Dayton / Lima, OH - HDTV - Page 145 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #4321 of 6617 Old 02-25-2007, 11:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderwoman77 View Post

I was wondering if any stations were looking into 24 hr.local/state news on any of their subs.It would be nice to news like we get the weather.

I think it would be nicer if stations were more interested in providing the highest quality HD pictures possible via ATSC vs. multicasting various SD "subchannels".

But, in some cases, currently, the SD subchannels can bring in additonal revenue streams for the stations, and that's mostly why stations are interested in it(especially to pay the millions of $ of bills for the "new" digital/HD station), as for the most part, HD doesn't make a station more $ than SD, and probably never will ...

Quote:


Anyone know if more Sinclair silliness occurred and they terminated carrying Tube anymore?

I hate that some of us have to suffer because Sinclair decides to reduce their power output to save money.They must figure 90% of people have cable or sat,so why do they need full power output.

They need to operate at "full power", because FCC requires all stations operate with parameters(including power) specified in their operating permit(license). They are allowed via "STA"(special temporary authority) from FCC to deviate from this on occasion when technical issues arise, but they have to tell FCC about it, pretty much immediately. It would be serious issue for them if they didn't do that+the commission found out about it.

Things were a bit different with DTV several years ago, when very few people were watching and many stations were operating with lower power STA's. For a while there, per their decisions in 1st DTV review report and order, for various reasons, FCC was allowing digital stations to operate with "extended" low power STA's for non-technical reasons - such as to get their digital station on the air more quickly to help move the DTV transistion along ---- that's not the case now. Now, and beginnging in July 2005 for most stations, if digital stations don't "cover" their service area, The FCC(and other stations) can take portions of it away from them. Why would they care? Well, in addition to serving their OTA audience, Because a stations signal contours/coverage area is VERY much related to cable carriage issues ....

As for "The tube"+Sinclair thing, commercial stations are running a business. If it doesn't contribute(or at least have a good chance of it) to their bottom line, generally speaking they're probably not likely to continue it, especially if they have to purchase additional equipment to provide EAS info/etc on those "subchannels" .... My understanding is, FCC made it very clear around the End of December that Stations MUST provide EAS/emergency alert info on ALL their digital channels/subchannels/etc ...

Of course, you can still currently get "The Tube" from WXIX-DT(Raycom owned - their deal with "The Tube" as well as with the cableco's that carry it from WXIX-DT may likely be "different" than Sinclair's deal with the Tube+the cablecos) Cincinnati.

Anyway, Judging by the blow torch signals from Sinclair owned or operated stations in the area -- analogs+digitals --- (WKEF/WRGT Dayton, WSYX/WTTE Columbus, WSTR Cincinnati, WDKY Lexington, KY), I don't think anyone is suffering because of the power output from those stations, currently ....

Although I certianly haven't allways agreed with how they "do things" nevertheless, Sinclair has been one of the biggest supporters and proponents of Free OTA TV, Including HD - and is on "record" for it as well. Jesse Jackson might not want Sinclair to own Two stations in Dayton, but when times get rough on broadcasters, I think it's better to have 2 stations run by one broadcaster vs. 1(or 2) of those stations going dark ....

Update - later decided to comment on this ...

Quote:


. Also,Titan TV listings have been slightly messed up lately.They say CinCW programming is unavaialable as well as state WKEF's 22.2 is TubeTV like WXIX and there are other goofs.

the Tube was on WKEF-DT 22.2 until just before midnite on 1/1/07.

Those listings have had accuracy problems(especially for SD "subchannels", and indicating all programming that is or isn't in HD) for as long as I've been watching HD/DTV(Since 2001) ....

I don't think they've found a good, cost effective way yet for all providers of TV listings to provide accurate listings of what's on each and every subchannel on each and every digital station from each+every broadcaster out there.

The PBS stations in the area do have excellent program listings of their SD+HD services on their websites.

