running to it.)

I'm just frustrated that Local TV A) has filed to somehow fix two OTA signals, but not WJW (they have a 30 kW CP, but local scuttlebutt says they may have no intention on building it out).

I'm just frustrated that if they're planning to do something about the WJW VHF signal, it's a state secret or something. Silly me, I think they SHOULD TELL VIEWERS that if they're having trouble with the station's new digital signal, something is being done.

Downstairs, if I can't scan WJW on that OTA DTV-only TV, the station no longer exists for me. And I'm less likely to tune in up here, too, even with cable, because of this. (Meanwhile, the CBS affiliate has dug such a giant DTV hole that I avoid it even more. :D)

Oh, and WJW appears to be the only VHF DTV station in America content with its current setup. Figures...yet another reason Cleveland stinks.

Silly me, I think they SHOULD TELL VIEWERS that if they're having trouble with the station's new digital signal, something is being done.

Don't forget, a commercial station's primary customers are the advertisers, not the viewers. Stations don't want to tell their primary customers "the signal sucks but we're working on it."

More fun filings today.

WJAC has applied for three new fill-in translators.

WABC has asked to increase power to 27 kW.

- Trip

Don't forget, a commercial station's primary customers are the advertisers, not the viewers. Stations don't want to tell their primary customers "the signal sucks but we're working on it."
That gives me an idea. I have the WHBF advertisers list. What if I watch all their programs one evening and check the advertisers that night. Then send some post cards to them, mentioning many folks in my area can not watch their commercials since June 13 due to no reception on VHF-LO.

That gives me an idea. I have the WHBF advertisers list. What if I watch all their programs one evening and check the advertisers that night. Then send some post cards to them, mentioning many folks in my area can not watch their commercials since June 13 due to no reception on VHF-LO.


You have to get some publicity in the local newspapers about the situation. Newspapers are in a decline themselves, but publicity about a TV station that has a weak signal and is not fixing it would be something that the TV station would not like to see. AND, some of the advertisers may drop the TV ads and move to newspaper ads, The advertising sales reps at the newspapers should be smelling blood in the streets and be approaching all the current advertisers on TV.

You have to get some publicity in the local newspapers about the situation. Newspapers are in a decline themselves, but publicity about a TV station that has a weak signal and is not fixing it would be something that the TV station would not like to see. AND, some of the advertisers may drop the TV ads and move to newspaper ads, The advertising sales reps at the newspapers should be smelling blood in the streets and be approaching all the current advertisers on TV.

The station and advertisers will know soon enough that viewing has gone down by way of Nielsen ratings. When a station's ratings go down, the station has to lower its advertising rates to reflect a drop in viewership.

Also, advertisers more than likely will not transfer advertising funds that had been allocated to television to newspapers. If they cut back spending on one station, they'll reinvest those dollars on another TV station.

Sorry, but that's how media planning and buying operate!

Oh, and WJW appears to be the only VHF DTV station in America content with its current setup. Figures...yet another reason Cleveland stinks.

You are making an assumption without any facts to back it up. What you see on the surface doesn't tell you want is below the water.

You are making an assumption without any facts to back it up. What you see on the surface doesn't tell you want is below the water.

Well, they'd better get that above the water, and soon, or folks in University Heights and Shaker Heights who only receive the OTA signal are going to start swimming in other stations' waters.

:D

My perception, I admit, is clouded by rumblings I've heard in the market - that WJW has no intent on even building out its 30 kW CP. That information may or may not be accurate, but I've heard it from different sources.

In all honesty, the 30 kW CP is directional, and puts all its power over the lake. A good number of people would actually see a net reduction in ERP due to that directional pattern.

- Trip

In all honesty, the 30 kW CP is directional, and puts all its power over the lake. A good number of people would actually see a net reduction in ERP due to that directional pattern.

Well, WJW apparently intends to do something (if the hinting here is to be believed :) ), and maybe they realize this, and are formulating Plan B.

If my input would mean anything as a viewer, I'd be happy if they just lit up RF 31 with its pre-transition setup. I realize it's Not That Easy.

If my input would mean anything as a viewer, I'd be happy if they just lit up RF 31 with its pre-transition setup. I realize it's Not That Easy.

As someone who did it, I am not sure if it is always the best way to go.

As someone who did it, I am not sure if it is always the best way to go.

Well, all I know here is that WJW's RF 31 facility received virtually NO complaints pre-transition, at least in the core of the market. Here, personally, I could pick it up with a coat hanger, and I'm 20 miles out from the stick. It was widely considered the most stable pre-transition signal here, give or take WEWS's DT 15 facility which it still uses today.

I know there's tradeoffs with every option, but in the most populated section of the Cleveland market, it would appear to me that 31 would be the best choice.

Out on the edges of the market? Maybe not. But they didn't lose places like University Heights (an inner ring Cleveland suburb) or where I am with RF 31. I shouldn't have to put up a rooftop antenna 20 miles out of Parma to get the signal, when everyone else comes in with a small indoor loop antenna (save for 19, of course, which stinks).

I'd really be fascinated to hear you talk about the plus/drawbacks of going back to the UHF facility. I think this kind of information needs to be out there.

Well, all I know here is that WJW's RF 31 facility received virtually NO complaints pre-transition, at least in the core of the market. Here, personally, I could pick it up with a coat hanger, and I'm 20 miles out from the stick. It was widely considered the most stable pre-transition signal here, give or take WEWS's DT 15 facility which it still uses today.

I know there's tradeoffs with every option, but in the most populated section of the Cleveland market, it would appear to me that 31 would be the best choice.

Out on the edges of the market? Maybe not. But they didn't lose places like University Heights (an inner ring Cleveland suburb) or where I am with RF 31. I shouldn't have to put up a rooftop antenna 20 miles out of Parma to get the signal, when everyone else comes in with a small indoor loop antenna (save for 19, of course, which stinks).

I'd really be fascinated to hear you talk about the plus/drawbacks of going back to the UHF facility. I think this kind of information needs to be out there.

It has nothing to do with the past. June 13th interference protection levels changed. While I don't know particulars on 31, in my own stations case, a station on a 1st adjacent that we had coexisted with for 7 years all of a sudden was shorted spaced to us due to these new rules. We needed permission from the station to turn our UHF back on. It took days and if the other station had said no, then we wouldn't have it back on now. Again, there is so much below the surface, you have no idea.

It has nothing to do with the past. June 13th interference protection levels changed. While I don't know particulars on 31, in my own stations case, a station on a 1st adjacent that we had coexisted with for 7 years all of a sudden was shorted spaced to us due to these new rules. We needed permission from the station to turn our UHF back on. It took days and if the other station had said no, then we wouldn't have it back on now. Again, there is so much below the surface, you have no idea.

I haven't gone through the records - hey, Trip, do you have any spare time? :) - but off the top of my head, I don't THINK WJW has any such problems on 31.

There is a Canadian on analog 31 itself - the Woodstock ON repeater for Toronto's CityTV - which is still quite easy to receive as close as Erie PA. But it was on 31 when WJW-DT was on 31, and I don't know if some of the protection level issues you talk about come up with them. This isn't quite the same situation that WOIO has on RF 10 with CFPL, and the Woodstock station never caused any major problems with WJW-DT that I know of. For one, WJW-DT had actual power. :D

WJW-DT co-existed with first-adjacent WBNX-DT (which is on 30), but I believe that is supposed to be no problem if the sites are basically within a short distance of each other...which WJW and WBNX were (like under 2 miles).

Whether it can "go back on" 31 or not, that I don't know. I'd just like to know, SOMEHOW, that there is a viable solution for WJW.

The RE search shows 31 as available for Zone I, but it may not be that simple:

http://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=channel&latitude=41.363&longitude=-81.716

As for the 30kW CP, it will put out less than 12kW to all points South of the tower. Not a good plan.

Dealing with the Canadians is full of mystery and intrigue. I can imagine that it's not as simple as it looks, and even though it looks like it should be fine to light up 31, the Canadians probably found something to complain about.

- Trip

Dealing with the Canadians is full of mystery and intrigue. I can imagine that it's not as simple as it looks, and even though it looks like it should be fine to light up 31, the Canadians probably found something to complain about.

I'm reminded that Canadian coordination held up WBNX-DT 30 for a long time, but that facility hadn't been on previously.

The same might be said for dealing with Mexico. KZTV-DT-18 Corpus Christi wanted to revert to their old analog Ch 10, but XHX-10 in Monterrey had "issues" with that. Considering the extreme tropo ducting conditions along the Gulf Coast their concerns were likely justified though they had coexisted as analogs there for many decades.

More fun filings today.

WJAC has applied for three new fill-in translators.

WABC has asked to increase power to 27 kW.

- Trip

This is interesting to me. W34DW has to discontinue opperations and Ch 34 due to causing interference to WJAC on Ch 34, W34DW applied for a displacement to Ch 30, WJAC has requested Ch 30 for their Bedford translator. Wonder who will get 30 and who will have to move??? This is W34DW's third time to get up and running, they started with Ch38, then asked for displacement and got 34 and now asked for displacement to 30.

Are there any timetables for analog LP stations to go dark? I'm surprised how many are still around that were co-channels of former full power analog stations.

WMDO-TV is still on analog 47 even though they also have a digital RF channel 8 in DC.

Are there any timetables for analog LP stations to go dark? I'm surprised how many are still around that were co-channels of former full power analog stations.

WMDO-TV is still on analog 47 even though they also have a digital RF channel 8 in DC.

I have contacted WITF and WNPB engineers, WITF has applied to replace its analog translator Ch 38 in Chambersburg with a digital one on Ch 33, from what they told me it shouldn't take long, I guess just waiting on equipment. WNPB told me that W41AO and W50DE would stay on until they got the problems with W34DW worked out, WNPB has 3 full power stations I think 7 analog translators and will have 9 digital translators. I don't know how many have been swithced out since W50DE and W41AO were the only that concerened me. There is something on analog Ch 42 in Hagerstown, but have never been able to makeout what it is.

W42CK Hagerstown is an affiliate of Three Angels Broadcasting.

- Trip

W42CK Hagerstown is an affiliate of Three Angels Broadcasting.

- Trip

Thanks, just knew something was there, of course I haven't checked since WVPY shut down analog.

I wonder which one the FCC will act on first WJAC or W34DW and who will have to find another channel? This will be the third time W38EG, W34DW has had to find a new home.

At least if WJAC get a translator in Bedford I should stand a better chance of getting them than WGAL which is in My DMA, and never again to watch WBAL which was the NBC station I always watched.

I did see and interesting statement in WCTI's STA request for 38.7kW, there is a reference to Section 73.622(f) or something like that, that is interesting to me who has lost stations I have watched for years from other DMA's

WNYT now also seeks two fill-in translators.

WIBW seeks more power.

- Trip

Holy fill-in translators, Batman!

Sometime after I went to bed, after filings stopped coming in, a bunch of new fill-in translators showed up.

WLS wants one on channel 32.
KTVU has asked for channel 48 in San Jose (is this to kill the KAXT problem?)
KTFK has asked for channel 5 in Stockton (Filling in San Francisco, but why?)
WSOC wants two.
KBCW wants one.
WPCW wants one.
WCBS wants one out on Long Island near an area where WFSB might interfere.
KDKA wants two.
KPIX wants one.

- Trip

Holy fill-in translators, Batman!

Sometime after I went to bed, after filings stopped coming in, a bunch of new fill-in translators showed up.

WLS wants one on channel 32.

- Trip

LOL, WLS wants the translator on the Sears Tower, is that not the very point of the original signal:)

Honestly, it is prolly not the worst idea ever, since they are broadcasting in the heart of their DMA, why not fire up a 15kW UHF transmission to get the UHF viewers back...

Not really related, but I just felt like showing this off for people who are interested:

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=dualhd

I just need to figure out how to make the thing sort by rank, which I will probably do at a later date.

- Trip

Trip -

Great idea and very helpful.

Is there a way to show the distribution of the bandwidth on this form???

Trip -

Great idea and very helpful.

Is there a way to show the distribution of the bandwidth on this form???

That can be arranged. (Check it now.)

- Trip

I thought you could NOT provide two HD sub channels on one 6MHz RF channel when using mpeg2 compression!

I thought you could NOT provide two HD sub channels on one 6MHz RF channel when using mpeg2 compression!

You could provide 98 of them. Doesn't mean you'd want to watch any of them. ;)

- Trip

Honestly, it is prolly not the worst idea ever, since they are broadcasting in the heart of their DMA, why not fire up a 15kW UHF transmission to get the UHF viewers back...

I think it's one of the best ideas. One which I have suggested for WPVI.

I would like to see a lot more of these 15kW UHF translators on the same tower. Most of the VHF problems seem to be up close to the tower vs. at distance.

I can receive a 400W LD station from Mt. Wilson ok (most of the time) at 51 miles. I would like to see the four VHF broadcasters add 15kW/UHF translators on their own towers.

Holy fill-in translators, Batman!

Sometime after I went to bed, after filings stopped coming in, a bunch of new fill-in translators showed up.

WLS wants one on channel 32.
KTVU has asked for channel 48 in San Jose (is this to kill the KAXT problem?)
KTFK has asked for channel 5 in Stockton (Filling in San Francisco, but why?)
WSOC wants two.
KBCW wants one.
WPCW wants one.
WCBS wants one out on Long Island near an area where WFSB might interfere.
KDKA wants two.
KPIX wants one.

