The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread [Text View] - Page 21

chipdouglass89

10-01-09, 11:00 AM

Yes, the 7698 is better than the 8200 because its smaller and cheaper.

Cheaper is always good :)

However now that I've seen your exact report here's what I would do.

Install a 91XG on a rotor.
Fix aim a Y5-7-13 at KOAM and KFJX.
Combine them with a AP-2870 preamp.

Reception of all of the KC stations will not be 100%. Experiment with antenna height and placement to maximize the signal. Try to avoid aiming the UHF antenna into a tree. KSNF will also be marginal.

Does it matter that there are trees about 50 yards to the north where I'd be pointing to KC? I couldn't get a antenna up high enough as they are very large trees. I do have a problem to the south pointing towards Pittsburg and Joplin. I've got a large tree next to my house that may cause problem. There actually not too "bushy" at the height of the antenna and has some open spaces between limbs and leaves. Maybe pruning might help, but would be quite dangerous for me to attempt as it's up there 35-40 feet. :(

If you want to forgo KODE, KOZJ, and KSNF you can omit the rotor.

You know, since the KC reception would be on some days and off others by the sounds of things, I'm not sure if I could forgo these stations. Wish there was the perfect solution, but that's the price to pay for living so far from the city. I prefer the more laid-back lifestyle :)
On a side note, you know in my original post I mentioned buying one of those "HDTV small antennas" that's had mixed results and am sure it's not the one I want (was trying to avoid the larger antennas even though I didn't have much hope). Anyway, for some reason, I have yet to lock in on KFJX-DT (Fox_HD) out of Pittsburg. I can get the SD version (I think it's on 7.2 which for some reason is not showing up on TVFool). Do you have any thoughts on this?
Thanks for all the help!
Chip

Tower Guy

10-01-09, 11:47 AM

For some reason, I have yet to lock in on KFJX-DT (Fox_HD) out of Pittsburg. Do you have any thoughts on this?
Thanks for all the help!

Possibility #1

KFJX is somewhat weaker than KOAM and the antenna is simply marginal.

Possibility #2

The antenna that you have is not rated for VHF, but happens to pick up KOAM because they are so strong. (KOAM is running 14.8 KW; KFJX 4.5 KW)

Possibility #3

The antenna that you have has an internal preamp that is overloaded by the strongest FM stations, KVCY and KOMB.

Step 1; buy a Y5-7-13 and fix KFJX.

I could never live in a big city myself.

chipdouglass89

10-01-09, 12:16 PM

Possibility #1

KFJX is somewhat weaker than KOAM and the antenna is simply marginal.

Possibility #2

The antenna that you have is not rated for VHF, but happens to pick up KOAM because they are so strong. (KOAM is running 14.8 KW; KFJX 4.5 KW)

Possibility #3

The antenna that you have has an internal preamp that is overloaded by the strongest FM stations, KVCY and KOMB.

Step 1; buy a Y5-7-13 and fix KFJX.

I could never live in a big city myself.

Probably a combination of 1 & 2. Thoughts on the trees 50 yards north that are probably 30-40 feet higher than my antenna? Is that far enough away that it won't make much difference with signal strength?

goldrich

10-01-09, 01:16 PM

Nothing interesting from the FCC tonight except for a few license apps. (WTTK, K23DT-D, KLSV-LD)

- Trip

Trip, thanks for the update and your attempt to get this thread back on its main topic. There are plenty of other threads for antenna discussions.

Steve

dline

10-01-09, 03:03 PM

From today's FCC Daily Digest:

The channel swap in Mississippi is on. The FCC has issued an order moving WLBT in Jackson from channel 7 to 30, and WDAM in Laurel from 28 to 7.

WDAM, the order says, has room to use much higher power on channel 7 than WLBT does.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2155A1.pdf

Trip in VA

10-01-09, 05:51 PM

I wonder how long it will take to get WLBT's 30 signal on the air. I imagine the WDAM signal will be easy since there's already a top-mounted 7 antenna there.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-02-09, 12:30 AM

Tonight's FCC stuff.

KBCI and WLS have filed for their new channels.

WRTN-LD 7 (6-1) in Nashville has applied to move to channel 17.

WTVD requests an STA to operate at 45 kW as specified in the application from a few days ago.

- Trip

BCF68

10-02-09, 01:29 AM

WRTN-LD 7 (6-1) in Nashville has applied to move to channel 17.

- Trip

Exactly how would that affect their viewing area? Since they are a LD is there a difference in the max power they can use from VHF to UHF?

Trip in VA

10-02-09, 08:47 AM

Yes. Low-powered digital stations on VHF can only use 0.3 kW, and that number is constant for both upper-VHF and low-VHF for some reason, so in reality, upper-VHF LP stations have a lower power constraint relative to full powered stations.

On UHF, they've asked for 15 kW, the maximum power level.

- Trip

Pete-N2

10-03-09, 12:17 PM

BCF68

10-03-09, 05:21 PM

A report from 35 miles east of Columbus, O. In the past all analog stations were received, but after the transition WOSU digital drops out from time to time. Click to see antenna setup 154292 . AMAZING!!

I've always believed that the VAST majority of "issues" with digital OTA are the fault of the person trying to receive the signals. Things like that continue to confirm that belief.

SnellKrell

10-03-09, 05:30 PM

Yes, it's my fault I choose to live in Manhattan. Yes, it's my fault that I live in a high rise apartment. Yes, it's my fault that I don't have line-of-sight to transmitters.
Yes, it's my fault that I choose not have a huge antenna in the middle of my living room.

But --- It isn't my fault that three important stations in my DMA ignorantly elected to be on VHF!

It isn't my fault that the UHF Combiner on the Empire State Building providing CBS, NBC and WWOR uses a problem-ridden side mounted antenna.

So, before you start finding fault, take into account that many people have many different reception problems with post-transition digital broadcasting.

One size does not fit all!!!!

Ken H

10-03-09, 07:03 PM

Enough.

Trip in VA

10-04-09, 08:16 PM

According to multiple reports, it sounds as though KYTV has its analog back on the air. Signal reports seem too widespread to be a cable leak...

- Trip

WA5IYX

10-04-09, 10:39 PM

KYTV NTSC 3 seems to have been "taken care of" http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17298455#post17298455

dline

10-05-09, 02:01 AM

ChrisPC

10-05-09, 03:12 AM

I wonder how long it will take to get WLBT's 30 signal on the air. I imagine the WDAM signal will be easy since there's already a top-mounted 7 antenna there.

- Trip

It's a bit ironic that a station is going back to VHF, but it makes sense. I grew up in the area, and the billions of pine trees wreak havoc on UHF signals. UHF multipath was very bad on some analog channels there, so digital would be unusable. VHF didn't seem to have multipath problems as much.

Jackson doesn't have as many trees as the Hattiesburg/Laurel area, especially to the north, which is flat, treeless, Delta farmland. UHF will work well there. One of my in-laws, 65 miles to the north, receives Jackson stations with rabbit ears!

gjvrieze

10-05-09, 02:55 PM

A couple of notes from Minnesota: Two VHF power-boost requests now show up as "granted."

KEYC, Mankato's CBS affiliate, sought 52.7 kW on channel 12 from just west of the Watonwan-Blue Earth county line.

KCCW Walker, a satellite station of CBS-owned WCCO in Minneapolis, sought 85 kW on channel 12 from about 20 km southeast of Walker.

I am going to have to email KEYC and see if they are ready to boast power. I am 82miles from them, and I do not get much during the day and at night it is pretty bad, with a big power increase like this, I may get them at night well.

enzytebob

10-05-09, 09:54 PM

Move to someplace within about 60 miles of the Kansas City transmitters!
(Sorry)

(you probably were experiencing abnormal reception by tropospheric refraction)

Actually, depending on local terrain, and the range of the KC transmitters, you MIGHT be able to get reliable reception with a different antenna and/or much higher antenna, I really can't guess from here.
I get fairly reliable overnight reception of WHIO-TV Dayton from about 80 miles away with an aged suburban rooftop antenna. So it is possible depending on HAAT and power. 1000-kw goes a long way on UHF.

TiVoFishMan

10-05-09, 10:35 PM

Larry Kenney

10-06-09, 03:47 AM

The last new antenna was installed on Sutro Tower on Saturday.
Photos at: http://www.larrykenney.com/sutrotwr.html
Now they have to finish up connecting the antennas to the combiners and transmitters and we'll see how the new antennas work.

This was posted today on the local San Francisco Yahoo HD Group:

On Monday, October 12, around 9 AM, all UHF DTV stations at Sutro Tower will switch to Auxiliary antennas, at reduced power, to begin connecting the ten UHF DTV stations to the new Main antennas.

The tower crew will begin to disconnect the lines from the Interim DTV Main antennas and connect the lines to New Main DTV antennas. During this 5 day period of Auxiliary antenna operation, each new antenna will be fully tested, lines tuned, and the phasing sections installed to properly match transmission line lengths between the upper and lower TUM antennas.

Based on a best estimate of scheduling, the stations will be operating on the DTV Auxiliary antenna until Friday, October 16th. However, there could be delays if problems are found with the antennas or if inclement weather causes problems for the tower crew.

- - -

KGO 7, the only VHF station on the tower, started using their new antenna back in July.

Larry
SF

Stanislav

10-06-09, 06:43 AM

KYTV NTSC 3 seems to have been "taken care of" http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17298455#post17298455

That's bizarre!??

Why would they have done that?

Could it possibly have been accidental?

:confused:

I'm not sure how you could "accidentally" fire up a transmitter. I'm also perplexed as to why the thing would still even be available to use almost four months post-transition -- even if the old transmitter had not been removed or scrapped yet, one would think the programming feed for the old transmitter (STLs, etc.) had long since been switched over to the DTV transmitter -- why would they even maintain the feeds and inputs to an inactive and obsolete transmitter for four months?

I've not seen any reports of this in the Springfield media -- only anecdotal reports from DXers and TV geeks on various forums. Interesting that it was done on a Sunday, when FCC monitors would (presumably) be less likely to be around to catch it, if they'd even be looking for anything analog on ch. 3 for any reason. Also, four months post-transition, with OTA viewers by now set with their DTV receiving setups, I doubt many "normal" viewers, if any, were even aware it was happening. Perhaps they literally thought no one would notice, and didn't count on the sort of obsessed people who frequent boards like this. ;)

If it was KYTV, and it was deliberate, I'm not sure what the motivation was. Maybe a stunt to prove a point about the alleged "equivalence" of coverage areas with DTV vs. analog -- they've had problems in the hilly terrain of the Ozarks with DTV reception. Maybe they hired some independent monitors, stationed them around the area, fired up the old transmitter, and had some field strength readings taken of the two signals (ch. 3 analog vs. ch. 44 DTV) to get some ammo to use to justify a power boost or some fill-in translators? (Of course, if you're going to try to stealthily pull something like that, why not do it briefly in the middle of the night when even fewer people might stumble onto it, instead of doing it for over 10 hours in the middle of the day?)

At this point, anyone's guess is as good as another.

TiVoFishMan

10-06-09, 08:33 AM

I'm not sure how you could "accidentally" fire up a transmitter. I'm also perplexed as to why the thing would still even be available to use almost four months post-transition -- even if the old transmitter had not been removed or scrapped yet, one would think the programming feed for the old transmitter (STLs, etc.) had long since been switched over to the DTV transmitter -- why would they even maintain the feeds and inputs to an inactive and obsolete transmitter for four months?

That the old transmitter is still sitting at the transmitter site is not particularly surprising. Lots of TV stations still have their old transmitter just sitting there, particularly ones that were on low-VHF and are on UHF in digital.

As far as getting a signal to it, it would be trivial to do something like hook up a cheap digital receiver, even a CECB set for center cut, tune it to the digital frequency (probably with no antenna at all if it's right at the transmitter site!) feed it into the analog transmitter input and fire that sucker up.

I suspect that your guess that it may have been a "stunt" to demonstrate how much coverage they lost in the transition is the explanation.

However, flagrant violation of FCC regulations is hardly the way to score points with the FCC if they're trying to get translator licenses or a power increase.

This is, of course, why the giant, "HUH??!! :confused:" reaction from me and, indeed, most others.

Sammer

10-06-09, 04:42 PM

I suspect that your guess that it may have been a "stunt" to demonstrate how much coverage they lost in the transition is the explanation.

However, flagrant violation of FCC regulations is hardly the way to score points with the FCC if they're trying to get translator licenses or a power increase.

Any possibility the FCC actually sanctioned this as a test of lost coverage?

foxeng

10-06-09, 05:14 PM

Any possibility the FCC actually sanctioned this as a test of lost coverage?