Also, there's the EPG info sent OTA digital via PSIP EIT's - The latter probably has the best chance to be accurate for SD subchannels, but unfortunetly not all Receivers out there support it, or support it fully, and not all stations have 100% properly implemented it at all times either, even though they are required by FCC currently to provide "fully populated" program guide info in the EIT out 12 hours.

The PBS stations, ThinkTV(WPTD-DT/WPTO-DT) and KET(WCVN-DT Covington, KY) have probably been the most consistant as of late in providing good, detailed EPG info via PSIP .... Overall, over the past several years, WLWT-DT(NBC HD Cincy), WCET-DT(One of the cincy PBS), and I suppose for the most part WDTN-DT has generally been very good about it as well.

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4322 of 6617 Old 02-26-2007, 08:20 PM
Newbie
 
wonderwoman77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dayton,Ohio area
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Reason why I stated about the Sinclair thing and power was that someone in the Columbus forum had made a statement that they had talked to someone(engineer?) at WSYX/WTTE and was told that they reduced their power or such.Whether they have or not is of little difference.I have found that using an amp of any sort(I have tried 3) kills my reception of all but the Dayton stations on the digital side.Take it off,and I get 5,48,and 64 back.Still no 12 or 19.But I will keep working to finally get the channels I am after.I keep learning from everyone here and I like that.Also,a friend of mine in Maine has an FTA sat system/box.Anyone here know if they are any good?Have a great night! :-)

1980-Those of you in Cincinnati,wondering why you are seeing WHIO here in Dayton..Around 2AM,a gunman forced his way into WCPO after taking a crew returning from U.C. hostage....
wonderwoman77 is offline  
post #4323 of 6617 Old 02-27-2007, 11:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderwoman77 View Post

I have found that using an amp of any sort(I have tried 3) kills my reception of all but the Dayton stations on the digital side.Take it off,and I get 5,48,and 64 back.Still no 12 or 19.

What happens to analog reception with(added interference,"sqiggly diagonal lines - perhaps especially on certian VHF hannels/etc - do stations such as TBN 20 Springfiled, or any of the dayton analogs show up with a "ugly" signal, or audio/etc. on other channels other than channel 20?) and without the preamp - especially the weaker or in other words "snowier" stations, or are you reffering to the analogs in the latter portion of that (5,48,64/etc?) .... Do look at it on a TV/Tuner that doesn't "mute" the screen to blue or black and shows "snow" when a weak or interference/ghost laden is present, or just "clean snow" when there is no signal ...


Could be something else as well, but it sounds very possibile your preamp/front end of your receiver is being overloaded with nearby "too strong" signals when you insert the preamp.

Any nearby source of RF is a potential problem, as these preamps are *very* broadband -- However, it's generally the stronger sources of RF on VHF/UHF which are most likely to cause a problem, and that generally means nearby broadcast facilities.

Most likely nearby sources to Donnelsville of very strong RF that might be causing this problem would be TBN LP translator W20CL, and 2 50 KW ERP FM stations on 100.7(WEEC)+102.9(WDHT). Those transmit from "between the curves" on SR 41 Just North Of Donnelsville, so especially if your are East of Donnelsville on 40, it could be a real problem for you and, if you're going to use+get the benefits of a preamp, you might require a bit of additional attenuation(use of filters/traps) of those very strong nearby signals other than the FM traps on a good preamp can provide.

I responded in more detail regarding your reception situation, and you post+recent discussion by others in the Antenna thread here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...03#post9892203

P.s. -- Also, Do keep in mind for "5", "19", "48" you are referring to the analog stations channel #'s, the digital stations transmit on different frequencies/channels entirely. Via some info sent in a station's datastream(It's called PSIP VCT - Virtual channel table), the station "shows up" as 5.1, 48.1/etc, so they "show up" on the same channel numbers as the analog, even though that is not where they are actually transmitting .... For example, WLWT-DT Cincinnati(digital) Transmits on UHF Channel 35, and remaps to "virtual channel" 5.1/5.2 -- The analog station WLWT transmits on 5 .... Antennaweb.org or FCC TV query info show the actual frequency the digital stations transmit on.

