WRIC-8 is still licensed to Petersburg.

Interesting. Upon checking into it, you're right, even though I remember reading several times that they got it changed to Richmond around 1990...

- Trip

Some markets have the opposite problem. Bakersfield was made an all UHF market in the early 60's. There were no VHF channels until a low power Telemundo station went on channel 11 sometime in the 90's. Then came LP Telefutura on channel 4 and LP 3ABN on channel 8. 2 Spanish LPs and one religious LP, might as well be 0 VHF for over half of OTA viewers. Consequently, most OTA viewers here have UHF only antennas. Then in 2002 ABC affiliate KERO 23's digital signal went on the air on channel 10. It is staying on 10 post transition. The other full power stations, both analog and digital, are UHF. The Bakersfield local thread has lots of posts where someone says they have difficulty receiving KERO-DT. Many people are unaware that the signal is actually on VHF, since this is hidden by it being virtual channel 23-1. Fresno is in a similar situation. An all UHF market since the 60's. Then a few minor LPs on VHF. Then 3 full power VHF digital channels, one of them on VHF-LO (a Spanish station on channel 5), KAIL MYTV on channel 7, and KFSN ABC O&O on channel 9. Next year KFSN is moving to channel 30 (their current analog channel). KAIL is staying on 7 (current analog is out of core channel 53) and the Spanish station is moving to channel 11 (current analog is some out of core channel). The Fresno DMA is very spread out, including important cities such as Visalia, Tulare, Porterville, Hanford, Madera, and Merced, some up to 50+ miles from Fresno. All those OTA users optimized for UHF and unprepared for VHF.

Interesting stuff.

As I've probably said before, the market I grew up in (Des Moines-Ames) had the big 3 and PBS on VHF. When an independent (now Fox) station came into being on channel 17 in the early 80s, they went as far as to sell cheap loop antennas in convenience stores, complete with "The Great Entertainer 17" logo. And since most TVs had knobs back then (when "Don't touch that dial!" actually meant something), the loop antennas came with instructions specifying that you had to turn the big knob to "U" and the other knob -- which most Central Iowans had never had to use until then -- to 17.

Those were the days ...

DMA Analog Ch Pre-Trans DT Post-Trans DT
#14 Seattle 4,5,7,9(P),13 38,48.39,41,12 38,48,39,9,12


There's a typo here -- KCPQ, channel 13 is currently on pre-transition DT channel 18, and will be returning to channel 13 after the transition.

I cannot seem to open Falcon's spreadsheet. I went to FCC, searched, got nothing, cannot find it. Anyone be willing to link me to a sheet which has an XLS extension? I can see there are changes, cannot seem to get the full story. I feel like I'm in a maze here.

I cannot seem to open Falcon's spreadsheet. I went to FCC, searched, got nothing, cannot find it. Anyone be willing to link me to a sheet which has an XLS extension? I can see there are changes, cannot seem to get the full story. I feel like I'm in a maze here.

Do you have a .zip utility? Follow the link in my signature to the .zip download. The file would be too large to upload to the board otherwise.

An older version of the spreadsheet can be found on Larry Kenney's website as well:

http://www.larrykenney.com/dtvlist.html

If you are still having problems, send me your e-mail in a PM and I can send you the spreadsheet itself.

I just updated the spreadsheet file "DTV-Channels.xls" to the June 9th version at http://www.larrykenney.com/dtvlist.html

Larry
SF

OK thanks to you both. I changed the extension of the file I downloaded from Falcon to .zip and extracted it. No idea why the extension would change in a download, have not seen this before, seems to me. The info is definitely useful and crucial to anyone needing to get set up for their area.

I was looking around to see if there was an assortment of channel specific antennas but have not really found any yet. In my case, something for 7-9 and I might consider using one of the FM antennas for that to augment a CM4228 which works well on all the others in the 7-51 range.

Will check Larry's sheet too.

TONS of filings yesterday, including WBRA-DT, filing for 2015' 9.8 kW ND. Dropping the DA pattern and boosting power more than quadruples the power I receive in my direction.

I'll upload the DTR in the morning, assuming my site is operational. It's all done and updated, but my host is down and has been for much of the day.

- Trip

My site finally came up an hour ago. Wow. So I posted the new DTR and am now running the site updates. The site will hopefully be fully up to date by 9 EDT, assuming it doesn't go down again. ><

- Trip

TONS of filings yesterday, including WBRA-DT, filing for 2015' 9.8 kW ND. Dropping the DA pattern and boosting power more than quadruples the power I receive in my direction.
Yes, just using DT stations as the filter, there were 131 applications posted on June 20 and 58 posted on June 19. There are presumably a few filings not related to maximizing the power in there, but still a lot of stations looking to increase their power. Presumably more will be posted on Sunday night after midnight ET.

What I was surprised by, for my immediate area, is that the 2 stations that have filed any noticeable change so far are public stations. WHUT-DT PBS 32, run by Howard University in Washington DC, which did not start up a digital broadcast until last fall, wants to increase from 100 kW on UHF 33 to 1000 kW. Their analog signal is 5000 kW, but 1000 kW digital will expand the nominal coverage area. In their filing, they state that WPXW-DT Ion 66 which will be occupying a co-located adjacent UHF 34 channel next February will also be filing for 1000 kW (WPXW-DT's filing has not been posted yet). WHUT must have more money for operating expenses than I would have thought. WHUT-DT has only a single SD sub-channel so far. The other public station that filed is WNVC-DT 56 in Fairfax, VA which filed to operate at a more modest 160 kW up from 45 kW.

On the DTV transition news front, the Senate passed a bill to increase funding for the DTV transition front. See Broadcasting & Cable article at http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6571824.html. But this is a Senate bill, has the House voted for this? Anyway, by the time the NTIA or the FCC set things up to spend the money, it will be next March.

The part that makes me shake my head:
"The Senate Commerce Committee in April agreed last week to allow the government to give out $65 million to help low-power TV stations and translators make the switch to digital on Feb. 17, 2009, as full-power stations will do.

The way the bill had been originally written, low-power stations would not get the money until October 2010. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) requested the change to alleviate concerns raised by the fact that its DTV-to-analog converter boxes are not permitted to have analog tuners in them and are not required to pass through analog signals. That would make the low-power stations virtually un-viewable."

Ok, I think that if the government was going to spend funds to help out LP stations with the transition that it was pretty stupid to pick October 2010 as the date; the funds should have been set up to be made available starting in 2008. Although $65 million is not going to go very far with thousands of LPs and TXs out there, but that is another issue. But is the concept of a co-axial cable splitter that hard to grasp?

WHUT must have more money for operating expenses than I would have thought. WHUT-DT has only a single SD sub-channel so far.

Well, they're not just boosting power on the 33 transmitter, they're also silencing a 5000 kW analog transmitter. More coverage = more income, too, so that is likely a factor as well.

- Trip

It looks like there are a lot of last minute maximization filings. At the time of this writing there were 277 filed with a 6/23/08 status date.

This is going to take some time to go through, but I'm seeing some wishful thinking on some stations.

It looks like there are a lot of last minute maximization filings. At the time of this writing there were 277 filed with a 6/23/08 status date.
You are not kiding, there must been a huge number of maximization filings on Thursday and Friday. My last search now shows 366 filings posted on 6/23/08. Based on the stations I've looked at, a lot of stations going for 1000 kW on UHF. If I am counting correctly, there are 4 stations in Washington DC all looking to go to 1000 kW and none of them are big four stations - WDCA-DT My 20, WHUT-DT PBS 32, WPXW-DT Ion 66, and WDCW-DT CW 50. WTTG-DT Fox 5 is already at 1000 kW on UHF 36.

A good question is how many of these maximization filings will be granted by the FCC? Just how close to the 0.5% population interference will the FCC be inclined to really accept?

WBNS-DT wants 1700 kW ND. Good luck with that.

- Trip

It's reminded me of few leftovers grandfathered super powered FM stations running high as 500 KW ERP!:eek:

If WBNS-DT did succeeded, by asking the FCC to approves this idea of by going to 1.7 MW ERP, this will be unheard in this history of super power digital TV station.

I would not be suprised if few other digital TV stations try this methods.:D

6-23-08

It's a typo. The max ERP on UHF is 1,000 kW. Period.

It's a typo. The max ERP on UHF is 1,000 kW. Period.
WBNS-DT CBS 10 is already at 1000 kW on UHF 21. If it is a typo, it is repeated multiple times in the filing and the attachments. http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101248285&formid=301&fac_num=71217.

From the attached coverage map, I get the impression the motive to ask for 1700 kW so WBNS-DT can get closer to matching WSYX-DT which is authorized for 59 kW on VHF 13. http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=650778. So the consensus is that this does not have any chance of being granted? Someone decided to file it to see if they could get lucky? Or make a point?

It's definitely not a typo, based on how many times they use it in the filing. WBNS actually does want 1700 kW.

I expect the FCC to completely reject it, but it'll be interesting to see.

- Trip

Let's suppose that NAB, ask the FCC for changes of ERP levels for 3 TV bands for improving the covereges ranges.

VHF-Low, go from 60 KW ERP, to 100 KW ERP, VHF-Hi, go from 160 KW ERP to 250 KW ERP, and finaly UHF, go from 1 MW, ERP, to 2.5 MW, ERP.:)

Any thought on this issue?:D

It should be a fun to debate on what power levels it should be at!

6-23-08

I think UHF power is fine where it is. It's VHF where power is going to become a problem.

In Zone II, upper VHF is okay at its power levels. It's Zone I where you run into problems. Note how WABC and WPIX in NYC will have less than 6 kW from Freedom Tower. I personally think they'd do better with 20 kW or so.

Low VHF, first of all, is capped at 45 kW, not 60 kW (I used to think it was 60 kW as well, but can't find anything in FCC regs to support this). But the power here definitely drops off too fast. I think WBRA-DT on 3 might be workable if it had 30 kW instead of 9.8 kW (their maximized level) to work with.

Those are my thoughts, anyway. =)

- Trip

I know a lot of stations in Iowa are pushing for more power, but nothing that radical ... yet. The most I've seen so far for any of our future VHF-high stations is 57 kW from KIIN (PBS/IPTV) in Iowa City, whose current CP is for 17.8 kW on channel 12.

We do, though, have a 1 MW station (KWKB, CW/My) which wants to transmit that same 1 MW from higher up on the tower.

It's definitely not a typo, based on how many times they use it in the filing. WBNS actually does want 1700 kW.

I expect the FCC to completely reject it, but it'll be interesting to see.

- Trip

Remember this: WPWR-DT in Chicago, at 1,800' on Sears Tower, was a pure accident. It was granted accidentally by the FCC, but it stands. Technically, you should only have around 600 kw from Sears, on the sliding power scale the FCC has. Which is why you can get that station in South Bend, IN with a good antenna, 80+ miles away, even in the daytime...

To be honest, though, while it is theoretically possible to get a waiver to go 1.7 mw...I submit you will go just as far with 1 mw on a lower UHF channel.
And VHF-HI for digital is overrated. There's poor penetration of buildings with it. The funny thing is, UHf stations used to be regarded as "half stations" by the FCC. These days, a UHF slot is pure gold. I'd rather run 50 kw on channel 20 say, than 15 kw on channel 13. But that's just me. And channels 2-6 should simply be junked for broadcast TV, period.

I know a lot of stations in Iowa are pushing for more power, but nothing that radical ... yet. The most I've seen so far for any of our future VHF-high stations is 57 kW from KIIN (PBS/IPTV) in Iowa City, whose current CP is for 17.8 kW on channel 12.

Some radical increases have been requested in the LA DMA for upper VHF, notably:

KTTV/11 (FOX): 115kW (from 15)
KCOP/13 (MyN): 120kW (from 14.1)

These seem to be way over spec for the height (over 5000' above sea level).

UHF stations KLCS and KSCI are also asking for large increases (1000 vs. 156 and 700 vs. 111, respectively).

There have been rare exceptions -- KXII-TV, channel 12, Sherman, TX used to be licensed to Ardmore, OK. The FCC did allow KXII-TV to change its COL in the nineties despite the fact that the change left Ardmore with no licensed full power TV station. Note that Sherman did not have a licensed TV station prior to the change, and Sherman has roughly double the population of Ardmore.

Apparently, it was a lengthy process to get the FCC to approve this change -- and something that was allowed only under very unusual circumstances. Perhaps it is the exception that proves the rule.


The FCC will let stations change their COL provided they can prove their new coverage and COL will increase the number of possile viewers (or listeners in radio)....and provided they still cover the old COL or other stations still provide service though not licensed there. Several AMs and FMs have been granted COL change this way...btw COL is Community of License...not CITY..you dont need an incorporated area to have a license assigned...(but it helps)

This will be good news for TV Dxers on VHF low band!!:D Since here in Albuquerque will be no local station VHF low band, assuming there are no new stations filing for CP to FCC.:eek:

Now back to TV DXing fun!!

6-6-08

Forget Lowband DTV...any noise pulse, etc causes the decoder to loose sync and the picture is gone...lightning within 30 miles will cause the signal to disappear...MOST if not all TV engineers agree 2-6 should have been given up and 52-60 kept for TV...but the money hungry FCC had other plans...aand tossed 52-60 to auction...and NOW want the lowband stations to move..WHERE??? There is no room in some areas....6 would have been great for expansion of the FM band...but with enough LPTVs and the LDs still on 6, thats a lost cause for now...

Hello Dr. Touchtone,

You might take a look at this digital TV DX reports on VHF E-skip!!:):D

http://www.wtfda.info/showthread.php?t=2103

6-23-08

Hello Dr. Touchtone,

You might take a look at this digital TV DX reports on VHF E-skip!!:):D

http://www.wtfda.info/showthread.php?t=2103

6-23-08

& Trip can talk about the one that got away...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=14039582&postcount=3461

Don't remind me! I need to go sob.

Seriously though, I'm keeping my eyes open for it. Had a carrier the other day but never got any signal out of it.

- Trip

Here's the tech information on KOTA-DT on channel 2....:)

KOTA-TV SD RAPID CITY USA (Digital)

Licensee: DUHAMEL BROADCASTING ENTERPRISES
Service Designation: DT Digital television station

Channel: 2 54 - 60 MHz Licensed
File No.: BLCDT-20030102ABF Facility ID number: 17688
CDBS Application ID No.: 621503

44° 04' 7.00 " N Latitude 103° 15' 3.00 " W Longitude (NAD 27)

Polarization: Horizontal (H) Effective Radiated Power (ERP): 7.1 kW ERP Antenna Height Above Average Terrain: 185. meters HAAT -- Calculate HAAT Antenna Height Above Mean Sea Level: 1295. meters AMSL Antenna Height Above Ground Level: 138. meters AGL TV Zone: 2 Frequency Offset: 0 (zero) Directional Antenna ID No.: 39981 Pattern Rotation: 0.00
Antenna Make: DIE Antenna Model: THP-S2-1-1-R

Not bad for a critter running at 7.1 KW ERP for a E-skip!!:D

6-24-08

Forget Lowband DTV...any noise pulse, etc causes the decoder to loose sync and the picture is gone...lightning within 30 miles will cause the signal to disappear...MOST if not all TV engineers agree 2-6 should have been given up and 52-60 kept for TV...but the money hungry FCC had other plans...aand tossed 52-60 to auction...and NOW want the lowband stations to move..WHERE??? There is no room in some areas....6 would have been great for expansion of the FM band...but with enough LPTVs and the LDs still on 6, thats a lost cause for now...

The Low-VHF Band, especially 2-4, would be better suited for enthusiast/amateur use I would think. E-skip might be fun for some of us, but the band is not reliable enough for everyday use. I'm sure it will improve when the analog stations vacate, w/o as many E-skip signals ruining local signals, but I doubt it will be enough to make 2-4 viable.

5 and 6 belong on FM radio and 52-59 should have remained for DTV use. However, at this point, our best hope may be to get Land Mobile allocations removed from 14-20. They are in areas that are in most desperate need of additional channels.

It's definitely not a typo, based on how many times they use it in the filing. WBNS actually does want 1700 kW.

I expect the FCC to completely reject it, but it'll be interesting to see.

- Trip

I looked at that application, my best guess concerning that application is someone(an unauthorized someone) ,may be playing games ... I have read this sort of thing has happened before ....

For example, The consulting engineer listed on the 1700KW WBNS app is

"MARTIN R. DOCZKAT" .....

The long national nightmare that was the Canadian Coordination issue dogging WPSU-DT Clearfield, PA appears to have been settled.
Looks like Penn State's TV station will jump to .8 MW (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=100661502&formid=340&fac_num=66219) on RF channel 15.

(BTW, for those scoring at home, the engineering firm preparing the application is using the station's former call letters, WPSX. The FCC database has this filed under the proper call.)

I looked at that application, my best guess concerning that application is someone(an unauthorized someone) ,may be playing games ... I have read this sort of thing has happened before ....

For example, The consulting engineer listed on the 1700KW WBNS app is

"MARTIN R. DOCZKAT" .....

I hope I'm wrong in thinking that possibly you're disparaging someone's name.

Mr. Doczkat is a real person and a professional.

He is a member of the Association of Federal Communications Consulting
Engineer!

If you would like to contact him or maybe apologize:


Martin R. Doczkat

Cohen, Dippell and Everist, P.C.

1300 L Street, NW, Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20005

202-898-0111

202-898-0895

I hope I'm wrong in thinking that possibly you're disparaging someone's name.


No, that was not my intent. Apologize if it was "taken" by anyone that way.

Mr. Doczkat should know in CFR 47, sec. 76.622 (http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2008/73/622/ ), regarding Maximum Allowable ERP for UHF DTV stations, it says :

(4) UHF DTV stations may request an increase in power, up to a maximum of
1000 kW ERP, to enhance service within their authorized service area.

(8) Maximum allowable ERP and Antenna Height for DTV Stations on Channels 14–59 :

All Zones
Antenna HAAT (meters) ERP (kW)
610 316
580 350
550 400
520 460
490 540
460 630
425 750
395 900
365 1000

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

Nowhere in FCC rules does it say a UHF DTV station will be allowed to operate with more than 1000KW ERP ...

In this (note link requires a PDF reader to open) exhibit attached to WBNS-DT's 1700 KW ERP application (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=650777) , it asserts the application is compliant with 76.622(f)(5) because "The proposed effective radiated power of 1700 kW is in compliance with Section 73.622(f)(5) of the FCC Rules as the predicted 41 dBu service area is totally contained within WSYX-DT noise level contour." that may well be true, but #1). this is an application for WBNS-DT, not WSYX-DT(another Columbus station, which is on VHF 13 BTW), and this assertion also does not demonstrate how the 1700KW ERP is compliant with FCC rules regarding the Maximum power levels allowed for DTV on UHF, as is detailed in other portions of 73.622.

Thus, I was assuming enginnering firms and consulting engineers were familiar with these rules regarding maximum power caps, and after reading through the exhibits attached to WBNS's 1700KW ERP application and Seeing no real (IMO) explanation for why they should be allowed to operate at power higher than the allowed maximum, AND other apparent inconsistancies with the application(reffering to WSYX instead of WBNS for example) AND after seeing their comments regarding "errors" in FCC's OET 69 Modelling in another attached exhibit, AND having heard reports that in the past, on occasion unauthorized folks have submitted "inaccurate" and unauthorized applications to FCC, thus I suspected it may be possible something may not be quite "right" with this application .....

Also, While "dozckat very well may be a "Real name" and I was not making "fun of it", one could for example even put my last name on a application somewhere and spell it a little differently and it wouldn't be all that disimilar to something along the lines of "doc's Cat"/etc -- again, it wasn't that I was making "fun" of it.

In any case, It seems I may very well be wrong about that, however, but hopefully this post will illustrate why I thought it may be a possibility ...

In this (note link requires a PDF reader to open) exhibit attached to WBNS-DT's 1700 KW ERP application (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=650777) , it asserts the application is compliant with 76.622(f)(5) because "The proposed effective radiated power of 1700 kW is in compliance with Section 73.622(f)(5) of the FCC Rules as the predicted 41 dBu service area is totally contained within WSYX-DT noise level contour." that may well be true, but #1). this is an application for WBNS-DT, not WSYX-DT(another Columbus station, which is on VHF 13 BTW), and this assertion also does not demonstrate how the 1700KW ERP is compliant with FCC rules regarding the Maximum power levels allowed for DTV on UHF, as is detailed in other portions of 73.622.I think what they're trying to argue is that, even with the power boost, the WBNS coverage area is still not going to equal that of WSYX.