Extremely doubtful.

dline

10-06-09, 08:25 PM

Any possibility the FCC actually sanctioned this as a test of lost coverage?More likely they still had the analog 3 rig hooked up, and someone or something -- a computer, an inexperienced operator, a squirrel, etc. -- accidentally sent a command to turn the thing on. Since they obviously have no reason to monitor channel 3 in master control anymore, it probably would have taken somebody on the outside to notice.

justalurker

10-06-09, 10:11 PM

-- even if the old transmitter had not been removed or scrapped yet, one would think the programming feed for the old transmitter (STLs, etc.) had long since been switched over to the DTV transmitter -- why would they even maintain the feeds and inputs to an inactive and obsolete transmitter for four months?
Digital ran in parallel with analog for years. Unless someone intentionally removed the connections having the STL hooked up is not surprising. If it was an operation I was responsible for it probably would be disabled enough that it couldn't magically turn back on, but it being in place and having feeds is a good example of an engineering staff that has more to do than tear down the old equipment.

I've not seen any reports of this in the Springfield media -- only anecdotal reports from DXers and TV geeks on various forums.
It would be interesting to know how it managed to get on the air. I'm assuming automation pushed the button but could it have been a vandal? No local coverage leads me to think that it was an error that the station would rather move past and unless a competitor picks up the story we may hear nothing more of it.

Maybe they hired some independent monitors, stationed them around the area, fired up the old transmitter, and had some field strength readings taken of the two signals (ch. 3 analog vs. ch. 44 DTV) to get some ammo to use to justify a power boost or some fill-in translators?
Operating illegally is not a good way to convince the FCC of anything. If they want to test they need to get a STA. Only a fool would file results from intentional illegal operation with the FCC.

(Of course, if you're going to try to stealthily pull something like that, why not do it briefly in the middle of the night when even fewer people might stumble onto it, instead of doing it for over 10 hours in the middle of the day?)
10 hours would be enough time for a single monitor person to traverse the area to do tests without conspiring with others to violate FCC rules. The more people involved in a decision to operate illegally the worse it would be when the NAL comes around. But I really doubt this was intentional.

Trip in VA

10-07-09, 12:28 AM

FCC Action:

It's been pretty quiet, but finally something of interest.

First of all, KRMA and KHET filed extensions on their digital CPs for translators.

Second, KLAU-LD 66, which has not yet been observed on the air, is now seeking an STA to operate on channel 53 at 15 kW.

Third, KTCI plans to be moved to channel 23 by January 1.

- Trip

dattier

10-07-09, 12:40 AM

Second, KLAU-LD 66, which has not yet been observed on the air, is now seeking an STA to operate on channel 53 at 15 kW.Are LD's allowed on out-of-core channels like 53?

Trip in VA

10-07-09, 12:57 AM

Yes, on a secondary basis. They can be required to vacate if the primary spectrum owners asks them to.

- Trip

Dave Loudin

10-07-09, 06:35 AM

WWPX's STA for an "on-channel translator" on 12 has been approved. The parameters are different than those of the distributed transmission system application filed in May.

foxeng

10-07-09, 07:25 AM

Digital ran in parallel with analog for years. Unless someone intentionally removed the connections having the STL hooked up is not surprising. If it was an operation I was responsible for it probably would be disabled enough that it couldn't magically turn back on, but it being in place and having feeds is a good example of an engineering staff that has more to do than tear down the old equipment.

I can't speak for anyone other than me, but within 2 weeks after analog shutdown, there was no vestige in my place there ever had been an analog signal. But yeah, it is beyond comprehension that someone didn't at the very least pull the breaker to the transmitter (if so then some one turned it back on, that is even worse) or disconnect the power wires to the transmitter (preferred) if they weren't going to do anything with it in the foreseeable future. It doesn't take that long to secure a transmitter like that and the there are rules in place (have been for YEARS) that state ALL licenses of ANY service will have COMPLETE control of the transmitter at all times. And even though the channel 3 analog signal is no longer licensed, because they do hold a valid FCC license, they still are responsible and can have sanctions on their remaining licenses applied.

I do know for a fact that several stations in NYC DID maintain their analog systems in the anticipation that the FCC might allow stations to turn analog back on, but I think even those stations have since disabled or removed their analogs.

TiVoFishMan

10-07-09, 09:21 AM

I can't speak for anyone other than me, but within 2 weeks after analog shutdown, there was no vestige in my place there ever had been an analog signal. But yeah, it is beyond comprehension that someone didn't at the very least pull the breaker to the transmitter (if so then some one turned it back on, that is even worse) or disconnect the power wires to the transmitter (preferred) if they weren't going to do anything with it in the foreseeable future. It doesn't take that long to secure a transmitter like that and the there are rules in place (have been for YEARS) that state ALL licenses of ANY service will have COMPLETE control of the transmitter at all times. And even though the channel 3 analog signal is no longer licensed, because they do hold a valid FCC license, they still are responsible and can have sanctions on their remaining licenses applied.

I do know for a fact that several stations in NYC DID maintain their analog systems in the anticipation that the FCC might allow stations to turn analog back on, but I think even those stations have since disabled or removed their analogs.

Indeed. I completely agree.

How this could have happened is really weird.

First, here are the components that it's not surprising are still in place:

That the analog transmitter would still be in place? Yes. this is fairly likely. After all there's not much market for a channel 3 analog transmitter anymore!
That it may still be connected to the channel 3 antenna? Still, quite possible. While most stations have plans to remove their old analog transmitter's antenna, and then move what's probably a side-mount UHF antenna for the digital transmitter to a top mount, there are a lot of stations that haven't gotten around to this yet. Tower crews are backlogged, the work has to be budgeted for, etc.
That the STL is still intact? Also, not terribly surprising. Toward the end of analog broadcasting, there were many stations who were doing little more than taking a center-cut of the digital feed right at the transmitter site and putting that into the analog transmitter. This allowed them to have re-configured their control room the way it would be for the digital-only era before the actual analog shutdown, and to stop paying for seperate bandwidth to bring both analog and digital to the transmitter site.

And now, the puzzling part:

If I were a TV engineer, I'd be damn sure that it was impossible for the analog transmitter to be powered up. To me, this would mean physically disconnecting the power from it. Disconnecting, or cutting the actual wires that provide AC current to power it!
Even if, at a minimum, the engineers had turned off the breaker for the analog transmitter, that breaker would be located at the transmitter site. Someone would have to get into the transmitter site to turn it back on.
For this to have been an innocent accident, the engineers would have had to leave the transmitter in a state where a simple accidental "button push" at the station could power it up remotely. (Power connected, STL feed connected, and breaker on.) I guess it's conceivable that the engineers left it that way, but hard to imagine.
If it was an "accident", I'll bet the power line has been disconnected from that transmitter now!

I'd sure love some follow-up info to come out about this.

Calaveras

10-07-09, 10:57 AM

I've been waiting to see when KNSO Merced, currently digital on channel 5, is going to switch to their final channel of 11. Seems like this antenna work should have been completed over the summer but they are still on 5.

KCSO-LP, a local station for me, has had a construction permit for channel 5. I've speculated that they've been waiting for KNSO to move because there would be co-channel interference otherwise.

Now it seems that speculation is true because KCSO-LP has filed an application for channel 3 claiming displacement by KNSO on channel 5.

Isn't KNSO required to move to their final post transition channel as they told the FCC they would do within 90 days of the transition? Anyone have any idea what's going on in this situation?

Stanislav

10-07-09, 11:53 AM

After all there's not much market for a channel 3 analog transmitter anymore!

"Not much," but not totally non-existent, either. For instance, much of Latin America still uses NTSC. Mexico probably won't totally kill their analogs for another decade or so; many Central and South American countries have no immediate plans to go digital. I'm sure there are a few lo-band stations that might be in the market for a better used transmitter at a bargain price, given that the state of both station equipment and budget down south lags well behind the U.S. in many cases. If it were a choice between junking a well-used, but perfectly serviceable transmitter versus getting rid of it by making some income on the deal, I'd take at least a few minutes to look up some South of the Border station contact info and make a few inquiries.

Trip in VA

10-07-09, 12:03 PM

When I was at WDBJ, we left the analog transmitter all set up and on standby in case the government decided to turn analog back on, but disconnected the video input from the transmitter and turned off the remote control. The transmitter wouldn't turn on if it detected no video signal, and without remote control, you'd have to go up to the transmitter to turn it on.

WDBJ's analog transmitter is now gone.

- Trip

Stanislav

10-07-09, 03:14 PM

I'd sure love some follow-up info to come out about this.

Looks like even the Springfield/Joplin AVS board has lost interest in the subject, save for one guy who posted yesterday claiming that he was still getting a weak KYTV on 3 (he lives about 50 miles from the station). Still nothing turning up on Google News from any area media sources. One DXer in Arkansas (who indeed caught the Sunday signal weakly at some considerable distance, over 200 miles) says on his blog that he has a "hunch" about the source and purpose of the signal, but has declined to elaborate.

If it wasn't KYTV doing it, there aren't really other possibilities that account for the scope of the reception. Cable leakage certainly doesn't; a "pirate" would be unlikely to have the resources to pull off a strong enough signal; even a rogue channel 3 analog translator with the wrong input wouldn't propagate as widely as this did.

Maybe some area geeks are digging into this behind the scenes. If not, we may never know the true story. (And if KYTV is directly involved, they ain't gonna be forthcoming about it.) We'll just have to see if a NAL shows up or not. (That is, assuming one or more of the observers blew the whistle on 'em...) ;)

Trip in VA

10-07-09, 05:19 PM

WTTA's relocation from 38 to 32 was approved today. WCPO was issued an NPRM for channel 22, but at 850 kW instead of 1000 kW.

- Trip

dline

10-07-09, 05:39 PM

From Cedar Rapids-Waterloo, Iowa:

KWWL's request for STA to operate at 49 kW on channel 7 now comes up "granted" on the FCC's CDBS.

BCF68

10-07-09, 07:31 PM

"Not much," but not totally non-existent, either. For instance, much of Latin America still uses NTSC. Mexico probably won't totally kill their analogs for another decade or so.

I believe it's Dec 31 2021 for Mexico

KingsleyRob

10-08-09, 10:08 AM

Hey Trip,

Well a lot of time has past since I first wrote in about how the coverage of digital stations vs analog would end up. I based this on how KIXE in northern CA worked out. I then moved to northern lower MI and have since reported the same results. I see that KIXE had to put up a translator to fill in the lost signals in that area. I have had a chance to talk to a lot of chief engineers here in the northern MI area and it is sad how much bad information they have. Most told me how there would never be a digital station on channels 2~6 and I was able to just let it go in one ear and out the other. Trip, I seriously think that the engineers at the FCC need refresher classes in fundamental electronics in light of the mess that was created with the whole transition picture. This isn't a bash digital TV post, I love DTV but just wish those making the big decissions knew what they were talking about. Trip....you have more brains in you baby finger than all the FCC does combined !!

BCF68

10-08-09, 11:44 AM

Crazy trop this morning here in Camden. I set a new personal DX record. I picked up WATE 6.1 ( RF 26 ) in Knoxville. That's 232 miles from me. I mean it came in where I could actually watch it for awhile. As high as 60% on my Digitalstream DTX 9950 converter box.

goldrich

10-08-09, 12:11 PM

WISE-DT 19 (33.1), Fort Wayne, IN (NBC) is scheduled to transition from ch. 19 to ch. 18 next Thursday, Oct. 15, per a station engineer. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17319088#post17319088

Steve

Dr Touchtone

10-08-09, 12:25 PM

Dr Touchtone

10-08-09, 12:29 PM

"Not much," but not totally non-existent, either. For instance, much of Latin America still uses NTSC. Mexico probably won't totally kill their analogs for another decade or so; many Central and South American countries have no immediate plans to go digital. I'm sure there are a few lo-band stations that might be in the market for a better used transmitter at a bargain price, given that the state of both station equipment and budget down south lags well behind the U.S. in many cases. If it were a choice between junking a well-used, but perfectly serviceable transmitter versus getting rid of it by making some income on the deal, I'd take at least a few minutes to look up some South of the Border station contact info and make a few inquiries.

Depending on the design, if its late model, it uses an exciter where the video and audio carriers are created and then the cabinets are linear amplifiers...Thus changing the exciter and adding a mask filter can allow it to work as a digital 3 transmitter..(well basic anyway....Im sure some folks will point out other things that need to be done...BIG whoop...cheaper than buying a new digital xmtr!)

Pete-N2

10-08-09, 12:39 PM

jtbell

10-08-09, 02:01 PM

I picked up WATE 6.1 ( RF 26 ) in Knoxville. That's 232 miles from me.

I'm closer but I've never gotten any of the Knoxville stations because of the mountains in between. Last night was also pretty good for me, though. I was able to see WPCH 17.1 in Atlanta and WXII 12.1 in Winston-Salem, both about 160 miles away, in opposite directions. I spent a while watching parts of a couple of old movies on 12.2, "This TV".

Trip in VA

10-08-09, 02:23 PM

Why would a station want to move one channel position??

To eliminate co-channel interference to other stations on 19? (Which is exactly the reason.)

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-08-09, 02:32 PM

WPBN was approved for channel 47 today.

- Trip

Inundated

10-08-09, 06:40 PM

To eliminate co-channel interference to other stations on 19? (Which is exactly the reason.)

What's the 19 signal involved here?

Trip in VA

10-08-09, 07:15 PM

WXMI.

- Trip

itsthemultipath!