In matters diagnosing your reception issues, it may be useful for you to know/think of the "actual channels" the digital stations transmit on in your case, as several Cincinnati/Columbus stations(some analog some digital) transmit on same channel, currently, and there are also several 1st adjacent channel relationships among the Cincinnati/Dayton Columbus stations.

You might want to consider seperate VHF/UHF antennas, and at this point, unless you want to "DX" on Low VHF, it doesn't look like you'll need lo-VHF (ch 2-6, 54~88MHZ) recption after analog shut off, so for VHF(for WSYX-DT+ WCPO-DT, after analog shut off, along with WKRC-DT, as they'll be moving from 31 to 12(their current analog channel), you might want to consider a Hi-Gain VHF-HI (ch 7~13 - 174~213MHZ) antenna, such as Winegard YA-1713 -- It will also help you reduce the strong signal levels from FM stations, especially the nearest ones, WEEC+WDHT ...

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4324 of 6617 Old 03-04-2007, 04:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton
Posts: 2,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkozma View Post

Anyways, I picked up the u75r last night and rigged it up in my attic. As luck would have it, I got every channel EXCEPT for the one I was looking for. DOH!

Ever since you said you picked up Cincy channels with the same antenna I've got I've been wanting to try different locations with mine. I moved around the attic a bit with NO change at all (not surprised). Then I tried the antenna partially inside, partially outside of my son's 2nd story window (facing west). I thought that being outside would make an improvement but again, NO change at all. I suspect I need to go higher, which isn't feasible at the moment. My dish is on the NE corner of my roof and is behind and below the roof line/peak, so 1) mounting it to the dish's mast would still have it shooting through my roof, effectively, and worse, "twice", 2) I wonder if it overhanging the dish itself will interfere with where the dish is looking at the satellites, and finally, 3) the dish is near my incoming power lines, as in if I were to lose a grip on the antenna while mounting it, it could fall on the power lines.

Someday, on the south side of my roof, my chimney has been replaced by a metal vent and I could possibly mount the antenna to it. I think it's high enough to get over my neighbor's house (roof) for Cincy direction. I don't think Dayton channels will be a problem at all given my proximity. Hell, I suspect I could mount the antenna pointing towards Columbus and pick up Dayton.
hall is online now  
post #4325 of 6617 Old 03-07-2007, 06:03 AM
Senior Member
 
JunkyardDogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Well I got another HDTV over the weekend. It's a LCD flat panel and wow, these things have come a long way since 2002, when we got our CRT RPTV. But with the new set, innovation seems to have lead reliance on the stations sending out the right time via PSIP. When I flip to WBDT-DT, the time skips ahead about 6 hours, which also screws up the guide. Can anyone confirm this? If so, could someone post/PM contact info for WBDT engineers.

Alex
JunkyardDogg is offline  
post #4326 of 6617 Old 03-08-2007, 09:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by JunkyardDogg View Post

When I flip to WBDT-DT, the time skips ahead about 6 hours, which also screws up the guide. Can anyone confirm this?

Yes, One reciever I have here (Hisense/USDTV DB-2010) lets you select which digital station's time info is used(such as for the guide display) for your time/date info and If I select to use WBDT-DT, it currently shows its time is off by +5 hours+10 Minutes or so.