Iowa City station KWKB makes a similar argument in its application (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/prefill_and_display.pl?Application_id=1251484&Service=DT&Form_id=301&Facility_id=35096) to raise its transmitter higher above average terrain (this is quoted straight from the FCC form, hence the all-caps):

"THE PROPOSAL EXCEEDS THE ERP/HAAT LIMIT PER FCC RULE SECTION 73.622(F)(8). THE PREDICTED KWKB-DT 39.9 DBU (DIPOLE ADJUSTED) CONTOUR WILL ENCOMPASS AN AREA OF 34,940 SQUARE KILOMETERS. STATION KWWL-DT'S APPENDIX B 28 DBU CONTOUR ENCOMPASSES 44,950 SQUARE KILOMETERS. THUS, THE PROPOSED NOISE-LIMITED CONTOUR WILL COVER LESS GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAN THE LARGEST STATION IN THE MARKET (KWWL) AND IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH FCC RULE SECTION 73.622(F)(5)."

It sounds like a similar argument to the one WBNS is making.

When I was looking up my local stations to see which ones had put in maximizing applications, I stumbled upon a nearby low power station that has put in an application for a low power digital station on channel 5. I thought this was really strange since they already had a CP for a LP digital on channel 11. I wondered how many other such applications there might be. Well, there's lots of them!

In California alone there are 16 applications for low power digital stations on channels 2 - 6 and six construction permits. A quick sampling of other states shows they are everywhere.

So much for reallocating low VHF for anything else!

Chuck

When I was looking up my local stations to see which ones had put in maximizing applications, I stumbled upon a nearby low power station that has put in an application for a low power digital station on channel 5. I thought this was really strange since they already had a CP for a LP digital on channel 11. I wondered how many other such applications there might be. Well, there's lots of them!

In California alone there are 16 applications for low power digital stations on channels 2 - 6 and six construction permits. A quick sampling of other states shows they are everywhere.

So much for reallocating low VHF for anything else!

Chuck

Didn't stop 'em from reallocating 52 through 69 ....

Besides, if the low VHFs are useless for full-power digital, they'll be equally useless for the LPs.

Nowhere in FCC rules does it say a UHF DTV station will be allowed to operate with more than 1000KW ERP ...



That was my reaction when I heard of this application. But then I re-read 73.622(f)(5) and concluded WBNS knows exactly what they're doing here, and this stands a fair chance of being granted.

From the regulation:
"(5) Licensees and permittees assigned a DTV channel in the initial
DTV Table of Allotments may request an increase in either ERP in some
azimuthal direction or antenna HAAT, or both, that exceed the initial
technical facilities specified for the allotment in Appendix B of the
Memorandum Opinion and Order (referenced in paragraph (c) of this
section), up to the maximum permissible limits on DTV power and antenna
height set forth in paragraph (f)(6), (f)(7), or (f)(8) of this section,
as appropriate, or up to that needed to provide the same geographic
coverage area as the largest station within their market, whichever
would allow the largest service area."

(emphasis mine)

I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, but the way I read this, you can exceed the 1000kw limit if necessary to replicate the coverage area of the station in the market with the best coverage. (and that's why WSYX is cited: they're presumably the Columbus-market station with the best DTV coverage.)

The FCC's online "Curves" program is not the official way of measuring DTV coverage, but with that disclaimer it does suggest WSYX-DT's 36dBu noise-limited contour on channel 13 extends to about 106km. WBNS-DT's 41dBu (more signal required on UHF) with the requested 1700kw facility extends to about 99km. So it fits within the service area of the market's most powerful station.

So the way I read this, this is grantable. And... there seems to be no actual limit in the FCC regulations to how much power a DTV station can run. (provided the extra power is necessary to replicate someone else's coverage)

Interesting.

So if this is granted, how long until we see stations all over trying to bump their power up to 5000 kW?

- Trip

I think what they're trying to argue is that, even with the power boost, the WBNS coverage area is still not going to equal that of WSYX.


Perhaps, and contour map attached to WBNS 1700KW ERP application seems to support that likelyhood.

If so perhaps the explanation of such an arguement is included in "exhibit 45" which is mentioned in the application but no such explanation is publicly available anywhere I could find in the WBNS 1700 KW application or exhibits which are attached to it, at least those which are publicly available from the links in the application here :

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101248285&formid=301&fac_num=71217

WBNS is on analog 10 currently, BTW .... While they *could* have elected to return to 10 for digital, given the interference protection rules FCC used for channel election, I'd guess it is probably likely there would have been interference protection concerns regarding WCPO-DT 10 Cincinnati (analog on 9), who of course, if they had decided to return to 9 may have also had have interference protection issues with WISH-DT 9 Indy (elected 9, analog on 8) .... And then if WISH had went back to 8, there is WLIO-DT 8 Lima (if not others I'm not thinking of at the moment ).....

BTW, I'm 78 Miles from WBNS-DT and WSYX-DT (about 15~25 miles outside of all the contours in the contour map exhibit attached to the form), and there are terrain issues involved. WBNS-DT seems to (more or less) do as well here as WSYX-DT .... But, I certianly am not "opposed" to a power increase of ~2db from WBNS ...

I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, but the way I read this, you can exceed the 1000kw limit if necessary to replicate the coverage area of the station in the market with the best coverage.


I also agree it seems like that is what it says(per the "or" portion you emphacized), but "in practice" I'd thought this had really already been went over and hashed and rehashed when FCC decided to make the UHF DTV power cap 1000KW ERP, even though for instance there are some DTV stations on UHF running 1000KW ERP which do NOT/did not quite replicate their analog VHF service areas ....

But that was of course *their* analog station, not another station in the market ....

We'll see what happens .....

This raises an interesting prospect.

Let's suppose that WBNS-DT gets their 1700 kW. The stations with the largest coverage contours are the low-VHF stations. If one station moves down to low-VHF and maximizes there, it allows every OTHER station in the market to get a HUGE power boost.

In my market, WBRA-DT is on 3, and despite their admittedly terrible signal, according to the FCC, they have a coverage contour of 107.6 km, and that's with their 7.25 kW non-maximized signal. WSLS-DT on 30 is the most powerful UHF in the market at 950 kW (with an app to go to 1000 kW) and has a coverage contour of 105 km.

Then, once every station maximizes as much as they like, then WBRA-DT could move up to UHF and put out some huge amount of power (if they wanted to) and someone else with a now-enlarged coverage area inherits the title of "largest station" which stations can maximize to.

This could be huge.

- Trip

That was my reaction when I heard of this application. But then I re-read 73.622(f)(5) and concluded WBNS knows exactly what they're doing here, and this stands a fair chance of being granted.

After reading the section, I stand corrected. I am not sure if this is what the FCC had in mind originally, but with all the changes in the rules lately, it seems this is a "letter of the law" issue and not an "intent of the law" issue and yeah, I would image you will see LOTS of these apps in the near future. Hope the FCC is ready.

What's kind of funny is, WSYX-DT (59 KW ERP on 13 BTW) originally elected 36 for post-transition via a NCE with WTTE, .... But, FCC didn't approve WTTE's 1st round election for 28(their current analog assignment), WTTE ended up with 36(where they are now) and WSYX ended up with 13 (also their current allotment) for post transition ....

Here's WSYX's 1st round election form,electing 36 via NCE as first choice and 13 if that wasn't approved ..... :

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101039339&formid=382&fac_num=56549

Here's WTTE's disapproved by FCC 1st round election form electing 28 (I don't think commission publicized the interference protection notices/etc, but I'm guessing WPTO-DT 28 (elected 28, analog on 14) Oxford, OH might have been one of the potential issues involved) :

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101039341&formid=382&fac_num=74137

------

So, IF it had turned out a little differently and WSYX had gotten off VHF for post-transition, there would be no Columbus Market VHF DTV stations, nor I would think likely any Columbus market station with a service area larger than WBNS-DT at 1000KW ....

Interesting.

So if this is granted, how long until we see stations all over trying to bump their power up to 5000 kW?

- Trip

Oh, there's nothing in there that would force people to stop at 5000kw...

BTW, I'm 78 Miles from WBNS-DT and WSYX-DT (about 15~25 miles outside of all the contours in the contour map exhibit attached to the form), and there are terrain issues involved. WBNS-DT seems to (more or less) do as well here as WSYX-DT .... But, I certianly am not "opposed" to a power increase of ~2db from WBNS ...
So you get both WBNS-DT and WSYX-DT OTA? Even though you are outside the coverage map areas? Do you get WCMH-DT NBC 4?

All three of these stations have favorable channel assignments: upper VHF 13 and the low end of UHF. Current channels & HAAT for the 3 DT stations:
WSYX-DT ABC 6 - VHF 13, 59 kW, 286 m
WCMH-DT NBC 4 - UHF 14, 902 kW, 264 m
WBNS-DT CBS 10 - UHF 21, 1000 kw, 279 m

I do not see a maximize filing from WCMH-DT so far. 279 meters is not that high an antenna height. If WBNS-DT really wants to increase their coverage area to officially match or get close to WSYX-DT, they could increase the antenna height. Probably rather expensive with major tower work or a new tower, sure, but they do have that option.

But in my experience, the UHF stations that in core and are cranking at 800 to 1000 kW with decent antenna height have seriously strong signals. I can pick up WJZ-DT 13 in Baltimore which is currently at 1000 kW on UHF 38 from indoors with a Silver Sensor at 43 miles. And this is not a line of sight station.

So you get both WBNS-DT and WSYX-DT OTA? Even though you are outside the coverage map areas?


Not all the time, but it's generally unusal for them to not "move the signal quality meter". I do decode them perfectly Quite often however, I'd almost call them "semi-locals" --- I wouldn't quite call it "tropo" DX, as I often get locks on them often during pretty much "dead band" conditions in middle of winter when it is extremely calm in middle of the night. The same is true for WTTE-DT, as well WDKY-DT 4, Lexington, KY (118 Miles to my south - I probably see that one even more often than any of the Columbus stations),

Other columbus digitals are imparied by strong Co-channel interference from Dayton or Cincinnati or concerning WWHO, involves a much more signifcant terrain issue on my end (I'm in a small, steep valley which is open to some extent to ENE and South - the direction the stream/creek that runs through it, but not east towards WWHO, where for example ground about 400 feet away from my antenna is 40 feet higher than the receive antenna ) ....


Do you get WCMH-DT NBC 4?


Occasionally I get the digital on 14, but I see WCMH 4 analog all the time. WPTO analog 14 (18 miles from me off back side of antenna when pointed at columbus) is co-channel to their digital(but is terrain shielded to a certian extent such that it's not all that strong -- lots of trees+leaves nearby in WPTO direction worsens their signal a bit in summer months as well) , and I don't see them as often as most of the other columbus stations.

Never quite got WBNS 10 "all the time" before WCPO-DT 10 Cincinnati came on the air, but almost .... WCPO-DT (32 miles to my south) "snows" them up too much off the side of antenna most of the time since 98 when WCPO-DT fired up .......

But in my experience, the UHF stations that in core and are cranking at 800 to 1000 kW with decent antenna height have seriously strong signals. I can pick up WJZ-DT 13 in Baltimore which is currently at 1000 kW on UHF 38 from indoors with a Silver Sensor at 43 miles. And this is not a line of sight station.

Agreed. 1000kW is a very strong UHF DTV signal, especially compared to a 5000kW analog NTSC station. All the power in the world is not going to allow the signals to tunnel through mountains and hills. Increasing height is far more effective than increasing power. There are serious diminishing returns for going from say 1000kW to 2000kW if that level of power were ever to be allowed.

None of my UHF stations are line of sight here, but even those in the 100kW range are not hard to receive.

If this loophole doesn't get closed, the FCC could have an ERP "arms-race" on its hands.

Has this not been tested in the past 9 years or is this a new regulation?

Oh, there's nothing in there that would force people to stop at 5000kw...

It's really interesting .... I'm just glad I'm not the only one who has "missed" seeing that part of 73.622 (f) (5) before now ;)

I think WBNS + their consulting engineers do Indeed deserve quite a bit of credit IMO for their "work" on this ...

Here's a perhaps interesting tidbit .... Interesting, I think because AFAIK, as it pertains to going above the power caps(1000KW ERP for UHF for example), --- Perhaps there's an example I'm not aware of, but I'm not aware of anyone who has tried to make any use of it sor far(and some stations *did* even maximize their "pre-feb 17,2009 facilities during the transition) until this 1700KW ERP WBNS app ...

Here is one interesting reference to it, from paragraph 153 and 154 of the MO&O on reconsideration of the 6th report and order, adopted Feb. 17, 1998 -- I've bolded the portions of most interest ... The entire document is available here for download :

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fcc98024.html


:

(4) Calculation of Maximum Allowable Power and Antenna Height
153. The Joint MSTV Petitioners request that we provide more guidance on how an existing licensee should calculate its maximum permissible power level and antenna height when it seeks to modify its facilities or change its channel. They observe that Section 73.622(f)(1) specifies that the maximum power and maximum antenna heights for allotments included in the
initial DTV Table of Allotments are in Appendix B.98 They also observe that Section 73.622(f)(3) further provides that DTV licensees may request increases in these initial specifications up to the maximum permissible limits on DTV power and antenna height set forth in this section or up to that needed to provide the same geographic coverage area as the largest station within their market. In addition, they note that footnote 70 of the Sixth Report and Order states that we will entertain requests for increases in power above 1000 kW where such additional power is needed to provide service to the station’s Grade B contour and would not result in additional interference. The Joint MSTV Petitioners submit, however, that paragraphs(4)-(6) of Section 73.622(f) explicitly address only the maximum power levels and antenna heights for DTV stations that operate on allotments created subsequent to the initial DTV Table. The Joint MSTV Petitioners request that we clarify how existing licensees making facility changes calculate appropriate power levels and antenna heights, and specifically whether paragraphs (4)-(6) apply to the initial DTV allotments. They also request that we clarify the rules governing power levels and antenna heights for existing licensees that seek to change their channels.

154. Decision. We agree with the Joint MSTV Petitioners that the rules are somewhat unclear with regard to maximum permitted power levels and antenna heights for DTV operation. We are therefore amending the rules to clarify that the maximum power levels and antenna heights specified in subparagraphs (4), (5) and (6) of Section 73.622(f) apply to all DTV stations, except for those DTV allotments that are specifically provided higher values in order to better replicate their existing NTSC service.99 We are also clarifying subparagraph (3) of Section 73.622(f) to indicate that DTV licensees and permittees may request increases in the maximum ERP and HAAT for a DTV allotment up to the maximum values specified in subparagraphs (4), (5) and (6) of this section or up to those of the largest station in its market in such cases where one or more stations have been specifically provided higher values.100 Further, we are clarifying that these rules also apply to existing licensees that seek to change their DTV
channels.


What seems a little odd though (surprise surprise!) ... in paragraph 154, first they say the max power caps apply to "all DTV stations" then they go on later to say "otherwise", LOL ...

Note: If you download the entire document, scroll down to appendix E, page 30, where the "actual" rules/amendments to be codifed in CFR is shown for 73.622(F)(5), this portion of it being as it is now, I believe ....

Prior to this, http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/1997/73/622/ ] here is the "1997" version of 73.622 ... Where this part of it of interest is worded a little differently and is present in (f) 3 (as it is referred to in a portion of above quote from MO&O on 6th report and order) instead of (f) 5 as it has been since 1998 ...


(3) DTV licensees and permittees may request an increase in either ERP in some azimuthal direction or HAAT, or both, that exceed the initial technical facilities specified for the allotment in Appendix B the Sixth Report and Order, up to the maximum permissible limits on DTV power and antenna height set forth in this section or up to that needed to provide the same geographic coverage area as the largest station
within their market.

I'll have to read over the latest discussion on WBNS-DT tomorrow, but for right now, let me just say one thing.

I now know of five channel changes that have been applied for or should have been applied for (see my DTR page), and have heard rumors of more than just those. I have confirmation on two (KYLE and today KUNP) but no actual documents. I searched EDOCS and other places too on the FCC site and couldn't find anything. I can't believe that the FCC site hides such things so well! Or are "petition[s] for rulemaking" just not made public until the comment period? When would the comment period be?

- Trip

Trip,

did you try ECFS search under docket 87-268 (the DTV "proceeding") ? Quite a bit of recent activity there it seems(and that's the proceeding where much of the DTV table of allotment stuff has been happening), but I don't have time to sort through any of the recent comments, currently ....

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

If it's being handled under a different proceeding/docket # in any given case (such as one specifically for a specific matter rather than a farily well known/published proceeding such as 3rd DTV review, or the 87-268 "DTV proceeding") , it can be really difficult to dig up ... I do recall digging one of those up once "somehow" regarding WDKY-DT's petition for a channel change from 4 to a UHF channel, as I had found the proceeding/docket# referenced in another document somewhere else ... But, I probably could have found it searching ECFS for "sinclair" or "SBG" in "filed in behalf of" as well ...

But, BTW, you can also search ECFS with the company name of interest/etc. and that can be useful as well ....

Update: Oh, the comments are "public" as well, they are accessable via ECFS (the blue "view' links that pop up for your search query under each record are usually/often links to PDF's with the submitted comments from interesting parties -- FCC documents related to the proceeding are also available there, entries via the search such as from "media bureau public notice/etc ....)

Trip,

did you try ECFS search under docket 87-268 (the DTV "proceeding") ? Quite a bit of recent activity there it seems(and that's the proceeding where much of the DTV table of allotment stuff has been happening), but I don't have time to sort through any of the recent comments, currently ....

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

I'd been there and checked that docket number, but checked again anyway. Only two comments have shown up since the beginning of June, neither are channel changes.

- Trip

All channel change apps are now listed on my DTR page. Sorry it's messy, I'm at work and did it in a hurry. I'll come up with something better when I get home.

www.rabbitears.info/dtr.php

Some of those are pretty interesting.

Does either KTBN or KVMD attempt to drop their channel move?

WJSP vs WTVM, who wins out? (My prediction: WTVM)

WWSI to 10. WPVI can now go to 48.

- Trip

I'd been there and checked that docket number, but checked again anyway. Only two comments have shown up since the beginning of June, neither are channel changes.


Update: Try searching for proceeding # "PRM08MB" , many of them seem to be there .... :end update

I just found one, but Haven't looked for the ones you mentioned ...

In ECFS search under "filed in behalf of", I searched for "WDKY", and found a "petition for reconsideration" involving a "new" petition from them for a channel change from 4 to 46, dated 6/20/2008 .... Note : Info on a channel 46 petition also now shows up in the TV query entry for them, as someone else recently posted ... The current proceeding # for it is weird --- it's shown as proceeding PRM08MB ...

Here is the link to it (requires PDF reader to open) :

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031442


Here is a quote from the text :


...If the proposal set forth herin is adopted, WDKY will promptly file the appropriate application for modification to specify operation on DTV Channel 46 at Danville with facilities consistent with those specified in the attached engineering statement and, if authorized, will construct the facilities contemplated therein and place the station into operation.

Oh my ... A recent post in Lexington thread reports A couple more stations have filed channel change petitions, including WSYX !!!

Wonder how that may effect WBNS's 1700KW ERP application, as according to TV query, WSYX has filed to move to UHF channel 48 !!! See here :

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state...&slon2=&size=9

Note: Haven't been able to find the WSYX channel change petition itself in ECFS yet ...

Update 3pm : Found it and several other new ones just posted online today under the PRM08MB proceeding .. Here's WSYX's, attached engineering exhibit proposes 1000KW ERP with Non DA .... :

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031594

Note: just a guess, but I'm thinking the "PRM08MB" proceeding may be a temporary "placeholder" until these petitions for rulemaking get a "real" docket/procceding number, so perhaps these links could go dead at some point and the documents may be located elsewhere ... There are currently 52 records which show up under PRM08MB, however, with dates from 1/15/08 to 6/20/08 .... (they are not all channel change petitions, btw, some aren't even for "TV")

-----------

Today's (6/25/08) FCC Daily Digest "Broadcast Applications (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283178A1.pdf)" is a staggering 95 pages, mostly DTV change requests.
Happy sifting!! :)

Suspect Trip is going to especially like this one :

WBRA Roanoke, VA /Blue ridge public TV has petitioned for channel change from 3 to 26 !

Proposed facility on 26 is for DA, 1000 KW ERP ....

See here:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031563

Update: --- Oops ... Looks like I should have read a little more, first, as per this quote from their petition, they are calling the channel change a "fall-back" possibility in case their maximization on 3 doesn't turn out well enough .... :

"Channel *3 with pre-transition facilities has proven to fall woefully short of acceptable market coverage. Blue Ridge is applying simultaneously herewith for maximization of the station on Channel *3 and is hopeful that the improvement of facilities that will be made possible by that maximization will permit it to stay on Channel *3. However, given the surprising shortfall in coverage with the pre-transition Channel *3 facilities, Blue Ridge is filing this Petition to provide a fall-back possibility."