10-08-09, 08:42 PM

Trip in VA

10-08-09, 09:15 PM

Trip in VA

10-08-09, 09:20 PM

Trip

Speaking of channels changing channels to get out of co-channel, but not really related...

I wonder how and why WDLI got to go from 39 to 49, with WNWO Toledo so close on 49?

Furthermore, the WDLI CP is DA - but not away from WNWO. In fact, both stations will have protected coverage of Norwalk!

Your guess is as good as mine. I didn't understand that one when it was filed, but I guess Longley-Rice predicts there won't be interference, so ignoring all common sense and real world observation, the FCC let it go.

- Trip

Stanislav

10-09-09, 07:02 AM

Your guess is as good as mine. I didn't understand that one when it was filed, but I guess Longley-Rice predicts there won't be interference, so ignoring all common sense and real world observation, the FCC let it go.

"Ignoring all common sense and real world observation" seems to be endemic at the FCC. But then, the same could be said of government in general. ;)

Trip in VA

10-09-09, 12:02 PM

For whatever reason, the FCC site didn't update last night. However, the updates are in now. All I have to say, is wow.

"KWTV-DT WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE POWER ON CHANNEL 39 AS SET FORTH HEREIN, IN ORDER TO MORE CLOSELY APPROXIMATE THE AUTHORIZED SIGNAL ON CHANNEL 9 AND IN ORDER TO CONDUCT A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS. ASSUMING THAT THOSE RESULTS ARE EQUALLY POSITIVE, KWTV-DT INTENDS TO FILE FOR CHANNEL 39 AS ITS PERMANENT CHANNEL ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 30, 2009 WHICH IS THE 90TH DAY FOLLOWING GRANT OF THE AUGUST 31, 2009 EXPERIMENTAL AUTHORIZATION."

That's in an app for an STA to run 1000 kW on channel 39. http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/prefill_and_display.pl?Application_id=1333921&Service=DS&Form_id=911&Facility_id=25382

Otherwise, nothing of interest yesterday.

- Trip

TiVoFishMan

10-09-09, 02:01 PM

For whatever reason, the FCC site didn't update last night. However, the updates are in now. All I have to say, is wow.

I take it the "wow" is due to the fact that at 1568' HAAT they should be limited to 575 kW max?

Gutsy of them (or ignorant, not sure which).

BCF68

10-09-09, 02:16 PM

I take it the "wow" is due to the fact that at 1568' HAAT they should be limited to 575 kW max?

Gutsy of them (or ignorant, not sure which).

except that per FCC rules if one UHF station in a area is broadasting at 1000 kw, all UHF stations are allowed to.

Trip in VA

10-09-09, 02:26 PM

BCF68

10-09-09, 04:03 PM

No, the wow is that the 62.2 kW channel 9 signal is pretty powerful for a VHF and is the right around the level many have suggested should be used by all stations, and still KWTV wants to jump ship.

- Trip

Any particular reason why stations on high VHF or even low VHF don't try to max out their signals? Surely they aren't saving that much on electricty being at lower power. For example WSMV ( RF 10 ) is/was broadcasting at 42.3 kw then got permission to boost it up to 60 kw( not sure if they are broadcasting at 60 kw yet ) but according to your calculator on your site they could go as high as 82 kw. So why not do it?

TiVoFishMan

10-09-09, 04:26 PM

TiVoFishMan

10-09-09, 04:31 PM

Any particular reason why stations on high VHF or even low VHF don't try to max out their signals? Surely they aren't saving that much on electricty being at lower power. For example WSMV ( RF 10 ) is/was broadcasting at 42.3 kw then got permission to boost it up to 60 kw( not sure if they are broadcasting at 60 kw yet ) but according to your calculator on your site they could go as high as 82 kw. So why not do it?

The reason my local example of a VHF nightmare (WVUE VHF 8) couldn't do that was because of potential to interfere with channel 9 in Baton Rouge. The FCC restricted them to an anemic 14.6 kW because of this. Therefore, they're going to UHF. Perhaps interference concerns are also the reason some others can't maximize.

The other VHF in this market (WYES), on the other hand, is not complaining, thanks to their FCC blessed 104 kW on VHF 11 blowtorch.

Trip in VA

10-09-09, 05:30 PM

TiVoFishMan pretty much hit the nail on the head. Stations can increase to that limit only if they do not cause 0.5% interference to some other station first.

For example, KWTV asked to boost to 1000 kW on channel 39 under STA despite the fact that they'd cause 1.5% interference to KWOG at that level. They would not be able to be licensed at that power level, but since an STA is temporary (by definition) they will almost certainly be allowed to do so.

- Trip

gjvrieze

10-09-09, 06:01 PM

Trip in VA

10-09-09, 06:10 PM

They might be counting on KWOG losing its license, or coming up with an interference agreement.

- Trip

foxeng

10-09-09, 07:13 PM

Trip in VA

10-09-09, 07:16 PM

Only if the interfered with station legally accepts the increased interference. Even with an STA, you still have to live within the same rules as everyone else.

Not so anymore.

WJLA's 52 kW STA causes 1.1% interference to WHRE, who refused to accept it, but the FCC granted it since all the interference is outside WHRE's DMA.

KSCW's 33 kW on channel 12 causes impermissible interference to unbuilt KSQA in Topeka but was allowed to boost under STA.

- Trip

jspENC

10-09-09, 08:07 PM

Not so anymore.

WJLA's 52 kW STA causes 1.1% interference to WHRE, who refused to accept it, but the FCC granted it since all the interference is outside WHRE's DMA.

KSCW's 33 kW on channel 12 causes impermissible interference to unbuilt KSQA in Topeka but was allowed to boost under STA.

- Trip

I don't see the point in going this route if it is only temporary. Seems like a waste of time to me. You can't just force your hand and hope that solves something.:confused:

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 01:14 PM

I've discovered in the FCC database that the Qualcomm channel 55 MediaFLO transmitters are listed in the ULS. It's not convenient, but any transmitter over 1 kW ERP is required to be filed with the FCC. I'm about 2/3 of the way through a list of as many of them as are listed as anything but "Inactive" or "Withdrawn."

I've done Midwest, Great Lakes (except for some of Chicago that are in a separate list), Mid-Atlantic, and Northeast. Still to come, Southeast and Pacific.

You may be asking why it's relevant. My answer is that you may have concerns about pre-amp overloading and knowing the locations of these transmitters could be helpful for that.

- Trip

Inundated

10-10-09, 01:28 PM

I've discovered in the FCC database that the Qualcomm channel 55 MediaFLO transmitters are listed in the ULS. It's not convenient, but any transmitter over 1 kW ERP is required to be filed with the FCC. I'm about 2/3 of the way through a list of as many of them as are listed as anything but "Inactive" or "Withdrawn."

I'm curious if Qualcomm jumped on it here in the Cleveland market yet. WBNX was on until 6/12...are any MediaFLO transmitters on in similar situations, where Qualcomm had to wait until the second deadline?

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 01:29 PM

Yes, Cleveland has like 9 Qualcomm transmitters that all filed right around June 12.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 03:38 PM

Falcon_77

10-10-09, 04:08 PM

Here is a link to Qualcomm's FLO TV map for the curious. It isn't very easy to identify tower locations in many areas, however. Also, I had to zoom in to start seeing the purple coverage areas.

http://www.flotv.com/whats-on-flo-tv/map

Thanks, Trip, for making a database for this.

WA5IYX

10-10-09, 04:09 PM

Ouch! I may need a Ch 55 trap ahead of my CM7777 as 50 kws at 3.7 mi at 19.8-deg, 6.9 mi at 120-deg, 14.5 mi at 73-deg, and a 10 kw DA 6.5 mi at 205-deg. Most of our full-power DTV are 20-25 mi away.

ohio41

10-10-09, 04:39 PM

Got one here only 2.5 miles away. Explains loss of WCBS-DT 56 when NYC was in during the months before June 12.

Thanks for the data Trip.

Thomas Desmond

10-10-09, 05:10 PM

They might be counting on KWOG losing its license, or coming up with an interference agreement.

Is there any reason to think that KWOG would be likely to surrender it's license -- or in danger of losing it?

Stanislav

10-10-09, 05:59 PM

Okay, 5/6 finished. All that's left is "Pacific" which I'm just dreading.

http://www.rabbitears.info/qualcomm-ch55-sorted.csv

Call sign, ERP (in kW), Height (meters AGL), Lat, Lon, State, Market, Location, Directional

If the height has an "a" after it, that means it's height above sea level and I was unable to determine height AGL.

Several around Orlando -- I believe they started operating here well before the final transition date -- IIRC, they are the reason WACX abandoned their ch. 55 analog signal over a year early -- Qualcomm "persuaded" them (presumably some form of financial incentive was involved) to vacate the channel ASAP.

SnellKrell

10-10-09, 06:03 PM

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 06:06 PM

Is there any reason to think that KWOG would be likely to surrender it's license -- or in danger of losing it?

I've heard conflicting reports that KWOG is silent. If it's gone for a year, without operating, it's gone for good.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 06:08 PM

Several around Orlando -- I believe they started operating here well before the final transition date -- IIRC, they are the reason WACX abandoned their ch. 55 analog signal over a year early -- Qualcomm "persuaded" them (presumably some form of financial incentive was involved) to vacate the channel ASAP.

Same thing with WLNY, Riverhead, NY.

I don't have a full list, but I know these stations signed off early due to Qualcomm:

WLNY-55
WACX-55
KWDK-56
WYPX-55
WHYY-DT 55 (moved to 50)
KFMB-DT 55 (moved to 7)
KENS-DT 55 (moved to 39, multicasted with KWEX)
KLDT-55

There were probably more that I'm forgetting.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 06:28 PM

It's not 100% complete, but I've now got the whole country in here. Still missing some lower powered signals which I have in PDF form but I really do not feel like copying in.

http://www.rabbitears.info/qualcomm-ch55-sorted.csv

- Trip

justalurker

10-10-09, 06:28 PM

I've discovered in the FCC database that the Qualcomm channel 55 MediaFLO transmitters are listed in the ULS.
The one closest to me in ULS doesn't exist. I found the notification in ULS a couple of months ago and was happy to see service in this area.

But there is no antenna or base equipment at that site. (I have access to a site that does have the MediaFlo equipment, so I know what I'm looking for.)

So it is good to see where MediaFlo MAY be, and will be some day, but there is no guarantee that there is actual broadcasting going on.

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 06:38 PM

If I'm thinking of the one you're thinking of, it's still listed as "Pending" on the ULS.

Should I have noted the ones that are pending? Not that I'm about to go back and add it, but still.

- Trip

N5XZS

10-10-09, 06:42 PM

I can see MediaFLO's signal's carrer, here in Albuquerque on the old analog NTSC tuner by going to channel 56 and see the signal is spilling over from channel 55.

The signal looks pretty strong, to me I think.:)

10-10-09

Trip in VA

10-10-09, 07:37 PM

itsthemultipath!

10-11-09, 01:48 AM

No, the wow is that the 62.2 kW channel 9 signal is pretty powerful for a VHF and is the right around the level many have suggested should be used by all stations, and still KWTV wants to jump ship.

- Trip

Two more reasons the KWTV effort to defect to UHF is a "wow":

1) With populated rural surroundings (contrast with New Orleans), and few residents living in multi-family housing (contrast with Chicago), the Oklahoma City market should have been a good setting for high-VHF DTV.

2) KWTV is not an "orphan" VHF-high DTV. The ABC and PBS affiliates are also on VHF high, which should have driven many viewers to use VHF-capable antenna systems.

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 02:59 AM

Okay, so I managed to nail down all but five of the ones for which I couldn't find an AGL. I don't know quite what to do with the last five.

http://www.rabbitears.info/qualcomm-ch55-mod.csv

The five for which I don't have AGL are the last five in the file.

- Trip

That file has been updated again. I found one of the missing AGLs but still no luck on the other four. I think it's in just about a finished state such that I can perhaps work on integrating it into RabbitEars somehow...

- Trip

ctdish

10-11-09, 11:39 AM

Trip,
Any info on what polarization they are using on channel 55? For mobile use I would guess circular. I can see the local one quite strongly on a spectrum analyzer. It looks just about like an ATSC signal but no pilot. How about adding column headings on your chart.
John

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 11:41 AM

I've got a database on RabbitEars set up with the data, just finished loading it in a few minutes ago. There'll be a page there for it in the near future.

Most of them look to be circular, with a very few of them being H only.

- Trip

Inundated

10-11-09, 11:53 AM

Yes, Cleveland has like 9 Qualcomm transmitters that all filed right around June 12.

Here is a link to Qualcomm's FLO TV map for the curious. It isn't very easy to identify tower locations in many areas, however. Also, I had to zoom in to start seeing the purple coverage areas.

Yep, there is no current coverage shown around here, so presumably, they are still in the post-6/12 construction phase in the Cleveland market. I presume that's also the same for other Channel 55 markets that didn't see the analog 55 station sign off until the deadline.

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 12:33 PM

http://www.rabbitears.info/mediaflo.php?request=list

Ta da. Maps to come later.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 12:41 PM

Maps are there. Not quite done, but usable. Click the market name to view.