Also -- Looking at it with TS reader, WBDT-DT's time info sent via PSIP STT is currently off by + 5 hours and a little less than 10 Minutes. For the STT time info it shows should indicate the current UTC or "GMT" instead of local time, so at this exact moment -- it should say 17:10:13:30 (the current time at 0 degrees longditude - I.e. in "Greenwich, England - 5:10:13:30pm ) but it says 22:21:10 (10:21:10pm instead .... The date is correct, currently however ... I *think* the GPS offset info in their STT table is correct, but I'd need to do some research on that to say for sure )

The EPG info in the EIT's are showing up just fine, though -- so, you'll probably only notice this if your certian receiver uses the time from the station it's "tuned to"(and the station is sending the wrong time/date info) for time display or for the guide ... My old DTC 100 was like that(I don't have it any more), and several years ago it made the guide info pretty useless because so many stations were sending the improper date/time info via PSIP STT ...

BTW, WHIO-DT's STT time is also off currently, it's about 5 minutes fast -
(BTW, FCC rules require the time they send via STT be within 1 second of GPS time ...)

BTW, just a thought -- you might want to wait a few more days before you contact them about it though -- until after this "earlier than usual" March 11 change to EST to see if they get it straightened out ...

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4327 of 6617 Old 03-08-2007, 10:09 AM
Senior Member
 
JunkyardDogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jeff,

Thanks for the info, I need to look into getting a card for my PC. The TV sets its time based on the channel that it is tuned to, but I figured the problem might have something to do with DST coming up this weekend. I will see if anything changes over the weekend. Thanks again.

Alex

Alex
JunkyardDogg is offline  
post #4328 of 6617 Old 03-08-2007, 09:23 PM
Member
 
campjjae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay, so let me say upfront that I understand every house/antenna/person is going to have different results. With that said...

I'm looking at building up in Vandalia across from the Rec Center (a stone's throw N of 70 and not very far W of 75). I've pulled up the map on antenna web and things look good (yellow - I believe). Currently I've got a Terk HDTVa in the attic and live just SE of the 70/75 interchange, at the bottom of a hill with a fairly large wood between me and the tranmitters. Signal strength is great, but I get some nasty multipath at times (really bothersome!). Should I expect my situation to improve in Vandalia? I primarily want the Dayton stations, but wouldn't mind picking up some Cincy stations (don't know if thats even a remote likelihood with this rig?). I think I'll be about on a level plane, with no large trees around, again I'll stick the antenna in the attic. What are the experiences out there for this part of town?

Also the house salesman has said outdoor antenna's are not allowed by the HOA, not even satelite dishes (although they do allow them if put up discretely). I thought I remembered someone here saying that this is not legal? But maybe that just applied to condo's/apartments. Anyway, hopefully it won't matter and the attic job will work better, but if not I was looking forward to mounting a nice rooftop model on the house I own and get to really hunt down some good signals.

Thanks!
campjjae is offline  
post #4329 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 03:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
terryfoster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Windsor Locks, CT
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by campjjae View Post

Also the house salesman has said outdoor antenna's are not allowed by the HOA, not even satelite dishes (although they do allow them if put up discretely). I thought I remembered someone here saying that this is not legal? But maybe that just applied to condo's/apartments. Anyway, hopefully it won't matter and the attic job will work better, but if not I was looking forward to mounting a nice rooftop model on the house I own and get to really hunt down some good signals.

OTARD. HOAs can put some limitations on where you place your antenna, but only as long as it doesn't affect your reception and it doesn't unreasonably increase the cost of your project. Placing an antenna in your attic will certainly have some affect on your ability to receive broadcast signals and most of us will always recommend placing an antenna outside and on your roof. There are size limitations on dishes, but broadcast antennas don't seem to have any limitation other than if you go 12ft over your roof line you may need a permit.

My posts are my own opinions and suggestions and do not represent those of my employer or other staff members.
terryfoster is offline  
post #4330 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 05:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton
Posts: 2,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by campjjae View Post

Also the house salesman has said outdoor antenna's are not allowed by the HOA, not even satelite dishes (although they do allow them if put up discretely).