Here's WBRA TV query Link ... Looks like the channel 3 maximization app is for 9.8 KW ERP, Non DA .... Which on the current main lobe for their somewhat DA for licensed facility at least would only be tiny fraction of a db more power .... Not sure how much that is going to help them ...

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state=&call=WBRA&arn=&city=&chan=&cha2=69&serv=&type=0&facid=&list=0&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&size=9

:end update



---------

I've only had time to look at a couple of the others under "PRM08MB" Currently, another one I'd looked at was WHMB Indy, asking for a change from 16 to 20 ....

but, judging from some of the "communites" that show up in the results list, suspect there may be at least a few more requests to get off lo-VHF ....

Update: Try searching for proceeding # "PRM08MB" , many of them seem to be there .... :end update

Holy channel change, batman! There are a bunch of channel change requests buried there. Many of them posted in the past 3 days. WETA-DT PBS 26 in DC, currently on UHF 27 at 90 kW, wants to move to UHF 51?! What is keeping WETA-DT from increasing their power on UHF 27? Will have to look. I see on Trip's site that WWPX-DT Ion 60 in Martinsburg, WV, currently on VHF 12, had filed to move to UHF 51? Land rush for UHF 51 in DC with WDCW-DT 50 vacating it next February? Wait a minute, found the Paxson petition for WPXW.
WETA 26: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031591
WWPX 60:http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031565
Interesting to see how the FCC resolves directly competing petitions.

PRM08MB must stand for something. Did the FCC put out a notice under proceding PRM08MB that opened the door for yet another round of channel petitions?

I made a list of all the channel changes, open it in Notepad until I get something more permanent up on RabbitEars.

It's attached.

PRM08MB = Petition for Rule Making 2008 Media Bureau

WWPX-DT wants to move to the WINC-FM mountaintop tower site, thus their channel change app. EDIT: Not that I think they'll get it. Their application does not meet the spacing requirements with respect to WDCW-DT 50. The tower site is about 50 miles away, it must be 68 miles away to fit. I imagine it'll get shot down based on that.

As for what's keeping WETA-DT from maximizing on 27, I have four letters. WFPT.

- Trip

Here we go. I now have something more permanent.

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

I'm not as pleased with WBRA-DT as you might think.

First of all, as you said, it's a fall-back (I'm almost certain they'll have to use it).
Second, though they want 1000 kW, their directional pattern ensures I'll only receive 55.7 kW in my direction. The nulls in their pattern will only receive 41 kW. Why beam 1000 kW into a bunch of mountains?
Third, they chose channel 26. Why, oh why, would you choose that? In Appomattox (yes, that Appomattox), WRLH-DT 26 from Richmond comes in WELL. Even from here, I always see signal from WRLH. They are at 800 kW. 800 kW vs ~50 kW from WBRA. Which one will come in?


I'm going to call and talk to their engineer tomorrow, if I can reach him. I talked to him last week and he gave me a lot of hope. Clearly it was false.

- Trip

Update: oops, I missed Trip's comment in earlier post when I posted this later, sorry : I would venture a guess that PRM stands for "Petition for Rule-Making" and the "MB" stands for "media bureau", and the "08" probably for 2008 .....

Again, I'm guessing at least some of those will get different proceeding/docket #'s as they move along in the process, I could be wrong, however. Perhaps specific to a given case. It's been quite a while, but If I recall correctly, something like that may have happened with a previous channel change petition from WDKY several years ago(for 22 If I recall correctly) which ended up being denied, if I recall correctly due to interference protection issues regarding a first-adjacent channel station.

I'm not as pleased with WBRA-DT as you might think.


I'm assuming that going back to 15 isn't an option? I think the fall-back will definitely be needed.

The petition from KNAZ to keep DTV operations on 22 noted that mobile DTV is not suitable for channel 2. They also had major damage to their channel 2 antenna in an ice-storm, but if mobile DTV gains traction, the stations on Low-VHF are going to have even more incentive to vacate. I don't know if this link will work for more than a few days, but here it is for now:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520031592

With many low power stations being effectively forced onto Low-VHF in major markets I have to wonder if another lawsuit is forthcoming when they realize they have no viewers. It may be ok while they can still transmit an analog signal, but when they transition to digital they will probably find that 0.3kW ERP on Low-VHF is a death sentence.

I thought about the Mobile DTV thing regarding some of these channel change petitions, particularly some of the Hi-VHF to UHF moves, as it pertains to antennas for the receive devices ..

We'll have to wait to see what ATSC ends up using for the Mobile DTV and publishes the "specs" but one interesting thing about the upcoming "mobile DTV" (MP/H, A-VSB/etc) is that it reportedly will require a much lower SNR than the current ~16db SNR ..... I've seen figures as low as 4db SNR ....

I'm really curious how that is going to work concerning the following -- Will it be the case that "somehow" the MPH/AVSB portion of the DTV signal will have less signal power than the "legacy" fixed services(via the 8VSB we're "used to") -- If not, given the signal level required for reception of the mobile DTV will be much less(and there is of course no reason why a fixed receiver hooked up to outdoor hi-gain directional antenna couldn't be used to receive the mobile DTV services as well) then I'd have to think it would be a completely different ballgame regarding interference protection between stations, given that the current FCC rules are based on Planning factors (which are described in OET bulletin #69, BTW), including the ~16dB SNR for 8VSB ....

It could be REALLY fun for Dx'ing the "mobile DTV services", that's for sure ....

Here we go. I now have something more permanent.

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

I'm not as pleased with WBRA-DT as you might think.

First of all, as you said, it's a fall-back (I'm almost certain they'll have to use it).
Second, though they want 1000 kW, their directional pattern ensures I'll only receive 55.7 kW in my direction. The nulls in their pattern will only receive 41 kW. Why beam 1000 kW into a bunch of mountains?
Third, they chose channel 26. Why, oh why, would you choose that? In Appomattox (yes, that Appomattox), WRLH-DT 26 from Richmond comes in WELL. Even from here, I always see signal from WRLH. They are at 800 kW. 800 kW vs ~50 kW from WBRA. Which one will come in?


I'm going to call and talk to their engineer tomorrow, if I can reach him. I talked to him last week and he gave me a lot of hope. Clearly it was false.

- Trip

I don't know the details anywhere near as well as you, but even I was wondering WTF. There's got to a better gap between 'noke, Richmond, Greensboro & the Tri-Cities

I thought channels 16 or 35 were a sure bet. Either one was wide open in all directions; they could run a modest 300-ish kW signal on an omnidirectional antenna. Maybe they figured the adjacent-channel interference from WFXR-DT or WPXR-DT would be too much? I can't think of any other sane reason for channel 26.

- Trip

I'm really curious how that is going to work concerning the following -- Will it be the case that "somehow" the MPH/AVSB portion of the DTV signal will have less signal power than the "legacy" fixed services(via the 8VSB we're "used to") -- ....

The best information I have is that the MPH system fits the mobile bits in with the existing fixed bits - there is only one datastream, everything transmitted at the same power, no changes to the transmitter, just to the data equipment.

I do not claim absolute accuracy here though.

The only channel change I've processed so far (working from the Daily Digests) has been KTCI-26 St. Paul to 38. However, I've processed six significant tower site change proposals:

WJFB-44 Lebanon, Tennessee: to the Sinclair tower in Nashville
KBEH-24 Oxnard, California: to Mt. Wilson
WPXK-23 Jellico, Tennessee: to Sharp's Ridge in Knoxville
KPXM-40 St. Cloud, Minnesota: to the KARE tower in the Shoreview tower farm near St. Paul

And the two most interesting ones:
WSAH-42 Bridgeport, Connecticut: to the Empire State Building
WLED-48 Littleton, New Hampshire: to Mt. Washington

The only channel change I've processed so far (working from the Daily Digests) has been KTCI-26 St. Paul to 38. However, I've processed six significant tower site change proposals:

WJFB-44 Lebanon, Tennessee: to the Sinclair tower in Nashville
KBEH-24 Oxnard, California: to Mt. Wilson
WPXK-23 Jellico, Tennessee: to Sharp's Ridge in Knoxville
KPXM-40 St. Cloud, Minnesota: to the KARE tower in the Shoreview tower farm near St. Paul

And the two most interesting ones:
WSAH-42 Bridgeport, Connecticut: to the Empire State Building
WLED-48 Littleton, New Hampshire: to Mt. WashingtonThere's another one in Iowa: Ion station KFPX-39, the only major Central Iowa station not transmitting from near Alleman -- about halfway between Ames and Des Moines -- wants to move there. They currently transmit from near Baxter.

The best information I have is that the MPH system fits the mobile bits in with the existing fixed bits - there is only one datastream, everything transmitted at the same power, no changes to the transmitter, just to the data equipment.



That's been my understanding as well, via adding more (bits) for error correction to make the mobile DTV service more robust/easier to receive, and using AVC (MPEG4) for better efficiency. The article at following link reports for 1Mb/s of "data bits" for mobile DTV service - audio/video/etc -- It will take ~3Mb/s of "extra" bits to make the reception more robust/suitable for mobile use -- meaning 1 Mb/s of Mobile DTV "payload" bits will take about 4 Mb/s out of our 19.39Mb/s total available payload ... While The trellis coding and FEC data bits for the system for fixed reception as we currently know it is and will continue to be "outside" of that 19.39Mb/s payload, the extra "bits" needed to make the Mobile DTV reception more robust won't be "outside" of it, they will take up a significant portion of our available payload in order to allow for mobile, and more robust reception .....

http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0082/t.13933.html

The article at above link also reports vastly improved SNR for threshold DTV reception of the mobile DTV "bits", it mentions reception is possible in the range of only 4dB SNR vs. our current ~15~16dB SNR required for threshold "fixed" service reception ....

So, hence my curiousity regarding what happens regarding interference protection among stations service areas where the threshold for Mobile DTV reception is only 4dB SNR vs 15~16dB SNR, the latter being one of the planning factors for DTV reception and is very much a "part" of FCC rules regarding interference protection among stations ....

While it is true it is likely that mobile receive devices will likely be using small, low gain antennas such that fringe area reception where interference among stations probably won't be much of a concern, I suspect the Mobile DTV services may also be useful for "more robust" fixed reception in situations where reception of the "fixed services" (at 16db SNR) as we know it is problematical, including in fringe areas ... And, I also think it sounds like a really good thing for DTV Dx'ing for the future as well! So, Hopefully, there will be some receivers on the market for the mobile DTV services which can be hooked up to external antennas .....

FCC ‘Maximization’ Window Draws Almost 700 Applications

by Doug Lung, 6.27.2008
Doug Lung is regional vice president of technology for a major station group.

I counted 694 applications after the lifting of the freeze on DTV coverage expansion and the midnight June 20 cutoff time. While it is possible that some of these applications were not “maximization” applications, they represent a significant percentage of all full service TV licensees.

The FCC has promised that it will quickly grant applications that do not cause interference above the 0.5 percent “de-minimis” level and give applicants that are mutually exclusive 30 days to resolve the conflicts before dismissing both applications.

Doing interference studies, I was surprised at the impact that Class A LPTV stations had on DTV stations’ ability to maximize. In one case, a four-channel offset UHF taboo existed for DTV into an analog Class A, but did not exist for analog full service TV into Class A. I suspect this may affect other UHF broadcasters planning to use their analog channel for DTV broadcasting. In some locations, such as the Northeast, any expansion of coverage was difficult due to interference to adjacent and co-channel stations.

I encourage broadcasters to work together should the FCC determine two applications are mutually exclusive. As I’ve pointed out, while the FCC planning factors may be fine, or even conservative, for outdoor antennas at a 30-foot elevation with a preamplifier, significantly higher signal levels are needed for indoor reception in suburban or urban areas. While higher power from one station may cause more predicted interference in rural areas or adjacent market population center, if stations cooperate and increase power together they will be able to improve reception for existing viewers, whether in rural or urban areas.

If you are interested in seeing the applications filed before the midnight June 20 deadline, I’ve created a spreadsheet, http://xmtr.com/fcc/dtv20080620.xls with all the applications filed between the lifting of the freeze and the June 20 cutoff time based on CDBS information.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0115/t.14256.html

Doing interference studies, I was surprised at the impact that Class A LPTV stations had on DTV stations’ ability to maximize. In one case, a four-channel offset UHF taboo existed for DTV into an analog Class A, but did not exist for analog full service TV into Class A. I suspect this may affect other UHF broadcasters planning to use their analog channel for DTV broadcasting.

Perhaps it would be useful to track CA stations on the spreadsheet since they have additional protection not afforded to LP/TX stations.

In one case, a four-channel offset UHF taboo existed for DTV into an analog Class A, but did not exist for analog full service TV into Class A.

Can someone explain how taboo channels work? Are they only an issue with/onto analog channels? i.e. can digital stations affect other digital stations more than 1 channel away?

I haven't been able to grasp the concept of taboo channels yet, including what causes them or where they are/appear. Thanks.

Can someone explain how taboo channels work? Are they only an issue with/onto analog channels? i.e. can digital stations affect other digital stations more than 1 channel away?

I haven't been able to grasp the concept of taboo channels yet, including what causes them or where they are/appear. Thanks.

In a nutshell:

Taboo channels are TV channels which cannot be used due to interference from other channels.

Check our http://www.kat5.tv/taboo.html for a more detailed explaination.

I've got a couple of questions about these Taboo channels:

The kat5 web page cited noted interference potential on UHF with channels 1, 5, or 9 channels from a channel. I'll call it the 1-5-9 rule. The post that brought this subject of a taboo channel up, if I understand the post correctly, involved a channel that was 4 channels away and only affected DTV into a Class A analog. It appears that there is something more to this than just the 1-5-9 rule. Is location a player, such as when two contiguous DTV channels are OK from the same/closeby tower(s) but not at a distance?

Lexington, KY has analogs WLEX on 18, WKYT on 27, and WTVQ on 36. This seems to directly contradict the 1-5-9 rule. Is it because they are transmitted from the same location with relatively the same ERP?

Perhaps it would be useful to track CA stations on the spreadsheet since they have additional protection not afforded to LP/TX stations.
Falcon_77 and I were discussing off-line about whether to add the Class A stations to his spreadsheet. I dug up a summary of the number of CA, LPs, and TXs in the FCC Report and Order released on March 3: "Currently, there are approximately 567 licensed Class A stations, 2,227 licensed LPTV stations, 4,518 licensed TV translators and 11 TV booster stations." The numbers are from a end of 2006 survey document, so the current number of active Class A stations may be changed, but it should be close. A lot of stations to process.

My understanding is that all Class A stations have to be on in-core channels. However, Falcon found 2 Class A stations out of core: WKHU-CA 60 in PA with a license, KFRE-CA 67 in California with a application. Can anyone explain this?

Another station KSBS-LP has a license for UHF 47 (analog) in Denver. However, the station recently filed an application for a digital channel, DC, on UHF 52! There is a tech box 13 on the application form for checking off that they are in compliance with 2 requirements for asking for a UHF 52-59 allotment. We are so focused on all digital stations post-transition falling in the 2-51 range, that we overlook that there may a few digital LP and CAs in the 52-59 range. Of course, these stations are taking a risk that who ever brought the 52-59 channel frequency they would be on will tell them to vacate in the near future. KSBS's DC 52 application: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101245207&formid=401&fac_num=67532.

Check our http://www.kat5.tv/taboo.html for a more detailed explaination.

This is for the UK, which I would think have different taboo channels, being 8MHz wide instead of our 6MHz channels. So, I wouldn't think 5 & 9 apply in our case?

Those interested in the "taboo" channels may also want to read this article :

The Superheterodyne Concept and Reception (http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0072/t.1648.html )

For DTV stations, regarding DTV applications and changes to DTV allotments what is currently "allowed" per different channel relationships is explained in the FCC rules, Among other things table of D/U ratios for the channel relationships can be found in portions of cfr. 47, sec. 73.623 (c) and (d) .. As you can see, it is quite "complicated" ..

The current version of 73.623 is available here(note: the "2008" in the URL's I've posted from this site will change to "2009" in 2009, "2010" in 2010, etc ...) :

http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2008/73/623/

I'm looking at those rules, do they specify digital-into-digital interference anywhere? I always ignored that rule because it looked to me like outside of adjacent and co-channel interference, it looked like that long list of N+2, N+3, etc only applied to digital-into-analog interference. I should probably look closer, but those rules get very difficult to read after a while.

- Trip

I'm looking at those rules, do they specify digital-into-digital interference anywhere?
- Trip

For DTV to DTV intererence, in 73.623 or OET Bulletin 69, I can only find D/U ratios specified for Co-Channel and First Adjacent channel.

Update: Several other Charles Rhodes articles indicate that as well (as you say, DTV to DTV interference rules seem to involve only Co-channel and N +/- 1).

Doug Lung has written some interesting articles in TV Technology on the N+/- 3,4 DTV into DTV issues.

These are interesting as well :

FCC Report Reveals More Potential Interference, by Charles Rhoades ... (http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0072/t.6906.html)

Concern Over Interference Continues (Another Charles Rhoades Column) (http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0072/t.8008.html)

FCC report(PDF) - Interference rejection Thresholds of Consumer digital Television Receivers Available in 2005 and 2006 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/reports/DTV_Interference_Rejection_Thresholds-03-30-07.pdf )

ATSC A/74 established non-mandatory "Guidelines" for adjacent channel (etc):
http://www.atsc.org/standards/practices.html

Some of these were stipulated as REQUIREMENTS for CECB boxes:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/frnotices/2007/DTVFinalRule_technical.htm

Fol. articles discuss Image Rejection, Adjacent Channel EMI and related AGC control:
http://www.eetasia.com/ARTICLES/2006MAY/PDF/EEOL_2006MAY01_ACC_DSP_OPT_TA.pdf?SOURCES=DOWNLOAD
http://www.rfdesignline.com/howto/207100201

Note that original analog TV definition of "Taboo" channels was based on difficulty
rejecting the image...14-15 and 7-8 channel positions away:
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/dtv-tvtx.html
http://www.danalee.ca/ttt/appendices.htm
[Search for "taboo" to find "Whatever happened to Channel 1".]

With DTV the definition of "taboo" channels no longer has any "prohibited" meaning....
it simply means a channel with an arbitrary channel offset....they are ALL "adjacent"....
some further away than others....

And for co-located transmitter groups, it is very common to see a station use a
single antenna structure for adjacent NTSC & DTV channels.

ACTUAL performance documented in the FCC OET report (post above) shows HDTVs
were much more susceptible to adjacent channel EMI out to +/- 7 than "theoretical"
input filter bandwidths would imply....and +/- 2 was sometimes worse than adjacent.

This is for the UK, which I would think have different taboo channels, being 8MHz wide instead of our 6 MHz channels. So, I wouldn't think 5 & 9 apply in our case?
For U.S. IF (center) freq of 44 MHz, taboos are 7(+) x 6 Mhz = 42(+) MHz
and twice that for 14(+) x 6 MHz = 84(+) MHz.

For 8 MHz in U.K., "typical" IF freq is 36+ MHz, "taboos" would be 6 and 12.
For lower IF freq, the "taboos" are lower....and vice versa....

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO. Proposed to substitute DTV channel 45 for DTV
channel 46 for station KWHD-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11447). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA No.
08-1494). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. Proposed to substitute DTV channel 46 for DTV
channel 48 for station WHME-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11439, 08-102). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1501). MB <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1501A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1501A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1501A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA. Proposed to substitute DTV channel *24 for DTV
channel *25 for station KLTS-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11455, 08-118). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1487). MB <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1487A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1487A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1487A1.txt>

AMENDMENT OF SEC. 73.622(I), FINAL DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENT, TV BROADCAST
STATIONS (GREENVILLE, NC). Proposed change of station WYDO-DT's DTV
channel from 14 to 47. Comments Due: 30 days from date of publication in the Federal Register. Reply Comments Due: 45 days from date of publication in the Federal Register. (Dkt No. RM-11465). Action by:
Chief, Video Division. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1588).
MB <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1588A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1588A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1588A1.txt>

Good for KLTS, Shreveport. I hope the FCC rules in their favour.

TV Technology Email Newsletters :: Doug Lung's RF Report

53 Stations (So Far) Ask for New DTV Channels

by Doug Lung, 7.03.2008
Doug Lung is regional vice president of technology for a major station group.