- Trip

Inundated

10-11-09, 01:52 PM

Maps are there. Not quite done, but usable. Click the market name to view.

Looks like the ones around here are in the usual suspect places - the Parma antenna farm, the TV/FM farm outside Akron, and south of downtown Youngstown...

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 03:55 PM

Alright, I think I'm done with it for the time being. Now, on the map, when you click the icon it will give you the ID, the height/power, and the location name.

You can also look at entire states by removing the "market_name" section of the address and instead using just the state. For example:

http://www.rabbitears.info/mediaflo.php?request=map&state=VA

Similarly, you can specify things on the list by adding state and market_name fields.

http://www.rabbitears.info/mediaflo.php?request=list&state=VA
http://www.rabbitears.info/mediaflo.php?request=list&state=NY&market_name=New+York

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-11-09, 07:49 PM

Chicago, Atlanta, and Los Angeles had a bunch of these 36 μW MediaFLO translators that I hadn't felt like loading in. They're now loaded in, and the maps show blue icons for any MediaFLO transmitter putting out less than .001 kW (1 W) ERP.

- Trip

justalurker

10-12-09, 12:19 AM

If I'm thinking of the one you're thinking of, it's still listed as "Pending" on the ULS.
I don't believe "Pending" has much to do with it. The notifications themselves read:
"Pursuant to Part 27.50(c)(5) of the FCC rules, licensees intending to operate a base or fixed station at a power level greater than 1 kW ERP must provide advance notice of such operation to the Commission and licensees authorized in their area of operation. This notice must provide the location and operating parameters of the base or fixed station."

The filings are an intent to operate. I don't see FCC approval as being proof of the station being on the air. The pending applications are not asking for construction permits ... they are notifications. Although I suppose if the application remains pending they might not be able to light it up, I would expect construction to proceed.

BTW: That doesn't mean that cataloging them isn't a really good idea and I really appreciate the work you have put into this!

Trip in VA

10-12-09, 01:11 AM

I could be completely wrong, but the way I read it is that while a "Grant" is no guarantee it's on the air, "Pending" tells me it probably isn't. That's my thinking, as I otherwise don't see why they'd have to wait for a grant of a notice. That just seems silly, even by FCC standards.

I'm glad you like the list and maps. It looks like these things are filed roughly every two weeks, and that's coming due. So I'll hopefully have more to post soon.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-12-09, 03:15 AM

Just out of curiosity, is anyone finding the Qualcomm MediaFLO information useful? I want to know if this sort of thing is something I should continue monitoring and/or expanding.

- Trip

chamb

10-12-09, 08:19 AM

Just out of curiosity, is anyone finding the Qualcomm MediaFLO information useful? I want to know if this sort of thing is something I should continue monitoring and/or expanding.

- Trip

I like what I have seen with your work on this, however ---
I really question the business model on MediaFLO. They are going to spend a whole bunch of money and I question the amount of people that will buy into this. They will need a certain amount of income to keep this going and I just do not see the math adding up.

I do not see lines of people lining up to buy this service now or in the future.

It is nice that this can be done, but the risk on the project looks to be obscene. I would not lend them one dime of my money to put toward the project.

But, your work was terrific on this.
It really gives a good picture of what they are trying to do.

Falcon_77

10-12-09, 10:37 AM

It's not 100% complete, but I've now got the whole country in here. Still missing some lower powered signals which I have in PDF form but I really do not feel like copying in.

Most interesting. Thanks again, Trip. It looks like I have one at 9 miles at 50kW, assuming the null in the pattern is out to sea. Judging by the FloTV coverage map, it's probably not operating yet, however.

50kW all over the place here should provide excellent coverage. However, 50kW from Mt. Harvard should be easy enough to receive.

I will relay this to the LA thread, for pre-amp warning purposes, if nothing else.

I hope we will start seeing 7-51 pre-amps or FAF (Frequency Agile Filter) pre-amps eventually. With WSD's in between channels and new services in 52-69, the old pre-amps are bound to have problems.

Falcon_77

10-12-09, 11:17 AM

2) KWTV is not an "orphan" VHF-high DTV. The ABC and PBS affiliates are also on VHF high, which should have driven many viewers to use VHF-capable antenna systems.

I know that KOCO (ABC/7) is having problems to the South, but they are still side-mounted and directional, according to the info I have.

KWTV has a mysterious interference issue on 9 as well.

Falcon_77

10-12-09, 11:23 AM

I really question the business model on MediaFLO. They are going to spend a whole bunch of money and I question the amount of people that will buy into this. They will need a certain amount of income to keep this going and I just do not see the math adding up.

I expect that they will be pushing hard for cell phone companies and manufacturers to add this service to front-line phones. Bandwidth is King and broadcast bandwidth need not be shared with cell phone data bandwidth.

However, the separate, portable TV market is probably quite limited for a subscription service. Who wants to pay a subscription to watch TV for tail-gates and during hurricane's, etc.? Hopefully, free mobile DTV can tap that market.

It would be better to have devices to handle both the free and subscription models, but I don't see that happening.

Nitewatchman

10-12-09, 06:09 PM

Qualcomm Rolls out handheld FLO TV :

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/88452

.... 250 bucks, $9 bucks a month for the service fees ....

Trip in VA

10-12-09, 06:20 PM

$9/month for three years. I'd much rather not be bound into a contract.

- Trip

justalurker

10-12-09, 06:31 PM

Providing service to multiple carriers is a good thing. I think MediaFLO will do fine - and with a standalone TV for the individual service they will do better. (They do need to reduce the three year contract ... but they are probably just making sure people who get the TVs will stick around long enough that they make money. Bigger screens and no lock to a phone provider can be a benefit.)

If you want less commitment get the service through a cell phone provider. One can add or drop VCast TV on a monthly basis. You just have to put up with a (likely) smaller screen.

Trip in VA

10-12-09, 06:46 PM

If you want less commitment get the service through a cell phone provider. One can add or drop VCast TV on a monthly basis. You just have to put up with a (likely) smaller screen.

My cell phone provider does not have a phone I want, nor do they have a contract with Qualcomm.

- Trip

kycubsfan

10-12-09, 08:12 PM

Excellent work Trip.

They have astounding coverage along the Interstate 4 corridor in central Florida.

sebenste

10-13-09, 10:29 AM

I know that KOCO (ABC/7) is having problems to the South, but they are still side-mounted and directional, according to the info I have.

KWTV has a mysterious interference issue on 9 as well.

I wonder if KWTV's problems are "N+2" interference from KOCO, per Charles W. Rhodes' discussion about it on TV Technology. It will be interesting to see what happens in the Chicago market when WWTO-DT 10 goes to 80 kw from their 16 kw they're at right now (and go top mounted as well).

Tower Guy

10-13-09, 11:53 AM

I wonder if KWTV's problems are "N+2" interference from KOCO.

I'd be just as concerned about KKNG 93.3 at 100 KW ERP and KHBZ 94.7 at 100 KW ERP. Their second harmonics and third order IM falls within channel 9.

itsthemultipath!

10-13-09, 09:27 PM

I have been reading a lot about FM broadcast overload interference to high
VHF DTV, and think I do observe the problem myself.

I work in a building 11.2 miles from WJBK (7), and that building is almost a faraday cage (metal siding on all exterior walls, which are about 18' tall).

With my portable DTV kludge, WJBK does come in, although antenna positioning is quite tricky.
If I take it outside to get better reception, I lose WJBK.

I also note I can't get WOIO (10) to decode when near Richfield, OH, even though the meter shows 100% signal strength.

I guess I'll have to compare CECBs to see if some boxes are better at handling FM than others (in any case, FM overload would be the fault of the BOX in any case!). This is yet another reason low VHF should not have been added to the DTV list at the last minute (the tuners have to be "wide open" in the front to tune those low channels).

Trip in VA

10-14-09, 12:26 AM

VHF Nightmare to report tonight folks. WJRT seeks to increase power from 18.2 kW to 30 kW. It has an interference agreement with WINM to make this happen.

The agreement? WJRT is giving its UHF "transmitter system" to TCT. Am I the only one who thinks that's HUGE INSANE OVERKILL for accepting 1.5% interference?

- Trip

ProjectSHO89

10-14-09, 07:52 AM

Adding an FM trap to the CECBs would have cost a few cents more and it wasn't mandated. Since the device is a planned obsolescence, it would have been overly optimistic to expect anything more than the minimum requirements to fulfill the mandate for participation in the coupon program.

Pop in an FM trap on your own in front of the first electronics device, whether it be the CECB or any amplifier. Keep in mind that there are two general types - those that attempt to preserve channel 6 and those that don't. Unless you have a channel 6 (and there aren't many of them) broadcast to preserve, select the one that flattens the whole FM band.

Falcon_77

10-14-09, 11:24 AM

The agreement? WJRT is giving its UHF "transmitter system" to TCT. Am I the only one who thinks that's HUGE INSANE OVERKILL for accepting 1.5% interference?

Is WINM planning to try an re-purpose it for a move to UHF (perhaps 33)? It looks like a move back to 36 is impossible for WJRT, with WLNS now on 36 in Lansing.

WJRT is a VHF "orphan" in Flint. ...one of the many nationwide.

Trip in VA

10-14-09, 11:35 AM

It doesn't necessarily have to go to WINM, as TCT does own a large chain of stations, though it wouldn't surprise me if they jumped ship from VHF too.

- Trip

justalurker

10-14-09, 06:08 PM

It doesn't necessarily have to go to WINM, as TCT does own a large chain of stations, though it wouldn't surprise me if they jumped ship from VHF too.
I would if I were them, being the only full power VHF in the market and a long way from the towers of the other channels. They might get more viewers if they were at least on the same antenna as every other station.

WINM has an application pending to move their VHF up to the top of the tower in place of the old UHF antenna (tuned to 63). Even when they get approval they don't have to follow through ... they could always become another "nightmare" station and move (back) to UHF.

Trip in VA

10-15-09, 12:19 AM

New VHF Nightmare, WHAS wants to bump from 5.2 kW up to 16.4 kW on their current omni. I have to wonder if they want to test that power level to determine whether or not to spend money on the new directional pattern they have a CP for...

The best available UHF channel looks to be channel 50, if they chose to go back to UHF.

- Trip

sebenste

10-15-09, 01:54 AM

I'd be just as concerned about KKNG 93.3 at 100 KW ERP and KHBZ 94.7 at 100 KW ERP. Their second harmonics and third order IM falls within channel 9.

WOW! I didn't realize they were there. Yikes...yeah, that'll do it, too...

sebenste

10-15-09, 01:56 AM

justalurker

10-15-09, 02:40 AM

I wonder if that "transmitter system" is an STL? I haven't read the agreement.
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=798157&formid=301&q_num=5440

They just call it "WJRT's former UHF transmitter system" and define when it will be turned over in detail (after the FCC approves the power upgrade). I'd expect a STL to be referred to as an STL. This looks like their DTV channel 36 system.

twaller

10-15-09, 12:42 PM

I wonder if that "transmitter system" is an STL? I haven't read the agreement.

There is a very close neighbor to WJRT, that is TCT station WAQP. I think that their transmitters are a stones throw away from each other. WAQP operates on channel 48. I wonder if they will use WJRT's UHF transmitter but modifed to a different frequency. 36 is in use in mid Michigan.

itsthemultipath!

10-15-09, 02:28 PM

In this case, it's sad that the pre-transition databases are gone, so I don't know exactly what antennas may be sitting atop the towers unused.

I don't see any particular reason for WAQP to leave 48. The have the strongest signal in the market, and the only way they could improve it would be to go omnidirectional (they can't on 48, since the SRC relay in Chatham has to be protected, but few stations really care to service the Thumb region, anyway).

One possible scenario would be an eventual facility swap between a power-upped WJRT and WAQP. WJRT on 48 would get a powerful UHF signal into the homes of the cities (cable systems are going to carry the ABC affiliate even where there is no virtual coverage), and WAQP would gain cable/satellite coverage over the larger channel 12 virtual service area. There is no way in Hell (that's a small Livingston County town where WAQP would gain coverage!) that WJRT would do this without being able to carry their virtual/PSIP channel 12 to the UHF frequency, which would require, technically, each station being approved for a facilities change, which could be contested.

The best thing WJRT could do would be to move to 31, being vacated by WPXD when it moves to 50. To use 31, WJRT would have to change TL to be close enough to WEYI on 30, either by sharing WEYI's antenna or tower, or building a new tower close enough to WEYI. This would also give WJRT a better site to serve its targeted viewers.

18 may also be available (per rabbitears).

One more thing about WJRT's interesting history. Their original plan was to build their TL a good distance Southeast of Flint, where it would still have city-grade coverage of Flint, but also over most of Detroit and all of it's (then) growing and prosperous Northern suburbs, giving Detroit (back then, a major metro area) a VHF independent on the American side. This was rejected, even though the engineering was compliant. They decided to go for ABC affiliation, and build near Chesaning to provide a signal to Lansing, which, at the time, had no ABC affiliate.