HOA rules or not, I'd always prefer that my own satellite dish or an antenna to be "discrete". You've got plenty of options....
hall is online now  
post #4331 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 11:28 AM
Senior Member
 
andy.s.lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by campjjae View Post

I'm looking at building up in Vandalia across from the Rec Center (a stone's throw N of 70 and not very far W of 75). I've pulled up the map on antenna web and things look good (yellow - I believe). Currently I've got a Terk HDTVa in the attic and live just SE of the 70/75 interchange, at the bottom of a hill with a fairly large wood between me and the tranmitters. Signal strength is great, but I get some nasty multipath at times (really bothersome!). Should I expect my situation to improve in Vandalia? I primarily want the Dayton stations, but wouldn't mind picking up some Cincy stations (don't know if thats even a remote likelihood with this rig?). I think I'll be about on a level plane, with no large trees around, again I'll stick the antenna in the attic.

Here's the analysis of TV signal strength at the Rec Center itself. The Rec Center is still in a slight depression in the terrain, so if the house is on higher ground, you can expect slightly better results.

In the attached radar plot, longer bars represent stronger signals. The table to the right of the plot provides details about each of the transmitters. The expected signal strength is under the column labeled "Rx_dBm". This analysis does not account for any antenna gain, amps, cable loss, splitters, tuners, etc. (since I don't know what they are), and simply represents the amount of signals "in the air" at a point in space.



My take on the results:

- The local Dayton channels will be easy. You might still have multipath issues depending on what other structures are around, but it's probably no worse that what you've encountered before.

- You'll probably have a hard time getting the Cincinnati channels with the Terk antenna due to its limited gain. If you went with a better antenna like the DB4 or 4221, you'd probably be able to pick up those channels easily (anything with a reading above about -100 under "Rx_dBm")

- If you could go on the roof with an even taller antenna, then even the Columbus channels will start to fall within reach. Of course, they are coming from a different direction, so you'll need to use a rotator to turn the antenna when you want them, but it's up to you if you want to pursue that option.



Best regards,
Andy
LL
andy.s.lee is offline  
post #4332 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 01:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

In the attached radar plot,

Very cool ...

I dug up a couple of your posts regarding the software you're using for this here : ( http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post9885254 ) --

Just thought I'd comment and say Great Work on this !-- and FWIW, I think if you can make these tools accessable for folks to use via web, I think that would certianly be excellent! Seems like it would be quite a project+well beyond the "call of duty" however ....

Quote:


My take on the results:

Interesting the predicted difference in signal strength between 1st adjacent channel stations WRGT-DT 30 Dayton and WKRC-DT 31/WXIX-DT 29 Cincinnati ... Looks like 35.9db difference predicted for this receive location between WRGT-DT and WKRC-DT, and 38.5db between WRGT-DT+WKRC-DT .. Given that these stations are on relatively similar azimuth headings from locations generally "north" of Dayton, if it is the case there's a problem here, it's not going to be easy to solve with a directional antenna.

As Paul and I were discussing earlier, I had read previously(somewhere in FCC documents, I can't seem to dig that up currently) that FCC considers as much as 46db D/U ratio between 1st adjacent DTV channels as "workable" ...

However, I was doing some research on this, and, in their current interference rules regarding changes in DTV table of allotments or petitions for new DTV stations -- It says they are using a threshold D/U ratio of only 26db(N-1) or 28db(N+1) for 1st adjacent channel DTV to DTV interference! Somehow, that seems odd given the situation regarding WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT's predicted service area(41dbu contour per FCC's contour methodology for instance) reaching these folks North of WRGT-DT location --- Specifically involving the first adjacent channel DTV operations of WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT currently, as well as WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT post analog shut off (as it stands right now, looks like both of those will be where they are now post analog shut off, WKRC-DT will be moving to their current analog channel assignment, VHF 12 ) ....