Last week I reported on the large number of applications filed in the period between the lifting of the FCC freeze on DTV coverage expansion and the June 20 cut-off date. In the CDBS files updated July 2, 53 petitions for rulemaking were filed by stations requesting a new DTV channel. More channel change requests may have been filed but not yet made it into CDBS.

The FCC is moving quickly to process the petitions. Wednesday, three notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRMs) were released for filings the FCC said warranted consideration.

LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver’s request to move KWHD-DT to channel 45 is covered in the NPRM in Docket 08-106, RM-11447. KWHD-DT requested the change to allow it to maximize. It was unable to maximize on Channel 46 because of predicted interference to Class A TV station KSBS-LP on Channel 47 in Denver.

The FCC issued an NPRM in Docket 08-102 RM-11439 for another LeSEA petition. This one requested substitution of DTV Channel 46 for WHME-DT’s Channel 48 in South Bend, Ind. The move allows WHME-DT to increase its interference-free service and provide a DTV signal to 546,558 people. On Channel 48, WHME-DT was unable to maximize due to interference to WAQP-DT and WBME-DT, both on Channel 48.

Louisiana Educational Television Authority (LETA) filed a petition requesting DTV Channel 24 for KLTS-DT instead of its allotted DTV Channel 25 in Shreveport, La. The FCC NPRM in Docket 08-118 RM-11455 says LETA requested the channel change to allow it to use its topmounted analog antenna, which is on Channel 24. The NPRM notes, “If Channel 24 is substituted for digital Channel 25, LETA will be able to use the topmount antenna currently used for its analog station, thus avoiding the costs and logistical challenge of replacing this antenna with a new antenna.”

Based on the number of entries in CDBS, I expect to see many more NPRMs released soon. The deadline for filing comments is 30 days after publication in the Federal Register with reply comments due 45 days after publication in the Federal Register. For a listing of all of the requested channel changes, download the dtvdb.zip file containing the dt20080702.xls spreadsheet. Use your spreadsheet’s auto-filter feature to show only file prefix BPRM and look for applications with file numbers beginning with 200806.


http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0115/t.14345.html

TV Technology Email Newsletters :: Doug Lung's RF Report

DTV Station Status

by Doug Lung, 7.03.2008
Doug Lung is regional vice president of technology for a major station group.

DTV Station Status per FCC CDBS – July 2, 2008

LICENSED (LIC) 1248 (+4)
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT:(CP) 693 (+9)
CP Modification (CP MOD) 297 (+10)
STA (All variations - authorized) 1015 (-0-)
STA (Modifications) 161 (-0-)
APPLICATIONS (minus rule making and channel/service elections) 1015 (+660)

Rule making - Digital channel changes
PENDING APPLICATIONS 70 (+53)
GRANTS 156 (-0-)

Final DTV Facilities Only (dtv_type = “posttran” or “both”)
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT:(CP) 509 (+23)
CP Modification (CP MOD) 99 (+21)
APPLICATIONS (minus RM and elections) 777 (+661)
(Change from June 18, 2008 listing)


Note: These totals do not include digital class A TV, low power TV or TV translator entries. The total will be greater than the number of DTV stations as some stations have licenses, construction permits and applications on file. Some stations also have licenses, construction permits or applications for backup facilities (auxiliary broadcast). Subtracting the STA Modification number from the number in STA (all variations) will give a more accurate indication of the number of DTV stations operating under STA, although STA records sometimes remain in the CDBS long after the licensed facility is operational. Entries with the call sign “TEST” are not included.

A spreadsheet (dtvdb.zip) showing all DTV entries (including digital LPTV and translator) in the FCC CDBS TV engineering database files as well as a spreadsheet (tvdb.zip) showing the entire TV engineering database (large file—more than 2 MB) extracted from the CDBS will be available at www.xmtr.com/fcc/. The July 2, 2008 spreadsheets are available for download now.

Your comments and story leads are always appreciated! Drop me a note at dlung@transmitter.com.


http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0115/t.14352.html

TV Technology Email Newsletters :: Doug Lung's RF Report

53 Stations (So Far) Ask for New DTV Channels

Thanks for the links to the articles. A lot of stations asked for new channels and to maximize their post-transition ERP. Do you think the FCC or those in the industry who follow such things were expecting this many channel change petitions and maximize power filings? Lot of filings and petitions to work through while the clock is ticking towards the February 17 deadline. I'm surprised that 53 stations want to change their post-transition channel with less than 8 months to go. The more DT stations that can be at maximized ERP or a better channel assignment on February 18, the better the odds are that the transition won't be seen as a complete disaster in the mainstream press or by the public.

Thanks for the links to the articles. A lot of stations asked for new channels and to maximize their post-transition ERP. Do you think the FCC or those in the industry who follow such things were expecting this many channel change petitions and maximize power filings? Lot of filings and petitions to work through while the clock is ticking towards the February 17 deadline. I'm surprised that 53 stations want to change their post-transition channel with less than 8 months to go. The more DT stations that can be at maximized ERP or a better channel assignment on February 18, the better the odds are that the transition won't be seen as a complete disaster in the mainstream press or by the public.

I don't know about the "industry" but I have always thought that at least post transition, you would see many want to change.

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO. Proposed to substitute DTV channel 45 for DTV
channel 46 for station KWHD-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11447). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA No.
08-1494). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1494A1.txt>


Musical channels, anyone?

The holders of the CP for a new digital TV station in Greeley, CO had successfully petitioned to change their channel from channel 45 (which was approved in the original 2004 rulemaking that created this channel) to channel 38. That, in turn, is allowing KWHD to move from 46 to 45...

So, who wants channel 46 in the Denver metro area?

Nobody. KWHD wants off of 46 because there's a Class A station on 47 that needs protection. Any station that attempted to use 46 would have its power limited by that CA station.

- Trip

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. 73.622(I),
WITTENBERG, WISCONSIN. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 50 for DTV
Channel 31 for Station WFXS(TV). (Dkt No. RM-11468, 08-136). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA
No. 08-1600). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1600A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1600A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1600A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
FREEPORT, ILLINOIS. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 23 for DTV
Channel 41 for Station WIFR-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11467, 08-135). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/01/2008 by NPRM. (DA
No. 08-1599). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1599A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1599A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1599A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 38 for DTV
Channel 26 for Station KTCI-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11450, 08-117). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/02/2008 by NPRM. (DA
No. 08-1491). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1491A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1491A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1491A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. 73.622(I),
SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 50 for DTV
Channel 49 for station WNEP-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11457, 08-125). Action by:
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/07/2008 by NPRM. (DA
No. 08-1601). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1601A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1601A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1601A1.txt>

Where are you getting the NPRMs? I'm not seeing them. WBRA-DT has a filing number but I have yet to see an NPRM for it...

I plan to file comments.

- Trip

Where are you getting the NPRMs? I'm not seeing them. WBRA-DT has a filing number but I have yet to see an NPRM for it...
I did some digging at the FCC web site over the weekend and found this notice page for 2008: http://www.fcc.gov/Document_Indexes/Media/2008_index_MB_Notice.html. I will be curious to see how or if the FCC handles the conflicting requests for UHF 51 from WETA-DT PBS 26 and WWPX-DT Ion 60.

Thanks.

Clearly WETA-DT gets it, because WWPX-DT's proposed site is improperly spaced to WDCW-DT 50. Their engineering statement doesn't even mention it.

- Trip

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), CASPER, WYOMING. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *6 for DTV Channel *8 for Station KPTW(TV). (Dkt No. RM-11451). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/07/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1624). MB DA-08-1624A1.doc DA-08-1624A1.pdf DA-08-1624A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 16 for DTV Channel 20 for Station WHMB-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11440). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/30/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1500). MB DA-08-1500A1.doc DA-08-1500A1.pdf DA-08-1500A1.txt

Yesterday, the FCC granted two new CPs for new stations. Both are owned by the Word of God Fellowship (that's Daystar).

One is for DT-03 in Apalachicola, FL. The station will transmit from near Panama City with 45 kW aimed entirely to the southeast toward the city of license. Most directions will receive 0.1125 kW. Nobody in Panama City is receiving that signal!

The other is for DT-51 near Spokane, WA. It looks like it will transmit from the same site as most of the rest of the Spokane stations.

DT-03. I wonder if that means the only goal is cable carriage, nothing OTA. Or if they plan to get it reassigned in the future.

- Trip

Another Florida DT-03: WSBS-DT Key West. 45 kW ERP, 99% of the coverage area is over Florida Bay and the Atlantic Ocean...

Yesterday, the FCC granted two new CPs for new stations. Both are owned by the Word of God Fellowship (that's Daystar).

One is for DT-03 in Apalachicola, FL. The station will transmit from near Panama City with 45 kW aimed entirely to the southeast toward the city of license. Most directions will receive 0.1125 kW. Nobody in Panama City is receiving that signal!

The other is for DT-51 near Spokane, WA. It looks like it will transmit from the same site as most of the rest of the Spokane stations.

DT-03. I wonder if that means the only goal is cable carriage, nothing OTA. Or if they plan to get it reassigned in the future.

- Trip

TV Fool is not showing FOX for ZIP 78572 in McAllen TX. Checking Rabbit Ears I see FOX is on display channel 48.3 KNVO. Thanks Trip. Is this unusual to place a major network on a sub-channel?

The problem is that Mexico's digital transition is slated for 2022, and so many Mexican stations do not or cannot operate digitally. XHRIO-TV 2 is one of these. They have no digital allocation to my knowledge.

However, XHRIO is being operated by the same company that owns KNVO-DT. So what KNVO did, since they are not doing HD, is they chose to carry Fox-HD on the digital signal of KNVO-DT 48.

It is a rather unusual setup, but I can't say I'd argue with it! =) I'm rather curious how they jammed three SD subchannels into it though...

- Trip

TV Fool is not showing FOX for ZIP 78572 in McAllen TX. Checking Rabbit Ears I see FOX is on display channel 48.3 KNVO. Thanks Trip. Is this unusual to place a major network on a sub-channel?

Not unheard of; up the road in Laredo, KXOF's (Class A Fox affiliate) digital signal is on a subchannel of Univision affiliate KLDO.

Both situations are similar in that the stations share the same owner, Entravision, who also own KNVO in McAllen.

On the border, I suppose this makes sense: operate a Mexican or Class A transmitter that doesn't have to go digital next February (to keep your Mexican viewers), and provide the digital signal on another station's frequency so people who have DTV receivers aren't left out. But you'd hope Entravision would get on the HD bandwagon at some point...

I don't think any of the Spanish networks do HD yet, actually. Entravision has to wait on Univision to get on board with HD before they can do HD.

I'm surprised though that Entravision isn't using one or more subchannels on XETV-DT in San Diego for something else. They could put XHDTV (My Network TV) on a subchannel, for instance.

- Trip

I was thinking more in terms of Entravision's Fox affiliates, rather than Univision.

From what I heard, Entravision is doing Fox-HD on KNVO-DT. I've heard no reports from KLDO-DT in Laredo though...

- Trip

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. 73.622(I),
BAINBRIDGE, GEORGIA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 50 for DTV
Channel 49 for Station WTLH-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11469). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/07/2008 by NPRM. (DA No.
08-1631). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1631A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1631A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1631A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. 73.622(I),
BISMARCK, NORTH DAKOTA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 17 for DTV
Channel 16 for Station KBMY-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11466). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/09/2008 by NPRM. (DA No.
08-1630). MB
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1630A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1630A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1630A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I),
WILLISTON, NORTH DAKOTA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *51 for DTV
Channel *11 for Station
KWSE-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11470). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/30/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1633). MB <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1633A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1633A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1633A1.txt>

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), CASPER, WYOMING. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *6 for DTV Channel *8 for Station KPTW(TV). (Dkt No. RM-11451). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/07/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1624). MB DA-08-1624A1.doc DA-08-1624A1.pdf DA-08-1624A1.txt


"Another One (low VHF) Bites the Dust"

TV Fool is not showing FOX for ZIP 78572 in McAllen TX. Checking Rabbit Ears I see FOX is on display channel 48.3 KNVO. Thanks Trip. Is this unusual to place a major network on a sub-channel?Some small markets have setups like this. Hannibal, MO-Quincy, IL-Keokuk, IA has ABC on the CBS station's subchannel, and its NBC station has Fox and CW on subs.

was looking for info about WMDT and if i'm reading it right it looks like analog 47 will be cut off on 12/15/08. Does that mean the digital signal will move from 53 to 47 on that date? Also will the coverage area be bigger or smaller than the current coverage on 53?

If I am interpreting the search results correctly, the FCC has begun to grant some of the maximize ERP filings submitted before the June 20 deadline. I have only looked at a few, so some of the 301 & 340 filings for digital TV stations may be for other stuff, but the FCC has granted over 50 applications for DTV stations in the past week.

I expect Trip saw this, but WBRA-DT PBS 15 in the Roanoke, VA market got their application to go to 9.8 kW with a omni-directional antenna on VHF 3. One station close to me, WNVC-DT 56 in Fairfax, VA got 160 kW on UHF 24 compared to the 45 kW original post-trans allotment. Will be a lot of work to keep up with these.

was looking for info about WMDT and if i'm reading it right it looks like analog 47 will be cut off on 12/15/08. Does that mean the digital signal will move from 53 to 47 on that date? Also will the coverage area be bigger or smaller than the current coverage on 53?
Very recent July 3 FCC filing for WMDT-DT ABC 47 in Salisbury, MD requesting permission for conversion plan: they are now planning to turn off analog 47 on or about September 20, 2008; the driver for the early shutdown is the availability of the tower crew; expected to be 3-10 days after analog is turned off before the digital channel 47 is fully operational, then the digital signal on UHF 53 is shut off. The FCC filing is at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101252972&formid=910&fac_num=16455.

WMDT-DT will have a much stronger digital signal once they flash cut to UHF 47. The station will go from UHF 53 at 25.1 kW & 286 meters HAAT (Height Above Average Terrain) to UHF 47 at 350 kW using the antenna on top of the tower at 307 meters.

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), RIO GRANDE CITY, TEXAS. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 40 for DTV Channel 20 for Station KTLM-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11471). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/09/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1652). MB DA-08-1652A1.doc DA-08-1652A1.pdf DA-08-1652A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 49 for Channel 48 for Station WAFF-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11444). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/14/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1497). MB DA-08-1497A1.doc DA-08-1497A1.pdf DA-08-1497A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), LA GRANGE, OREGON. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 29 for DTV Channel 16 for Station KUNP-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11449). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/14/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1492). MB DA-08-1492A1.doc DA-08-1492A1.pdf DA-08-1492A1.txt

This is interesting (http://dtv.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=455642):

KTXA Dallas-Fort Worth will shut off its analog transmitter for 15 seconds sometime between 7 p.m.-9 p.m. July 23 as a test of the switch from analog to digital to help viewers determine whether their TVs are ready. "This is the most reliable way to know if you are ready for digital TV,” KTXA 21 senior vice president and station manager Gary Schneider said in announcing the test. “If your set goes dark during that time, you will know that you still need to take action before Feb. 17.”


The crap storm of irate phone calls, emails, and torch & pitchfork wielding villagers should be entertaining. OTOH there are worse ideas floating around out there.

I doubt anyone will notice.

I doubt anyone will notice.

Not many... the DFW market is just under 5,000,000 people, one station may (on a good night) get maybe 5% of that, of which only about 15 or 20% watch OTA -- that's less than 50,000; at least a few of them are bound to notice. :)
---
Reminds me of a time when I worked at a small TV station when there was a power failure at the transmitter site and the generator did not kick in. We were off the air for maybe an hour while somebody drove up the mountain to fire up the genny.
Not 5 minutes into the blackout the station manager called to ask what was wrong. I explained the situation.
He demanded to know why we had not done an announcement to explain to our viewers why we were off the air.
True story.

Reminds me of a time when I worked at a small TV station when there was a power failure at the transmitter site and the generator did not kick in. We were off the air for maybe an hour while somebody drove up the mountain to fire up the genny.
Not 5 minutes into the blackout the station manager called to ask what was wrong. I explained the situation.
He demanded to know why we had not done an announcement to explain to our viewers why we were off the air.
True story.

It happens more than you know.

This is interesting (http://dtv.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=455642):

Quote:
KTXA Dallas-Fort Worth will shut off its analog transmitter for 15 seconds sometime between 7 p.m.-9 p.m. July 23 as a test of the switch from analog to digital to help viewers determine whether their TVs are ready. "This is the most reliable way to know if you are ready for digital TV,” KTXA 21 senior vice president and station manager Gary Schneider said in announcing the test. “If your set goes dark during that time, you will know that you still need to take action before Feb. 17.”

The crap storm of irate phone calls, emails, and torch & pitchfork wielding villagers should be entertaining. OTOH there are worse ideas floating around out there.

I've heard of a few other stations who are planning to do this, too. The big problem with doing this now, though, is that those watching on analog cable and satellite will lose their picture. The cable and satellite systems haven't switched to the digital signals yet. Those viewers really won't have to do anything, because the cable and satellite systems will change to the digital signals before February 17, but the majority of them won't know that.

Stations should do that type of test after the cable and satellite services have made the switch. Then it'll be a good test to determine who really needs to do something.

Larry
SF

There is growing panic here in the San Francisco Bay Area. Viewers are finding out that KGO - ABC7 will be moving their digital transmission from channel 24 back to their analog channel 7 next February. They've put up CM4228's for digital reception, and seem to get KNTV on channel 12 okay, but they're afraid that the 4228 won't work for channel 7. They all wonder if they will have to add a VHF antenna.

Several of us have been repeating over and over to look at the signal you're now getting on analog 7 on the 4228. That'll give you a good idea of how well the 4228 will work for you next February. For most, they seem to think it's going to work okay.

Is this problem popping up in the local groups for other cities where UHF digitals are changing to VHF at the transition?

Larry
SF

TELEVISION STATIONS IDENTIFIED AS FACING “UNIQUE TECHNICAL CHALLENGE” DTV CONSTRUCTION DEADLINE MODIFIED TO FEBRUARY 17, 2009
In the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order, the Commission announced procedures whereby television stations with earlier digital television (DTV) construction deadlines now facing a “unique technical challenge” could document their status and thereby obtain February 17, 2009 as their new construction deadline.

The 20 stations in Appendix A made the requisite showing and have been determined to be facing a “unique technical challenge.” Therefore, the DTV construction deadline for
these stations is hereby modified to February 17, 2009.

For further information, contact the Shaun A. Maher, Video Division, Media Bureau, at 202-418-1600 or Shaun.Maher@fcc.gov. TTY: (202) 418-0432.

-FCC-

APPENDIX A
STATIONS FACING UNIQUE TECHNICAL CHALLENGE DTV CONSTRUCTION DEADLINE MODIFIED TO 2/17/09

KAUZ-DT Wichita Falls TX 6864 20080612AAD
KCSM-DT San Mateo CA 58912 20080516ABP
KDVR-DT Denver CO 126 20080318ACL
KETC-DT St. Louis MO 62182
KFTR-DT Ontario CA 60549 20080318ALZ
KLEW-DT Lewiston ID 56032 20080515ACK
KPTV-DT Portland OR 50633 20080528AFY
KQED-DT San Francisco CA 35500
KSNC-DT Great Bend KS 72359 20080603ACA
KVHP-DT Lake Charles LA 35852 20080306AAD
KVRR-DT Fargo ND 55372 200801617ADB
WCVI-DT Christiansted VI 83304
WEWS-DT Cleveland OH 59441
WJAR-DT Providence RI 50780 20080610AAM
WKBN-DT Youngstown OH 73153 20080508AAE
WLAE-DT New Orleans LA 18819 20080530AET
WMFD-DT Mansfield OH 41893 20080514ADZ
WMYO-DT Salem IN 34167 20080612ABE
WNPB-DT Morgantown WV 71676 20080616ACP
WTLW-DT Lima OH 1222

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1672A1.pdf

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), LONGVIEW, TEXAS. Proposed substituting Channel 38 for Channel 51 for Station KCEB-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11456, 08-112). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/15/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1486). MB DA-08-1486A1.doc DA-08-1486A1.pdf DA-08-1486A1.txt

Is this problem popping up in the local groups for other cities where UHF digitals are changing to VHF at the transition?


Not completely sure yet, In Eastern NC, we already have a DT channel 10, and I get it really well (91%) with a UHF yagi antenna at 42 miles. We will also have a channel 8 on the 17th of Feb. on a much shorter tower at 55 miles east. Whether or not the UHF will pull that in is the question. Also we will have a 12 DT at 25 miles but that should be fine.

This is interesting (http://dtv.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=455642)

KTXA Dallas-Fort Worth will shut off its analog transmitter for 15 seconds sometime between 7 p.m.-9 p.m. July 23



So they're just going to pick a random time? That seems kind of odd.