- Trip

Where are these listed? I didn't see them during a search on the station's callsign.

KTFK probably wants to regain their Bay Area audience that they lost when they moved from Mt. Diablo to Walnut Grove on June 12th.

That can be arranged. (Check it now.)

- Trip

I'm trying to figure out how best to add in whether it's static or variable bitrate. Opinions?

- Trip

Where are these listed? I didn't see them during a search on the station's callsign.

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_sear.htm

Put "BDRTCDT" in the left box for "File Number" and then search.

KTFK probably wants to regain their Bay Area audience that they lost when they moved from Mt. Diablo to Walnut Grove on June 12th.

But why? They already have KFSF for that.

- Trip

I thought you could NOT provide two HD sub channels on one 6MHz RF channel when using mpeg2 compression!

You can, but the results are hideous. I don't know how the other stations are doing, but KABC's Live Well feed is absolutely unwatchable. It would look tons better (and sharper) if they just did widescreen SD. There are also several locals (mostly Spanish language) who are running only one SD feed and thus should have plenty of extra lease-able bandwidth, but noooooo.

I guess it's more important to call their new little channel HD than to make it watchable. YA case of the marketing department's almighty focus group research overruling reality.

Not really related, but I just felt like showing this off for people who are interested:

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=dualhd

I just need to figure out how to make the thing sort by rank, which I will probably do at a later date.

- Trip

I'm glad I don't live in Meridian, MS!


WGBC (MERIDIAN, MS)
30-1 (720p) (6.95 Mbps) FOX HD FOX
30-1 (720p) (6.95 Mbps) FOX HD RTV
30-2 (1080i) (11.4 Mbps) WGBC HD NBC


That NBC's gonna look kind of bleah and that FOX is going to look like total arse!

I pity the residents of Meridian trying to watch the NFL games on FOX this fall! Analog SD would look much better than this is going to look!

EDIT: I thought FOX did not permit affiliates to reduce the bitrate from what the network sent out (which this most certianly is). Does WGBC have some sort of special waiver from FOX?

In my DMA, I have it on pretty good authority that WNOL/WGNO considered temporarily putting them on the same transmitter in 1080i and 720p respectively. Then they looked at a closed-circuit simulation of how it was going to look, and changed their minds, opting for 480i and 720p instead. (Post transition, those channels are on their own ATSC transmitters, in full HD and look just fine.) In fact, WNOL is good about having the majority of their syndicated programming in 1080i. (Pre-transition, their feed to the local cable companies showed them to be a local leader in having syndicated stuff, and not just the CW feed in HD.) So, pre-transition, they clearly had the studio equipment in place to do 2 HD feeds on one transmitter, and chose not to!

Realize that it's Fox/RTN. It's one subchannel on 30-1, I just have it listed twice because they're separate networks.

- Trip

I think it's one of the best ideas. One which I have suggested for WPVI.

I would like to see a lot more of these 15kW UHF translators on the same tower. Most of the VHF problems seem to be up close to the tower vs. at distance.

I can receive a 400W LD station from Mt. Wilson ok (most of the time) at 51 miles. I would like to see the four VHF broadcasters add 15kW/UHF translators on their own towers.

It will work good where the tower is at the heart of where people are trying to receive them. Here in Rochester, the VHF-HI station is 30 miles outside of town, 15kW will not light up indoor antennas at that distance.

It looks like WWAZ's wish is going to be granted. Low-VHF 5 in Milwaukee.

DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), FOND DU LAC, WISCONSIN. Proposed substituting DTV channel 5 for DTV channel 44 for station WWAZ-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11543 09-115 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/29/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-1490).

Also, the KTCI saga may be drawing to a close:

AMENDMENT OF SECTION 73.622(I), POST-TRANSITION TABLE OF DTV ALLOTMENTS, TELEVISION BROADCAST STATIONS, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA. Substituted channel *23 for channel *26 for station KTCI-TV. (Dkt No. RM-11533 09-71 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/30/2009 by R&O. (DA No. 09-1495).

Realize that it's Fox/RTN. It's one subchannel on 30-1, I just have it listed twice because they're separate networks.

- Trip

Ah, yes. The bitrates don't add otherwise. (Total is greater than ATSC is capable of.)

Still, I thought FOX had a strict policy that affiliates were not allowed to transmit a bitrate lower than what FOX sent out to the affiliates. 6.95 Mbps is a reduction in that. (foxeng, of another FOX affiliate engineer: What is the max bitrate FOX HD sends?)

So, while it's not as horrid as I thought it was at first blush, I still have the question: Do they have some sort of waiver from FOX?

They almost surely are not using the famous "FOX Splicer" for this.

The capture was probably taken during RTN programming which would go through the upconverter rather than through the splicer.

That said, I think Fox has been doing something to allow setups like these dual HD things to happen. I'm not sure what it is, but it's definitely stepped down from the fully controlled bitrate that Fox provides with the splicer.

- Trip

It looks like WWAZ's wish is going to be granted. Low-VHF 5 in Milwaukee.

Also, the KTCI saga may be drawing to a close:.

Looks like the KTCI allotment change is approved immediately. The FCC seems to want it on the air ASAP.

I'm tempted to file comments about WWAZ but I'm not sure I have standing. Opinions?

- Trip

Still, I thought FOX had a strict policy that affiliates were not allowed to transmit a bitrate lower than what FOX sent out to the affiliates. 6.95 Mbps is a reduction in that. (foxeng, of another FOX affiliate engineer: What is the max bitrate FOX HD sends?)

There is no policy on the minimum allowed. A station can run 1 mbps out of their encoder if they want. When net switches in, it will be whatever FOX is sending in variable bit rate between 9 and 16 mbps.

That can be arranged. (Check it now.)

WLS is broadcasting an HD subchannel with 2.6 Mbps? How horrible is the picture?

WLS is broadcasting an HD subchannel with 2.6 Mbps? How horrible is the picture?

No, it's old data from when it was SD. I don't have a contact in the Chicago area, and my last capture from there was when someone was going through the area...

The bitrate is probably in the area of 4-6 Mbps, and before you ask, yes, it's horrendous. I've seen it on WTVD-DT.

- Trip

Trip,

You got another mention at Ohio Digital TV.

http://ohiodigitaltv.blogspot.com/2009/06/we-give-up-on-wjw-woio-signals.html

There is no policy on the minimum allowed. A station can run 1 mbps out of their encoder if they want. When net switches in, it will be whatever FOX is sending in variable bit rate between 9 and 16 mbps.

So, I'm still confused.

Is the affiliate allowed to reduce what FOX sends them (variable between 9 and 16) or not?

If not, then it's probably true that that sample from WGBC was taken when RTV was on, and when FOX comes on, it's the NBC that will get hosed, bandwidth wise.

Is the affiliate allowed to reduce what FOX sends them (variable between 9 and 16) or not?

No. They are not supposed to and the way the splicer works, it makes it all but impossible to do it. Can it be done? Yes, but it is a pain in the butt. FOX has worked with several stations that have done 2 HD streams with mixed results at best.

I read that WGGB, who has Fox-HD on 40-2, is using a fixed bitrate on both HD subchannels.

- Trip

No. They are not supposed to and the way the splicer works, it makes it all but impossible to do it. Can it be done? Yes, but it is a pain in the butt. FOX has worked with several stations that have done 2 HD streams with mixed results at best.

Thanks.

That's what I thought.

So, I was mistaken when I said I felt sorry for anyone watching NFL on FOX this fall on that station. I'm no longer sorry for them.

Instead, I'm sorry for the folks watching NBC on that station, any time FOX network programming is coming through the splicer. ;)

(Bottom line, 2 HD subchannels on one transmitter sucks.)

I note WLS now has an STA in with the FCC to light up the channel 32 translator they've applied for ASAP.

- Trip

I note WLS now has an STA in with the FCC to light up the channel 32 translator they've applied for ASAP.

- Trip

June 30, 2009. yeap. I just noticed myself doing research on Chicago stations about an hour ago and posted it over on dtvusaforum.com

I was going to ask you, isn't that really odd, to put a translator in the middle of your main coverage? I understand their reception problem but still it's odd.

Also go read Stanislav's post in Orlando. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16755181#post16755181
The man did a very good job of summing up fringe DTV in Florida (actually the Gulf and lower Atlantic Seaboard). I totally 100% concur with his synopsis. He alludes he just gathered his information by lurking and seeing the same complaints over and over.

What he suggests works in other digital TV standards, but not in ATSC. But he sounds like he's got it about right.

The big problem is that VHF stations have more problems closer in than further out, which is because there are more indoor antennas closer in. So it makes sense to have a UHF booster in town like that.

- Trip

Four more.

WFXI has a permit to boost to 42 kW, but they cannot do it with existing equipment, so they've applied to boost power as much as possible immediately.

The other Schurz stations in Kansas, KBSD, KBSL, and KBSH, all asked for power boosts. All are VHF.

- Trip

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_sear.htm

Put "BDRTCDT" in the left box for "File Number" and then search.



But why? They already have KFSF for that.

- Trip

Now that I've seen their coverage maps I'll bet they're trying to get a better signal into the areas of the Livermore and Diablo valleys that neither KFSF nor KTFK cover very well. Looks like that is what KPIX/KBCW want to do up in Napa.

I don't know why KTFK moved from Mt. Diablo to Walnut Grove. Looks like they gave up more coverage area than they gained.

They moved because there was not a channel available to them from Mount Diablo. Only 14 fit, which KTNC ended up with. KTFK volunteered to move down to Walnut Grove and take 26. (I suspect a lot of that had to do with wanting to be co-located with the other stations in Sacramento.)

I don't see how they expect to cover much of anything on channel 5.

- Trip

What he suggests works in other digital TV standards, but not in ATSC. But he sounds like he's got it about right.
- Trip
There's no "capture effect" with ATSC like there is with FM stations. Remember, 8VSB is still amplitude modulation. For one signal to "win", it must be at least 15 dB stronger. In other words, an interfering signal is just noise, and the typical demodulator needs 15 dB of S/N.

Ron

I would love to see all channels who broadcast their main network channel in HD limit their number of sub-channels to either a single 480p widescreen (for a movie subchannel) or a single 480i (vintage TV shows) plus a downrezzed 480i for local weather or local info.

In the case of our local PBS, Wisconsin carries 3 channels, PBS-HD, Wisconsin Public TV "The Wisconsin Channel" and Create. They show widescreen HD content on a small scale with a black border around the picture, which leaves a smaller, yet clear picture in widescreen format. I would rather see all 3 of these sub-channels in 480p widescreen.

I understand that 480p is not nearly as good as HD, but it looks pretty darn good on my 720p LCD, and I would think that 480p uses much less bandwidth.

Can 3 sub-channels using 480p with 5.1 audio fit in the alloted bandwidth without a lot of loss?

How much bandwidth is needed for 1080i, 720p, 480p and 480i? How much bandwidth is needed for 5.1 audio vs. 2 channel stereo vs. mono?

Bill

The big problem is that VHF stations have more problems closer in than further out, which is because there are more indoor antennas closer in. So it makes sense to have a UHF booster in town like that.
I wondered about that, since I can pull in a usable signal for KTBC some 60 miles out, whereas a lot of people much closer to the tower can't get anything. Indoor antennas tend to be lousy for VHF digital, even when the signal should be "strong" enough to receive them with ease.

They moved because there was not a channel available to them from Mount Diablo. Only 14 fit, which KTNC ended up with. KTFK volunteered to move down to Walnut Grove and take 26. (I suspect a lot of that had to do with wanting to be co-located with the other stations in Sacramento.)

What was wrong with 26 or 42 from Mt. Diablo? No co-channel problems. Adjacent channel?

I don't see how they expect to cover much of anything on channel 5.

- Trip

Mt. Diablo dominates the landscape from the Livermore and Diablo valleys. Reception of even 300 w should be easy in those regions.

I would love to see all channels who broadcast their main network channel in HD limit their number of sub-channels to either a single 480p widescreen (for a movie subchannel) or a single 480i (vintage TV shows) plus a downrezzed 480i for local weather or local info.

In the case of our local PBS, Wisconsin carries 3 channels, PBS-HD, Wisconsin Public TV "The Wisconsin Channel" and Create. They show widescreen HD content on a small scale with a black border around the picture, which leaves a smaller, yet clear picture in widescreen format. I would rather see all 3 of these sub-channels in 480p widescreen.

I understand that 480p is not nearly as good as HD, but it looks pretty darn good on my 720p LCD, and I would think that 480p uses much less bandwidth.

Can 3 sub-channels using 480p with 5.1 audio fit in the alloted bandwidth without a lot of loss?

How much bandwidth is needed for 1080i, 720p, 480p and 480i? How much bandwidth is needed for 5.1 audio vs. 2 channel stereo vs. mono?

Bill

How much band width is needed is a personal thing. These are my opinions on the subject:

1080i should either not have any subs or they should be under 2Mbps.

720p looks best around 14-15Mbps (clearly, it gets even better with more bits) this would leave room for a SD sub of 4Mbps roughly sized to fit. This is the system that Fox uses.