Trip in VA

10-16-09, 12:41 AM

(Cross-posting with Greensboro)

Well, sorry foxeng, but the cat is now out of the bag. WAXN filed for that channel 36 translator and included the interference agreement. http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/prefill_and_display.pl?Application_id=1338503&Service=LD&Form_id=346&Facility_id=12793

So that's the FCC action for tonight, WGHP apparently plans to file to relocate from channel 8 to channel 35, after having simulcast on both for four months now.

- Trip

foxeng

10-16-09, 08:09 AM

At least you didn't hear it from me! :D

Trip in VA

10-19-09, 12:40 AM

VHF Nightmare this evening is WTHR, who wants an increase from 22 kW to 30 kW.

- Trip

enzytebob

10-19-09, 10:34 PM

Why is WTHR so stubborn? Why don't they just go back to 46?

Trip in VA

10-19-09, 10:44 PM

Spacing problem. (WHME)

- Trip

Desert Hawk

10-20-09, 05:36 PM

I noticed on the FCC's website that the construction permit for TBN's analog LP on 21 in Bakersfield is no longer listed. Does this mean that TBN has decided to keep this station analog for awhile longer, possibly until the FCC requires all LPs to do digital? Is TBN going to keep their entire LP network analog until then?

Trip in VA

10-20-09, 06:27 PM

TBN is selling off their network. The permit likely expired.

- Trip

NashDigie

10-20-09, 09:30 PM

TBN is selling off their network....
- Trip

What do you mean? Could you please elaborate on the details?

Trip in VA

10-20-09, 09:38 PM

PinkSplice

10-20-09, 10:05 PM

TBN has decided the OTA audience is too small to justify upgrading their translator network to digital. So they're selling them off one by one, keeping the full service stations for must-carry purposes.

The one in Macon GA was sold not long ago for $6,000 to WPGA who has made it WPGA-LP airing RTV.

- Trip

Trip, there are two TBN LP's in the STL market, K33GU (RF 33), and K22HG (Analog RF 22, which has a CP for a 15 KW LD on RF 17).

K33GU is in the Shrewsbury Antenna Farm, (Ground Zero for OTA) with a fairly decent coverage of the central market:

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=TX694719.html

K22HG is aimed at St. Charles County, and is not the direction most OTA viewers would point antennas (15 KW LD pattern):

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=LD1121686.html

K33GU would seem to be more generally marketable. Any rumors?

Trip in VA

10-20-09, 10:09 PM

I haven't heard any rumors about any specific TBN translator sales.

In the case of K22HG, it's close enough that it could probably be displaced to the main tower site...

- Trip

BCF68

10-20-09, 11:32 PM

WJTE-LD TN JACKSON USA (Digital)

Licensee: TIGER EYE BROADCASTING CORP.
Service Designation: LD Digital Low Power Television station (Digital LPTV)

Channel: 27 548 - 554 MHz

WKRN-TV TN NASHVILLE USA (Digital)

Licensee: WKRN, G.P., DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
Service Designation: DT Digital television station

Channel: 27 548 - 554 MHz Licensed

Stations are only 102 miles apart. I swear the FCC hates my area. Bad enough you have possible interference on Ch 5, and definite interference on Ch 36 but now 27? Not to mention a Ch 10 got approved in Memphis and of course there's been a Ch 23 in Memphis too. You'd think when you have good trop your reception would improve. In my area it's just going to create problems. While they're at it why doesn't the FCC approve Ch 39 and 47 for Nashville, and Channels 8, 15 and 21 for Memphis/Jackson so all my channels can be screwed?

Trip in VA

10-21-09, 12:20 AM

FCC action tonight has three items of note.

First, KNSO in the Fresno market seeks another extension to retain channel 5, this time until February 2010. They claim problems with getting permits prevented finishing the build out.

Second, KNBC has filed for a permanent auxiliary facility, though I think it is on Mount Wilson. Not sure how helpful that would be in case it burned.

Finally, KSTW-DT 11 in Seattle has increased power to 68 kW from 12.5 kW. This is not a VHF nightmare since the power increase was requested long before the transition. KSTW holds a permit to further increase to 100 kW, but needs additional time to increase from 68 kW to 100 kW.

- Trip

Larry Kenney

10-21-09, 01:49 AM

The 7 out 10 San Francisco stations transmitting on UHF are now using the new antennas at Sutro Tower. The last three stations are supposed to switch tonight.

Early reports show several readings around 75-79 in the Santa Rosa area 70 miles to the north on Dish Vip receivers. Strong solid signals were also reported from a viewer 115 miles east northeast of Sutro... but they have the advantage of added height, being up in the Sierra foothills. Another report came in of solid signals at 130 miles at 3,300 feet.

Locally, just 3/4 of a mile from the tower, I see little change. Some signals went up a little, some stayed the same, some went down a little... nothing drastic. I think that most of the signals are going right over us. :)

Larry
SF

justalurker

10-21-09, 08:21 PM

TBN has decided the OTA audience is too small to justify upgrading their translator network to digital. So they're selling them off one by one, keeping the full service stations for must-carry purposes.
That explains why they let the digital flash cut on my local translator expire. A shame since the multicast would reach people in the area - but staying analog (until sold?) serves those who didn't bother getting a converter box and only care about TBN.

$6k? I wonder how much they would take for ours (and how much it would take to keep it running then convert and use it for digital). I wouldn't mind seeing TBN stay on it in the interim, and even as a subchannel after going digital. It would have to make enough money locally to pay to keep it on the air.

Trip in VA

10-22-09, 12:36 AM

FCC note, WRGB has filed for a fill-in translator on channel 39. Instead of filling in Albany, where their channel 6 signal needs all the help it can get, it is instead to be located in Glens Falls.

- Trip

Calaveras

10-22-09, 11:57 AM

FCC action tonight has three items of note.

First, KNSO in the Fresno market seeks another extension to retain channel 5, this time until February 2010. They claim problems with getting permits prevented finishing the build out.

- Trip

Thanks for pointing this out. I've been wondering what is going on. I might be able to believe their excuse about the permitting process yet all the other stations there have transitioned but the weather excuse is lame. We had one big storm on Oct. 13. Other than that we've had almost nothing. Sounds like this station doesn't have its act together. No wonder KCSO is frustrated.

Calaveras

10-22-09, 12:02 PM

This is for Trip or anyone else who keeps up on these sorts of issues.

I'm wondering why KTVU has not been approved for 1000KW on CH 44 after more than year? KCSM is on 43 with 536KW and KBCW on 45 with 1000KW all on the same tower. KTVU has suffered a major reduction in coverage area moving from CH 2 to 44. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Trip in VA

10-22-09, 01:06 PM

I honestly have no idea about KTVU. Who knows.

As for KNSO, keep in mind that a channel 11 antenna is likely going to be taller than a channel 51 antenna, so top-mounting it will likely require a whole new set of permits since the height of the structure increased overall.

- Trip

sebenste

10-22-09, 03:47 PM

That explains why they let the digital flash cut on my local translator expire. A shame since the multicast would reach people in the area - but staying analog (until sold?) serves those who didn't bother getting a converter box and only care about TBN.

$6k? I wonder how much they would take for ours (and how much it would take to keep it running then convert and use it for digital). I wouldn't mind seeing TBN stay on it in the interim, and even as a subchannel after going digital. It would have to make enough money locally to pay to keep it on the air.

Those that they thought worthwile were flash-cut to digital to be sold, or they got an extension of the CP. However, they will most certainly keep their full power statons. WWTO-DT, some 70 miles southwest of Chicago, is side-mounted at 16 kw on channel 10. It will go top-mount at 80 kw, which will help reception at 1400'+ in the air.

Desert Hawk

10-22-09, 07:15 PM

This news about TBN is a very bad omen about the low power switch to digital. TBN is one of the largest, if not the largest, low power broadcaster in America. If they don't think switching to digital is worthwhile, what about other much smaller operators of low power stations? I am afraid that many low power station operators will let their stations go dark when the FCC declares an end of low power analog tv, either because they can't afford to switch to digital or decide that it isn't worth the cost. And of course the threat of this will probably cause the FCC to continue to allow analog low power broadcasting for another 5-10 years. It is almost certain that the FCC will not take any action on ending low power analog tv until the currect recession is over. Like it or not, ANALOG LIVES!!! Just not over 150000 watts on UHF or 900 watts on VHF.

BCF68

10-22-09, 08:31 PM

Trip in VA

10-22-09, 09:03 PM

TBN doesn't think it's worthwhile because they already have satellite carriage and cable carriage all over. Other LPTV stations don't have cable carriage. I have to imagine most will make the transition and multicast SD.

- Trip

Desert Hawk

10-22-09, 10:03 PM

"How is this allowed?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WJTE-LD TN JACKSON USA (Digital)

Licensee: TIGER EYE BROADCASTING CORP.
Service Designation: LD Digital Low Power Television station (Digital LPTV)

Channel: 27 548 - 554 MHz

WKRN-TV TN NASHVILLE USA (Digital)

Licensee: WKRN, G.P., DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION
Service Designation: DT Digital television station

Channel: 27 548 - 554 MHz Licensed"

Bakersfield and Fresno are about 100 miles apart. Fresno has full power stations on RF 34, 36, 38, and 43. Bakersfield has low power analog stations on the same channels. When analog was still on the air Fresno had full power stations on 21, 24, and 47, also co-channeled with analog low power stations in Bakersfield. Fresno also has a full power station on 7 and 3ABN wants to build a digital low power station in Bakersfield on RF7. In northern Kern County and much of Kings and Tulare it used to be possible to receive both markets with a set top antenna (I know this because my dad used to be work as a boss of oil rigs and had a tv in his trailer). I can only imagine how hard it must be to get reception there today. You would probably need a rooftop directional antenna to get any of the channels subject to this cochannel interference.

itsthemultipath!

10-23-09, 12:26 PM

I wonder if TBN will continue with its pentaplex on its remaining full-service stations, or, since the subchanels do not have must-carry, will they abandon Church Channel, JCTV, Enlace and Smile Of A Child?

Trip in VA

10-23-09, 12:31 PM

With the gear already in place, I doubt they'll be dropping it.

- Trip

mgsports

10-23-09, 12:59 PM

We don't even get those other TBN Station on Comcast Olathe/MO yet.

Trip in VA

10-23-09, 02:48 PM

New feature on RabbitEars. Currently only visible on the Charlottesville, VA stations as my testing stations, I now am capable of listing individual streams as being variable or fixed, and what the range of bitrates are for those variable streams.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-23-09, 03:03 PM

WKYT's move to 36 has been approved.

- Trip

mgsports

10-23-09, 05:51 PM

Dot2 Network has going the air yet and so hasen't IONTV HD in the KC area and it's almost November. Olathe/MO Comcast doesn't even have IONTV's other channels yet.

ChrisC47

10-23-09, 08:45 PM

I now am capable of listing individual streams as being variable or fixed, and what the range of bitrates are for those variable streams.

Great! This has been the one thing on my wishlist.

Trip in VA

10-24-09, 12:25 PM

Great! This has been the one thing on my wishlist.

Of course, the big problem is getting the information about it. Apparently it requires a full version of TSReader, which is $99 and I have, but most people do not.

I wish I was good at programming. (I'm not.) I'd write my own tool to do this stuff.

- Trip

kb7oeb

10-24-09, 10:10 PM

Dot2 Network has going the air yet and so hasen't IONTV HD in the KC area and it's almost November. Olathe/MO Comcast doesn't even have IONTV's other channels yet.

We got ION HD a couple weeks ago even though Phoenix was supposed to be one of the launch stations.

Calaveras

10-24-09, 10:26 PM

TBN has decided the OTA audience is too small to justify upgrading their translator network to digital. So they're selling them off one by one, keeping the full service stations for must-carry purposes.

- Trip

Well this explains why K45HC transmitting from Walnut Grove hasn't switched despite their CP expiring in January 2010. So it'll be sold soon?

There's only been one LPTV in my market that has switched. I know of 9 LPTV stations in the Salinas market and only one has switched.

I'm still wondering what KAZV-LP is going to do. They must be unwatchable in their own area with KTNC-DT also on 14 blanketing their area. I would have thought they would have done something by now.

I wonder how many of these LPTV stations will just give it up?

Inundated

10-24-09, 11:53 PM

TBN has decided the OTA audience is too small to justify upgrading their translator network to digital. So they're selling them off one by one, keeping the full service stations for must-carry purposes.

Trip, I'm curious, where did you hear this? This is the first I've heard of it.

Of course, here in Northeast Ohio, W51BI/Kirtland was still analog, last I picked that signal up...and TBN is relying on full-power WDLI/17 Canton (RF 39, moving to 49).

Trip in VA

10-25-09, 12:03 AM

I've heard it from multiple sources, including several who bought LPTVs from TBN or inquired about buying from TBN.

- Trip

sebenste

10-25-09, 02:33 AM

Trip, I'm curious, where did you hear this? This is the first I've heard of it.

Of course, here in Northeast Ohio, W51BI/Kirtland was still analog, last I picked that signal up...and TBN is relying on full-power WDLI/17 Canton (RF 39, moving to 49).