For more info, See CFR 47, Section 73.623, specifically the info+charts under section (c) (2) - Note you might find some of the info under section (c)(3), interesting as well :

http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2007/73/623/

Update, oh -- furthermore, Also, in regards to the rules as they apply for this section --- 73.623 says no adjacent channel DTV allotments permitted between 20~110KM .. Of course, WKRC-DT/WXIX-DT and WRGT-DT transmit locations are within that "non-permitted" range ....

Maybe I'm missing something here, however?

update: I can't seem to dig any specifics up on it in the part 73 rules, but, perhaps is it that the rules regarding interference protection are less stringent for the DTV "channel election" process, and regarding the current DTV table of allotments?

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4333 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 04:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
Paul210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Greetings everyone!

I hope this isn't too far off-topic for this thread.

It finally warmed up enough for me to climb up on the roof to see why my antenna rotator quit working. I believe it's a CM9521 and it's only 4 1/2 years old. When I inspected the drive unit, the plastic housing around the coils was partially melted. It could be fried completely or just a broken wire internally but I wasn't going to attempt meter checks standing on the roof. I know the antenna is big and somewhat heavy (CM 3671) but I didn't think the load would cause it to overheat. It's not like I spin the thing around that much or that often. Do any of you guys have any advice on a more heavy-duty drive unit? I suppose if I were going to purchase the same one again, I could go with a more reasonable antenna, perhaps something UHF only or high VHF/UHF.

Thanks,

Paul

Panny Plasma Junkie: TC-P50VT20, TC-P50G15, TH-42PX60U
Paul210 is offline  
post #4334 of 6617 Old 03-09-2007, 09:43 PM
Member
 
campjjae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wow great info, thanks guys! I'm optimistic about my results.

TerryFoster, great info on the FCC regs. It was so clear and to the point that I had to do a double check to confirm it was an actual gov't document! I'll keep that in my hip pocket incase the need arises.

Andy.S.Lee, great graph and chart, thanks for putting in the effort. If I can get those signals as projected AND avoid multipath, I'll probably stick with the Terk in the attic. I really think all the trees here (in Huber) are creating most of it, as it gets much worse relative to the wind. The new house should have a pretty clear local view to the south.

Thanks again all!
campjjae is offline  
post #4335 of 6617 Old 03-10-2007, 12:42 AM
Senior Member
 
andy.s.lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

Very cool ...

I dug up a couple of your posts regarding the software you're using for this here : ( http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post9885254 ) --

Just thought I'd comment and say Great Work on this !-- and FWIW, I think if you can make these tools accessable for folks to use via web, I think that would certianly be excellent! Seems like it would be quite a project+well beyond the "call of duty" however ....

Thanks for the comments. I really enjoy this stuff both for my work and for my personal interests, so I'm all but too happy to share what I can. Besides, the tools are already written, so somebody might as well benefit from them...



Quote:


Interesting the predicted difference in signal strength between 1st adjacent channel stations WRGT-DT 30 Dayton and WKRC-DT 31/WXIX-DT 29 Cincinnati ... Looks like 35.9db difference predicted for this receive location between WRGT-DT and WKRC-DT, and 38.5db between WRGT-DT+WKRC-DT .. Given that these stations are on relatively similar azimuth headings from locations generally "north" of Dayton, if it is the case there's a problem here, it's not going to be easy to solve with a directional antenna.

As Paul and I were discussing earlier, I had read previously(somewhere in FCC documents, I can't seem to dig that up currently) that FCC considers as much as 46db D/U ratio between 1st adjacent DTV channels as "workable" ...

However, I was doing some research on this, and, in their current interference rules regarding changes in DTV table of allotments or petitions for new DTV stations -- It says they are using a threshold D/U ratio of only 26db(N-1) or 28db(N+1) for 1st adjacent channel DTV to DTV interference! Somehow, that seems odd given the situation regarding WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT's predicted service area(41dbu contour per FCC's contour methodology for instance) reaching these folks North of WRGT-DT location --- Specifically involving the first adjacent channel DTV operations of WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT currently, as well as WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT post analog shut off (as it stands right now, looks like both of those will be where they are now post analog shut off, WKRC-DT will be moving to their current analog channel assignment, VHF 12 ) ....