480p looks really nice between 6-8Mbps (it becomes hard to tell soft HD from 480p)

480i looks poor at 2-3Mbps generally, but really looks "ok" at 4+Mbps.
For example, Twin Cities Public TV switched from PBS Create to "TPT Life" because of all the complaints that they got on Create, the new sub is around 8Mbps, and looks GREAT for SD.

We have two stations in LA each running 8 (count 'em, 8) 480i programs simultaneously. You wouldn't confuse it with high quality video, but it doesn't look as bad as you might expect. It looks considerably better than KABC's 720p Live Well channel.

TV Notes
Nielsen: DTV Unready Homes Drop to 1.7 Million
Reports only 1.5% of TV households now unready for digital
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 7/1/2009 12:36:49 PM EDT

DTV readiness continues to rise as the transition approaches three weeks since the June 12 hard date for the switch to all-analog full-power TV, with 800,000 homes having prepared themselves since that date.

According to Nielsen's latest figures (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/common/jumplink.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.nielsen.com%2Fnielsenw ire%2Fmedia_entertainment%2F800000-homes-have-upgraded-to-dtv-since-june-12-transition%2F) only 1.5% of TV households, or about 1.7 million homes, remain unready for the switch. Those are homes without cable or satellite and without a DTV set or an analog-to-digital converter box hooked up.

That number is down 400,000 homes from June 21, when the numbers were 1.8% and 2.1 million homes unready.

The DTV transition date was moved from Feb. 17 in part to allow more homes to prepare for the switch.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/307272-Nielsen_DTV_Unready_Homes_Drop_to_1_7_Million.php

The big problem is that VHF stations have more problems closer in than further out, which is because there are more indoor antennas closer in. So it makes sense to have a UHF booster in town like that.

- Trip

Oh yeah, I figured out why they were doing it. Penetrating high rises downtown and others close in with indoor UHF antennas.

I was just thinking was this the first time something like this has been done was my point. I never heard of it being done before.

DTV readiness continues to rise as the transition approaches three weeks since the June 12 hard date for the switch to all-analog full-power TV, with 800,000 homes having prepared themselves since that date.
You mean some people just would never get ready until they started seeing snow? Who would have guessed it?

Oh, wait -- pretty much all of us did....

What was wrong with 26 or 42 from Mt. Diablo? No co-channel problems. Adjacent channel?

Yes. KOVR and KTSF for 26, KKPX and KCSM for 42.

Mt. Diablo dominates the landscape from the Livermore and Diablo valleys. Reception of even 300 w should be easy in those regions.

With a roof antenna perhaps.

I tend to be VERY skeptical of low-VHF at any power level.

- Trip

VHF is such a nightmare.

I got back from a trip to NJ and PA today, and I was doing my DTV reception thing all the way there, while there, and then all the way back. Would you expect anything less from me? :)

I drove part of the way up, and thus could not signal check. Mom drove the whole way back though. The bowtie is so big that I only broke it out for the one stop on the way back down when trying to receive W08EE-D. Anything else I tried only with the ears or the Silver Sensor.

As expected, the UHF signals caused my antenna to catch fire, while the VHF signals were absent. Let's make a list:

WVPT-DT 11
I've had terrible luck trying to lock this one, as some may already know. I did not see a hint of signal coming back. (I drove going up, did not check this signal.)

WWPX-DT 12
Usable signal on Silver Sensor once stopped at the rest stop, bowtie maxed out. (I drove going up, did not check this signal.)

W08EE-D 8
Nightmare. Could not get it to decode after 20 minutes of bowtie fighting. With and without the amp. Only 10-ish miles out. ( I drove going up, did not check this signal.)

Around this time, Mom took over driving going up, so I was able to return to my signal tests.

WHTM-DT 10
Usable on the Silver Sensor when VERY close. Rabbit ears were more successful. I've locked this with rabbit ears at 40 miles before, didn't try this time.

WGAL-DT 8
Did not observe this signal at all.

WBPH-DT 9
Managed to lock it with rabbit ears while right under the main lobe of the directional pattern.

WPVI-DT 6
Did not make a serious attempt on this one.

WHYY-DT 12
Did not make a serious attempt on this one.

WNJB-DT 8
Ears showed no signal at all even at less than 5 miles.

WABC-DT 7
Managed to get it up to 70% signal with ears, no higher.

WPIX-DT 11
Barely got it above 60% for a TSReader capture with ears, but then could not duplicate. Never decoded it again.

WNET-DT 13
Managed to get it up to 70% signal with ears, no higher.

WBRE-DT 11
WYOU-DT 13
Ears broke, managed to receive these on the Silver Sensor at 70% at less than 5 miles.

In all cases, the UHFs were easy catches. I was watching some of them while moving at 65 MPH, even with ATSC's poor handling of motion. The VHFs were a real pain.

Weakest station locked on the whole trip? I watched a few seconds of W26DE-D while rolling along I-80 at 65 MPH. Power? 0.105 kW on channel 26. Also stopped in a parking lot in Stroudsburg to get a TSReader capture which is already on the website.

- Trip

Does ATSC have a 16:9 SD spec or would they have to use anamorphic for 16:9 SD?

I got back from a trip to NJ and PA today, and I was doing my DTV reception thing all the way there, while there, and then all the way back. Would you expect anything less from me? :)

...

Weakest station locked on the whole trip? I watched a few seconds of W26DE-D while rolling along I-80 at 65 MPH. Power? 0.105 kW on channel 26. Also stopped in a parking lot in Stroudsburg to get a TSReader capture which is already on the website.

- Trip

Here, about a block from I80 near Camelback Mtn, Digital Day left me with three nightlights; one from Philadelphia and two from from New York City. I have nothing digital on either VHF or UHF.

I do receive one of the NTSC translators on Channel 60. The translators are on a ridge just south of I80 at Stroudsburg and have good line of sight in that direction. They seem to be directional.

Hope you enjoyed your visit to the Poconos.

--- CHAS

Does ATSC have a 16:9 SD spec or would they have to use anamorphic for 16:9 SD?

A 480 mode for 16:9 that assumes rectangular pixels ... I think I've seen it on a subchannel from one of the Baltimore stations.

--- CHAS

Does ATSC have a 16:9 SD spec or would they have to use anamorphic for 16:9 SD?

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=widesd

:)

Here, about a block from I80 near Camelback Mtn, Digital Day left me with three nightlights; one from Philadelphia and two from from New York City. I have nothing digital on either VHF or UHF.

I do receive one of the NTSC translators on Channel 60. The translators are on a ridge just south of I80 at Stroudsburg and have good line of sight in that direction. They seem to be directional.

The analog translators are still on the air? I looked for them and didn't see them. I assumed they'd went off the air.

Look for W26DE-D. It is directional, but the TV Fool maps make it look like some signal should reach you. If you're seeing the analog translators, I would think you might see the digital one...

Hope you enjoyed your visit to the Poconos.

--- CHAS

It was alright. Would be better if there was decent reception. I think I heard three ham repeaters and only a few FM stations while I was there. Used to see two analogs (WTBY and WMBC) but nothing digital.

- Trip

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=widesd

:)

You may, unfortunately, add KBEH 63-1 (and the colorbars on 63-2 and their two "phantom streams") to that list. They've been transmitting in SD 16:9 "stretch-o-vision" since they added the additional subchannels. :mad:

It was alright. Would be better if there was decent reception.

Now that's a true hobbyist! :D

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=widesd
- Trip

Are those stations stretching the picture (a.k.a. Stretch-O-Vision or originating local programming,etc. in 16:9?

The reason I ask is that WLFG in Abingdon, VA (and their rebroadcast on WAGV and WLFB) stretches their 4:3 content to 16:9.

And then the local cable company won't convert it back to 4:3 and it looks awful. (Tis same company also shows all the local stations' 16:9 feed in a cropped 4:3 because a vocal minority complained about the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen. Before the networks started protecting the 4:3 area you couldn't see the time left in the game on NBC football games)

You may, unfortunately, add KBEH 63-1 (and the colorbars on 63-2 and their two "phantom streams") to that list. They've been transmitting in SD 16:9 "stretch-o-vision" since they added the additional subchannels. :mad:

Thanks for the tip. Done.

Now that's a true hobbyist! :D

Don't forget, I had my antenna in one hand and was running TSReader or the signal strength checker pretty much any time I was in the car. :D

Are those stations stretching the picture (a.k.a. Stretch-O-Vision or originating local programming,etc. in 16:9?

Some of them are stretching, though I don't think it's most of them.

- Trip

VHF is such a nightmare.

In all cases, the UHFs were easy catches. I was watching some of them while moving at 65 MPH, even with ATSC's poor handling of motion. The VHFs were a real pain.

- Trip

Funny, I just posted over http://www.dtvusaforum.com/mobile-dtv/4266-will-mobile-dtv-survive-economy.html#post20164 about how all these stations ran to VHF like it was the last gold rush.

Now what do they do? Lease time on a competitor's UHF to stream MPH?

To me it's just the ironic way the world seems to work, if you get too greedy.

Trip you need a gutter mount if your cars have gutters. Or one that works in a roll up window. Inside the car really cuts down reception.

I have an old set of Radio Shack rabbit ears for automobile gutters or trunk mount. Nothing like it for UHF, that I have..

If I had my own car, I would be more apt to agree.

That said, I'm not sure that I want a proper antenna outside the car like that. :D

- Trip

If I had my own car, I would be more apt to agree.

That said, I'm not sure that I want a proper antenna outside the car like that. :D

- Trip

You could stack halo antenna's like the did in the mid 20th century for working 6 and 2 meter SSB horizontal! Low band on the left rear bumper and high band on the right rear. Then in front many stacked UHF halos for extra gain!

Then you would look mobile!!!

PS: This would still leave room for 2 m, 220 and 70cm verticals mounted on the roof like a porcupine.

But you would have to exit the vehicle in lightning storms....... :@):p

=====

Edit

The halos you could feed through antenna tuners so you could also operate SSB mobile on 3 bands!

Do I need to stop now? :)

This is all starting to sound very expensive... :D

(I hope you got my PM last night.)

- Trip

Wow. I was just sent data for KRII in Chisholm (to be posted later today), and it has a 720p plus 4 SD subs. I can only imagine...

http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/mn-hbb/82698-0_0.htm

- Trip

This is similar to WJCT in Jax, FL. They have 5 subs and a 720p
http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/fl-jax/73130-0_0.htm
7-5 is mostly slides. They also have a 7-6 and 7-7 which I guess are for update TV and TVGOS

Now I only have a 32 inch 720p TV. But what they are doing to me blows way WUFT
They subs are close to unwatchable and their main even at 14.33 blocks on wipes, fades and any motion that involves the entire screen, like a field of flowers moving in the wind.

I would rather live with WJCT's less than sharp detail, not see the blocks on fades etc and have subs that are watchable.

This argument has no answer as it approaches religion, with so many opinions to what is good and differences in equipment.

A good example is WUFT-3 at 1.26mbps. It just looks a little blurry on my SD TV (built in tuner) but it's looks like heck on my 720p. I bet it really look bad at higher res screen or larger.

One of my latest feeling on this is OTA can only provide on channel of 1080i TV at best. As 1080p which is a viable standard, in a lot of higher end TV's becomes more of the norm people will demand their program sources fit the resolution of their TV. This will happen long before any hope of MPEG4 hits OTA, and is probably 5 years away at the most, most likely 3 years. Cable and Satellite providers will deliver uncompressed feeds to their customers which is already happening in a lot of markets. OTA will be left behind as the 1996 technology, to which it gets much of it's standards.

What then? Well it's free with a $50 to $250 investment every 5 to 8 years in antenna hardware. It has multiple programs. It will deliver MPH if that catches on. The shear fact of MPH catching on will put more pressure on bandwidth.

Programming choices and free will be it's forte', not resolution to the growing numbers that own 48 and 52 inch 1080p screens.

A lot of the people that can't afford cable will be lucky to be watching in 720p on much larger than what I have a 32 inch. So if they want to keep viewers then their OTA audience will be those with older TVs and smaller cheaper TVs, much like their analog base had become.

This of course is one guess at the future and I don't pretend to have figured it out.

Two more for the VHF file.

WTVF wants to light up a channel 50 "fill in translator" at 100 kW. That's not a typo, they want a waiver of the 15 kW limit. My question is, if you're going to put out that much power, why even keep the VHF on the air?

KOTA wants to boost power from 7.1 kW to 18.2 kW.

- Trip

Two more for the VHF file.

WTVF wants to light up a channel 50 "fill in translator" at 100 kW. That's not a typo, they want a waiver of the 15 kW limit. My question is, if you're going to put out that much power, why even keep the VHF on the air?
- Trip

I just want a hula hoop for Christmas! 100 KW, class B license for Big....

---------

Speaking of too small, WJGV-LP did do digital. I picked it up turning the beam in skip toward Palataka one night but could not get TSReader to lock.

I tried it just now with no skip or minimal, WJXX is still wiped out and WJCT is coming and going. but I could not lock WJGV-LP on any TV.

Not sure it might be off the air, being Sunday morning they might just go off or if 1.8 KW is not enough for my location. Even though it 28 miles and LOS.

Two more for the VHF file.