And I have heard it, first hand, from TBN's Chief Engineer, Ben Miller.

Stanislav

10-25-09, 02:26 PM

And I have heard it, first hand, from TBN's Chief Engineer, Ben Miller.

If you are still in contact with him, ask him why Orlando's WHLV is still sending out 4 blank subchannels (52-2 through 52-5) instead of the programming lineup shared by all other full-power TBNs. You'd think whatever problem existed here would have been solved by now (4 1/2 months post-transition). As I have said on the Orlando board, while I don't even watch WHLV, this situation annoys me as a certified TV Geek. ;)

satpro

10-25-09, 06:13 PM

The FCC doesnt seem too concerned by WHLV so why not ask him yourself, his contact info is available: http://www.tbn.org/announcements/?nid=38

Be sure to site the following recent scan:
http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/fl-orl/24582-0_0.htm

justalurker

10-25-09, 07:17 PM

satpro

10-25-09, 07:58 PM

Not exactly the ONLY one,

The violation reported regarded the small technicality of the children's TV E/I requirement and non compliance due to the fact that the subs are actually off the air and various excuses on the main channel which prevented the run of the E/I there because it was supposedly to be run to be on the subs which aren't on the air, but we could go back and forth all day about WHLV so....

Stanislav

10-25-09, 09:33 PM

The FCC doesnt seem too concerned by WHLV so why not ask him yourself, his contact info is available: http://www.tbn.org/announcements/?nid=38

OK, I did just that -- we'll see if there is a response. I tried to make the inquiry sound like "disappointed regular TBN viewer" rather than "annoyed TV Geek." :D

Trip in VA

10-26-09, 12:26 AM

1) WLS has filed for an STA to operate channel 7. I'm guessing this means they plan to fire up 44 very, VERY soon.

2) KFSF is operating at reduced power but now on the Sutro antenna. Many of the other Sutro stations are up at full power now on the new top-mounted antennas.

3) Whether you can believe it or not, Hillary Clinton is 62 today, if my math is right. And I'm 21.

- Trip

Larry Kenney

10-26-09, 01:05 AM

And I'm 21.

- Trip

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, Trip! You're now legal, eh?

Larry
SF

Trip in VA

10-26-09, 01:12 AM

Technically, but I don't drink or gamble anyway, so it really doesn't matter. :)

- Trip

BCF68

10-26-09, 01:24 AM

Trip in VA

10-26-09, 04:03 AM

I'm about to go to bed after a while coding when I should have been homeworking, but I just figured I'd drop a hint.

RabbitEars for mobile devices. :)

It's in progress...

- Trip

Stanislav

10-26-09, 06:33 AM

When I turned 21 you were barely walking and still pooping in your britches. Thanks now I feel old. :(

Hell, when I turned 21, Trip was almost a decade away from even being a gleam in his father's eye one night. So, think of how old *I* feel! :(

(BTW, Trip...happy birthday!) :D

TiVoFishMan

10-26-09, 09:02 AM

Hell, when I turned 21, Trip was almost a decade away from even being a gleam in his father's eye one night. So, think of how old *I* feel! :(

(BTW, Trip...happy birthday!) :D

This for me too. Trip was born several years after I turned 21.

Happy birthday, Trip!

Tschmidt

10-26-09, 09:49 AM

And I'm 21.
- Trip
Happy Birthday - you have accomplished a lot already. Hopefully you will be able to generate a little revenue from RabbitEars, it is a very useful site.

When I was 21 I was in Vietnam, you do the math. :)

Trip in VA

10-26-09, 11:01 AM

Thanks, all. :)

RabbitEars for mobile devices. :)

It's in progress...

It's still very much not finished, and I'm fighting some rather big problems, but here's a very, very early alpha to look at: http://ds.rabbitears.info/

Opinions?

- Trip

Stanislav

10-26-09, 02:12 PM

If you are still in contact with him, ask him why Orlando's WHLV is still sending out 4 blank subchannels (52-2 through 52-5) instead of the programming lineup shared by all other full-power TBNs. You'd think whatever problem existed here would have been solved by now (4 1/2 months post-transition). As I have said on the Orlando board, while I don't even watch WHLV, this situation annoys me as a certified TV Geek. ;)

The FCC doesnt seem too concerned by WHLV so why not ask him yourself, his contact info is available: http://www.tbn.org/announcements/?nid=38

OK, I did just that -- we'll see if there is a response. I tried to make the inquiry sound like "disappointed regular TBN viewer" rather than "annoyed TV Geek." :D

Well, that was fast...got his response this morning:

WHLV is currently constructing it's permanent studios at the site of
Holyland Experience. Until they are complete, we must share the
facilities of WTGL-TV which are only equipped to allow us to play out one
channel. We hope to be able to move to our new facility by next summer at
which time we will then have the capability of playing out all 5 channels.

(Holyland Experience, for those who may not have heard of it, is a Christian theme park here in Orlando. They were embroiled in recent years in a long IRS battle over tax exemption -- the question was whether the park constituted a business or a ministry. Somehow, don't ask me how, they managed to keep their exemption as long as they open the park for free one day a year. Even if they charge admission the other 364. Go figure...)

Not sure how his explanation holds up from a technical standpoint -- obviously, they are transmitting five subchannels (four blank), they are just not feeding a signal to those four. What kind of technical limitations would keep them from feeding video to those channels? Maybe sharing a receive dish with WTGL that can only accommodate so many channels? Perhaps the more engineer-ish types here could speculate?

foxeng

10-26-09, 04:18 PM

Not sure how his explanation holds up from a technical standpoint -- obviously, they are transmitting five subchannels (four blank), they are just not feeding a signal to those four. What kind of technical limitations would keep them from feeding video to those channels? Maybe sharing a receive dish with WTGL that can only accommodate so many channels? Perhaps the more engineer-ish types here could speculate?

They are feeding a single analog STL to the transmitter and converting to digital at the transmitter site. That would do it since there is no digital STL feed. Just a guess.

Dave Loudin

10-26-09, 04:18 PM

Sounds like they can't route enough independent video signals to supply those subchannels. Having the ability in the digital chain to create the subchannels is a separate issue.

rviele

10-26-09, 04:59 PM

Happy Birthday - you have accomplished a lot already. Hopefully you will be able to generate a little revenue from RabbitEars, it is a very useful site.

When I was 21 I was in Vietnam, you do the math. :)
i was with the 199th in long binh where were you?

Stanislav

10-26-09, 05:46 PM

They are feeding a single analog STL to the transmitter and converting to digital at the transmitter site. That would do it since there is no digital STL feed. Just a guess.

Actually, that makes a lot of sense given their situation. WHLV and WTGL are sister stations, but I've always had the impression that WHLV is like the stepchild, and most of the budget has been funneled to WTGL (which does a considerable amount of local production). WHLV spent their last year or two on analog on reduced power, unable to cough up the cash to fix their transmitter problems, and they never built-out full digital facilities pre-transition (they were running a flea-power DTV transmitter for their pre-transition operations on ch. 53, probably with STA, and didn't fire up the full megawatt on ch. 51 until transition day). While many stations did not or could not go full-power on their pre-transition channels, they still in most cases sent out a halfway decent signal -- WHLV's was no better, and probably worse, than an LPTV. I have just a window antenna, but 17 miles from the transmitter site, I never saw even a peep of their channel 53 signal.

So, if they are indeed using WTGL's old analog STL out of poverty and lack of facilities, that would explain why there is only one available video stream. It does not, however, explain why they are bothering to send out 52-2 thru 52-5 at all if it will be next summer before they can provide programming to them. Maybe they don't want their viewers needing to mess with rescanning if they wait until then to activate the four subchannels?

justalurker

10-26-09, 07:13 PM

Technically, but I don't drink or gamble anyway, so it really doesn't matter. :)I remember my 21st birthday (before you were born). I walked into a liquor store walked around the aisles and back out the door. For the first day of my life it was a choice that wasn't influenced by "besides, it is against the law".

I'm glad I made the choice I did. More money for toys. :D

Jeff747

10-26-09, 07:33 PM

On the subject of TBN selling off their LP and Translator stations, does anyone think TBN might hang onto these stations in areas with no other OTA religious channels?
Here in Wichita, TBN filed for an extension of their LD CP, and we have no other OTA religious channels, but I realize the story is different in many other areas.

Larry Kenney

10-26-09, 08:29 PM

Thanks, all. :)

It's still very much not finished, and I'm fighting some rather big problems, but here's a very, very early alpha to look at: http://ds.rabbitears.info/

Opinions?

- Trip

I did a few searches for various calls. Seems to work fine locating the records. Is there anything else that it's supposed to do?

Larry
SF

Trip in VA

10-26-09, 08:33 PM

Not really. I am designing it to work with my DS, and it's really, really finicky. I tried to put parentheses around the resolutions and it turned all the cells into separate rows. Who knows.

Oh, clicking the little arrows at the right will eventually bring up the detailed technical data and all that, but I am trying to sort out the formatting problems first.

- Trip

satpro

10-26-09, 09:29 PM

I never saw even a peep of their channel 53 signal.

That is because there was some question between the broadcasting community as to whether ch 53 was even on the air since no one out of a million ever captured it, also ch 51 was unavailable pretransition because WOGX analog was using it, however WHLV-DT 51 came on the air at exactly 11:59 pm and testing was observed in the weeks/month prior on friday afternoons and weekends in the middle of the night.

WHLV STL with an outdated address and calls: 7.112.5ghz
http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licensePathsSum.jsp?licKey=2716060

S.M.A. partner WTGL STL (with a correct address) 7.037.5ghz
http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licensePathsSum.jsp?pageNumToReturn=1&licKey=2716044

Both are digital Baseband Digital Rate (kbps): 19400.0 Digital Modulation Type: 8VSB

I think there is way more to the WHLV story than any of you outside of the orlando market realize! Because again as posted elsewhere the 4 subs are satellite feeds and only require minimal equipment needed beyond what is already in place for main channel which comes off of the same satellite mux live, they could have even installed gear for station logo or EAS insertion and a 6' C band dish could catch these at the tower from satellite if they were that bad off.

http://www.lyngsat.com/galaxy14.html

The facts tell a different story. So I don't believe all the usual shady excuses from WHLV. Only what I observe which is null packets: http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/fl-orl/24582-0_0.htm

They could not be using WTGL's STL because the full payload 19400 is used by them.
http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/fl-orl/9881-0_0.htm

mgsports

10-26-09, 09:33 PM

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/content_display/news/local-broadcast/e3i18f9fdff77fbe360c575973113dc907b maybe Boston,Orlando and so on.

mrvideo

10-26-09, 09:45 PM

... and a 6' C band dish could catch these at the tower from satellite even they were that bad off.

These days, especially with DVB-S and DVB-S2, a 6' dish ain't gonna cut it. The 2 degree spacing pretty much requires a 9' dish, or larger.

A 6' dish beam would include the birds on either side and since those birds have carries on transponders 1 and 2 (one has transponder 1 and the other transponder 2), the interference to the DVB-S signal just might make it untunable.

Finding used 9, 10, or 12' consumer dishes is a breeze these days :D

satpro

10-26-09, 09:57 PM

I see the mux just fine in Central Fl on my 6' and I am using a 12 year old 20 degree LNB with a feedhorn that is even older. The station has some larger dishes because WTGL/WHLV are now in the former WKCF/emmis centralcasting building.

Trip in VA

10-27-09, 12:38 AM

FCC action for the evening.

As reported by sebenste in the Chicago thread, WLS has filed for an STA to fire up channel 44 at 346 kW DA rather than the 473.3 kW ND they're approved for. Looks like they'll be lighting up by the end of the week, if all goes well.

KRON is at 530 kW while it waits for the FCC to approve slight modifications to its permit. Apparently, the antenna is the one approved, but the specs provided by the antenna manufacturer did not turn out to match, so there's excess radiation in some directions. I suspect this will be approved quickly.

Has anyone in San Diego observed KSDX-LD 9 on the air? It filed a license app.

KVIA, currently simulcasting on 7 and 17, has requested an increase in power up to 55 kW on channel 7. Apparently, the Mexicans have approved up to 65 kW, so no Mexican coordination is required.

I've saved the best for last. KCBU, the former Equity station now owned by Daystar in Price, UT, has filed to sign back on the air. The station had been operating on channel 3 and has an allotment and application now for channel 11, but went dark on June 12. Daystar wants to sign it back on the air at 0.095 kW in the short term.

What makes it interesting? Daystar is planning to file a petition for rulemaking to move KCBU to UHF within 30 days. I wonder if a similar petition is being considered for other VHF stations Daystar has bought: WNGS and KUTF. And more confusingly, Daystar very recently signed on a low-powered digital on 7 in Cleveland,*even though the same arguments would apply there.

- Trip

Inundated

10-27-09, 04:07 AM

And more confusingly, Daystar very recently signed on a low-powered digital on 7 in Cleveland,*even though the same arguments would apply there.

Though WCDN-LD just came on, they filed for that CP back in April 2007 - some time before it became common knowledge that VHF DTs weren't as lovely as everyone thought they were.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_det.pl?Application_id=1182451

Stanislav

10-27-09, 08:07 AM

I think there is way more to the WHLV story than any of you outside of the orlando market realize!