Some other stations have done a brief analog switchoff, but they've all set a specific time and promoted it so people can tune in for it. WSPA in Spartanburg SC did it last week during their 6 pm news, and announced the specific time frequently in promos for that segment ("Snowstorm in July") during the preceding few days.

There is growing panic here in the San Francisco Bay Area. Viewers are finding out that KGO - ABC7 will be moving their digital transmission from channel 24 back to their analog channel 7 next February. They've put up CM4228's for digital reception, and seem to get KNTV on channel 12 okay, but they're afraid that the 4228 won't work for channel 7. They all wonder if they will have to add a VHF antenna.

Several of us have been repeating over and over to look at the signal you're now getting on analog 7 on the 4228. That'll give you a good idea of how well the 4228 will work for you next February. For most, they seem to think it's going to work okay.

Is this problem popping up in the local groups for other cities where UHF digitals are changing to VHF at the transition?

Larry
SF

Not a peep on the LA board. I think the musical channels thing is the best kept secret of the whole DTV switch. I wonder how many people will wake up on the 17th and panic because several of their stations seem to have disappeared?

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 28 for DTV Channel 13 for Station KSTU-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11472, 08-144). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/10/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1692). MB DA-08-1692A1.doc DA-08-1692A1.pdf DA-08-1692A1.txt

I think the musical channels thing is the best kept secret of the whole DTV switch. I wonder how many people will wake up on the 17th and panic because several of their stations seem to have disappeared?Not many, but when they wake up on the eighteenth ...

The nation is so saturated by cable and satellite, I don't think it will be such a big deal.

Not a peep on the LA board. I think the musical channels thing is the best kept secret of the whole DTV switch. I wonder how many people will wake up on the 17th and panic because several of their stations seem to have disappeared?

Yeah, they're going to need a second DTV2009 campaign to tell everybody that already has digital tuners/converters that they'll need to find the manual for their equipment and figure out how to rescan all of their channels on Feb 17th, 2009.

Yeah, they're going to need a second DTV2009 campaign to tell everybody that already has digital tuners/converters that they'll need to find the manual for their equipment and figure out how to rescan all of their channels on Feb 17th, 2009.
If they need to find the manual on how to do a rescan, we are all in trouble. It is not that hard to find the option in the menus. But anyone who is putting in a converter box for grandma should take the time to explain how to do a re-scan not only for 02/17/09, but for the times a station sends out a messed up PSIP and the station get sent to a different channel. People need to learn that a re-scan is one of the step to take if a station disapears from the list or how to enter the physical RF channel for the station.

As for all stations changing physical digital channels next February, yes, this part is something that is often not covered in the mainstream press articles on the transition. The articles and on-line info gloss over what may be a major issue for some in cities where the big four are all on VHF that many VHF stations are currently on and may stay on on UHF. Of course, this leads to the opposite problem of people who think that all digital TV stations will be on UHF and will stay that way.

I wonder how many even on avsforum know which of their local stations will be moving from UHF to upper VHF or in a few cases to low VHF? How many have their antenna setup ready for the post-transition era? Poll worthy questions?

I wonder how many even on avsforum know which of their local stations will be moving from UHF to upper VHF or in a few cases to low VHF? How many have their antenna setup ready for the post-transition era? Poll worthy questions?

I think it is - just as a general knowledge reminder for people.

My answers - I'm EXTREMELY aware of where my DTV channels are now and where they will be going :D . I also know how to reprogram all my equipment and my antenna setup is ready. I might add one piece after all the moving is done, but it is not crucial. I may also re-do my antennas after D-Day.

Not many... the DFW market is just under 5,000,000 people, one station may (on a good night) get maybe 5% of that, of which only about 15 or 20% watch OTA -- that's less than 50,000; at least a few of them are bound to notice. :)


Actually, the DFW market is well over 5 million people. Per an article in the June 16 edition of
i Broadcasting & Cable
the current estimate is 6.72 million people. The TVB website gives Nielsen's estimates of cable and "ADS" (alternative delivery services, primarily satellite) for all markets, and their latest estimates (May 2008) for DFW is that 78.3% of area households receive cable and/or ADS service. Doing the math, that says that 21.7% of DFW households are OTA only. When one factors in the households that may have some televisions connected to cable or satellite, and some that are connected to rabbit ears, the likely percentage of OTA viewers in this market is going to be well above "15 or 20%" -- if I were to make a guess, I'll bet it would be more like 30% or more around here. This isn't one of those heavily cable northeastern markets where people just automatically assume that you have to pay for television; with our flat terrain and all the digital TV stations transmitting from the same area, this is a very strong OTA market.

It will get noticed around here, even running on a fairly low rated station like KTXA/21.

Not a peep on the LA board. I think the musical channels thing is the best kept secret of the whole DTV switch. I wonder how many people will wake up on the 17th and panic because several of their stations seem to have disappeared?

It comes up now and then, but perhaps not often enough. It's been about a month since the last time we discussed it, though the consequences of such could certainly be better noted.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=14054722#post14054722

Many of the bow-ties perform more poorly towards 7 than 13. It seems to related to the third harmonic for antennas cut for 69. Re-designing antennas for 51 could help. If most ABC O&O's were on analog 4, this would be a more serious issue.

As for re-scanning, probably most that are currently using DTV will know what to do. The masses are being "educated" that DTV will begin next year. :rolleyes:

Actually, the DFW market is well over 5 million people. Per an article in the June 16 edition of
i Broadcasting & Cable
the current estimate is 6.72 million people. The TVB website gives Nielsen's estimates of cable and "ADS" (alternative delivery services, primarily satellite) for all markets, and their latest estimates (May 2008) for DFW is that 78.3% of area households receive cable and/or ADS service. Doing the math, that says that 21.7% of DFW households are OTA only. When one factors in the households that may have some televisions connected to cable or satellite, and some that are connected to rabbit ears, the likely percentage of OTA viewers in this market is going to be well above "15 or 20%" -- if I were to make a guess, I'll bet it would be more like 30% or more around here. This isn't one of those heavily cable northeastern markets where people just automatically assume that you have to pay for television; with our flat terrain and all the digital TV stations transmitting from the same area, this is a very strong OTA market.

It will get noticed around here, even running on a fairly low rated station like KTXA/21.


That what I get for pulling my data from Nielsen! :)
The 15-20% is a SWAG based on national averages. So, you made me look again. And according to a report released earlier this year by Consumers Union (http://www.hearusnow.org/fileadmin/sitecontent/dtv_nielson_final_release_--_full_version.pdf), the actual OTA percentage in the Dallas-Fort Worth DMA is just over 22%.

Still, the point I was trying to make is that even in DFW, the vast majority of homes get their TV from cable or satellite. And that even if the test is valid (that is, the station does an uninterrupted fiber feed to cable and satellite intakes) the interruption will have to be significant enough for OTA viewers to notice and potentially be motivated enough to take action.

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), HENDERSONVILLE, TENNESSEE. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 51 for DTV Channel 33 for Station WPGD-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11460, 08-128). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/18/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1698). MB DA-08-1698A1.doc DA-08-1698A1.pdf DA-08-1698A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), HONOLULU AND WAIMANALO, HAWAII. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *10 for DTV Channel *38 for Station KALO-DT and proposed substituting DTV Channel 38 for DTV Channel 15 for Station KUPU-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11435, 08-98). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/18/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1485). MB DA-08-1485A1.doc DA-08-1485A1.pdf DA-08-1485A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), STUART, FLORIDA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 44 for DTV Channel 42 for Station WHDT-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11473, 08-147). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/17/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1705). MB DA-08-1705A1.doc DA-08-1705A1.pdf DA-08-1705A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), GLENDIVE, MONTANA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 10 for DTV Channel 5 for Station KXGN-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11446, 08-113). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/17/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1495). MB DA-08-1495A1.doc DA-08-1495A1.pdf DA-08-1495A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), FORT WORTH, TEXAS. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 18 for DTV Channel 19 for Station KTXA-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11474, 08-148). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/17/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1704). MB DA-08-1704A1.doc DA-08-1704A1.pdf DA-08-1704A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), COLUMBUS, GEORGIA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *23 for DTV Channel *11 for Station of WJSP-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11475, 08-149). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/17/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1703). MB DA-08-1703A1.doc DA-08-1703A1.pdf DA-08-1703A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), SPOKANE, WASHINGTON. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 7 for DTV Channel 15 for Station KHQ-DT, and proposed substituting DTV Channel *8 for DTV Channel *7 for Station KSPS-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11461, 08-129). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/22/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1712). MB DA-08-1712A1.doc DA-08-1712A1.pdf DA-08-1712A1.txt

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), SPOKANE, WASHINGTON. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 7 for DTV Channel 15 for Station KHQ-DT, and proposed substituting DTV Channel *8 for DTV Channel *7 for Station KSPS-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11461, 08-129). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/22/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1712). MB DA-08-1712A1.doc DA-08-1712A1.pdf DA-08-1712A1.txt

From the Department of Dumb Questions: What's with the occasional channel designation *7 rather than just 7 in the DTV Allotment Change requests?
And in the Bonus Round: After transition, will station calls revert back to the "TV" suffix, or stay with the "DT" - or will either one be allowed?

In the FCC records, an asterick by a channel number denotes it is to be use for non commerical/educational use only, ie PBS or other educational station.

As for the second, good question. All the CP's that I have seen have had -DT listed even the ones for CP's on old analog channels and by law, what the license says is what you are to use as your call sign. So if it says WABC-DT, then that is what call sign is. Of course you can go back and have it changed to drop the -DT as some stations have to drop -TV but I suspect that will not happen until after the transition.

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), COLUMBUS, GEORGIA. Proposed substituting DTV Channel *23 for DTV Channel *11 for Station of WJSP-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11475, 08-149). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/17/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1703). MB DA-08-1703A1.doc DA-08-1703A1.pdf DA-08-1703A1.txt

If I'm reading these correctly, the 2nd listed channel is the one they want to move to, right?

In the case of WJSP, I show that WTVM also wants 11.

Yep.

Hmm, two petitions for rule-making showed up on July 15, both from Pappas.

KHGI-DT wants to operate on 13 instead of 36.

KSWT-DT wants to operate on 13 instead of 16.

Pappas wants to reuse existing antennas apparently. It's a good call financially, given the current situation with the company.

- Trip

In the FCC records, an asterick by a channel number denotes it is to be use for non commerical/educational use only, ie PBS or other educational station.

As for the second, good question. All the CP's that I have seen have had -DT listed even the ones for CP's on old analog channels and by law, what the license says is what you are to use as your call sign. So if it says WABC-DT, then that is what call sign is. Of course you can go back and have it changed to drop the -DT as some stations have to drop -TV but I suspect that will not happen until after the transition.

Thanks for the info.

I have redone my channel change page!

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

It now contains direct links to each station's Petition for Rule Making, any other filings, and the FCC's NPRM (if posted).

- Trip

Trip,

Thanks for putting this info in a convenient format and for including the links. I wonder how long it will be before the FCC takes any action on these. They still seem to be busy enough with the maximization filings, however.

KCOP's request for 120kW on 13 was struck down, it appears due to Mexican concerns. It looks like 13.5kW will have to do. It doesn't bode well for the other local maximizations requested.

Trip,

Thanks for putting this info in a convenient format and for including the links. I wonder how long it will be before the FCC takes any action on these. They still seem to be busy enough with the maximization filings, however.

KCOP's request for 120kW on 13 was struck down, it appears due to Mexican concerns. It looks like 13.5kW will have to do. It doesn't bode well for the other local maximizations requested.

In fairness, 120 kW is a gigantic increase for channel 13 DTV.

In our market, WQED of Pittsburgh requested and received approval for an increase from 13 kW to 26 kW. I would suspect that the FCC will want to take these increases slowly until they understand the full extent of the need after February.

Yeah, the FCC could save us all some grief and just admit that the power levels they're assigning aren't sufficient. But, they won't. They're going to make everyone beg, one-by-one.

I'd be surprised to see anyone get more than a 100% increase.

Trip,

Thanks for putting this info in a convenient format and for including the links. I wonder how long it will be before the FCC takes any action on these. They still seem to be busy enough with the maximization filings, however.

They're already taking action on them. Any that have NPRMs attached have had action taken. After the comment period is up following the issuance of the NPRM, assuming there are no objections, the allocation table change occurs. Don't quote me on that though, I'm not sure.

- Trip

I have redone my channel change page!

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

It now contains direct links to each station's Petition for Rule Making, any other filings, and the FCC's NPRM (if posted).

- Trip

Thanks for digging through the files, Trip. Great work!

Steve

They're already taking action on them. Any that have NPRMs attached have had action taken. After the comment period is up following the issuance of the NPRM, assuming there are no objections, the allocation table change occurs. Don't quote me on that though, I'm not sure.


Great. Thanks again for doing this. It appears that quite a few are at the next step already, including KMBC's request for 29. Can anyone file comments? They reference an Appendix outlining the proper procedure.

It also appears that WTVM is losing the battle with WJSP over channel 11, in Columbus Georgia. WJSP's petition is being considered, but will only 2kW on 11 replicate 5000kW on 28? WTVM had an interference agreement with another station (WSFA) for 50kW on 11. I don't see any notes from WJSP for the same.

Yes, as long as you have that Docket number (like for WBRA it's 08-114) you can use the ECFS to file comments. I have 6 pages of comments prepared to file for WBRA-DT's app.

- Trip

The difference of the polarizations is the angle at which the signal travels over the surface of the earth. Horizontal travels flat, just like you see TV antennas now. Vertical travels at right angles to the earth like you see in CB antennas and AM antennas on cars. CP travels in a helical spiral pattern but there are two pols with this mode as well. Left hand and right hand rotation. Each mode gives about 20 db of isolation from each other. Meaning a horizontal signal received on a vertical antenna is 20 db lower in signal strength than the same signal in the same location at the same receive height being received by a horizontal antenna.

So what happens when a CP signal is picked up by a horizontal antenna? And what is E polarization?

David

I noticed there are only TV stations from Marquette for Michigan's Upper Pennisula. Some of the stations missing are already broadcasting digitally. Such as, Cheboygan WTOM-DT channel 35.

Here is a list of stations I found
http://www.northpine.com/broadcast/mi/tvmarkets.html

David

Cheboygan is in the lower peninsula BTW.
Besides the Marquette DMA, there are Channels 10 and 7 from Sault Ste. Marie, which are satellites of 9 and 4 from Traverse City and are considered part of the Traverse City DMA. These stations are broadcasting digitally, but when I took a converter box up to the cabin, I couldn't get a thing. Maybe they are just super low power in their pre-transistion state.

So what happens when a CP signal is picked up by a horizontal antenna? And what is E polarization?

David

In theory, a CP antenna at one end and a linear antenna at the other has 3 dB loss over matched polarization antennas. My experience with ham radio CP antennas is that this is true for line-of-sight paths but for non line-of-sight paths, like going over mountains, it is better to have at least one CP antenna.

I can't find the original quote, but I assume "E polarization" refers to E-plane. E-plane is the electrical field of an antenna and H-plane is the magnetic field and they are perpendicular to each other. E-plane is what is meant when you say that an antenna is horizontal or vertical polarization.

I would assume that the best antenna for broadcasters is the CP. A 3dB loss for viewers who are line-of-sight means little but it really does help those viewers who have obstructions.

Actually, it is elliptical polarization, see this definition. (http://www.answers.com/topic/elliptical-polarization)

Thanks for the info @ Rabbit Ears...good stuff...Nice effort on your part for keeping current Trip!

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), BANGOR, MAINE. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 19 for DTV Channel 12 for Station WABI-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11477). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/24/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1735). MB DA-08-1735A1.doc DA-08-1735A1.pdf DA-08-1735A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), HONOLULU, HAWAII. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 9 for DTV Channel 22 for Station KGMB-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11479). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/24/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1734). MB DA-08-1734A1.doc DA-08-1734A1.pdf DA-08-1734A1.txt


POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), LA CROSSE, WISCONSIN. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 14 for DTV Channel 48 for Station WXOW-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11480). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/24/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1736). MB DA-08-1736A1.doc DA-08-1736A1.pdf DA-08-1736A1.txt


WWAZ-TV, FOND DU LAC, WISCONSIN. Granted the request of WWAZ License, LLC to surrender its analog license and operate WWAZ-DT, Fond du Lac, WI as a single channel, digital-only television station. Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau by LETTER. (DA No. 08-1569). MB DA-08-1569A1.doc DA-08-1569A1.pdf DA-08-1569A1.txt


WTBY-TV, POUGHKEEPSIE, NEW YORK. Granted the request of Trinity Broadcasting of New York, Inc. to surrender its analog license and operate WTBY-DT, Poughkeepsie, NY as a single channel, digital-only television station. Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau by LETTER. (DA No. 08-1571). MB DA-08-1571A1.doc DA-08-1571A1.pdf DA-08-1571A1.txt

Was there another required update of the Form 387's in the past week? There are almost 900 new filings since my last update to these on 7/11. I have no idea when I will be able to review these, especially if hundreds more follow.

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 73.622(I), BANGOR, MAINE. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 19 for DTV Channel 12 for Station WABI-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11477). Action by: Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 07/24/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1735). MB DA-08-1735A1.doc DA-08-1735A1.pdf DA-08-1735A1.txt


If granted, this would appear to make Bangor, ME the first all VHF DTV DMA, with 5 or more stations (as respects full power stations). However, WLBZ may not find 2 to their liking, but channel 13 appears to be available if they do not.

With DTV adjacent rules being more favorable will we see more such DMA's in the 100+ range? Probably not too many unless the US ever gets organized and assigns specific parts of the band(s) to specific areas.

Was there another required update of the Form 387's in the past week? There are almost 900 new filings since my last update to these on 7/11. I have no idea when I will be able to review these, especially if hundreds more follow.
Looks like it. These are all updates or amendments to 387's filed earlier this year. However, a spot check of stations in my area does not show that all stations have filed an update. Were there rules that required some stations to file an update, but not others? The spot check of the updated 387s show some stations have no changes to their earlier plan, but others do have revisions.

For example WJLA-DT ABC 7 now plans to reduce analog power for 4 days in August to modify the VHF 7 transmitter for digital operation and then resume full analog power until the shutdown instead of reducing power by 50% early in January. Looks like they decided as a big four station in a major city to keep the analog signal at full strength until the bitter end. WHAG NBC 25 in Hagerstown, MD now plans to shut down analog a week early so they can replace the UHF 25 antenna with a new one for digital UHF 26 operation.

Was there another required update of the Form 387's in the past week? There are almost 900 new filings since my last update to these on 7/11. I have no idea when I will be able to review these, especially if hundreds more follow.

Yes. And I believe there is one more before the end. If I remember correctly, if a station is operating it's post transition facility with no changes and is licensed for it, they do not have to submit updates since they are finished.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322
DA 08-1568
Released: July 29, 2008
MEDIA BUREAU RECEIVES REQUEST BY ANALOG TELEVISION STATION
IN THE UPPER 700 MHZ BAND TO CEASE ANALOG BROADCASTING,
SURRENDER NTSC LICENSE, AND OPERATE AS
A SINGLE CHANNEL, DIGITAL-ONLY TELEVISION STATION
In the 700 MHz First Report and Order,1 the Commission adopted service rules for licensing
the commercial use of the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands, which had been
reallocated by Congressional direction from their previous use solely for the broadcasting
service. On reconsideration, the Commission clarified how it would review, on a case-by-
case basis, requests by incumbent broadcasters on channels 60-69 to voluntarily vacate their
NTSC channels prior to the end of the DTV transition.2
The Media Bureau has received a request from Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc., the licensee
of analog television station WLLA(TV), NTSC Channel 64, and digital television station
WLLA-DT, DTV Channel 45, Kalamazoo, Michigan,3 for Commission authority to: (i)
cease analog broadcasting on NTSC Channel 64 and surrender its license for the channel
prior to the end of the DTV transition; and (ii) thereafter operate WLLA-DT as a single
channel, digital-only television station on DTV Channel 45.
This request is available for inspection at the Commission’s Reference Center, 445 Twelfth
Street, S.W., Room CY-A257, Washington, D.C. 20554, and may also be accessed on the
FCC’s website at www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tv.html.
To promote the public interest and consistent with the requirement adopted in the Third DTV
Periodic Review Report and Order,4 Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. must comply with the
following viewer notification requirements: The station must air viewer notifications on
its analog and DTV facilities every day on-air at least four times a day including at least once

1 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s
Rules, WT Docket No. 99-168, First Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 476 (2000).
2 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s
Rules, WT Docket No. 99-168 et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 20845, 20868-72 (2000).
3 Facility ID 11033.
4 In the Matter of Third Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion
to Digital Television, FCC 07-228 (released December 31, 2007).
2
in primetime for a 60-day period prior to termination of broadcasting the analog signal.
These notifications must include: (1) the station’s call sign and community of license; (2) the
fact that the station intends to terminate its analog operations before the transition date; (3)
the expected date of analog termination; (4) what viewers can do to continue to receive the
station, i.e., how and when the station’s digital signal can be received, and whether viewers
will need to repeat the channel scan on their DTV receivers; (5) information about the
availability of digital- to-analog converter boxes in their service area; and (6) the street
address, email address (if available), and phone number of the station where viewers may
register comments or request information.
For further information, contact Joyce Bernstein of the Media Bureau, Video Division at
(202) 418-1647.
By: Chief, Media Bureau
-FCC-

If granted, this would appear to make Bangor, ME the first all VHF DTV DMA, with 5 or more stations (as respects full power stations). However, WLBZ may not find 2 to their liking, but channel 13 appears to be available if they do not.