WTVF wants to light up a channel 50 "fill in translator" at 100 kW. That's not a typo, they want a waiver of the 15 kW limit. My question is, if you're going to put out that much power, why even keep the VHF on the air?
- Trip
Guess since they had experience with a million watts on 56 they think their best coverage will be a combo. I actually hope the FCC grants them a waiver for 75 kW so everyone can see what happens.

This is similar to WJCT in Jax, FL. They have 5 subs and a 720p
http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/fl-jax/73130-0_0.htm
...
One of my latest feeling on this is OTA can only provide on channel of 1080i TV at best. As 1080p which is a viable standard, in a lot of higher end TV's becomes more of the norm people will demand their program sources fit the resolution of their TV. This will happen long before any hope of MPEG4 hits OTA, and is probably 5 years away at the most, most likely 3 years. Cable and Satellite providers will deliver uncompressed feeds to their customers which is already happening in a lot of markets. OTA will be left behind as the 1996 technology, to which it gets much of it's standards.

...

Hi Piggie -

I agree you can't get more than one 1080i stream into 19.3 mbps, at least with MPEG-2 encoders. Anything more actually gets so many artifacts that you get LESS usesful information to the viewers.

But I don't think there is anything lost with using 720p instead of 1080i. It can look excellent on my 1080p Vizio LCD. Most TV's are becoming progressive these days and I think scaling can be done much easier than deinterlacing.

But that's just my own opinion and I don't want to open up the 1080i vs 720p religious wars that have popped up on this forum from time to time over the years. ;)

I don't see much chance of 1080p/60 MPEG-2 OTA ever being broadcast under the ATSC standard. But some 1080p TV's can properly do inverse telecine on 24p sourced movies sent in 1080i and I think that already gives much the same effect for the 24 fps movie source frame rate.

- Tom

WTVF wants to light up a channel 50 "fill in translator" at 100 kW. That's not a typo, they want a waiver of the 15 kW limit. My question is, if you're going to put out that much power, why even keep the VHF on the air?
The only thing that makes sense to me is that they hope to continue to "work" on the VHF signal to the point where they can shut down the more power-hungry UHF signals in the future.

I think at least some of the VHF stations wanting additional UHF translators are likely in this boat. I'm sure they desperately want to make the VHF work for its lower power costs.

Cable and Satellite providers will deliver uncompressed feeds to their customers which is already happening in a lot of markets.

There's no way anyone is or will in the near future deliver "uncompressed" HD signals. Even blu-ray is compressed and it has a 40 mbps bitrate. A truely uncompressed HD singal would have a bitrate 50-100 times higher than what cable/satelite offer now.

And OTA ...

Uncompressed HD (1080i or 720p) are around 1.5 Gbps. Uncompressed 1080p is 3 Gbps.

Uncompressed HD (1080i or 720p) are around 1.5 Gbps. Uncompressed 1080p is 3 Gbps.

HUGE difference between 19 Mbps and 3 Gbps about 160 fold by my math. Maybe Piggie can explain where he heard about his magic technology.

HUGE difference between 19 Mbps and 3 Gbps about 160 fold by my math. Maybe Piggie can explain where he heard about his magic technology.

Or, more likely, he misspoke. :rolleyes:

- Trip

Pixes per line*lines*frames per sec*24 bits per pixel=1900*1080*60*24=2,954,880,000 bits per second.

ctdish - correct for a 1080p - for 1080i it would be 30 instead of 60.

Pixes per line*lines*frames per sec*24 bits per pixel=1900*1080*60*24=2,954,880,000 bits per second.
Yeah, but transmit in 0/1 black and white (no greyscale) and you're down to 123 Mbps. :)

Here we go. I see a Petition for Rulemaking filed by WHDH, but no idea whether it specifies 42 or not. I'll know in 6 hours.

Also, WHEC filed something. It reads like they're only using the bottom half of their antenna (maybe?) and instead want to use the top half. And slightly cut power to compensate, thank you Canada. I'm not really sure what the deal is.

- Trip

Two more for the VHF file.

WTVF wants to light up a channel 50 "fill in translator" at 100 kW. That's not a typo, they want a waiver of the 15 kW limit. My question is, if you're going to put out that much power, why even keep the VHF on the air?

- Trip

Finally see it listed on the FCC website. Translator I guess is useful for those near Nashville absolutely ZERO use for me. Range only extends between Dickson and Waverly which is even worse than Ch 5 itself. Which supposedly reaches beyond my area. One day maybe stations will put translators where they are actually needed. Doesn't matter the the small group of people in Nashville that are having issues get it resolved with this Ch 5 and the FCC don't care about some hillbillies in between Memphis and Nashville. Only big city folk count apparently.

By the way tonight I'm getting in Ch 3( RF 28 ), Ch 10( RF 29 ), Ch 24( RF 25 ), Ch 30( RF 31 ) and Ch 40( RF 41 ) out of Memphis. Not getting in Ch 5 out of Memphis nor Nashville as per usual. Funny how that is. Both Ch 5s are supposedly the strongest stations in each area. Ch 39( RF 38 ) out of Murfreesboro which is 92 miles away comes in stronger than WTVF on a consistant basis. How can that be?

Here we go. I see a Petition for Rulemaking filed by WHDH, but no idea whether it specifies 42 or not. I'll know in 6 hours.

And, of course, the one day I'm highly anticipating something is the one day the FCC fails to update the database at 3AM like they're supposed to.

- Trip

And, of course, the one day I'm highly anticipating something is the one day the FCC fails to update the database at 3AM like they're supposed to.

- Trip

They knew you were waiting for it. ;)

They knew you were waiting for it. ;)

Guess so.

Okay, it got updated 20 minutes ago, so I've just now started running the update process on RabbitEars again. It'll take about half an hour to complete.

- Trip

Alright, have to wait for the PDF to show up on the FCC website before I can confirm it 100%, but it appears that WHDH has filed to move to channel 42 permanently.

- Trip

When does the FCC filing window for fill-in translators close?

No idea.

- Trip

Hey Trip! How about date-stamping each entry your VHF Nightmares listing?

It would be interesting to see the progression of evolution...

Hmm... if I can think of a neat way to do it, perhaps I will.

- Trip

Just in case anyone had given up on my job blog in the last week and a half of no updates, I updated today... http://www.rabbitears.info/jobblog/index.php?

For anyone wondering, this is what WDRL looked like, except the "Nothing" lines repeated another 500 times. Also note how I've hacked the azap tool to be much more friendly:

trip@trip-laptop:~/opt/dvb-apps/util/szap$ ./azap -r A24
using '/dev/dvb/adapter0/frontend0' and '/dev/dvb/adapter0/demux0'
tuning to 533028615 Hz
video pid 0x0031, audio pid 0x0034
status 00 | signal 0000 (00 dB) | unc 3287 (12935) | Nothing . . . | |
status 16 | signal 0000 (00 dB) | unc 3287 (12935) | Signal Locked | ==== |
status 1e | signal 8430 (16 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Decoder Active | ====== |
status 1e | signal 7278 (14 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Decoder Active | ====== |
status 1e | signal 2f01 (05 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Decoder Active | ====== |
status 16 | signal 0000 (00 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Signal Locked | ==== |
status 00 | signal 0000 (00 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Nothing . . . | |
status 00 | signal 0000 (00 dB) | unc 0000 (00000) | Nothing . . . | |

- Trip

New day, new VHF problems.

KVIA in El Paso requests to light up DT-17 again, and seeks either more power on 7 or to keep 17 permanently.

KIIN seeks an STA to boost power, but it was applied for before the VHF problems became so apparent. Thus, it does not count toward the VHF nightmares.

=====

WVVA Bluefield seeks a fill-in translator at 15 kW on channel 43 in Beckley. Channel 6 made it around the mountains, channel 46 does not.

- Trip

When does the FCC filing window for fill-in translators close?
Is there a limited-time window for such filings??


Patty

You could stack halo antenna's like the did in the mid 20th century for working 6 and 2 meter SSB horizontal! Low band on the left rear bumper and high band on the right rear. Then in front many stacked UHF halos for extra gain!

Then you would look mobile!!!

PS: This would still leave room for 2 m, 220 and 70cm verticals mounted on the roof like a porcupine.

But you would have to exit the vehicle in lightning storms....... :@):p

=====

Edit

The halos you could feed through antenna tuners so you could also operate SSB mobile on 3 bands!

Do I need to stop now? :)

You mean we dont stack halos or other similar anymore for 6/2/432 SSB?? RATS!! that means I have to take mine off the vehicle????:eek:

Hey Trip! How about date-stamping each entry your VHF Nightmares listing?

It would be interesting to see the progression of evolution...

Hey:

Peek at the last few entries. I'm going to go back and do the rest of them today; do you like the way I've listed the dates, particularly for WLS?

- Trip

HUGE difference between 19 Mbps and 3 Gbps about 160 fold by my math. Maybe Piggie can explain where he heard about his magic technology.

Much less compressed, does that appease the sorry I misspoke crowd or were posts so thin that day I was an easy target?

Correcting a mistake is good. picking is bad. sorry, I really hate that in forums.

-----

that said only Barry overlooked my mistake and go my point that unless a station wants to give up all subs (MPH not considered for the sake of my point) they should not run 1080i.
Even at 14.3 mb[s or so on a local, 1080i breaks up and looks better on the next towns 720p feed of 9mbps

With 720p on the main feed, there is room for subs. With 1080i there isn't.

Those that want more resolution the OTA provides should to a source with "less" compression.

However these are my opinions and nor do I want to start another religious war over resolution.

WPXD has received Canadian concurrence to move to channel 50. They were issued an NPRM today.

Honestly, I don't want them to get it. It would be better used in Lansing for WILX, if they wanted it. It would be superior there because it'd be right next to WLAJ-DT 51.

- Trip

You mean we dont stack halos or other similar anymore for 6/2/432 SSB?? RATS!! that means I have to take mine off the vehicle????:eek:

I suggest you leave your there to work SSB mobile, but in your case you could probably use them for mobile DTV and MPH reception and not need a tuner, since receiving is less picky on mismatch.

Please leave them there, someone has to keep up those effective traditional antlers.

WPXD has received Canadian concurrence to move to channel 50. They were issued an NPRM today.

Honestly, I don't want them to get it. It would be better used in Lansing for WILX, if they wanted it. It would be superior there because it'd be right next to WLAJ-DT 51.

- Trip

Isn't it amazing with 13 years to get it right, no one actually did a nation wide band plan. A lot of the co-channel people complain about could have been eliminated.

And why is the VHF nightmare such a sudden shock to some stations? Weren't there enough people already on VHF as an example? Why was that data ignored?

What do we pay the FCC to do anyway? :rolleyes:

What do we pay the FCC to do anyway? :rolleyes:To keep Janet Jackson from having any more wardrobe malfunctions.::eek:

I like the date addition, Trip...you're doing a real service!

I'm still not seeing what I'm hoping to see, but that's not your fault. :D

WPXD has received Canadian concurrence to move to channel 50. They were issued an NPRM today.

Honestly, I don't want them to get it. It would be better used in Lansing for WILX, if they wanted it. It would be superior there because it'd be right next to WLAJ-DT 51.

- Trip

Are they still planning to move to WKBD's tower (and, I'm guessing, reuse their RF50 antenna & transmitter)?

I don't know. Their paperwork never showed up on the FCC site.

I would assume that's the plan, though.

- Trip

And why is the VHF nightmare such a sudden shock to some stations? Weren't there enough people already on VHF as an example? Why was that data ignored?
I was wondering that myself. We spent ten years transitioning for A to D. I know the VHF band was quite crowded, but did we require that the theory be tested in the field. There must have been room somewhere in the 50 states!
Was any data accumulated?

Then there is the impulse noise issue. Was that known when channel assignments were made? Did the stations have a choice of channels?

(Finally -- where is the spell check button:mad:)

Did the stations have a choice of channels?

Yes. WBRA-DT had three chances during the channel election process to get off of channel 3. They rejected all three.

- Trip

I added some new data to the Technical Data part of RabbitEars. Opinions?

- Trip

Isn't it amazing with 13 years to get it right, no one actually did a nation wide band plan.
...
What do we pay the FCC to do anyway? :rolleyes:
Agreed. I think it would have made much more sense to start with an ideal digital channel allocation and then work backwards to figure out a good way to migrate towards that, rather than trying to shoehorn digital replication channels around a 1950s analog infrastructure, and then giving those transition channels interference protection priority for the post transition era.

For instance, if we're going to use VHF, then all 7 high band channels should have been allocated as a group to selected cities with appropriate separation and power. Similarly, UHF channels should have been allocated in contiguous groups, and transmitter co-location should have been not just encouraged but required.

Done properly, the transition should have leveled the playing field between stations and made digital OTA a plug-and-play, comprehensive alternative to lifeline cable in urban and suburban areas.

Instead, we have a chaotic mishmash of wasteful allocations, with numerous channels lost to adjacent channel prohibitions, and numerous urban and suburban areas with one or more major networks difficult or extremely inconvenient to receive. Far from reviving broadcast, this will only serve to drive people to cable over time. Indeed, absent the recession, cable and satellite would probably already have reaped an enormous windfall from this boondoggle.

joblo, your ideas are too intelligent for the FCC. Too bad, because you're 100% right and it would just make so much sense.