Or even in the market -- I live here and am still perplexed.

Because again as posted elsewhere the 4 subs are satellite feeds and only require minimal equipment needed beyond what is already in place for main channel which comes off of the same satellite mux live, they could have even installed gear for station logo or EAS insertion and a 6' C band dish could catch these at the tower from satellite if they were that bad off.

If there is no legitimate technical or financial issue keeping them from multiplexing now, then I just don't understand what the motivation is behind them dragging their feet in this manner. WHLV is O&O by TBN. AFAIK, the other full-power TBN stations do not have these issues, and are sending out all five channels just fine. Why is it just the Orlando station that is having these issues?

TBN's whole purpose is to (a)evangelize the masses, and (b)inspire them to donate money to the ministry. The subchannels target specific groups including Hispanics (Enlace USA), teens and young adults (JCTV) and children (Smile of a Child), all of whom are not necessarily tuned in (in both the literal and metaphorical sense of the phrase) to the usual diet of preaching on the main feed. Even if there is some issue involving rogue local management having some objection to the programming or style of the subs, why would TBN not rein them in or replace them if they are costing the network in terms of both viewers and donations? Evangelical Christianity tends to be quite authoritative and hierarchical, and does not tolerate mavericks and dissenters well.

I also think your implying that the E/I factor is somehow involved is a specious theory. Evangelicals love to target children, because they are more malleable and subject to influence, and they know that the earlier you impart religious beliefs to them, the more likely they are to maintain those beliefs to some degree in later years. There is tons of Christian-based kidvid that both serves this purpose and meets the E/I requirements as well (much of which makes up what TBN broadcasts on SOAC). Having the multicast, with its dedicated kid channel, makes fulfillment of E/I a breeze, proselytizing the tykes, while minimally impacting the main programming targeting the hearts and minds (and wallets) of adults (where the money is).

In short, if WHLV can multicast, but is not, it makes no sense from a philosophical or financial standpoint.

Tschmidt

10-27-09, 10:16 AM

where were you? ChuLai 'Feb67-Mar68 (VMA-211 MAG-12) DaNang Dec68 - Dec99 (H&MS-11 MAG-11). Was there for Tet - pretty exciting, but we are getting rather off-topic.

Trip in VA

10-27-09, 10:19 AM

Though WCDN-LD just came on, they filed for that CP back in April 2007 - some time before it became common knowledge that VHF DTs weren't as lovely as everyone thought they were.

Even still, had they ordered the equipment that far back? I could have seen them filing for displacement (based on WJBK and WTRF) to UHF once they figured it out.

I should probably just ask the guy I know who does work for Daystar...

- Trip

rviele

10-27-09, 12:38 PM

ChuLai 'Feb67-Mar68 (VMA-211 MAG-12) DaNang Dec68 - Dec99 (H&MS-11 MAG-11). Was there for Tet - pretty exciting, but we are getting rather off-topic.
thanks for the answer, like to talk to you somtime

kycubsfan

10-27-09, 07:06 PM

WLJC in Beattyville, Ky. doesn't pass any of the TBN subchannels.

Stanislav

10-27-09, 07:16 PM

WLJC in Beattyville, Ky. doesn't pass any of the TBN subchannels.

WLJC is not owned and operated by TBN -- they are an affiliate only, owned by Hour of Harvest. Probably only contracted to carry the main TBN feed.

(Also, I believe, one of the VHF Nightmares, as they have a CP to increase power from 28 kw to 70 kw.)

Trip in VA

10-27-09, 07:42 PM

I don't count WLJC as a VHF nightmare as it was filed before the transition as a maximization. As far as I know, it's operating at that 70 kW level already.

- Trip

satpro

10-27-09, 09:02 PM

WLJC in Beattyville, Ky. doesn't pass any of the TBN subchannels.

Just curious since WHLV TBN Orlando passes the channel info but not the video/audio, I would like to know how many other stations of any network around the country have channels in the lineup that are empty, dark and/or nulls.

ohio41

10-27-09, 09:10 PM

WBPH Bethlehem, PA 60.2 is usually blank, occasionally color bars.

Dave Loudin

10-27-09, 10:01 PM

WHUT 32.2 has been blank and WFDC 14.2 is also currently blank.

Trip in VA

10-27-09, 10:31 PM

http://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=network_search&network=[blank]

That list includes stations which are airing a test pattern.

- Trip

satpro

10-27-09, 10:45 PM

I noticed that feature on your site Trip, most were low power stations not 1000 kw like WHLV, sorta expect that from LPs, in the case of stations like WOGX and WRBW they have actually removed those blank channels now when you autoscan since they have completed moving all cable operators off the separate SD feeds and torn them down.
Just trying to determine if there are other full service stations like WHLV out there that have channels in the line up for 4+ months that amount to null.

Trip in VA

10-27-09, 11:07 PM

Actually, according to the last TSReader capture I have, WOGX has not gotten rid of their subchannel entirely. Whereas WHLV has them active in the PMT and is mapping them in PSIP, WOGX is not mapping its subchannel--it's only in the PMT.

- Trip

Trip in VA

10-28-09, 12:33 AM

FCC action:

1) WTHR has now filed an STA to operate at the 30 kW they've already requested permanently. In the filing, WTHR notes that it plans to file to operate at 65 kW under experimental authority in the near future.

2) WHTV in the Lansing market, currently at 13.6 kW DA, had filed for 1000 kW ND. It has now amended that filing to instead specify 540 kW DA, presumably to protect CBEFT-35 in Windsor. (The null is in that direction.)

3) WUNL's new top-mounted antenna is slightly lower than anticipated. As such, they've filed to modify the permit (and today added an STA to operate immediately). The modified permit and STA specify a power increase from 400 kW to 575 kW, from a height of 1637' instead of 1653' (likely a negligible difference).

- Trip

Dave Loudin

10-28-09, 06:36 AM

WHUT 32.2 has been blank and WFDC 14.2 is also currently blank.

Rechecked: WHUT has dropped the subchannel.

Stanislav

10-28-09, 12:18 PM

WRBW here in Orlando started out with just color bars on 65.2, then went through a period of occasionally carrying center-cut SD versions of sister stations WOFL (Orlando) or WOGX (Ocala), then started carrying an SD duplicate of its own programming, which they did regularly for quite some time. In recent weeks, however, 65.2 is now blank, but still there.

Trip in VA

10-29-09, 12:24 AM

FCC Action:

WBUP-10 wants 9 kW on a taller tower. I don't consider this a VHF Nightmare as I heard about this tower being proposed a while ago.

WBFF-46 wants to increase power to 655 kW from 550 kW on the same antenna, it appears.

WFGX-50 wants a new antenna pattern.

WVUE, WDAM, and WLBT all filed for their new channels.

- Trip

sebenste

10-29-09, 01:17 AM

http://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=network_search&network=[blank]

That list includes stations which are airing a test pattern.

- Trip

FYI: 26-5 is gone permanently from WCIU-DT in Chicago.

Trip in VA

10-29-09, 01:27 AM

FYI: 26-5 is gone permanently from WCIU-DT in Chicago.

Now, see, I knew that, but hadn't updated it. Should be correct now. What about the "THAT" streams on WWME-LD?

- Trip

retromzc

10-29-09, 10:27 AM

Now, see, I knew that, but hadn't updated it. Should be correct now. What about the "THAT" streams on WWME-LD?

- Trip

At the present time, they too are gone. It has been reported that they will be coming back soon though.

holl_ands

10-29-09, 12:05 PM

Yes, KSDX-LD is now active on Ch9 in San Diego, CA:
http://hdtv.forsandiego.com/messages/1/7872.html#POST40511
Blocking Lakers & Dodgers reception on Ch9 (KCAL) from Mt Wilson in L.A.
The OTHER local Ch9 "user" is apparently K09YL (whopping 3 watts) in nearby National City.

Larry Kenney

10-29-09, 05:03 PM

KTVU Oakland, transmitting from Sutro Tower in San Francisco, has received the power upgrade they were looking for. On Monday afternoon at 4:03 pm they switched from 400 kW ERP to 1000 kW ERP.

Larry
SF

foxeng

10-29-09, 07:17 PM

Cross posted

From The Wall Street Journal - FCC Considers Shifting Some TV Airwaves to Broadband
FCC Considers Shifting Some TV Airwaves to Broadband

By AMY SCHATZ

WASHINGTON—Federal regulators are considering taking back some airwaves from television broadcasters and auctioning them off to wireless companies to increase the availability of wireless broadband services.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has warned that the U.S. doesn't have enough airwaves set aside for wireless broadband service in the future, and the agency is looking at a variety of ways to remedy that shortage.

"The record is very clear that we're facing a looming spectrum gap," said Blair Levin, a former telecom analyst who is in charge of crafting the FCC's national broadband plan, which is expected to lay out a variety of things the U.S. can do to increase broadband availability and usage. The plan will be released in February.

It's not clear if the proposal will actually make it into the FCC's final plan. At this stage, FCC officials are mostly trying to get input from broadcasters and others. Station owners are likely to fight the plan, although the FCC is envisioning paying broadcasters for any airwaves that are taken away.

The agency is "looking at everything, including broadcasting" airwaves, Mr. Levin said.

The National Association of Broadcasters "believes it is imperative that policy makers explore spectrum efficiency choices that don't limit consumer access to the full potential of digital broadcasting," said spokesman Dennis Wharton.

On Friday, the Consumer Electronics Association released a study it commissioned on the value of the large chunk of airwaves set aside for TV broadcasters. If the FCC took back all of those airwaves and auctioned them off, the government could make up to $62 billion, the study found.

Such an approach would cost about $12 billion in payments to broadcasters and about $9 billion to "migrate all households that rely on over-the-air broadcasts to subscription services," the study found.

The political will to take such an approach could be weak, however, because the federal government just spent $2.15 billion over the last two years to help consumers move to digital-only broadcast television. Consumers who rely on free TV now might also take a dim view of being asked to subscribe to cable or satellite television,. Many of them just had to go through the trouble of either buying new digital TVs or hooking up digital converter boxes to their old TVs to keep them working.

The FCC isn't looking at taking away all of the broadcasters' airwaves. Instead, FCC officials are focusing on the benefits of taking back a portion of the airwaves set aside for digital TV broadcasts and auctioning those off to wireless companies that want to offer more wireless Internet services. It's not clear yet how much of the airwaves they might suggest taking back.

Some broadcast-station owners are already expressing concern about the idea. They want to keep those airwaves for themselves. Many broadcasters would like wireless phones and other gadgets to come equipped with receivers that would allow consumers to watch digital TV.

"CEA's study ignores the immeasurable public benefit of a vibrant free and local broadcasting system that is ubiquitous, reliable as a lifeline service in times of emergency, and flexible enough to include HDTV, diverse multicast programming and mobile DTV," said Mr. Wharton, the broadcasters' spokesman.

dewster1977

10-29-09, 10:41 PM

To bad they didn't think about this 10 years ago. Maybe they could have developed a system where they could have condensed 4 or 5 channels in a city onto one frequency. That could have saved everyone a lot of money, reducing the need for transmitter towers and antennas.

Trip in VA

10-30-09, 12:22 AM

Another of the Multicultural stations has been sold. Paperwork has been filed showing that TCT, owner of WLXI in Greensboro, is buying WRAY in Wilson/Raleigh. The exact same thing happened with then-WOAC now-WRLM in Canton/Cleveland.

WHAS wants more time to test with higher power on 11. They claim that the additional power helps with indoor reception. (I'm not sure I believe that.)

KAYU is finally back on 28.

- Trip

Stanislav

10-30-09, 06:03 AM

Cross posted

WASHINGTON—Federal regulators are considering taking back some airwaves from television broadcasters and auctioning them off to wireless companies to increase the availability of wireless broadband services.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has warned that the U.S. doesn't have enough airwaves set aside for wireless broadband service in the future, and the agency is looking at a variety of ways to remedy that shortage.

"The record is very clear that we're facing a looming spectrum gap," said Blair Levin, a former telecom analyst who is in charge of crafting the FCC's national broadband plan, which is expected to lay out a variety of things the U.S. can do to increase broadband availability and usage. The plan will be released in February.

It's not clear if the proposal will actually make it into the FCC's final plan. At this stage, FCC officials are mostly trying to get input from broadcasters and others. Station owners are likely to fight the plan, although the FCC is envisioning paying broadcasters for any airwaves that are taken away.

You've gotta be kidding -- they just took over 100 mHz of spectrum from broadcasting with the digital transition, and now they want to take more? The band is crowded now -- how do they propose cramming the same (or more) stations into even less space without massive interference?

And all for the sake of the companies serving masses of glassy-eyed modern consumers who have a stupid and pathological need to be "connected" with the world on their little gizmos 24/7, anywhere, anytime, no matter what else they are doing. God forbid they should be unable to text, IM, or surf the web for even a second while driving, shopping, dining, working, or sitting on the crapper. Why, if that happens, they may be forced to actually interact with the real world, and the psychological consequences could be devastating!