With DTV adjacent rules being more favorable will we see more such DMA's in the 100+ range? Probably not too many unless the US ever gets organized and assigns specific parts of the band(s) to specific areas.
It is interesting that Bangor, ME might have all the full power stations on VHF. WABI reason for moving to UHF 12 is to save money on operating cost, not unreasonable for a small market DMA. Bangor has to be one of the more isolated cities in the lower 48, so they don't have that many nearby cities to contend with on broadcast channels.

But before someone thinks that they can unload their extra VHF only antenna(s) in Bangor, the Bangor Fox affiliate is a WFVX-LP 22. WFVX is also the My Network affiliate. The station has a LD application for digital operation on UHF 22 at 15 kW which could give it OTA decent coverage. Besides some UHF translators, there is also a Class A WBGR-LP Ion/America One 33 station in Bangor.

If a city or market has only 1 remaining VHF station, it could make sense to move it so all the stations are on UHF. But the flip side of putting all the stations on VHF is not likely to be practical because the smaller market cities will have LP or TX stations on UHF to contend with.

Each station is issued a UNIQUE digital ID from the FCC (currently being a table created by ATSC several years ago and approved by the FCC) called a TSID or Transport Stream ID. This is a 4 digit HEX number that is unique to each station and major channel numbers are linked to it. This is how you can have a virtual channel 38 and an unrelated actual RF channel 38 (with a different virtual channel number) listed in the same EPG and be able to tune to both depending on which one you click on. The VCT (Virtual Channel Table) holds 3 items (the TSID, RF channel and Virtual Channel) that are linked together and this is how the tuner knows which channel to actually select, for each station. Tuners do not use virtual or RF channels to determine where to tune but use the TSID as the reference and then looks to see where to tune for that station. When you enter the virtual channel number, the TSID is referenced and the correct RF channel is selected. If the TSID is not present or is the same as another station in the market (a common problem in the early days when stations never bothered to correctly set the TSID and left it with the default 0 or 1) stations will not be received because the tuner will not know which TSID to use to reference the correct RF channel (more than one of the same number).

I must be misunderstanding what you are trying to say, because real world experience is different.

What I'm about to describe is based upon the Digital Stream 9900 cheapy converter.

I turned it on and let it scan, so that it can build its table. For some strange reason it missed 27A/26D. So I directly tuned 26, to which it then tuned and mapped. I read that the station was not in the receiver's VCT, you can never directly tune, which is obviously wrong, because all digital tuners can directly tune the digital RF channel. No VCT or TSID entry exists for said station. Gotta get there somehow.

Here comes the cute part. If a station gave up analog 38 and is now on 22 and then a new station comes along and is assigned RF 38, the viewer would never be able to manually tune 38 to get the new channel, because the VCT/TSID data has said that 38 is now equal to RF 22 and goes there. Talk about a frustrated joe/Jane viewer. If the new station identifies themself as XYZ19 and Joe/Jane tries tuning 19, they'll still get nothing.

Here comes the kicker, which just might piss off Joe and Jane even more... they do a rescan, but the rescan only gets some of the channels, because the antenna is pointing in the wrong directlon and if rescanning does a delete all before scanning, that means they have to repoint the antenna and manually reenter all of the missing channels, instead of repointing and rescanning add.

Like I've said, IMHO mandated chaos is wrong. As another poster noted, he favors the stations being forced to use the new channel number after the transition in all identification. No more chaos. Expensive? Yes. Chaos? No.

As I said, each station has its own unique TSID no matter what channel it is on and they are required to transmit it so the VCT can located it. Should that station change channels, the TSID stays with the station, not the channel. The next time a scan is done or a manual channel change is called, the VCT is updated with the new information. That is how the system works, I see it working all the time. Right now in my DX DTV receiver I have 2 analog channel 8's (DT-35 and DT-25) 1 analog 17 (DT-53) 1 analog 27 with DT-17 and because of TSID, my receiver knows which one to go to when I tell it. The system works.

As I said, each station has its own unique TSID no matter what channel it is on and they are required to transmit it so the VCT can located it. Should that station change channels, the TSID stays with the station, not the channel. The next time a scan is done or a manual channel change is called, the VCT is updated with the new information. That is how the system works, I see it working all the time.

This description is a little bit different than your first one, which appeared to imply that the user couldn't manually tune to the digital RF channel, i.e., that it had to use the VCT in order to tune it in. I knew that you really didn't mean that, but that is how I read it.

Right now in my DX DTV receiver I have 2 analog channel 8's (DT-35 and DT-25) 1 analog 17 (DT-53) 1 analog 27 with DT-17 and because of TSID, my receiver knows which one to go to when I tell it. The system works.

I'm not saying that the system doesn't work. But notice that a TSID and VCT are needed in order to tune, AFTER the digital RF channel is found. That is all well and good if the autoscan finds the digital RF channels in the first place. There are situations whereby the user is in a location where an outside antenna is required and when the antenna is pointed in one location, the receiver doesn't "see" the channels located in the other direction. If the user's receiver can autoscan add, then that user is fine, in that the antenna can be repointed and the update scan done.

But there are those receivers that when an autoscan is done, clears out the VCT first. In that case the user has to manually add the other channels by manually tuning them. Same case if a new station goes on air. The user will need to know the true RF channel before the receiver can add it to the VCT. And with the station probably identifying itself via a number that it really isn't using, the station can't be found, since tuning to that channel results in nothing being received. The poor user is confused and frustrated and has to now figure out where the channel is really located, if they knew that the new digital scheme means that what channel the station is branding itself by it not necessarily the channel that it is broadcasting on.

Now if every station in an area sent out the TSID/VCTs for all of the stations in the area, then all the user would have to do is tune in one channel and bam, the receiver now knows about all of the others in the area. Basically the DCII VCT scheme. I tune in one CBS RF feed and bam, I now have the complete VCT. This way, if a new RF channel 49 showed up in the area, which brands itself as 15, because of the someone is already branded at 49 (RF 32), the viewer sees some kind of ad that says channel 15 is now on the air, they punch in 15 and bam, there it is, or better yet, they use their up/down button and bam, they now discovered a new channel exists. Something you can do in the analog world, but no longer do in the digital world, because every broadcaster just reports to the receiver who they are, not giving a damn about the other channels in town.

Like I said, while the readers of this forum have a better handle as to what is going on, poor John and Jane average viewer do not have a clue. Many of them are going to be thinking about how they tuned channels before, where if you wanted channel 3 OTA, you tuned channel 3. Image their surprise after they get into the situation where they try tuning channel 3 on the new CECB, only to discover that there is nothing there at 3, as it is now really at 50 (my market). Yes, in theory they should have let the CECB autoscan. If all goes according to plan, they'll be OK. But in the new digital world, plans can go wrong.

I hope you understand what I am trying to say. I'm not the only one that believes that your branded channel should be your actual RF channel. In the old analog world, if you changed analog channels, you had to spend the money to rebrand at the new channel. That whole concept is being thrown out the window and many average OTA TV viewers will not know that.

But before someone thinks that they can unload their extra VHF only antenna(s) in Bangor, the Bangor Fox affiliate is a WFVX-LP 22. WFVX is also the My Network affiliate. The station has a LD application for digital operation on UHF 22 at 15 kW which could give it OTA decent coverage. Besides some UHF translators, there is also a Class A WBGR-LP Ion/America One 33 station in Bangor.

If a city or market has only 1 remaining VHF station, it could make sense to move it so all the stations are on UHF. But the flip side of putting all the stations on VHF is not likely to be practical because the smaller market cities will have LP or TX stations on UHF to contend with.

I suppose that even the smaller markets can't expect to be VHF only, due to the LP stations. The UHF band would have been able to support all stations in all DMA's, probably even with 14-59. It's unfortunate that we will still have to contend with multiple bands (and combos or separates) in almost all areas.

If a city or market has only 1 remaining VHF station, it could make sense to move it so all the stations are on UHF. But the flip side of putting all the stations on VHF is not likely to be practical because the smaller market cities will have LP or TX stations on UHF to contend with.

My market is like that. Ignoring the few LPTV stations that exist (which I believe are all UHF anyway), we have one one digital VHF station, the Fox affiliate on channel 11. Their analog is 47 and I think they wanted to go back but were not allowed. But I think I read somewhere that they are trying to get changed to a UHF channel in this market as way too many people are reporting reception problems. There have a few posts from local viewers, in the local thread, asking how to get Fox47, while they have no problem with the other UHF channels.

Yep, the transition is a real blast. :D

WMSN-DT is trying to get moved from DT-11 to DT-49.

- Trip

WMSN-DT is trying to get moved from DT-11 to DT-49.

Thanks, I knew I read that somewhere. I wonder if they'll be able to use their existing UHF antenna if they manage to get 49.

Side questions. How is it that you can list links to your website in your signature, while if I do that (list my website), I'm told to remove it?

In your station listings, you have a TSReader category? What is that for?

Vizio tvs will not allow direct entry of RF digital channel numbers. It is scan or no receive. There is also no add-on scan function. I have read that RCA converter boxes work the same way.

Side questions. How is it that you can list links to your website in your signature, while if I do that (list my website), I'm told to remove it?

I'm not certain. I've never had any issues with linking my site here; maybe it has something to do with how directly related it is to the subject at hand? I really don't know and wasn't even aware that there was any kind of issue with links in signatures like that.

In your station listings, you have a TSReader category? What is that for?

TSReader is an application for Windows XP which takes the signal of a digital station and analyzes it. It supports most modern computer-based digital receivers.

Basically, I drag it and an antenna with me when I go places and get captures. I've also asked several people around the forum (they are credited on my credits page) with such equipment to send me such captures. I'm due to upload the newest ones in the near future.

TSReader output looks something like this, this one is taken from my local CBS station:

http://www.rabbitears.info/screencaps/va-roa/71329-0_0.htm

(Yes, the images are broken, ignore that)

You'll find that in markets where I've either visited personally or I've been given data by others, that "TSReader Data" section actually is text that links to output that looks like that. That contains just about everything about the bitstream you could want to know. (It also can show the guide data, but that's so large that I don't keep it in the outputs I post on my site.)

At some point I need to add a guide to my site about what it all means. Unfortunately, between work, school in under a month, and the digital transition (I have 900+ FCC filings to look through sometime in the near future), it's a low priority.

I hope some of that helps, and if you have any further questions, don't hesitate to ask. =)

- Trip

Vizio tvs will not allow direct entry of RF digital channel numbers. It is scan or no receive. There is also no add-on scan function. I have read that RCA converter boxes work the same way.

Damn, that is really not consumer friendly.

What I'm about to describe is based upon the Digital Stream 9900 cheapy converter. ...

Here comes the cute part. If a station gave up analog 38 and is now on 22 and then a new station comes along and is assigned RF 38, the viewer would never be able to manually tune 38 to get the new channel, because the VCT/TSID data has said that 38 is now equal to RF 22 and goes there.Ironically, your DTX9900 is one of the few tuners that can get around that.  Enter .38 (note the leading period) and it will tune to RF38's main channel rather than to virtual 38.1.

The biggest problem with PSIP - TSID is the way receivers function. As pointed out above, some receivers clear the table when you scan, some allow you to add channels to the list when you scan, some let you enter the RF channel so you can manually add stations, some don't allow you to enter the RF channel at all and you can only scan to get stations, some receivers don't use the PSIP information at all, and so on.... it really varies a lot, so the results can be very different from receiver to receiver.

I have six different receivers... two Sony XBRs, Dish 622, Hi-Pix, Win-TV 950, and a Infinity digital to analog converter... and they all work differently. Even the two Sonys aren't alike. Using the same antenna I get stations on some of the receivers that I don't get on others due to PSIP interpretation. Then there's the sensitivity issue and multipath rejection, too, so my station lists vary from receiver to receiver.

I find it interesting that with the Hi-Pix receiver I can designate any channel I want as the Virtual Channel and it doesn't care. They have a table where you select each channel and manually assign the Virtual Channel you want. For example, if it's RF 24, I can call it 3, 7, 24, or any channel number that's not already used. It doesn't care, as it uses the RF channel info only. To really test this I made the ABC station 2, CBS as 3, CW as 4, FOX as 5, NBC as 6, etc. If I tuned to 2 I got ABC. If I tuned to 3 I got CBS, and so on.

Most of us have figured out how to get around the problems and the various weird circumstances, but I feel sorry for the newcomers, Dick, Jane and the kids, who have no idea what's going on. Probably most just settle on whatever they get with the initial scan and never go any further, so they end up missing a lot of channels available to them.

Earlier today someone here in the SF Bay Area posted an interesting situation having to do with tuning and digital reception. Let me copy and paste it here for you:

- - -

While I was getting my vehicle smog checked in Mountain View, I
waited and for the lack of anything better to do, I watched some TV
(ugh, afternoon TV). The TV was a LCD HDTV but didn't really think
about HDTV since such TVs are rarely showing HD content.

As 1pm rolled around, I tried to find something decent to watch, so I
tuned to channel 9 (analog) and got a snowy picture. Obviously using
a UHF antenna as 9 was barely viewable. I noticed '-' on the remote,
so I did 9-1 and it came in perfectly in HD.

The other person in the office went, "Wow! How did you do that? We
only have an antenna. We can get HD over it?". I replied, "Looks
that way."

Among the other channels I checked where 2-1, 7-1, 11-1 which all
came in fine.

- - -

I think this might be representative of more than a few people out there with new digital receivers. They don't even know they can get HD OTA. Apparently someone had already done a scan on the TV in the waiting room, but the people working there didn't know they could receive HD.

There is going to be a lot of educating to do in the months ahead so that average Joe will be able to watch his local channels OTA. First they have to figure out what their receiver is doing!

Larry
SF

I hope you understand what I am trying to say. I'm not the only one that believes that your branded channel should be your actual RF channel. In the old analog world, if you changed analog channels, you had to spend the money to rebrand at the new channel. That whole concept is being thrown out the window and many average OTA TV viewers will not know that.

You are arguing with the wrong people here. You need to go to the FCC. But the point is, this has been debated at the FCC for 6 years by lawmakers, broadcasters, engineers and the ATSC and this is what it is and it isn't going to be changing. To continue this debate here it is pointless. We can't do anything about it.

The system, as designed, works. No where that I have seen does the ATSC say you CAN'T manually tune a station. If a receiver doesn't allow for a manual channel change, that isn't the ATSC standards fault, but the fault of the manufacturer to allow this. And yes, there are receivers that will allow both a manual tune and a rescan without loosing what is already scanned in. I personally own one that does BOTH. Problem is, they are NOT the majority of receivers out in the field at this time.

Well, that was fun. Tried to submit comments to the FCC regarding WBRA-DT's request to move to channel 26 this morning.

"This proceeding is not open to comments from the ECFS." So I have to mail my comments in.

- Trip

Regarding digital tuners that both allow you to tune to a channel directly and do a rescan by only adding new "finds", my Best Buy Insignia does that.

Regarding the FCC, I've run into this situation also - mail only. Isn't it amazing that the agency that controls electronic media doesn't accept electronic documents on a 100% basis? I sent a reply I received from the FCC on this to my Rep/Senators asking them to try to require the FCC to get with the program. Got generic emails back. But that's what I expected and least it was an electronic response!

You are arguing with the wrong people here. You need to go to the FCC. But the point is, this has been debated at the FCC for 6 years by lawmakers, broadcasters, engineers and the ATSC and this is what it is and it isn't going to be changing. To continue this debate here it is pointless. We can't do anything about it.


AND of course, we know the FCC is never wrong....like CB on 27MHz, AM stereo, no code ham license (aka: the new CB on Shortwave), AM IBUZ...eeeerrrr IBOC, radio consolidation, the XM-Sirius merger and much much more :D

Regarding digital tuners that both allow you to tune to a channel directly and do a rescan by only adding new "finds", my Best Buy Insignia does that.


So does the new R/S box and the CM 7000 too. The RS allows you to manually tune via mapped or RF channel....nice! I think its better than the CM box!

We can't do anything about it.

I agree, there is nothing that can be done. The door has been closed on and technical changes. Rulemaking changes for getting channel ID to be real channels will never happen either. The money will keep anything there from happening as well.

I'm strongly voicing my displeasure with aspects of what was put together.

The system, as designed, works.

Bingo. Therein lies the problem. IMHO the design is flawed. Unfortunately I wasn't paying attention during the public comment period and that is my fault. Not that anyone would have cared about what little old me had to say.

No where that I have seen does the ATSC say you CAN'T manually tune a station. If a receiver doesn't allow for a manual channel change, that isn't the ATSC standards fault, but the fault of the manufacturer to allow this.

No, it is the ATSC standard's fault in that it doesn't require that manual tuning must be there, so that makes it a loophole for the manufacturers to drive a Mack truck through. If you don't require it, you know damn well that someone is not going to do it.

And yes, there are receivers that will allow both a manual tune and a rescan without loosing what is already scanned in. I personally own one that does BOTH. Problem is, they are NOT the majority of receivers out in the field at this time.

The Digital Stream 9900 does as well.

In any event, you are very right in that this discussion isn't going to result in any changes. The government/ATSC has made their bed and now they have to lie on it, lumps and all.

I should probably vent my frustration with the whole ATSC digital infrastructure in a different thread. Is there a thread for venting displeasure with the ATSC standard and how it is being used by the broadcasters?

No, it is the ATSC standard's fault in that it doesn't require that manual tuning must be there, so that makes it a loophole for the manufacturers to drive a Mack truck through. If you don't require it, you know damn well that someone is not going to do it.


There are some requirements (most from ATSC A74 recommended practices for receivers) for the CECB's, otherwise there are no DTV receiver performance standards which manufacturers are required to follow.

If granted, this would appear to make Bangor, ME the first all VHF DTV DMA, with 5 or more stations (as respects full power stations). However, WLBZ may not find 2 to their liking, but channel 13 appears to be available if they do not.

With DTV adjacent rules being more favorable will we see more such DMA's in the 100+ range? Probably not too many unless the US ever gets organized and assigns specific parts of the band(s) to specific areas.

Actually, the correct answer to that trivia question is Las Vegas.

KVBC-DT 2
KLAS-DT 7
KVVU-DT 9
KLVX-DT 11
KTNV-DT 12 (to be 13 post-transition)

Another market with 5 VHFs next year: Grand Rapids, MI.

WGVK-DT 5
WOOD-DT 7
WWMT-DT 8
WGVU-DT 11
WZZM-DT 13

Granted, only 7 and 8 are full market signals, 5 and 11 are a simulcast, and 13 only covers the northern half of the market, but still.

Anyway, our long conversation about additional channel changes is gone! The important notes of mine were:

KWNB-DT in North Platte, NE (another Pappas station) wants to keep channel 6 instead of their assigned channel 18.

WDKY-DT in Lexington, KY withdrew their petition to move to channel 46, instead applying to move to channel 31.

There was a fantastic discussion of transmitter costs going on that I'd love to see reposted...

- Trip

KWNB-DT in North Platte, NE (another Pappas station) wants to keep channel 6 instead of their assigned channel 18 ...... and just today, the FCC appears inclined to go along with Pappas on its request to move KSWT-DT in Yuma, AZ (CBS/CW) from 16 to 13 post-transition, at 20 kW ERP, assuming the FCC can coordinate the change with Mexican authorities.

(Source: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1897A1.pdf)

Looks like stations that try to keep their coverages may benefit according to this:

Public aware of DTV transition, slow to take action

A new survey from the Association of Public Television Stations (APTS) reveals a mixed bag when it comes to the public’s involvement with the February 2009 digital television transition.