Totally different subject, but I've now added code to RabbitEars to calculate the HAAT of some low-powered and Class A stations. It checks the tower registration number or coordinates to see if there's a full powered station on the same tower. If so, it finds the difference in the height above ground level between the two and adds or subtracts accordingly.

- Trip

I was wondering that myself. We spent ten years transitioning for A to D. I know the VHF band was quite crowded, but did we require that the theory be tested in the field. There must have been room somewhere in the 50 states!
Was any data accumulated?

Then there is the impulse noise issue. Was that known when channel assignments were made? Did the stations have a choice of channels?



Well the data was out there, just about every channel had a digital station on it if anyone really wanted to know the truth (The Truth is Out There). But mostly it was ignored because stations though to save money and so many remembered the wonderful range of VHF. Well it didn't exatly work that way on digital compared to the analog days.

Moreover at the last minute there was a warning bell that was ignored to at least warn viewers their station was cutting to VHF on June 12. A lot of stations took advantage of the April or so early transition. Many of those were flash cuts. I know in some of the towns where it happened was scenarios of things to come on June 12 as they flash cut to VHF digital from UHF. By then it was way too late to change many allocations, etc. However it was not too late to realize to warn viewers what was going to happen when they moved not just channels but entire frequency bands to VHF. Few stations took heed but kept running their PSA just about being ready for digital, not go change your antenna.

For a spell checker I use Firefox browser that has one built in.

WCYB has filed another STA for 29.9 kW. I was most amused with this one:

"Approximately 6.7 percent of the 333,000 viewers in the Station’s market rely on over-the-air television signals. This is a significant percentage and one that is at risk of losing critical and timely emergency information and news from the Station. The call volume indicates that about 3.9 percent of these viewers relying on over-the-air television have already called the Station because of difficulty in receiving the Station’s signal. With two recent tornados and more tornados possible over the course of the summer, the Station is particularly concerned about these viewers losing access to potentially live-saving information."

Also applying for immediate increase, KEYC. From 15.2 kW to 35 kW.

- Trip

WCYB has filed another STA for 29.9 kW. I was most amused with this one:

"Approximately 6.7 percent of the 333,000 viewers in the Station’s market rely on over-the-air television signals. This is a significant percentage and one that is at risk of losing critical and timely emergency information and news from the Station.

No they are worried about advertisers wanting to pay less because there are 21,000 less viewers.

Anyways Trip I saw this on the FCC website

DIGITAL TRANSLATOR OR DIGITAL LPTV APPLICATIONS FOR DTV
REPLACEMENT TRANSLATOR ACCEPTED FOR FILING

BDRTCDT-20090702ACO

CHAN-50 WTVF 36504

NEWSCHANNEL 5 NETWORK, LLC TN , NASHVILLE

Construction permit for a DTV Replacement Translator for callsign WTVF

So does that mean they got permission to go ahead with it?

No. The "Accepted for Filing" is what you should be looking at. When that changes to "Granted" is when you'll know they have the green light.

They are applying for a construction permit, which is why those words are displayed.

- Trip

WPXD has received Canadian concurrence to move to channel 50. They were issued an NPRM today.

Honestly, I don't want them to get it. It would be better used in Lansing for WILX, if they wanted it. It would be superior there because it'd be right next to WLAJ-DT 51.

- Trip

Trip, That just makes way too much sense. It would be perfect for me to recieve all Lansing stations with an XG91....as it is WILX-DT is a goner. OTOH WPXD comes in great for me on 31 (their transmitter is north and west of Ann Arbor currently).

Well the data was out there, just about every channel had a digital station on it if anyone really wanted to know the truth (The Truth is Out There). But mostly it was ignored because stations though to save money and so many remembered the wonderful range of VHF. Well it didn't exatly work that way on digital compared to the analog days.

Most digital stations were on UHF (I think), so the data pool may not have been very large as one would think. (Also many transmitters were at a lower power to protect Analog stations.) But -- somewhere around 2005 someone should have figured out this VHF thing is not working as planned and we need to reevaluate and modify the plan. 2009 is too late, everything is basically on auto pilot.

Most digital stations were on UHF (I think), so the data pool may not have been very large as one would think. (Also many transmitters were at a lower power to protect Analog stations.) But -- somewhere around 2005 someone should have figured out this VHF thing is not working as planned and we need to reevaluate and modify the plan. 2009 is too late, everything is basically on auto pilot.

Yes a lot were on UHF. But here in Florida, between Orlando, Tampa and Jacksonville there was a 7, 10, 11, 12, 13 for years. But yes, part of the problem started when two things happened. One is stations finally installed there final antenna/power and the co-channel became digital not analog. The impluse noise issue was obvious as soon as realized back in 2007 I had to turn off my misting lamp to see WESH. I am sure other's noticed this years before. But it was the co-channel interference that really wasn't apparent until June 12. The co-channel from my solely empirical finding is worse than analog co-channel was to digital. I have never seen any studies to show if this is true, as I was doing a lot better watching Jax before Tampa when digital on the same channels.

They got the loot, so now it's moot, money talks and OTA walks.......

The co-channel from my solely empirical finding is worse than analog co-channel was to digital. I have never seen any studies to show if this is true, as I was doing a lot better watching Jax before Tampa when digital on the same channels.

ATSC was designed that way. If I recall correctly, they actually notched out the places in the ATSC signal where the NTSC carriers would go so as to minimize the impact of co-channel NTSC.

Go to DXFM and read his thing about digital TV. http://www.dxfm.com/Content/DTV_info_old.htm He shows himself decoding a digital while an analog picture had color and everything, and this was on that same ancient computer tuner I have.

- Trip

I just saw the print version of TV Technology and was thoroughly amused with a few paragraphs about upper-VHF reception issues from someone at WWNY-DT 7 in Carthage/Watertown, NY. They reverted from 35 to 7 a while ago, and what struck me was a part where they noted that many viewers had upgraded to outdoor antennas and still had issues.

I have to wonder if they're looking at going back to UHF...

- Trip

I just saw the print version of TV Technology and was thoroughly amused with a few paragraphs about upper-VHF reception issues from someone at WWNY-DT 7 in Carthage/Watertown, NY.
- Trip

The failure of DTV reception on channel 7 in Watertown was not specifically compared to UHF DTV reception, nor was it clear if the comparison was analog 7 to DTV 7.

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/newbay/tvt_20090708/#/12

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=7019808615

There's WHDH's petition to keep channel 42 in lieu of channel 7.

- Trip

I added some new data to the Technical Data part of RabbitEars. Opinions?

- Trip

These links?
FAC-ID: 25454 FCC Query CDBS List REC Query

Overall, nothing but praise for the wealth of information on the site.

No, those have been there.

I added the TPO, antenna system gain, height AGL, and beam tilt figures. Those were all newly added, along with the HAAT calculations for some low-powered stations that I am now calculating on the fly.

- Trip

WCYB has filed another STA for 29.9 kW. I was most amused with this one:

"Approximately 6.7 percent of the 333,000 viewers in the Station’s market rely on over-the-air television signals. This is a significant percentage and one that is at risk of losing critical and timely emergency information and news from the Station. The call volume indicates that about 3.9 percent of these viewers relying on over-the-air television have already called the Station because of difficulty in receiving the Station’s signal. With two recent tornados and more tornados possible over the course of the summer, the Station is particularly concerned about these viewers losing access to potentially live-saving information."


I and others brought up worries about WCYB going back to VHF-lo on this very message board (Tri-Cities, TN-VA topic area) several months ago and this one poster (who only has posted two messages TOTAL on this board and sounds a lot like a corporate shill for WCYB) basically told us not to worry.

And I quote....
WCYB can only cover 82% of the market on channel 28, even if the effective radiated power were increased to a million watts. This is due to the terrain features of this area and a UHF channel. Returning to VHF channel 5 with 7.1kW of average DTV power will more than replicate the existing analog coverage area and exceed the 95% FCC requirement. Note that Nashville and Memphis stations are also returning to channel 5. The latest generation of receiver chips have overcome ghosting and terrestrial interference issues. Analog or digital....it's still RF!

Consulting engineers agree that channel 5 is the lowest VHF channel that should be used for DTV and can handle the noise issues. They proved that in the early Charlotte DTV testing back in the late 90's. That's why nationwide over 20 stations will return to channel 5. Some other markets that wanted to come back cannot because of station interference issues. WCYB is concerned with the audience and advertisers within the Tri Cities DMA market and not outside markets or viewers that are miles away. It is also important to note that 90% of all the Tri Cities viewers get all their signals from cable and satellite, leaving only 10% of over the air viewers. The WCYB-DT signal will hit all the cable headends, DISH, and DIRECT TV. Yes, strong lightning affects lower VHF channels. Heavy rains affect satellite and microwave signals too. It's always been that way! With an antenna elevation near 4,600 ft ASL, the Tri Cities viewers will not have a problem. Come back in Feb., 2009, WCYB-DT will be there with a beautiful picture!

Wonder where this guy is now and what he would say in light of the power increase application and STA request?

By the way, losing those 6.7 percent of viewers will mean that WCYB's decades-long dominance of local news ratings is in serious trouble. WJHL has been gaining on them for a while now and this might put them on top. I'd love to see that happen just to watch all the fallout. :)

Wonder where this guy is now and what he would say in light of the power increase application and STA request?

I also found this part funny since it's so ironic.

"Note that Nashville and Memphis stations are also returning to channel 5."

yes and both those stations are having huge issues with reception too. I gues engineers don't know everything. Or more like the management just wanted to be cheap save a few bucks. How much savings is now being spent trying to correct reception issues?

More VHF news:

KFMB-8 in San Diego wants to bump from 14.9 kW to 19.9 kW.

WRGB-6 now apparently has the gear to bump from 11 kW to 30 kW, and is requesting the 30 kW.

- Trip

WRGB-6 now apparently has the gear to bump from 11 kW to 30 kW, and is requesting the 30 kW.

Both WPVI and WRGB are horizontally polarized. I think they will find that adding a vertical component will be more useful. However, that would effectively end WRGB's plans to add back the FM carrier, if that idea is still on the table.

...I am reminded of the building the "castle in the swamp" analogy again.

The FM audio is already on the air for WRGB, but on 87.9 and not 87.7.

- Trip

The UHF terrain issues cited by "VCTC" are real, but would probably have been better addressed by building a series of translators to serve all of those "hollers". They probably wanted to avoid the expense of that solution, however.
What "VCTC" did not realize was that the power level was far too low. There were serious flaws in the old DTV tests. They did not take into account the huge (and still growing) proliferation of microprocessors and switching-type power supplies, which produce a great deal of interference at HF and VHF. The early DTV tests were all modeled on outdoor antennas 30' above ground, with the embedded belief that outdoor antennas and cable TV had made indoor antennas obsolete and that they were no longer in use (a *major* disconnect with reality!).
WTVF and WMC, with their significant urban audiences, made EPIC FAILS! In-core UHF channels were available (in WMC's case, high VHF as well), and they are alone on low VHF in their markets (this makes a difference - people are likely to accept a compromise that loses one station, but would not accept the loss of two or more and would upgrade their systems).
My opinion: The channel 50 translator for WTVF should be approved - for now, but with the stipulation that after a certain amount of time (e.g., 2 years), they would have to maximize their ch 50 facility as full service (and shut down ch5), license ch 50 with 100 kW as a full-service license (and shut down ch5), or stay with channel 5 (and shut down channel 50). They should not be able to hog two channels forever.

Hogging two channels was never the original idea, even for Pigs.

But on the other hand, will anyone want the low band channels for new apps after seeing what really happened on a wide scale?

The early DTV tests were all modeled on outdoor antennas 30' above ground,

yeah I see that what it's says on the FCC reception maps. Very few people have antennas that high. At least in my area so those maps are less than useless. At least Tvfool let's you change the height to get different results. what's also ironic is the fact I get better reception the LOWER my antenna is to the ground. And Tvfool confirms this. My DB4 works best when the bottom bow-ties are mere inches off the ground. Even my VHF dipole. the "best"( and I use that term loosely ) reception for WTVF is about 6 feet off the ground. For Ch 4 and 8 it's about 7 feet. I've put it as high as 12 feet and the signal goes to crap. I have no way or desire of getting either of them 30 feet in the air to see if things improve. Tvfool suggests that at 30 feet reception is much worse and that in fact I would have to have an antenna 130 feet off the ground to equal the reception I get from ground level. Only higher than 130 feet does reception improve. So why bother?


WTVF and WMC, with their significant urban audiences, made EPIC FAILS! In-core UHF channels were available (in WMC's case, high VHF as well),

Because they thought "Oh we're channel 5 so we need to actually be on Ch 5" like a bunch of idiots. And also they were trying to be cheapskates. WTVF for example could have easily taken Ch 26. WMC could have had Ch 9 if a VHF channel was so important.

My opinion: The channel 50 translator for WTVF should be approved - for now, but with the stipulation that after a certain amount of time (e.g., 2 years), they would have to maximize their ch 50 facility as full service (and shut down ch5), license ch 50 with 100 kW as a full-service license (and shut down ch5), or stay with channel 5 (and shut down channel 50). They should not be able to hog two channels forever.