More fuel for the theory that the FCC's ultimate goal is to eliminate free OTA television altogether.

foxeng

10-30-09, 07:14 AM

Remember, the new FCC Chairman comes straight from the wireless industry and he is looking after his buddies like the rest of Washinington.

jtbell

10-30-09, 07:26 AM

how do they propose cramming the same (or more) stations into even less space without massive interference?

The way the economic climate for broadcasting and advertiser-supported mass media in general has been deteriorating during the last few years, I wouldn't be surprised to see some stations starting to go dark soon anyway. Some newspapers and magazines have folded already.

TiVoFishMan

10-30-09, 08:55 AM

You've gotta be kidding -- they just took over 100 mHz of spectrum from broadcasting with the digital transition, and now they want to take more? The band is crowded now -- how do they propose cramming the same (or more) stations into even less space without massive interference?

And all for the sake of the companies serving masses of glassy-eyed modern consumers who have a stupid and pathological need to be "connected" with the world on their little gizmos 24/7, anywhere, anytime, no matter what else they are doing. God forbid they should be unable to text, IM, or surf the web for even a second while driving, shopping, dining, working, or sitting on the crapper. Why, if that happens, they may be forced to actually interact with the real world, and the psychological consequences could be devastating!

More fuel for the theory that the FCC's ultimate goal is to eliminate free OTA television altogether.

Post of the week, IMHO. :)

Tower Guy

10-30-09, 09:40 AM

You've gotta be kidding -- how do they propose cramming the same (or more) stations into even less space without massive interference?

More fuel for the theory that the FCC's ultimate goal is to eliminate free OTA television altogether.

Actually, each old analog assignment is now a candidate for further spectrum packing.

The real irony here is that the CEA is supporting the concept. That's the same CEA who's members designed converter boxes that the typical user can't program properly.

gjvrieze

10-30-09, 09:56 AM

Post of the week, IMHO. :)

Ya, I agree +1!

Tschmidt

10-30-09, 10:41 AM

Federal regulators are considering taking back some airwaves from television broadcasters and auctioning them off to wireless companies to increase the availability of wireless broadband services.
I don't understand the point – doesn’t the whitespace initiative address this?

Seems to me whitespace is a good tradeoff between broadcast TV and broadband. In urban areas there are lots of OTA stations and multiple forms of wired broadband. So there is little need for additional wireless broadband. In rural areas there are few stations and limited wired broadband making wireless ISPs attractive.

Wireless carriers are rolling out 3G data service. I am not aware they face a huge bandwidth crunch. They just got much of the spectrum freed up from TV. Mobile wireless services are power constrained resulting in small coverage area with high degree of frequency reuse. That makes them very spectrum efficient.

I for one have no desire to trade my once every 20-year capital investment in an outdoor antenna for monthly fee.

/Tom

BCF68

10-30-09, 01:58 PM

ziggy29

10-30-09, 03:07 PM

WTF are they doing with it?
Developing paid subscription services to replace the free over the air services they removed? There's little more the telecoms would like to see more than the death of free OTA alternatives to their cable, satellite and wireless packages.

Falcon_77

10-30-09, 03:35 PM

Yes, KSDX-LD is now active on Ch9 in San Diego, CA

I still don't understand why they wanted VHF from the main UHF site, Mt. San Miguel. The main upper VHF stations are on Mt. Soledad, which is at a very different angle for much of the San Diego area.

spokybob

10-30-09, 04:26 PM

That's the same CEA who's members designed converter boxes that the typical user can't program properly.
I find the boxes are easier to program than most HD sets. Reception is #1 issue with VHF-LO and UHF xmitters located more than 15 miles apart and the CW at a third and even more distant location, and all in the same DMA.

Falcon_77

10-30-09, 05:55 PM

Another article on the spectrum subject:

CEA Funded Study Says Free OTA TV Not Worth Keeping

http://tvtechnology.com/article/89516

Another option that I've heard is to eliminate HDTV broadcasts (at least over-the-air) and consolidate multiple broadcasters' SD transmissions into a smaller number of remaining channels. Multiple broadcasters would share one TV channel. This seems to be what Bazelon is proposing when he says, "Alternatively, broadcasters could continue to provide over-the-air broadcasts on a smaller portion of their allocated frequencies, freeing up a significant portion of the band for wireless broadband. This latter option would cost less—an estimated $6 billion in compensation to broadcasters—but only free up about $48 billion worth of spectrum."

So, the future of OTA may be to have a few stations like KJLA in the LA area, with around 1.3-2.6 Mbps per channel, on 9 subs.

Let me guess, these will all be on VHF, since it isn't as valuable?

It sure seems like a lot of money has been spent only to downgrade the whole system now, just to turn free airwaves into pay airwaves.

vwoom

10-31-09, 01:24 PM

Btw, dunno if you guys are aware...but for the record in the Los Angeles market, another sub-channel slot of KTLA I assume (besides 5.2 THIS) is available called "The Tube" on 5.5...my CM picked it up yesterday, no programming as of this writing though. :(

StudioTech

10-31-09, 08:51 PM

The Tube went off the air 2 years ago. Dunno why KTLA still has it listed.

Jeff747

11-01-09, 09:49 AM

"FCC Considers Shifting Some TV Airwaves to Broadband"

I've had a feeling of mostly reverence and respect for our government, but this is too much!

Trip in VA

11-02-09, 12:46 AM

Tonight's FCC action, both are VHF Nightmares:

WREX has requested a power boost from 18 kW to 24.4 kW.

WCYB has filed to locate their fill-in translator on channel 29 at 9.6 kW instead of 28 at 5.1 kW.

- Trip

Trip in VA

11-02-09, 11:23 AM

I just won an auction for a Sencore SLM1456CM. Finally, a tool for looking at digital signals. :)

- Trip

Trip in VA

11-02-09, 12:02 PM

KDMD in Anchorage has petitioned to change its channel from 32 to 33, so as to recycle analog equipment. Not sure why it took this long to figure that out, but there you go.

- Trip

foxeng

11-02-09, 12:21 PM

DTV Notes
KUAC Makes Unusual Digital Switch
Alaska station goes from UHF to VHF
By Glen Dickson -- Broadcasting & Cable, 11/2/2009 2:00:00 AM

After full-power broadcasters ceased analog operations on June 12 and settled into their final digital TV (DTV) assignments, one of the early findings was that stations with VHF channel assignments were experiencing far more reception problems than their UHF counterparts.

Reception issues were particularly prevalent in Eastern cities like Philadelphia and New York, where the number of stations in close proximity meant that VHF stations had to curtail their power to avoid interference and were often left with signals unable to penetrate into apartment buildings for reception on small indoor antennas.

The FCC has since granted power increases to a number of VHF stations, and let others switch their digital assignments to available slots in the UHF band. Raycom Media, for example, has switched WLOX, its Biloxi, Miss. station, from VHF to UHF operation, and plans to do the same at its Jackson, Miss., station, WLBT, next month. And WCPO Cincinnati wants to move from its current VHF Ch. 10 assignment to UHF Ch. 22, even though the Scripps Television station has already received a power increase.

“We're still finding areas where the digital signal is not acceptable and is not being received at all,” says Mike Doback, VP of engineering for Scripps.

But at least one station, KUAC Fairbanks, Alaska, decided to move in the other direction to solve its reception problems. The public broadcaster actually switched in late September from a DTV assignment on UHF Ch. 24 to VHF Ch. 9, its previous analog home, undergoing a “rechannelization” process that required it to go off-air for six days.

Using funds from a Corporation for Public Broadcasting grant, KUAC spent $1.1 million on a new Harris VHF transmitter and ERI transmission line and antenna, which were installed in a tightly coordinated process designed to take advantage of Alaska's brief window for weather conducive to tower work.

The Fairbanks market never had a UHF station until stations began broadcasting DTV. So when KUAC began broadcasting DTV on Ch. 24 in 2004, it didn't expect many viewers to have the proper UHF antenna required to receive the signal. The station also had a relatively low-power allocation for UHF of 79 kilowatts ERP (effective radiated power), and actually went on-air at a licensed power of 69 kW. Initial tests showed reception problems at a range of only 11 miles from the transmitter.

But with roughly 28% of the market relying on over-the-air service instead of pay-TV, plenty of homes were already equipped with roof-mounted VHF antennas, particularly those residing in the “bush” communities on the fringes of the market. Fairbanks also doesn't have a lot of big apartment buildings with viewers relying on indoor antennas. More important, the power costs of running a higher-powered UHF transmitter weren't feasible for a public broadcaster like KUAC.

So the station filed a request with the FCC several years ago to switch its DTV assignment to its old analog position at Ch. 9. While that request was granted, it was only at an effective radiated power of 3.2 kW, which KUAC feared would still result in coverage issues. So it subsequently asked the FCC to maximize its power to 30 kW.

That request was granted in late March, but due to budget issues, scheduling with vendors and tower crews, and Alaska's harsh spring weather, KUAC wasn't able to launch DTV on Ch. 9 on June 12. The complaints from viewers forced to rely on Ch. 24 for service flooded in, as homes in the outer ranges of the Fairbanks market were unable to receive the DTV signal.

“We had hundreds of calls,” says KUAC Director of Engineering Keith Martin. “We knew it was going to happen, but there was nothing we could do about it. We had everything in the works to fix it, but the timing was pushed out to September.”

So KUAC worked with Harris, its prime contractor on the project, to get the work done before the long Alaskan winter set in and with minimum interruption to on-air operations. Besides installing a new transmitter, antenna and transmission line, the tower's foundation had to be reinforced, and new guy wires and guy piers installed. The bulk of the work was done in a week, between Sept. 13 and 20, and the station was off-air from Sept. 14 to 20. Luckily, the weather cooperated.

“The week we had was in the 50s, so it was perfect,” says Nathan Smith, program manager of transmission for Harris.

KUAC did heavy community outreach to alert viewers, including ads in local newspapers and e-mail blasts, and a follow-up round reminding them to rescan their converter boxes or digital TVs to find the station on Ch. 9. Although KUAC had planned to be off-air until Sept. 23, it resumed operations part-time three days earlier, and soon started receiving phone calls from happy viewers.

As Martin puts it: “The impact wasimmediate.”

KUAC’s UHF-to-VHF success story is certainly unusual, says John Howell, manager of installations for Harris. The company is currently working with about 150 stations to improve their DTV coverage, says Howell, but most of them are looking to maximize their power, including several VHF stations in the Plains states. Those stations looking to switch assignments are “predominantly going from VHF to UHF,” says Howell.

According to the FCC, of the 79 full power television stations requesting a channel substitution, 22 stations asked to change their channel allotments from a VHF to a UHF channel. Less than 10 went from UHF to VHF.

The problems suffered by high-V stations like WCPO Cincinnati are somewhat ironic, says Scripps’ Doback, as several years ago stations with a high-V assignment thought they would “be in heaven” because of the expected combination of good signal propagation and low power costs.

“It’s only now that we’ve found out the planning factors were probably wrong in terms of how much power you need to replicate analog service,” says Doback.

Raycom’s VHF reception problems in Biloxi and Jackson were primarily due to adjacent-market, co-channel interference issues that prevented the stations from broadcasting at a high enough power to replicate analog coverage, says Chief Technology Officer Dave Folsom.

“It’s not an indictment of VHF,” says Folsom. “There’s nothing inherently wrong with VHF. It’s just easier to have interference, because it goes out further.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/366969-KUAC_Makes_Unusual_Digital_Switch.php

Piggie

11-03-09, 08:58 AM

Another article on the spectrum subject:

CEA Funded Study Says Free OTA TV Not Worth Keeping

http://tvtechnology.com/article/89516

So, the future of OTA may be to have a few stations like KJLA in the LA area, with around 1.3-2.6 Mbps per channel, on 9 subs.

Let me guess, these will all be on VHF, since it isn't as valuable?

It sure seems like a lot of money has been spent only to downgrade the whole system now, just to turn free airwaves into pay airwaves.

So does that mean they have to do coupons again for mp4 stations crammed in VHF?

This is very political, and probably no one wants to post that way or get post banned.

They give one bank $100 billion and get all excited to end OTA for less than half of that?

There are now a handful of people in power that don't care what happens to the Earth or the USA.

Both political parties are as in as deep as the other, so don't go partisan about this.

Neither party can free itself from the oil, medical and now wireless industry.

===========

Now to more technical aspects. If all the UHF channels became twitter and text boxes. Sooner or later still there will not be enough spectrum. This is nothing but a short term profit for grabbing the public airwaves and turning them private for dollars. We could call it Dialing for Dollars.

It was known 20 years ago that the future of digital communications, could not be contained within the wireless electromagnetic spectrum. There was just way too much data. This is a monetary power grab and nothing more.

Two outcomes are likely. One is there will be a glut of wireless frequencies with OTA gone forever. Two, they will run out of wireless room anyway. The only answer then is either better compression techniques or very limited range cell sites so the same frequencies could be reused (new idea? lol).

In the past the FCC allocated different services slices of the LIMITED electromagnetic spectrum. The wireless already has the lion's share now of UHF.