On the one hand, awareness of the impending transition is at an all-time high, according to the study. On the other, many over-the-air (OTA) households are slow to take the necessary steps to continue receiving terrestrial television after the plug is pulled on analog transmitters, the survey found.

As of May 2008, 62 percent of OTA households said they would buy a converter box or digital television, compared to 28 percent in November 2006.

However, the study found that most of the 8.8 million OTA households saying they would buy a set-top converter box to continue receiving free OTA television have not done so.

Among all TV households surveyed, 9.2 percent — or 10.3 million households — said they requested a coupon. Of those requesting a coupon, 64.4 percent said they received the coupon and 54.2 percent had redeemed the coupon. Roughly 38 percent of those who redeemed the coupon reported installing the converter box.

About 70 percent of OTA households said they know what they need to do to continue to view television after the transition.

The APTS study also found that as the transition date nears, fewer OTA consumers said they would sign up for cable, satellite or telecommunications service to receive digital television, while more are inclined to buy a converter box or digital TV set. Those that said they would sign up for a paid service had dropped from 29 percent in November 2006 to 12 percent in May 2008.

The study results are based on a May-June 2008 survey of 1439 households conducted by research firm CENTRIS in Fort Washington, PA.

For more information, visit www.apts.org.

http://broadcastengineering.com/eng/...w-action-0813/

DA 08-1854
Released: August 14, 2008
MEDIA BUREAU RECEIVES REQUEST BY ANALOG TELEVISION STATION
IN THE UPPER 700 MHZ BAND TO CEASE ANALOG BROADCASTING,
SURRENDER NTSC LICENSE, AND OPERATE AS
A SINGLE CHANNEL, DIGITAL-ONLY TELEVISION STATION
In the 700 MHz First Report and Order,1 the Commission adopted service rules for licensing
the commercial use of the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands, which had been
reallocated by Congressional direction from their previous use solely for the broadcasting
service. On reconsideration, the Commission clarified how it would review, on a case-bycase
basis, requests by incumbent broadcasters on channels 60-69 to voluntarily vacate their
NTSC channels prior to the end of the DTV transition.2
The Media Bureau has received a request from Indianapolis Community Television, Inc., the
licensee of analog television station WDTI-TV, NTSC Channel *69, and digital television
station WDTI-DT, DTV Channel *44,3 for Commission authority to: (i) cease analog
broadcasting on NTSC Channel *69 and surrender its license for the channel prior to the end
of the DTV transition; and (ii) thereafter operate WDTI-DT as a single channel, digital-only
television station on DTV Channel *44.
This request is available for inspection at the Commission’s Reference Center, 445 Twelfth
Street, S.W., Room CY-A257, Washington, D.C. 20554, and may also be accessed on the
FCC’s website at www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tv.html.
To promote the public interest and consistent with the requirement adopted in the Third DTV
Periodic Review Report and Order,4 in the event this request is granted, Indianapolis
Community Television, Inc. will be required to comply with the following viewer
notification requirements: The station must air viewer notifications on its analog and DTV
1 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s
Rules, WT Docket No. 99-168, First Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 476 (2000).
2 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s
Rules, WT Docket No. 99-168 et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 20845, 20868-72 (2000).
3 Facility ID 7908.
4 In the Matter of Third Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion
to Digital Television, 23 FCC Rcd 2994 (2007).
2
facilities every day on-air at least four times a day including at least once in primetime for a
60-day period prior to termination of broadcasting the analog signal. These notifications
must include: (1) the station’s call sign and community of license; (2) the fact that the
station intends to terminate its analog operations before the transition date; (3) the expected
date of analog termination; (4) what viewers can do to continue to receive the station, i.e.,
how and when the station’s digital signal can be received, and whether viewers will need to
repeat the channel scan on their DTV receivers; (5) information about the availability of
digital- to-analog converter boxes in their service area; and (6) the street address, email
address (if available), and phone number of the station where viewers may register comments
or request information.
For further information, contact Joyce Bernstein of the Media Bureau, Video Division at
(202) 418-1647.
By: Chief, Media Bureau
-FCC

POST-TRANSITION DTV TABLE OF ALLOTMENTS, 47 C.F.R. § 73.622(I), MADISON, WISCONSIN. Proposed substituting DTV Channel 49 for DTV Channel 11 for Station WMSN-DT. (Dkt No. RM-11459, 08-127). Action by: Deputy Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. Adopted: 08/13/2008 by NPRM. (DA No. 08-1907). MB DA-08-1907A1.doc DA-08-1907A1.pdf DA-08-1907A1.txt

i hope this happens then i can watch the packers in HD

i hope this happens then i can watch the packers in HD

Depends on where you are....They are licensed at 15KW for DTV 11 but currently run 5KW ERP....on 49, it depends on co and adj channel assignments to see what ERP they get...could be their range wont be better on 49...I have a feeling they want to reuse a cabinet or two on 49 (easy to move up from analog 47)....the antenna MAY make it...but that depends on antenna design...it is a Dielectric but it may not have a low enough SWR on 49....if it has any tilt, it wont be bad only two channels over..all this comes to is a cheaper hit to their budget rather than building out a station on 11 (but they have the antenna, etc already..personally I would rather stay on 11 unless there is a co channel problem).
WELLL took another look at their service contour maps...THEY are getting BETTER coverage on 11 with 5KW than they do on their analog UHF channel now! Closer to Milwaukee and about the same to the west...(directional antenna NW-SE on 11)......MUST be financial to move to 49...otherwise, they are shooting their own foot not staying on DTV11 though I didnt check co channel yet!

WELLL took another look at their service contour maps...THEY are getting BETTER coverage on 11 with 5KW than they do on their analog UHF channel now! Closer to Milwaukee and about the same to the west...(directional antenna NW-SE on 11)......MUST be financial to move to 49...otherwise, they are shooting their own foot not staying on DTV11 though I didnt check co channel yet!

What seems good on paper doesn't seem to be that way locally. If you read the local Madison thread, there have been complaints from people downtown who are having a helluv a time getting digital 11, when they are able to get all of the other channels (UHF), even though the antenna is on the same tower with three other stations.

They are probably figuring that they'll be able to get those viewers back as well as make sure they won't lose others at transition time.

Sinclair wants off of VHF and FAST. They own four stations with VHFs as their final channels, they've asked to change channels on three of them (WMSN, WSYX, WDKY) to UHF. There are a lot of reception issues with VHF channels in general it seems, and Sinclair wants to avoid them as much as possible. I can't say that I blame them in the least. They're not the only owner to opt to stay with UHF in most places. (See Cox, Nexstar)

- Trip

Just went ahead and did my weekly update to my Channel Change page:

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

The FCC issued NPRMs for KSWT and WMSN this week.

KALO, WHME, and KWHD filed comments in support of their own filings.

And finally, and my own comments to the FCC regarding WBRA-DT have been received and posted. I'm hoping something good will come out of it. =)

- Trip

While reviewing the new Form 387's (it's going to take a while longer yet), I noticed the following stations are ending analog operations earlier than previously noted:

WGFL (CBS/Gainesville FL) - their 5000kW analog signal is off the air permanently as of 7/19/08:

http://www.mygainesville.tv/index.php

The reasoning was that the new local station on 9 is unable to commence construction on the tower until 53 is removed.

KDSE & KWSE (2 of PBS ND), will be ending analog operations on 9/1/08

WPXT (CW Portland, ME) - 9/13/08, due to equipment problems

This raises the early count to 106 and the already off count to 65.

FYI - KJLA is running on-air announcements that their analog will shut down on August 27th.

FYI - KJLA is running on-air announcements that their analog will shut down on August 27th.

They have been trying to turn off analog for 3 years. I may watch this channel just to see how they are handling it. The Form 387 indicates a grant in June, when their request had been denied as recently as May.

Not entirely on-topic, but worth noting:

The FCC announced today (press release .pdf) (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284633A1.pdf) that Wilmington, NC stations will be allowed to display a graphic after noon on September 8 on their analog channels. The graphic would tell viewers that analog service has been discontinued and how to get the digital channels.

The commission also agreed that Wilmington stations could continue to use analog channels for emergency information should a hurricane or other major disaster strike the area.

As you've probably heard, most Wilmington stations are scheduled to cut off analog service at noon September 8 by special arrangement with the FCC, which plans to use the area as a test market. The FCC, however, made it clear today that no analog transmissions of any type -- emergency or otherwise -- will be allowed from U.S. full-power TV stations after February 17, the national cutoff.

The FCC announced today (press release .pdf) (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284633A1.pdf) that Wilmington, NC stations will be allowed to display a graphic after noon on September 8 on their analog channels. The graphic would tell viewers that analog service has been discontinued and how to get the digital channels.

I like this idea. If it's not available to the rest of the stations, perhaps some will turn off analog programming early to show a similar message, since they will be unable to after 2/17/09.

Not entirely on-topic, but worth noting:

The FCC announced today (press release .pdf) (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284633A1.pdf) that Wilmington, NC stations will be allowed to display a graphic after noon on September 8 on their analog channels. The graphic would tell viewers that analog service has been discontinued and how to get the digital channels.

The commission also agreed that Wilmington stations could continue to use analog channels for emergency information should a hurricane or other major disaster strike the area.

As you've probably heard, most Wilmington stations are scheduled to cut off analog service at noon September 8 by special arrangement with the FCC, which plans to use the area as a test market. The FCC, however, made it clear today that no analog transmissions of any type -- emergency or otherwise -- will be allowed from U.S. full-power TV stations after February 17, the national cutoff.

YEah our WONDERFUL State Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX, note the party she is with!), wants to change that along the border......I say BULL!!! They have the same chance to get HDTVs or the converter boxes just like Poduka Iowa and BFE Texas...(and I'm close :eek:)....so tooo bad! Its all or none.....let the digital move take place; though I am not a big fan of saying bye bye to analog BUT I LOVE the HD.....not gonna be doing DXing of weak signal anymore...have to get a spectrum analyzer to look for a RF2 or 3 signal to see if 6m ham is open after Feb!! (hmmm my ex wife will be 51 on that day!! I should send a BIG TV for her birthday...analog of course :D

You can still DX with DTV, I do it all the time. =) Well, at least, I do when I'm home, at school I don't have antennas at high enough/outdoor locations that will get me much beyond the local stuff.

- Trip

You can still DX with DTV, I do it all the time. =) Well, at least, I do when I'm home, at school I don't have antennas at high enough/outdoor locations that will get me much beyond the local stuff.

- Trip

I actually enjoy DXing a bit more with DTV. You have to make some judgments, as opposed to simply turning the rotator on a high tropo day.

And, I'll confess the DXing results are very inferior to VHF analog. I'm in western central PA. My best results DXing analog were South Dakota, Nova Scotia and eastern Texas/Louisiana. My best with DTV have been Buffalo and Cleveland. But I actually thought it was cooler getting those, since you had to really know where you're aiming and what conditions would be worth trying.

Well, tropo on UHF and skip on VHF are two different things. There will still be skip targets on VHF (I've received KOTA-DT 2 in Rapid City, covering 1,370 miles) but they'll be a lot harder to positively ID.

- Trip

YEah our WONDERFUL State Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX, note the party she is with!), wants to change that along the border......I say BULL!!! They have the same chance to get HDTVs or the converter boxes just like Poduka Iowa and BFE Texas...(and I'm close :eek:)....so tooo bad! Its all or none.....let the digital move take place; though I am not a big fan of saying bye bye to analog BUT I LOVE the HD.....not gonna be doing DXing of weak signal anymore...have to get a spectrum analyzer to look for a RF2 or 3 signal to see if 6m ham is open after Feb!! (hmmm my ex wife will be 51 on that day!! I should send a BIG TV for her birthday...analog of course :D

Please note that your wonderful State Senator (R-TX) is in cahoots with our wonderful State Senator, Barbara Boxer (D-CA). That bill passed the Senate unanimously, and if the House ever comes back from vacation, it very well might become law. Pandering and craven cowardice are not exclusive to one party or the other.

I can see the border stations' point (they're directly competing with Mexican broadcasters who aren't going to switch), but I fear the domino effect in adjacent markets, particularly mine (LA). Our stations are having a tough enough time maximizing as it is.

There will still be skip targets on VHF (I've received KOTA-DT 2 in Rapid City, covering 1,370 miles)


Yeah, and I can't wait until the "noise" from U.S. analog VHF's shut down for the Es DTV Dx ! .... For example, KOTA-DT is One of the best DTV Es targets for me currently, but the problem is, local WDTN 2 is blow torch ... Although, I have seen what was likely to be a DTV station on 2 from that direction (probably KOTA-DT given how the ananlog was coming in on 3) "snow up" WDTN a couple of times ...

There will be Fewer U.S. Lo-VHF targets certianly, but I've seen enough Analog E-skip over the years, anyway ... Then again, with all the noise from the Full service U.S. VHF's gone, While they're still up I'm also hoping to log some LP analogs I haven't seen before as well ...



but they'll be a lot harder to positively ID.
- Trip

Hmm.. Have to disagree a bit, there. With DTV I think It will be harder to figure out if there is any DX, and where the DX is coming from/detect weak signals(although in some cases we'll still be able to use the analog LP's for that for a while) ..

But I think PSIP and the TSID makes DTV stations via DX easier to ID than analog, and I have Id'd stations via PSIP w/o being able to quite decode video ... My personal "policy" though is that I don't log a station unless I can decode some video to some extent as well as positively ID it ...

Hmm.. Have to disagree a bit, there. With DTV I think It will be harder to figure out if there is any DX, and where the DX is coming from/detect weak signals(although in some cases we'll still be able to use the analog LP's for that for a while) ..

But I think PSIP and the TSID makes DTV stations via DX easier to ID than analog, and I have Id'd stations via PSIP w/o being able to quite decode video ... My personal "policy" though is that I don't log a station unless I can decode some video to some extent as well as positively ID it ...

I mean, once you get one, IDing it won't be a problem, but figuring out what signals you're seeing... in a minute of skip, I can see maybe 5 or 6 signals fade in and out.

As far as figuring out if there's anything going on, that's no problem for me. The WinTV-D (I just got another one today) shows a carrier offset that's nice and stable around 1.250 KHz when there's a digital on channels 2 or 5.

Other tuners, though, you're right.

- Trip

I won't be able to play with VHF DTV DXing until after the transition. Right now my neighboring markets have all VHFs occupied with analogs.

I'm fairly hopeful for regular reception of a VHF 9, WTOV out of Ohio, as their current analog signal is always receivable. How well that actually works remains to be seen.

Slightly side question to all this: does anyone have a sense of the relationship between VHF DT reception as compared to VHF analog reception? For example, one of my DTs will be reverting to VHF 8 in February. That analog channel comes in gorgeously right now. Will that present a similar strong signal post-transition?

I ask because I have some doubts concerning the massive ERP reductions these channels will undertake. Also, we're going from zero VHF DTs now to three in February plus at least two with good chances of DXing.

Slightly side question to all this: does anyone have a sense of the relationship between VHF DT reception as compared to VHF analog reception? For example, one of my DTs will be reverting to VHF 8 in February. That analog channel comes in gorgeously right now. Will that present a similar strong signal post-transition?

I ask because I have some doubts concerning the massive ERP reductions these channels will undertake. Also, we're going from zero VHF DTs now to three in February plus at least two with good chances of DXing.

Odds are it will be ok. Which station is it? WJW? A rule of thumb that I use is if a 7-13 analog ERP is at least 1/16 of the analog ERP it should be enough for replication. Remember that analog and DTV ERP's are two different things (peak vs. average power).

Note that many VHF ERP's are increasing by way of maximization applications, though most are still pending approval.

If it is WJW, 11kW is a bit light, but they have a maximization app pending for 30kW, though most of the increase is aimed at Canada? :confused:

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/polarplot?temp=87765&rotate=0.00&p0=1.000&p10=0.995&p20=0.980&p30=0.954&p40=0.918&p50=0.872&p60=0.817&p70=0.755&p80=0.690&p90=0.626&p100=0.569&p110=0.528&p120=0.506&p130=0.505&p140=0.519&p150=0.542&p160=0.564&p170=0.580&p180=0.586&p190=0.580&p200=0.564&p210=0.542&p220=0.519&p230=0.505&p240=0.506&p250=0.528&p260=0.569&p270=0.626&p280=0.690&p290=0.755&p300=0.817&p310=0.872&p320=0.918&p330=0.954&p340=0.980&p350=0.995&p360=1.000&

I don't see any pattern rotation.

Which station is it? A rule of thumb that I use is if a 7-13 analog ERP is at least 1/16 of the analog ERP it should be enough for replication.

WWCP http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?call=WWCP

The FCC file indicates it is right at the fringe of your rule of thumb (analog ERP: 166 kw; DTV ERP: 9.3 kw).

The only maximization permits in my neighboring markets I've seen is WQED was approved for an increase from 13 to 26. Of course, I haven't looked in more than a month, so...

Now, WTOV is looking real good if your rule of thumb holds up. They're going from 316 kw to 26.2 kw.

- - - ADDED - - -

Does the FCC really feel that DTV on VHF-Hi is going to be this effective? On UHF, we're talking 25% of the analog power. On VHF we're almost universally talking 10% or even less.

If it is WJW, 11kW is a bit light, but they have a maximization app pending for 30kW, though most of the increase is aimed at Canada? :confused:

Actually, WJW's pattern is specifically meant to avoid interference with WWCP out of Somerset, PA. Having lived in NW and central PA my whole life, I can confirm that stations out of eastern OH are a major issue for us in terms of interference.

First rule of thumb with any FCC choices on radiating patterns: it's always to protect someone else.

But I think PSIP and the TSID makes DTV stations via DX easier to ID than analog, and I have Id'd stations via PSIP w/o being able to quite decode video ... My personal "policy" though is that I don't log a station unless I can decode some video to some extent as well as positively ID it ...

Ehh I can decode an analog signal just out of the noise (video OR audio ;)...well before my HDTV sees the PSIP from a DTV (if it is lucky...I need a better decoder...well hell I need a new HDTV :)....AM analog is ALWAYS weak signal..why do you think the Aviation Radio Service is still AM after all these decades??? Not FM or going digital either....but AM (ancient modulation it aint! :) Reminds me of a coffee cup I got from a microwave radio manufacturer a decade ago...the type that changes its look with heated liquids?? This one showed a skeleton when cold....but hot, the complete dinosaur was filled in and the cup had writing that said "Analog??? Dead my a$$!!" I know PLENTY of 6 GHz analog microwave in existance today though in a point to point, digital IS better...but HDTV just gives us something in a trade...no more weak signal reception but better quality and more "channels" to view...

Regarding Id'ing stations, The point I was making is, Other than via XDS, You need some sort of identifying feature present(it often isnt' present) in the video/audio (station bug, local advertising/etc) to ID an analog station. But, You can ID a DTV station in most cases at any time via certian PSIP (the channel description info for instance) info or TSID any time you can acheive a signal lock.

Regarding extremely weak signals, yes we need about 15~16db SNR (roughly about -84 dBm at receiver input, but we can do a few dB better if our system NF is lower than typcial DTV receiver's front-end) to decode anything from a DTV station, whearas yes, with a good receive setup we can detect+use (to some extent) weaker/extremely weak analog signals, such as signals from within 300~500 Miles popping up above the noise every now of then in the middle of the day(pretty much happens all the time to some extent) via everyday tropo-scatter.

However, we won't know the real specs until the standard is finalized, but I've read as little as 4db SNR may be required for threshold reception of Mobile DTV via ATSC's upcoming M/H Standard --- If you're not familar with M/H, (sometimes called "MPH) Basically, the Mobile DTV streams are going to be "more robust" datastreams, transmitted via DTV stations as we know them but with added error correction to make the mobile DTV streams more robust and allow for mobile portable reception (but they will be receivable with fixed receivers as well, If anyone makes one that supports the new Mobile DTV standards that can be hooked up to outdoor antenna).

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

The FCC file indicates it is right at the fringe of your rule of thumb (analog ERP: 166 kw; DTV ERP: 9.3 kw).

Does the FCC really feel that DTV on VHF-Hi is going to be this effective? On UHF, we're talking 25% of the analog power. On VHF we're almost universally talking 10% or even less.

9.3kW looks like the maximized app for WWCP, vs. the CP for 8.4kW. Not much of a boost, but perhaps they can't raise it as much as they would want due to interference from other stations (as you noted).

My rule of thumb for UHF-UHF is 1/20, but 1/5 is often seen. 1000kW was intended for stations moving off of Low-VHF, but many existing UHF stations have taken advantage of the extra power available as well.