Well when WTVF was on Ch 56 it didn't come in great but it came in better than what it does now. I'm not sure if WTVF went to 50 and had the same power as 56 if it would be any better, but as I said 56 was better than 5 is anyways.

Hogging two channels was never the original idea, even for Pigs.

But on the other hand, will anyone want the low band channels for new apps after seeing what really happened on a wide scale?

Yes. There has been a channel 2 filed for New Jersey just outside NYC and a channel 3 in Delaware, just outside Philly.

The NJ ch 2 and DE ch 3 proposals will result in what I call virtual broadcast stations. They're only there to get on cable systems and satellite. Missing the OTA universe isn't that big of a deal. So they miss 10 - 15 % of the total population, they get to be players in the #1 and #4 markets.

Still, I think these are speculative proposals. The only people that will make $ off these are the lawyers and consulting engineers. Who needs a 2nd or 3rd broadcast shopping channel? (then again it probably doesn't take too many viewers/buyers to cash flow)

The FM audio is already on the air for WRGB, but on 87.9 and not 87.7.

- Trip

87.9? Are they filing for it to be a real radio station then?

I have no idea what WRGB is doing up there. I'd really like to find out, though.

- Trip

87.9? Are they filing for it to be a real radio station then?

87.9 is still within the range of VHF channel 6. 87.9 (FM Channel 200) is only used by 3 FM stations in the U.S., because it's use is highly restricted (Class D - i.e. less than 10 W - non commercial stations that were displaced and could not find a channel in the commercial range to move to). I don't think KRGB would have any chance of getting 87.9 as a normal FM radio station.

I thought they had applied for an experimental license to do this, but I didn't see it in the CDBS.

Yes. There has been a channel 2 filed for New Jersey just outside NYC and a channel 3 in Delaware, just outside Philly.

Actually it's the other way around. It's Ch.3 for NJ and Ch. 2 for DE.

While lowband DTV has real problems, it is not truly "virtual" coverage, either. We have a lowband VHF DTV 24 miles away with a very short tower and 10kW ERP, and reception is excellent. We also have an antenna about 33' above ground, on the chimney of a "ranch style" house (many homes around here have them higher).
Someone has posted on YouTube their reception of WMC at 1050 miles.

Our lowband local does not work with an indoor antenna.

I've noticed nobody has mentioned any VHF success stories. Here are some personal observations:

DTV from three markets:
Local market (average 12 miles) had one low VHF and five UHF DTVs, two of which switched to high VHF with transition.
Larger market (average 51 miles), had nine UHF DTVs, one of which was out-of-core and switched to high VHF (not its original lowband analog channel) with transition.
Very small market, from which only a PBS UHF DTV at 48 miles is usable here, it switched from out-of-core UHF to original analog in-core UHF in early transition.

system 1 - older CRT set with integral SDTV tuner (not very multipath tolerant) and V/U combo at 33':
The new highband VHF at 50 miles exceeded my expectations. The antenna aim has to be in the right general direction, but not very critical, and its reception is not hampered by appliances in the home (and this is with temporary 15kW power and low side mount antenna) The locals that moved to VHF high as as good as they had been on UHF.

system 2 - Zenith CECB with a UHF 4-bay inside the attic and UHF-only preamp, aimed at the larger market (and right angles to the locals):
The lowbander never came in and the new high-V at 50 miles was lost (no surprise- the preamp blocks out VHF), but the high-V locals are solid 7/8th scale on the CECB's meter and reliable.

system 3 - Sansonic CECB with rabbit ears/loop in a kitchen cabinet in the center of a brick house. One major net local UHF DTV at 12 miles is very hard to lock, the other UHFs work reasonably well, it the antenna is not moved too far of the "spot", but the new high-Vs are virtually foolproof. The signal meter only reads 55%, but the signal quality is at or near 100% (in contrast, one of the UHFs had a 90% signal but won't lock due to multipath).
(this system is strictly local market).

Sometimes I think I'm way too into this DTV thing.

Last night, I had a dream and in it, I checked the FCC website and WNDY in Marion IN had requested a channel change from 32 to 17 with the goal of co-locating with WISH in Indianapolis. I remember wondering how it would affect co-owned WIIH-CA 17. I actually went and checked the FCC site this morning just to make sure it was a dream.

The scary part is that I checked the spacing requirements this morning and while I can't run an interference study, it looks like it could have been a feasible move, outside of co-owned WIIH-CA.

- Trip

Trip, you have looked at it so much no doubt you got the spacing right even in your dream.

To take it to the next level, if we could have add a port to the side of your neck, you could plug directly in and not need to rent a server for rabbit ears!! :@)

Someone has posted on YouTube their reception of WMC at 1050 miles.

I'm waiting for someone to report our KCWX-DT-5 (the only full-power low-VHF DTV in Texas) that way. Across the US there are more DTV on Ch 5 than any other low-VHF channel. It's only a matter of time during this peak part of the summer Es season before that happens, and the return "favor" of some other DT-5 knocking out their OTA 23kw at 50 mi from San Antonio. Of course, it's nothing like the 10 season of them as KCWX-2 with scores of US and Mexico stations clobbering them for hours on end (as well as the several US DT-2 "snowing" them). Now it will be just some pixelations and a blank screen.

I'm waiting for someone to report our KCWX-DT-5 (the only full-power low-VHF DTV in Texas) that way. Across the US there are more DTV on Ch 5 than any other low-VHF channel. It's only a matter of time during this peak part of the summer Es season before that happens, and the return "favor" of some other DT-5 knocking out their OTA 23kw at 50 mi from San Antonio. Of course, it's nothing like the 10 season of them as KCWX-2 with scores of US and Mexico stations clobbering them for hours on end (as well as the several US DT-2 "snowing" them). Now it will be just some pixelations and a blank screen.
Is KCWX up yet? They filed just before the transition that they expected to be operational on July 10.

Both WPVI and WRGB are horizontally polarized. I think they will find that adding a vertical component will be more useful.

FWIW WTVF is circularly polarized.

This may be old news. The day of the cutoff the E's were rolling here from North Central Florida. I never did ID anything but another local here did watch a sign off on low band from the upper midwest.

Is KCWX up yet? They filed just before the transition that they expected to be operational on July 10.

I caught them on Jul 2nd http://www.qsl.net/wa5iyx/images/kcwx-dt-5.1z.jpg

They might have snuck on the afternoon before http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16774683#post16774683

Today is the final day of nightlighting. By midnight, all the nightlights are supposed to be off the air and the only analog left in the US are LP's.

Today is the final day of nightlighting. By midnight, all the nightlights are supposed to be off the air and the only analog left in the US are LP's.Newbie guy: What does LPs stand for? I noticed a few analog channel this morning. Sheesh, go away already. :)

Low Power. It's a separate FCC license class. They ain't going anywhere for now.

Today is the final day of nightlighting. By midnight, all the nightlights are supposed to be off the air and the only analog left in the US are LP's.

Tell that to KBSV who continues to operate analog intermittently right up through yesterday. I've e-mailed them about it and called the FCC twice. No enforcement and I guess KBSV knows it.

Tell that to KBSV who continues to operate analog intermittently right up through yesterday. I've e-mailed them about it and called the FCC twice. No enforcement and I guess KBSV knows it.

Nightlight rules did allow for nightlight stations to provide news programming if they choose along with emergency programming if warranted, but could not provide any other programming other than the nightlight programming.

Low Power. It's a separate FCC license class. They ain't going anywhere for now.

Class A TV stations also fall in this same category of allowed analog stations past July 12th. Class A's usually are not separated out from the LP's. When talking LP's, Class A's are automatically assumed since they are really LP stations who because they conform more to the rules of a full power, get a little more interference protection than plain LP's.

Nightlight rules did allow for nightlight stations to provide news programming if they choose along with emergency programming if warranted, but could not provide any other programming other than the nightlight programming.

KBSV is not a nightlight station. I read their filing of "Notification of Termination of Analog Service." The FCC told me on the phone that they are a full power station and not a nightlight station. They are broadcasting the same program on analog as they are on digital.

KBSV is not a nightlight station. I read their filing of "Notification of Termination of Analog Service." The FCC told me on the phone that they are a full power station and not a nightlight station. They are broadcasting the same program on analog as they are on digital.

... with 421 watts. I don't see the FCC considering this a top priority on their to-do list.

... with 421 watts. I don't see the FCC considering this a top priority on their to-do list.

Uh, no.... 7.72KW, still not high power. Their application for a 7.72 KW digital station is the analog transmitter they're currently operating. So you think it is fine for any smaller station to stay on analog a month after the shutoff? If they don't have to follow the rules, then why should anyone else?

... with 421 watts. I don't see the FCC considering this a top priority on their to-do list.

That is the digital station with a STA, not the analog.

If they don't have to follow the rules, then why should anyone else?

Because neither you nor I are the TV station police. MYOB.

Because neither you nor I are the TV station police. MYOB.

Sorry, but I disagree that citizens should not report illegal activities.

When it comes to reporting technical violations of broadcasters to the FCC one runs up against the concept of "standing". I was told by others in 2007 that my observations of extra "sidebands" from a local (non-HD) 94.1 (93.7 thru 94.5) might not be acted upon since it seems that only another affected broadcaster would be paid attention to. I almost got a 94.3 involved, but the 94.1 problem was "fixed" (long after I'd sent them e-mails and even posted a video of their 20db-down 93.9 and 94.3 signals). OTOH, if you are a licensed user of affected spectrum (ham bands, 2x radio, etc) they must respond.

The FCC only listens if someone licensed complains. They don't care if you complain.

I called to complain about interference to WBRA-DT that I was observing. The FCC told me to call WBRA, they wouldn't take my complaint directly. WBRA didn't care and wouldn't advance the complaint.

I eventually figured out it was something in my house interfering, but that's not the point.

- Trip

More for the VHF file.

WGAL wants a boost from 8.1 kW to 14.1 kW.

KGUN wants to light up K16EO-D as soon as possible to help "restore some service." KGUN is a lone VHF.

WDSE wants to make DT-38 into a fill-in translator. My question is, if you want to file for a new license for DT-38 anyway, why not just move back there now at full power and then apply for DT-08 later? Unless it's a money thing...

- Trip

WTVF amended their application for a fill-in translator on 50, they now want the standard 15 kW.

If I was the FCC, I'd tell these stations like WLS, WTVF, and WDSE that they can operate two transmitters from the same tower for a short time, but then they need to pick one and stick with it after a while because otherwise they're chewing up two channels for the same service.

7500 posts. Do I need a life? Probably. :D

- Trip

7500 posts. Do I need a life? Probably. :D

- Trip

Isn't having more posts supposed to be a good thing?!:D:eek:

The FCC only listens if someone licensed complains. They don't care if you complain.

You are wrong, they do care. If the complaint appears legitimate.


I called to complain about interference to WBRA-DT that I was observing. The FCC told me to call WBRA, they wouldn't take my complaint directly. WBRA didn't care and wouldn't advance the complaint.

I eventually figured out it was something in my house interfering, but that's not the point.

- Trip
That is exactly the point. They can not chase after every complaint that some goober files. Especially if the interference is self inflicted, as in your case.

I have a question in regards to interference, or in this case future interference that I'm sure one of you can answer. Is there some way to file a protest with the FCC after they have granted a CP to a low power station because said station is going to interfere with another station?

The situation...... As of July 1st KICU seems to have completed their post transition antenna/transmitter work and I now receive them essentially 100% of the time, but they are 90 miles away and I'm far beyond the edge of their contour map. This is not an unusual situation here in California where most of the broadcasters are on top of hills or mountains and some of the viewers are also on hills (like me) so their expected coverage is greatly extended.

KAZV-LP has a CP for digital 36. Again I'm far outside their contour and they'll be only 500 watts but it's essentially LOS and the antenna heading is only 12 degrees off of KICU. The two stations will be mutual obliteration here.

I'm trying to convince KAZV that 36 is poor choice. (I think 23 is a much better choice.) They also have KFRE-DT in Frenso on 36 which TVFool shows as LOS to Modesto (prime focus of KAZV) with a roof mounted antenna. Even though the contour of KFRE doesn't cover Modesto, LOS is LOS no matter what the distance. Certainly this will be a problem for KAZV.

Does the FCC consider anything other than the coverage contours? It doesn't look like it. I know there are distance restrictions between stations, and LPs can't interfere with full power stations, and applicants have to file an interference analysis, but situations like this still arise.

I have a question in regards to interference.

Does the FCC consider anything other than the coverage contours? It doesn't look like it.

Here's the fine print for LPTV interference into full power stations: 74.703 (b)

Interference will be considered to occur whenever reception of a regularly used signal is impaired by the signals radiated by the low power TV, TV translator, or TV booster station, regardless of the quality of the reception or the strength of the signal so used.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/octqtr/pdf/47cfr74.703.pdf

Here's the fine print for LPTV interference into full power stations: 74.703 (b)

Interference will be considered to occur whenever reception of a regularly used signal is impaired by the signals radiated by the low power TV, TV translator, or TV booster station, regardless of the quality of the reception or the strength of the signal so used.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/octqtr/pdf/47cfr74.703.pdf

Thanks for the link. A little before your quoted text:

..... the licensee of a new low power TV, TV translator, or TV booster shall protect existing low power TV and TV translator stations from interference within the protected contour defined in § 74.707 and shall protect existing Class A TV and digital Class A TV stations within the protected contours defined in § 73.6010 of this chapter.

I assume the converse of this is true. If you're outside the protected contour then interference is okay, which is my situation. :(

Off topic and bickering comments removed. Keep it civil and on topic.

Off topic and bickering comments removed. Keep it civil and on topic.

Thanks Dr. Don...

Sorry, but I disagree that citizens should not report illegal activities.

You CAN report illegal operation...Using the FCC web site:

http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm

can be used to report lots of illegal and other operations...If you file on the web, they send you a confirmation email if you enter one and also a written ack in the US Mail within 30days...then a followup when the complaint is resolved OR in one case, the FCC decided a station operating illegally was
"Not within the realm of authority of the Federal Communications Commission"...YES, that was on the reply..I SAW it...what a JOKE (what are those folks smoking there??)

I report any and all I can.......have two radio station reported now because of violations...on air without a proper license or correctly issued STA (their license expired and has not been renewed...but they have lied on a lot of 301 filings since and are in violation of their last STA), towers not lit or improperly painted, one with NO main studio, the other with NOone manning the "main studio"!!! Both big NOnos!!!!

Cross-posting from Seattle:

I feel like I've missed something big in Seattle.

Zyland sent me new data for the Seattle TV stations he could receive, and I found odd data streams on KUNS, KWDK, and KMYQ. They look almost like extra video/audio feeds, but they're either encrypted or hidden or in some format that TSReader cannot understand.

http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/wa-sea/4624-0_0.htm

See all those extra "Unknown Usage" streams at the bottom? Does someone know something that I don't?

- Trip

See all those extra "Unknown Usage" streams at the bottom? Does someone know something that I don't?

- Trip

I don't know but curious what TSReader means with red bars instead of green? I know MPH, GoesTV and stuff still show up green.

Red means it's either corrupted by errors or it's scrambled. It might have more meanings, but those are two I've run into.

- Trip

Is it possible they are doing the M/H stream like WRAL is ?

Is it possible they are doing the M/H stream like WRAL is ?

This isn't ATSC-M/H because M/H uses fixed bitrate streams with multiples of 0.917 Mbps. These streams are different and don't conform to that bitrate.

They also appear to have separate video and audio, something not characteristic of M/H. Note how each stream of roughly 1.3 Mbps is followed by a much smaller stream of either 192k, 128k, or something in that range. That screams audio and video to me.

- Trip

One thing you/he might be able to try with the TS is You could Try TSreader's "Record PID" function for those individual streams, which should demux the stream specified and dump it to a file .... I don't know if that will work for the "red" streams ....

Assuming you have decoders which will play them, You can then change the resulting file's extension to various common extensions used (such as *.ac3 for example for the 192k "presumed" audio streams) and see if they play ...

Or, alternatively --- Some TS de(or "re")muxers out there(such as TSremux or TsmuxeR) may identify(to some extent) some of those streams and may potentially allow you to demux the streams involved ...

Tsremux :

http://www.videohelp.com/tools/TsRemux

TsmuxeR :

http://www.videohelp.com/tools/tsMuxeR



Both methods worked for me for a AC3 audio stream from one local station(WCET - the "unknown usage" stream at PID 42/002a - a Reading service for the blind ) which was being sent in that manner ... I can't recall though if I'd used "Tsremux" or "TsmuxeR", one of them worked and identified the "PID 42" stream/demuxed the ac3 stream properly, one of them didn't as I recall ....

Does the Record PID function work in the Lite version?

- Trip

^ Yes ..

Update : oh --- It is also not limited to 1 minute (at least with 2.8.46e) as is the case with the lite version if you dump a program stream to MPG container ....

And, Simply "uncheck" the "record PID" in drop down menu when you want to stop ....

I'll consult zyland and see what he can do.

- Trip

Three more for the VHF file:

WBAL-DT 11 is requesting to boost power from 5 kW to 26.6 kW under experimental authority.

WLOX-DT 13 has petitioned to make their return to channel 39 permanent.

WEDY-DT 6 has requested a channel change but I do not yet know to what channel. I will know in the morning.

- Trip

One does have to be careful ... For instance, I just capped a bit of the WCET AC3 stream with the "record PID" function(checking none of the "options"), renamed the resulting *.bin file to *.ac3, but WMP 11 wouldn't play it (with a cyberlink AC3 decoder via directshow) ....

However, I then opened it with MPC (using it's internal AC3 decoder), and it played it just fine ...

How about VLC?

- Trip

Three more for the VHF file:

WBAL-DT 11 is requesting to boost power from 5 kW to 26.6 kW under experimental authority.

WLOX-DT 13 has petitioned to make their return to channel 39 permanent.

WEDY-DT 6 has requested a channel change but I do not yet know to what channel. I will know in the morning.

- Trip

It about time WBAL does something

How about VLC?

- Trip

Nope .....

Screencap attached of how it "works" (sort of) using Tsremux -- the resulting TS (with only the PID 42 Elementary audio stream) will then play in MPC ( you hear the audio) ....

[b]Three more for the VHF file:

WBAL-DT 11 is requesting to boost power from 5 kW to 26.6 kW under experimental authority.

- Trip

That is what WNBW needs to do.

5 to 26.6 KW is about 7.25 db, that should really help some folks.

Thanks, Nitewatchman. I've sent off a message and will try to get this hammered out. I really want to know what those extra feeds are.

And we have our answer. WEDY-DT wants 200 kW on channel 41.

- Trip

Analog TV
Analog Nightlights Go Out
Signals from more than 100 stations were required to end Sunday
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 7/13/2009 4:50:26 PM EDT

The other analog plug-pulling hard date came and went Sunday night without fanfare.

July 12 was the date when all the analog nightlight TV stations, 121 stations in 87 markets at its peak according to the FCC, had to end their analog broadcasts because it would have been illegal to continue past that date.

They had agreed, at the FCC's urging, to continue to broadcast an analog signal for up to 30 days past the statutory June 12 hard date for ending analog broadcasts. That signal was to be a lifeline service of DTV transition info, news and information in the event of emergency.

"They are all supposed to be off by yesterday," said FCC spokesman David Fiske of the nightlight stations. "They signed up for a particular date, no later than July 12. We are not checking unless someone reports a station continuing to broadcast a full-power analog signal." Fiske said he knew of no reports of stations leaving their analog nightlights on.

That would be unlikely, not only as a matter of law but of economics, since those stations were absorbing additional transmission costs at a time when extra money is hard to come by.

While 1.7 million viewers still couldn't receive a digital signal as of July 1 according to Nielsen, former FCC Acting Chairman Michael Copps told B&C last week that there had not been any consideration of asking Congress to give broadcasters more analog nightlight time.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/315076-Analog_Nightlights_Go_Out.php

The FCC only listens if someone licensed complains. They don't care if you complain.


- TripI agree. I went to a lot of trouble to complain about a telemarketer. I had dates, after hour times, phone #, transcript. I filed the complaint. It was accepted. I called for a follow-up. They told me it was a valid complaint, but FCC only filed complaints. They take no action. He recommended I sue the violator in his state court.

I agree. I went to a lot of trouble to complain about a telemarketer. I had dates, after hour times, phone #, transcript. I filed the complaint. It was accepted. I called for a follow-up. They told me it was a valid complaint, but FCC only filed complaints. They take no action. He recommended I sue the violator in his state court.

Yes, SpongeBob, that is true. But Trip was interfering with himself. He can not sue himself. :eek: Or can he? :rolleyes:

And we have our answer. WEDY-DT wants 200 kW on channel 41.

This power level is surprising. I think that 50kW would have been sufficient for this station. 200kW (ERP) probably can't be done solid-state, can it?

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),AMARILLO, TEXAS. Changed station KACV-DT, DTV channel from *8 to *9. Terminated the Proceeding. (Dkt No. 09-70 RM-11534 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/13/2009 by R&O. (DA No. 09-1533).

AMENDMENT OF SECTION 73.622(I), POST-TRANSITION TABLE OF DTV ALLOTMENTS, TELEVISION BROADCAST STATIONS, BANGOR, MAINE. Proposed channel substitution for station WABI-DT to change DTV channel from 19 to 13. (Dkt No. RM-11544 09-122 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/13/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-1534).

WABI's request for 13 has advanced to the next step. If approved, this would eventually make Bangor, ME all VHF for full-power DTV. However, will WLBZ be content with 3kW on 2? Also, I have not heard any reports on how WVII's move from 14 to 7 went.

This power level is surprising. I think that 50kW would have been sufficient for this station. 200kW (ERP) probably can't be done solid-state, can it?

Depends on their antenna gain. With a 12 db gain antenna and say 1 db of transmission loss would only take about 16 KW TPO

The station I used to work for claims even more antenna gain.
http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=station_search&callsign=wcjb#station

But I have not idea what the upper limit of an affordable transmitter is solid state is these days. When I left broadcasting 5 KW solid state was becoming common in local radio and none of the TV stations were at that time.

The FCC only listens if someone licensed complains. Take it from someone who has had an action filed against him, this is totally not true. (I beat the rap, by the way).

Now, enough of this line. Let's stick to the topic.

A bit of news from the LA market ...

KJLA (57) just added their 9th SD program stream. When will the madness end?

KJLA (57) just added their 9th SD program stream. When will the madness end?

Nine? Is there a miscount somewhere? Each stream is lucky to get 2 Mbps, if all streams are SD. If there is an HD stream in there as well, why are they even bothering to be on the air?

A bit of news from the LA market ...

KJLA (57) just added their 9th SD program stream. When will the madness end?


Welcome to the wonderful world of digital idiocy.

Here in New York City we have a "horror" - WNYN a low power station with
NINE SD channels.

2 are the same Azteca feed and all the rest are infomercials - 6 channels are simulcasts. Some of the channels are almost impossible to watch and hear - bit-starved.

What a waste!!!!

Nine? Is there a miscount somewhere? Each stream is lucky to get 2 Mbps, if all streams are SD. If there is an HD stream in there as well, why are they even bothering to be on the air?

Nine, count 'em, nine standard definition. Apparently using some sort of bit allocation algorithm, since the bitrates vary from 800 kbps to over 4 Mbps from second to second. All but a few of them are running relatively static talking heads programming at the moment.

Artifacts are certainly present, but it isn't as bad as you'd expect. We have stations running 5 Mbps SD that look a lot worse.

A bit of news from the LA market ...

KJLA (57) just added their 9th SD program stream. When will the madness end?What's on it? ;)

This power level is surprising. I think that 50kW would have been sufficient for this station. 200kW (ERP) probably can't be done solid-state, can it?

I don't think so, but I'm not sure. I wonder if they just want to get the allotment to protect the coverage and then might build out something smaller.

Maybe mdodge has a comment? :)

- Trip

More for the VHF file:

WTVF has now reapplied for the 100 kW on channel 50 after amending their initial request down to 15 kW. Probably a legal thing.

KCWX has requested a blazing 82.9 kW (!) on channel 5. The FCC limit is 45 kW at 305 meters, and with KCWX at 413 meters, their power limit would be 23.6 kW, which they're already operating...

- Trip

Wow, you are making TV DXer's, drooling like crazy chasing after KCWX-DT going for 82.9 ERP on VHF-Low! band:D

7-15-09

Wow, you are making TV DXer's, drooling like crazy chasing after KCWX-DT going for 82.9 ERP on VHF-Low! band:D

7-15-09

Not like it'll be too hard at that power level! Of course, there's no telling whether or not the FCC will grant it, since it's way over the limit.

I got your e-mail and will answer it a little later. I've got a backlog of e-mails to answer. Again.

To anyone who's interested, I've finally posted about yesterday's power boost at WDBJ: http://www.rabbitears.info/jobblog/index.php?post/2009/07/15/Day-Thirty%3A-Power-Boost-Day

- Trip

Wow, you are making TV DXer's, drooling like crazy chasing after KCWX-DT going for 82.9 ERP on VHF-Low! band:D

7-15-09

And anyone else in a market with a much-lower powered DT-5 cringe.:eek:
It doesn't take much else on a DT channel to inhibit a decode - especially when it's another DT signal challenging the tuner/CECB. There are some dozen other DT-5 in optimal one-hop Es range (and only one, Memphis, within a reasonable, allbeit long, tropo range). It almosts sounds like they want "revenge" for all the hours of NTSC CCI they suffered thru on Ch 2 since their Aug 2000 debut :) Thing is, the majority of the DT-5 were NTSC 5. KCWX wanted DT-8, but Austin's KTBC-DT-7 objected. As often as KIII-DT-8 is in here from Corpus, perhaps just as well.

If KCWX had been smart about it, they'd have tried to operate on a UHF channel (35?) from the same tower that KMYS uses instead of fighting for VHF and trying to cover two markets when they only have programming that can be seen on subscription services in one market.

- Trip

It is done. :)

WCPB in Salisbury, MD has become the 1000th TSReader capture on RabbitEars. That's 996 unique stations, with the 4 additional captures coming from 3 PBS stations that switch between HD and SD multicasting depending on time of day, and 1 station's fill-in translator on a different channel but under the same license.