9.3kW looks like the maximized app for WWCP, vs. the CP for 8.4kW. Not much of a boost, but perhaps they can't raise it as much as they would want due to interference from other stations (as you noted).

Their transmitter on analog VHF 8 is well-known to carry a looong way. Obviously, in theory, a transmitter in Cleveland should not cause great conflict with a transmitter two counties east of Pittsburgh (approx 200 mi away from Cleveland).

And in areas like central PA, I'm sure some of the ERP decisions stem from the height of the terrain + the height of the tower.

I just really, really wish they hadn't slated the switchover for February. It's not exactly an easy time to go up on the roof and tinker with adding a VHF antenna.

might be a good reason for doing it NOW... :D

I just really, really wish they hadn't slated the switchover for February. It's not exactly an easy time to go up on the roof and tinker with adding a VHF antenna.

Nor transmit antenna work either. The date choice was a purely political decision to be between the Super Bowl and March Madness and nothing else. The Senate wanted Dec 31, 2008, the House wanted April 15th, 2009. They compromised on Feb 17.

Nor transmit antenna work either. The date choice was a purely political decision to be between the Super Bowl and March Madness and nothing else. The Senate wanted Dec 31, 2008, the House wanted April 15th, 2009. They compromised on Feb 17.

Just curious; in general, as in the case of WWCP, where they plan to use their existing (directional) analog antenna, what kind of tower work, if any, would be needed at transition?

Nor transmit antenna work either. The date choice was a purely political decision to be between the Super Bowl and March Madness and nothing else. The Senate wanted Dec 31, 2008, the House wanted April 15th, 2009. They compromised on Feb 17.
Yea, April 15th would have been a great date to do this. Get your taxes in and shut down the analog broadcasts on the same day. The guvmint would be REAL popular that day. :p

Obviously few thought through - Congress, congressional staffers, FCC board, upper mucks at the NAB, the lobbyists and law firms who represent the communication industry - the practical aspects of choosing a analog shutdown in the dead of winter for stations and people with outdoor antennas. They never gave much consideration to the stations in the more northern climates that might have to replace antennas or do tower work at that time. They should have picked a shutdown date in July or August, when TV viewership is down and when many stations do tower and antenna work anyway. What they should have done is have picked 2 dates: one for final analog shutdown and a second date, 30 to 60 days later, for stations to completely vacate UHF 52 to 69. That 30-60 days would provide time for the stations with a out of core transition digital channel to move to their analog channel or another station's vacated analog channel. Yes, more rescans, but would give stations that need the time to put up new antennas and/or check out their new in-core digital transmission.

Just curious; in general, as in the case of WWCP, where they plan to use their existing (directional) analog antenna, what kind of tower work, if any, would be needed at transition?

The station plans on using their existing antenna for digital, then none, but many stations who are staying on their DTV channels have their analog antennas on top and need to remove them to move the DTV to the top and the FCC wants all stations at their permament confugrations on Feb 17. In the winter, that is tough.

Yea, April 15th would have been a great date to do this. Get your taxes in and shut down the analog broadcasts on the same day. The guvmint would be REAL popular that day. :p

Obviously few thought through - Congress, congressional staffers, FCC board, upper mucks at the NAB, the lobbyists and law firms who represent the communication industry - the piratical aspects of choosing a analog shutdown in the dead of winter for stations and people with outdoor antennas. They never gave much consideration to the stations in the more northern climates that might have to replace antennas or do tower work at that time. They should have picked a shutdown date in July or August, when TV viewership is down and when many stations do tower and antenna work anyway. What they should have done is have picked 2 dates: one for final analog shutdown and a second date, 30 to 60 days later, for stations to completely vacate UHF 52 to 69. That 30-60 days would provide time for the stations with a out of core transition digital channel to move to their analog channel or another station's vacated analog channel. Yes, more rescans, but would give stations that need the time to put up new antennas and/or check out their new in-core digital transmission.

Oh and it gets worse. Feb 17 is RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of the profitable February sweeps for stations. Because the switch off, Nielsen has moved the Feb ratings to March.

Oh and it gets worse. Feb 17 is RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of the profitable February sweeps for stations. Because the switch off, Nielsen has moved the Feb ratings to March.

The transition is the kind of thing that only groupthink among a group of people who've never touched any of the technology can come up with.

It fascinates that in two chambers of Congress, with 500+ members and tens of thousands of staffers and lobbyists that the idea never gained any traction that February is a really stoopid time to be screwing with antennas, transmitters and towers.

Yea, April 15th would have been a great date to do this. Get your taxes in and shut down the analog broadcasts on the same day. The guvmint would be REAL popular that day. :p

You're right. December 31st at midnight would've been MUCH better. ;)

The transition is the kind of thing that only groupthink among a group of people who've never touched any of the technology can come up with.

It fascinates that in two chambers of Congress, with 500+ members and tens of thousands of staffers and lobbyists that the idea never gained any traction that February is a really stoopid time to be screwing with antennas, transmitters and towers.

But its perfectly logical. Its not any different than the current 'war' which was approved by the same intelligent chambers and members upon their hearing all the BS from the guy at the top. Isn't Feb 17th on a Tuesday? -- middle of the week when the NFL games won't be on and therefore the same chambers members will be hard at work?

But its perfectly logical. Its not any different than the current 'war' which was approved by the same intelligent chambers and members upon their hearing all the BS from the guy at the top.

Sorry if I take a pass on conflating the DTV transition with a land war in Asia.

Isn't Feb 17th on a Tuesday? -- middle of the week when the NFL games won't be on and therefore the same chambers members will be hard at work?

My feeling is that all of this has to do with climate in northern Virginia. Feb 17 is about the time there feels like hope that spring is coming in VA.

I live in central PA. Feb 17 is usually about the time we start wondering whether winter will really ever end.

The problem is that most politicians live in northern VA, not their come states. Oh, and I'd be shocked if any of them own an antenna and if more than a few have ever been up on a roof in good weather, let alone bad weather.

The only politician I've ever heard say they use an Antenna is Howard Dean.

Former House Chair of the Commerce and Telecommunications committee Joe Barton (the committee that set the April 15 date) has stated he uses an antenna at his home and vacation home. Who knows if he really does or not, but his district, has only a 40% cable penetration, one of the lowest in the country.

Former House Chair of the Commerce and Telecommunications committee Joe Barton (the committee that set the April 15 date) has stated he uses an antenna at his home and vacation home. Who knows if he really does or not, but his district, has only a 40% cable penetration, one of the lowest in the country.

I have to confess, that's interesting. I'd also note that the guy using the technology went for the more reasonable April 15 date.

Now, WTOV is looking real good if your rule of thumb holds up. They're going from 316 kw to 26.2 kw.

- - - ADDED - - -

Does the FCC really feel that DTV on VHF-Hi is going to be this effective? On UHF, we're talking 25% of the analog power. On VHF we're almost universally talking 10% or even less.

The real question is whether the FCC will approve WTOV-DT's maximization petition. They were already turned down for 12kw because that would have caused almost 3% interference to WWCP.

The real question is whether the FCC will approve WTOV-DT's maximization petition. They were already turned down for 12kw because that would have caused almost 3% interference to WWCP.

I'm not certain if this holds true on VHF-Hi or not, but isn't DTV supposed to be less prone to near channel interference?

I'm not certain if this holds true on VHF-Hi or not, but isn't DTV supposed to be less prone to near channel interference?

Somebody like foxeng could probably answer that better that I can but my understanding is that adjacent channels have to be either very close or more than eighty miles apart.

Yes, they can be side-by-side (8 and 9, for instance) only if they're co-located or within 14 miles of each other. Otherwise, they must be 68.35 miles apart.

- Trip

In their Form 387 filings, KSNB and KWNB indicated that they would be filing petitions to return to their analog Low-VHF channels (4 and 6), instead of constructing full power UHF facilities. From their filings:

THE LICENSEE INTENDS TO FILE A PETITION FOR RULEMAKING THAT WILL SPECIFY A FINAL, POST-TRANSITION DTV FACILITY TO OPERATE ON ITS ANALOG CHANNEL AND WILL REPLICATE THE FACILTY SPECIFIED IN APPENDIX B. UPON GRANT OF THE PETITION FOR RULEMAKING, THE LICENSEE WILL SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR THE AUTHORIZED FACILITIES, AND INTENDS TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 17, 2009.

Per Trip's channel change listing, I see that KWNB's was filed (this is the one that had the discussion deleted wasn't it?). KSNB's petition was filed on 8/1 according the the FCC TV Query.

Per Trip's channel change listing, I see that KWNB's was filed (this is the one that had the discussion deleted wasn't it?). KSNB's petition was filed on 8/1 according the the FCC TV Query.

Nice catch. Also noted, WISE-DT 19 in Fort Wayne has asked to move to channel 18. No ECFS filing noted for that one, either. Wonder why?

- Trip

I have to confess, that's interesting. I'd also note that the guy using the technology went for the more reasonable April 15 date.

Don't bet on his "technological smarts." At the very time (2005) his committee he was chairing was debating on the time frame for the transition and haranging the FCC about setting a sundown date on analog TV set importation so people wouldn't be caught with an analog only set at the end, he was spotted at a big box store, purchasing an analog only TV for his vacation home. When asked why he wasn't buying a digital TV knowing he was helping set the date and demanding the sundown date for TV's, he replied it was a good deal and that is all cared about.

Smart? You decide.

Yes, they can be side-by-side (8 and 9, for instance) only if they're co-located or within 14 miles of each other. Otherwise, they must be 68.35 miles apart.

- Trip

WTOV and WWCP are 78.45 miles apart so I don't know why so much interference was expected.

I found this site and map from NET (Nebraska PBS) detailing how they are handling the transition. For the stations that will be flash-cutting, they will be doing so in advance of 2/17/09, starting next month. They even have a map which shows the real channels numbers, pre and post-transition.

http://www.netnebraska.org/extras/dtv/
http://www.netnebraska.org/extras/dtv/pdfs/coverage_and_transition.pdf

Though I do not see a reason given for the early flash-cuts, it can probably be assumed that it is necessary due to the size of their system and winter weather concerns. They are also planning to convert the translators before 2/17/09.

Nice catch. Also noted, WISE-DT 19 in Fort Wayne has asked to move to channel 18. No ECFS filing noted for that one, either. Wonder why?

- Trip

Wise -tv was sold to Wpta-tv sometime back. When Wpta put up the new digital -analog antenna I asked why all the extra feed connections inside the antenna shroud. I was told to accept multiple inputs. Wise-tv studio complex has been vacant for a few years now and only the transmitter and tower located directly next to the studio complex is active. All Wise-tv broadcasting is on a microwave link from the roof of Wpta-tv to the Wise-tv tower located just south of the Wpta-tv complex. So Wpta wants to locate the wise-tv digital signal from the same tower. Another television history story loss for Wkjg or Wise tv here in Fort Wayne.

Two months have passed now since the FCC unfroze requests for maximization. There seems to be a large number they have not acted on. Anyone have any insight into why this might be the case?

I only follow the Sacramento and San Francisco stations and only a couple of requests have been granted. The rest have no action. Does the FCC's failure to grant the requests by now essentially mean they've been denied?

Some of these requests are so minimal I can't imagine why they haven't been granted. For example, KMAX is requesting a power increase from 850KW to 1000KW and KOVR 760KW to 1000KW and both stations are requesting to raise their antennas by 20M when their antennas are already at 594M.

Two months have passed now since the FCC unfroze requests for maximization. There seems to be a large number they have not acted on. Anyone have any insight into why this might be the case?

I only follow the Sacramento and San Francisco stations and only a couple of requests have been granted. The rest have no action. Does the FCC's failure to grant the requests by now essentially mean they've been denied?

Some of these requests are so minimal I can't imagine why they haven't been granted. For example, KMAX is requesting a power increase from 850KW to 1000KW and KOVR 760KW to 1000KW and both stations are requesting to raise their antennas by 20M when their antennas are already at 594M.

I know there are a number of stations which are not planning to maximize until after the shutoff next year, and I think the FCC has said they will not process those applications until 02/17/09, so the stations have a full three years to build out their facilities.

- Trip

Some of these requests are so minimal I can't imagine why they haven't been granted. For example, KMAX is requesting a power increase from 850KW to 1000KW and KOVR 760KW to 1000KW and both stations are requesting to raise their antennas by 20M when their antennas are already at 594M.

KMAX might effect KBWB.

I know there are a number of stations which are not planning to maximize until after the shutoff next year, and I think the FCC has said they will not process those applications until 02/17/09, so the stations have a full three years to build out their facilities.

- TripThat's interesting, but in our market we've got two stations which are going back to 7 and 9 and by definition can't maximize until after the shutoff, and the FCC has already granted the request from 7.

Please, don't leave me hanging, FCC!!! :)

No, I mean there are some stations which have said they want to build out maximized facilities from the start. Those are the ones you're seeing approved now.

Then there are others (WDIO is one that sticks out in my mind) which plan to build out the replication facilities and then increase power once the demand for parts and people goes down.

- Trip

Here we go, a petition from WISE-DT to move from channel 19 to channel 18 showed up yesterday, and here it is:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520048512

Apparently, the FCC would not let them drop height and increase power (15m lower, 35 kW higher) without an interference agreement with WXMI-DT in Grand Rapids (and WPXD-DT in Ann Arbor). So they proposed moving to channel 18 to resolve the problem rather than accept the interference.

I wonder if we'll be seeing any more of these stations propose channel changes rather than accepting interference.

- Trip

ENTERING THE HOME STRETCH:
MEDIA BUREAU RELEASES REPORT ON THE STATUS OF TV BROADCASTERS AT THE FINAL SIX MONTHS OF THE DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:
August 27, 2008 Edie Herman at (202) 418-2035


A report on the status of the digital build out by full power television broadcasters by the FCC’s Media Bureau shows that over 96 percent of active full power television stations are either fully operational with digital service or are on track to have their full digital service operational by February 17, 2009. In summary stations have reported the following:

• 1,002 stations (56 percent of a current total of 1,798 active television stations) reported in their Form 387s that they have fully constructed their post-transition DTV facilities and are ready for the DTV transition. The only step remaining for these stations is to terminate analog operations before February 18, 2009.

• 41 percent of stations (736) have not completed construction yet but report making appropriate progress and expect to be operating their full digital service before February 18.

• Approximately three percent (56 stations) will take advantage of the flexibility offered by the Commission in the Third DTV Periodic Review Report and Order and will be serving at least 85 percent of their service population on February 17, 2009, with final digital operations beginning sometime thereafter. The flexibility is available for stations needing additional time due to “unique technical challenges,” such as top mount/side mount, weather-related issues, or coordination with other stations.

• One station forecasts that it will not be able to complete construction of its full digital facility until a few days after February 17, 2009 and will be dark for this brief time.

• Three stations have not submitted their Form 387s but have unofficially reported that they intend to be ready for the DTV transition.

The numbers presented in the Report were derived from the information provided by stations in their FCC Form 387 DTV Transition Status Report and other filings. Stations are required to update their filings as they progress towards completion of the transition. The Media Bureau’s report provides a snapshot of broadcasters’ overall readiness six months before the transition deadline, which is February 17, 2009. Full power stations must terminate analog broadcasting no later than 11:59:59 pm on February 17, 2009, and broadcast only digital signals as of February 18, 2009.


# # #

I found this site and map from NET (Nebraska PBS) detailing how they are handling the transition. For the stations that will be flash-cutting, they will be doing so in advance of 2/17/09, starting next month. They even have a map which shows the real channels numbers, pre and post-transition.

http://www.netnebraska.org/extras/dtv/
http://www.netnebraska.org/extras/dtv/pdfs/coverage_and_transition.pdf

Though I do not see a reason given for the early flash-cuts, it can probably be assumed that it is necessary due to the size of their system and winter weather concerns. They are also planning to convert the translators before 2/17/09.

It's interesting to note that in several markets they are shutting everything down for several days, then coming up digital on one channel, then a little later switching the digital to their previous analog channel. Seems like a lot of unnecessary work and changes. They must have a reason, as you said, but the way they're doing it seems rather odd.

Larry
SF

I was just looking at the post transition digital channels in my area. It looks like there will be a channel 38(WDCN-LD) only 0.3 miles from me. There is a channel 38 less than 40 miles from here that I now watch.

It almost seems like this is a huge FCC oversight. I'm thinking that the more distant WMAR-38 will be nearly impossible from here. Anyone have some insight??????

Thanks, Glen:confused:

I was just looking at the post transition digital channels in my area. It looks like there will be a channel 38(WDCN-LD) only 0.3 miles from me. There is a channel 38 less than 40 miles from here that I now watch.

It almost seems like this is a huge FCC oversight. I'm thinking that the more distant WMAR-38 will be nearly impossible from here. Anyone have some insight??????

Thanks, Glen:confused:

WDCN-LD submitted an application for a LP DTV station on 38 to FCC in 2006, It hasn't yet been approved, and likely won't be with WMAR-DT on 38 post-transition. ....(WJZ is on 38 now and will move to 13 post transition). When TVfool pulls info from FCC database, it sometimes gets the info on the applications stations send FCC, applications which in some cases may never work out.

Look at the info for the WDCN-LD channel 38 "application" entry here (note, Under "legal" info, you'll find info on an objection from Scripps Howard, which owns WMAR ...) ... update: looking at the application itself, it looks like at the time they filed it, they didn't know WMAR would be on 38 post-transition ....

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state=&call=WDCN&arn=&city=&chan=&cha2=69&serv=&type=0&facid=&list=0&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&size=9

I was just looking at the post transition digital channels in my area. It looks like there will be a channel 38(WDCN-LD) only 0.3 miles from me. There is a channel 38 less than 40 miles from here that I now watch.

It almost seems like this is a huge FCC oversight. I'm thinking that the more distant WMAR-38 will be nearly impossible from here. Anyone have some insight??????
You have to be careful with the low power digital station listings at tvfool.com. He is showing filed applications still in the FCC database, many of which were filed years ago, were never granted, and are no longer valid. The WDCN-LD application was filed in 2006 and has not been granted. Not sure when WMAR-DT ABC 2 in Baltimore selected to take over WJZ-DT CBS 13's UHF 38 antenna and transmitter for the post-transition digital assignment. WJZ-DT 13 will be flash cutting back to VHF 13, so they are selling the UHF 38 hardware to WMAR 2.

WDCN-LP has a license to broadcast analog on VHF 6 at 3 kW,but the station has been off the air for some time, since 2007 or even 2006, because of interference problems to WTTG Fox 5. In fact, looking at the CDBS applications, WDCN-LP 6 was granted another extension to stay silent on August 18, 2008. Their latest Request for Silent STA application is at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101262181&formid=910&fac_num=20450. I suspect their plan is stay off the air until next February 18 and then fire up a VHF 6 analog signal once WTTG 5 is off the air. That is, if they are still financially afloat.

Anyway, sorting through the digital applications for LP stations can be messy as stations may have filed a series of applications looking for a viable post-transition channel slot. However, I have periodically checked LD and digital TX filings with the FCC and I have noticed a steady stream of granted Construction Permit filings, so we may see a fair number of low power stations and translators go all digital not long after February 17, 2009.

I was just looking at the post transition digital channels in my area. It looks like there will be a channel 38(WDCN-LD) only 0.3 miles from me. There is a channel 38 less than 40 miles from here that I now watch.

It almost seems like this is a huge FCC oversight. I'm thinking that the more distant WMAR-38 will be nearly impossible from here. Anyone have some insight??????

Thanks, Glen:confused:

According to the FCC site, it's just an application. No action has been taken to approve or disapprove it. My guess is that they'll deny it at some point.

- Trip

Thanks everyone. You made my day.

I guess it's safe to assume that WDCN will eventually broadcast from that tower at low power; but on a different UHF channel.

Glen:)

Five stations were scheduled to turn off analog tomorrow. However, it has not been easy to find out if KJLA actually turned off its signal locally, so I don't know when we will know on these:

KFPH - Telefutura - Flagstaff/Phoenix - F/C to 13
KUVE - Univision - Green Valley/Tuscon - F/C to 46
KDSE - PBS - Dickinson/Bismark - F/C to 9
KWSE - PBS - Williston/Bismark - turning off analog 4
KRNE - PBS - Merriman/North Platte - F/C to 12

Some of these stations will be dark while they change over.

Technically speaking, KWSE plans to transition their digital from channel 51 to channel 11 if the FCC will hurry up and issue and R&O for their PRM. They need to kill 4 early to put up the new channel 11 antenna.

- Trip

Today, the FCC issues NPRMs for KYLE-DT's move from 28 to 29, and for WWSI-DT's move from 49 to 10.

- Trip