- Trip

More for the VHF file:

WTVF has now reapplied for the 100 kW on channel 50 after amending their initial request down to 15 kW. Probably a legal thing.

KCWX has requested a blazing 82.9 kW (!) on channel 5. The FCC limit is 45 kW at 305 meters, and with KCWX at 413 meters, their power limit would be 23.6 kW, which they're already operating...

- Trip

Hey Trip do you have a link to the rules on power level and transmitter height?

Hey Trip do you have a link to the rules on power level and transmitter height?

I don't remember where they are off-hand. There's formulas to calculate them, and I have made a calculator based on that here:

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

It's the "Max Power vs HAAT" calculator. Here's a map of the Zone I:

http://www.rabbitears.info/Zone1.jpg

Everything else is Zone 2.

- Trip

I don't remember where they are off-hand. There's formulas to calculate them, and I have made a calculator based on that here:

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

It's the "Max Power vs HAAT" calculator. Here's a map of the Zone I:

http://www.rabbitears.info/Zone1.jpg

Everything else is Zone 2.

- Trip

Thanks so basically WTVF is at thier max allowed power( according to the calculator assuming I did it right ) unless the FCC grants a waiver. And Ch 4 could go as high as 82 kW which now they are at 60. Well they applied to go to 60 kW not sure if they are at 60 kW yet. On the FCC website it says "Construction Permit" for 60 kW it says "Licensed" for 42.4 kW. Not sure how to tell which they are running on.

Thanks so basically WVTF is at thier max allowed power( according to the calculator assuming I did it right ) unless the FCC grants a waiver. And Ch 4 could go as high as 82 kW which now they are at 60. Well they applied to go to 60 kW not sure if they are at 60 kW yet. On the FCC website it says "Construction Permit" for 60 kW it says "Licensed" for 42.4 kW. Not sure how to tell which they are running on.

W9WI could tell you which they're running. I'd bet on 42.4 kW, but I don't know.

But yes, your numbers are pretty accurate. Now the interesting exception is that there's a rule 73.622(f)(5) which says a station can expand its coverage to match the largest station in the market. This is how so many UHF stations managed 1000 kW even though the cap is much lower than that.

- Trip

Is there still a Zone 3 for us tropo-laden folk around the Gulf of Mexico ?

W9WI could tell you which they're running. I'd bet on 42.4 kW, but I don't know.

But yes, your numbers are pretty accurate. Now the interesting exception is that there's a rule 73.622(f)(5) which says a station can expand its coverage to match the largest station in the market. This is how so many UHF stations managed 1000 kW even though the cap is much lower than that.

- Trip

Well that kind of irks me then that WNAB is at 350 kW and WNPX is only at 733 when both could go to 1000 kW.

WSYX's request for 48 has advanced to the next step.

DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), COLUMBUS, OHIO. Proposed substituting DTV channel 48 for DTV channel 13 for station WSYX-DT. (Dkt No. 09-124 RM-11547 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/13/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-1537).

If KCWX had been smart about it, they'd have tried to operate on a UHF channel (35?) from the same tower that KMYS uses instead of fighting for VHF and trying to cover two markets when they only have programming that can be seen on subscription services in one market.

- Trip

There's been nothing smart nor sane about the 20+ year history of KBEJ/KCWX efforts here http://home.swbell.net/pjdyer/fred-2.htm:rolleyes:
KCWX can have Ch 36, I like watching KPRC-DT-35.2 ("This") when I can. All the local non-edu/non-relig subchannels are Hispanic news/music videos.

Is there still a Zone 3 for us tropo-laden folk around the Gulf of Mexico ?

Technically, yes, but the spacing rules and whatnot are identical to Zone 2. So for all intents and purposes, it might as well not exist.

Well that kind of irks me then that WNAB is at 350 kW and WNPX is only at 733 when both could go to 1000 kW.

If you can't see WNPX at 733 kW, you likely will not see it at 1000 kW. It's less than 1.4 dB higher.

WSYX's request for 48 has advanced to the next step.

DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), COLUMBUS, OHIO. Proposed substituting DTV channel 48 for DTV channel 13 for station WSYX-DT. (Dkt No. 09-124 RM-11547 ). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/13/2009 by NPRM. (DA No. 09-1537).

Very good news.

- Trip

But, still nothing out of WJW or WOIO in this market. Sigh. :D Maybe they're waiting for 39 to hop to 49...

If you can't see WNPX at 733 kW, you likely will not see it at 1000 kW. It's less than 1.4 dB higher.

I can get it in sometimes. As I've said before since it and WKMU both use 36 and I'm 50 miles from WKMU I'm probably getting interference. ION is the stronger of the 2 signals and that extra 1.4 dB might be just enough to override that interference. Might not. No biggie. That doesn't excuse WNAB for only being 350 kW. That would be a 4.5 dB increase and if my math is correct that's about 3 times the signal. Now I do get it in at night under normal conditions. For at least a few hours. Usually gone shortly after sunrise. Usually doesn't come in until at least 1 after sunset. If the weather is bad or it is really really hot and humid out I can forget getting in a watchable signal. I'm pretty sure a 4.5 dB increase could help with that.

W9WI could tell you which they're running. I'd bet on 42.4 kW, but I don't know.


Trip would be right about that.

BCF68: FWIW:
With either a "construction permit" or a "licensed" status, either way, the facility may or may not be on the air. With a license, it almost certainly is on -- with a construction permit it probably isn't.


A construction permit means the FCC has approved the technical parameters, and will grant a license if the station is built according to the terms of the permit. Once the permit is issued the station may begin construction. It has 18 months to finish; a single 18-month extension is available if needed.

After the station is built and measurements have been made to ensure it's operating according to the permit, the station applies for a license. Assuming the paperwork is in order, the license will be granted. The station is now subject to the minimum operating schedule rules, though it may suspend operations for up to a year if necessary. Of course, a license may be renewed as many times as desired.

Trip would be right about that.

BCF68: FWIW:
With either a "construction permit" or a "licensed" status, either way, the facility may or may not be on the air. With a license, it almost certainly is on -- with a construction permit it probably isn't.


A construction permit means the FCC has approved the technical parameters, and will grant a license if the station is built according to the terms of the permit. Once the permit is issued the station may begin construction. It has 18 months to finish; a single 18-month extension is available if needed.


Ok so to be clear Ch 4 is operating at 42.4 and not 60 KW? Also Ch 5 it says "Modification of Construction Permit" for their 22 kW listing. They originally were going to operate at 10.3 kW. So are they running at 10.3 or 22? If it's 10.3 maybe when they go to 22 kW that will solve the problem. I was under the assumption that all these station that requested and got permission to increase power meant to do it right away not in 18 months. Tvfool.com lists their data based on the newer numbers. So I assumed stations were already running at the higher power.

Ok so to be clear Ch 4 is operating at 42.4 and not 60 KW? Also Ch 5 it says "Modification of Construction Permit" for their 22 kW listing. They originally were going to operate at 10.3 kW. So are they running at 10.3 or 22? If it's 10.3 maybe when they go to 22 kW that will solve the problem. I was under the assumption that all these station that requested and got permission to increase power meant to do it right away not in 18 months. Tvfool.com lists their data based on the newer numbers. So I assumed stations were already running at the higher power.

Yes, WTVF is broadcasting at 22kw. The reason it says "Modication of Construction Permit" and not "Licensed" is because they have filed for a license but the FCC has not yet granted the license. So sorry to break the bad news.

NashDigie signing off.

Well, I fell asleep while "resting my eyes" last night, so I missed the FCC update. Fun.

Anyway, more for the VHF file:

Not going on my list, but KTTV's permit to boost power to 115 kW was granted.

KTSM in El Paso is now the second of three VHF digitals in the market to request to light up their pre-transition UHF digital signal. KCOS (PBS) is the last one on VHF.

- Trip

Well, I fell asleep while "resting my eyes" last night, so I missed the FCC update. Fun.

Anyway, more for the VHF file:

Not going on my list, but KTTV's permit to boost power to 115 kW was granted.
- Trip

OMG, if they go to 115kW with the height that Mt. Wilson gives, that will be a BOOMER signal! I wonder if they just filed at that power to block any else from taking over the interference area, or if they are serious about going to that power level.

OMG, if they go to 115kW with the height that Mt. Wilson gives, that will be a BOOMER signal! I wonder if they just filed at that power to block any else from taking over the interference area, or if they are serious about going to that power level.I thought KTTV fixed this.

I expect that KTTV is serious about this. Their signal on 11 remains relatively weak, compared to the other local VHF's.

The 3 degree beam tilt limits its effective range over the horizon, at least to the West through the Southeast. It will be interesting to see reception reports from "over the hills" if anyone in the high desert area here can report (e.g. Palmdale and Lancaster).

When implemented, I will check to see how much it helps small whip antenna and rabbit ear reception.

I thought KTTV fixed this.

They moved from the Aux facility to the main, which improved reception, but the current main is at 15kW.

OMG, if they go to 115kW with the height that Mt. Wilson gives, that will be a BOOMER signal! I wonder if they just filed at that power to block any else from taking over the interference area, or if they are serious about going to that power level.

They do have the transmitter power capablity on site to do 115kw too. Last time I heard, they only had 4 channel 11 full power (digital capable) transmitters on site. Yeah, they got the horsepower sitting right there.

DTV Transition Notes
Nielsen: Month After DTV Switch, 1.3% of Country Unready for Digital
1.5 million don't have DTV set or converter box hooked up, but numbers lowering
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 7/16/2009 11:16:07 AM EDT

According to Nielsen, 1.5 million TV households, or 1.3% of the country, were unready for DTV as of July 12, a month after the June 12 transition date.

That is down 200,000 households from the 1.7 million households that weren't ready two weeks before, according to the latest Nielsen figures.

Nielsen defines unready as homes that rely on over-the-air TV and don't have a digital TV set or a DTV-to-analog set-top converter hooked up.

It was Nielsen's 5 million homes-plus unreadiness figure back in January and early February that many in Congress used to buttress their arguments for moving the DTV hard date to June 12.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/315503-Nielsen_Month_After_DTV_Switch_1_3_of_Country_Unready_for_Di gital.php

Wow, NPRMs for WEDY and WLOX already. The FCC is really moving!

- Trip

Who knows, maybe even KNAZ will make some progress, some day.

DTV Transition Notes
Nielsen: Month After DTV Switch, 1.3% of Country Unready for Digital
1.5 million don't have DTV set or converter box hooked up, but numbers lowering
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 7/16/2009 11:16:07 AM EDT

According to Nielsen, 1.5 million TV households, or 1.3% of the country, were unready for DTV as of July 12, a month after the June 12 transition date.

That is down 200,000 households from the 1.7 million households that weren't ready two weeks before, according to the latest Nielsen figures.

Nielsen defines unready as homes that rely on over-the-air TV and don't have a digital TV set or a DTV-to-analog set-top converter hooked up.

It was Nielsen's 5 million homes-plus unreadiness figure back in January and early February that many in Congress used to buttress their arguments for moving the DTV hard date to June 12.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/315503-Nielsen_Month_After_DTV_Switch_1_3_of_Country_Unready_for_Di gital.php

What's sad and irks me is that those of us that were ready were forced to wait 4 extra months for those that weren't ready and here we are 1 month after the transition and 5 months after the delay and 30% of those that weren't ready in February still are not ready. At the rate they are getting ready now it will be Halloween before the rest get ready. I guess most of those 1.5 million are sitting in front of a TV full of static wondering "Hey how come my TV has been blank for a month?"

If you lived in a rural area where no stations are digital, would you hook up your converter box? I would not.

Is there an official estimate of how many households remain analog-only, with all their stations via translators?

If you lived in a rural area where no stations are digital, would you hook up your converter box? I would not.

Is there an official estimate of how many households remain analog-only, with all their stations via translators?

That will only happen if you live in a place where ALL broadcast TV is delivered only by translator / cable / DBS. Darn few places are THAT remote... Although they DO exist...

That will only happen if you live in a place where ALL broadcast TV is delivered only by translator / cable / DBS. Darn few places are THAT remote... Although they DO exist...

I wouldn't say "only." If all the signals you want are available on analog translators, then there's no incentive to go digital even if it is available.

Ok so to be clear Ch 4 is operating at 42.4 and not 60 KW?


Yep, 42.4.

See NashDigie about WTVF -- as he says, they've filed for their license for 22kw but the FCC hasn't acted on the request yet.


I was under the assumption that all these station that requested and got permission to increase power meant to do it right away not in 18 months.

It takes time to order and install equipment, especially if the antenna needs to be replaced. And, these days, to obtain financing...

The 18 months also has to include time to make the measurements and prepare and submit the license application. It also allows for the possibility of construction delays. (again, when antenna work is involved, Mother Nature is definitely part of the schedule!)

If it weren't for our local analog low power Telemundo station on channel 11, I might be able to get KTTV here in Bakersfield if they were 115000 watts. Thanks to the analog low power, I will never know.

I fell asleep AGAIN. Oy.

Just one for the VHF file today; all three El Paso stations have now taken some type of action. KCOS is requesting to increase power on channel 13 from 27 kW to 42 kW.

KTCI and WHME filed CPs for their permanent channels yesterday as well.

- Trip