Looks like you've done a great job on your homework!

Aside from all the regulatory stuff, I feel that the FCC and the industry (broadcasters, tuner designers, video processing algorithms, display manufacturers, etc.) still have some learning to do regarding ATSC signals and the factors that affect the consumer experience. It's not surprising given that the technology is new, it's sophisticated, and it's taking time to find where all the "corner cases" are. If you keep in mind that it took over 250 engineers a period of three years to come up with the NTSC standards that the FCC uses today, it will help put things in perspective regarding the learning curve for ATSC.



On a more practical (engineering) note, I see two potential problems with these so-called "near-far" cases:



1) If the difference is very large, it limits the use of amplifiers in the receive chain. The strong channels put a cap on how much amplification you can apply before getting distortion / clipping / intermodulation products / or whatever you want to call it. That leaves the weaker channels "in the mud". These cases go up against the dynamic range limitations of all the radio equipment leading up to the tuner and affects all weak channels across the band simultaneously.

In this particular case, the near channels are not that strong and the far channels are not that weak, so I actually don't think there's a problem here for most of the equipment people would typically use.



2) Adjacent channel rejection is a problem that depends on the way a receiver is designed. When a receiver tunes to a channel, it tries to select only the channel of interest and ignore all other RF energy on the rest of the channels. In practice that's hard to do if you've got a very strong signal right next to the channel you want. Think of stargazing as an analogy. It's easy enough to see stars, even dim ones, using a telescope. However, if you try looking for the same star when the sun is out right next to it, it's near impossible.

In terms of radio technology, the adjacent channel rejection depends on how good the band-pass filters, automatic gain control (AGC), and analog-to-digital (A/D) converters are in the tuner's "front-end". Since most OTA tuner manufacturers don't tell you how their radios are designed, it's hard to tell how good or bad they are at handling these cases. Based on reasonable radio design principles, I've estimated where some tuners might have problems and include "adjacent channel warnings" with my radar plots. Some tuners may struggle with these channels while others will have no problem at all.

In this particular case, there are some channels marked with adjacent channel warnings. Again, there's no way to know if a particular tuner will have any difficulties until you try it.



As a whole, I don't think the situation for campjjae is all that difficult. There's a good chance he'll get all the channels he wants without going to exotic or unusual work-arounds.



BTW, since this particular near-far case cannot be fixed with directional antennas (since they are all coming from the same direction), the next best way to fix these problems is with notch filters, which are actually not that hard to get.

One of the difficulties for the FCC in specifying the limits of a "workable" environment is defining what is a reasonable amount of effort needed to make a system work. Is it too much to expect consumers to install high gain directional antennas on a tall mast? how about requiring antenna rotators? or combining signals from multiple antennas? using FM traps? using pre-amps? adding notch filters? ...?



Again, thanks for the comments and discussion.

Best regards,
Andy
andy.s.lee is offline  
post #4336 of 6617 Old 03-10-2007, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul210 View Post

Do any of you guys have any advice on a more heavy-duty drive unit?

I don't have the URL for their website handy, but a place called "norm's rotor service" has a nice list of rotors up on their website you might want to look at ... He carries a number of good rotors+provides a good list of what you might want to look for, most of those which are suitable for much heavier loading than most any TV antennas, mostly rebuilt(should be like new) I believe .. It really doesn't hurt to have "too much" rotor, though ...

I don't want to talk them down, but I can't say I'm too impressed with what I've seen of the newer "consumer grade" rotors from companies such as CM .... Just like should be the case with antenna, personally, I want something that will work+will last a long time(as in decades) that you don't have to mess with or worry about "burning up" if you turn the antenna when it's full of ice and the wind is blowing/etc ...

FWIW, I'm using an Alliance HD-73-1 for my main TV antennas currently - It's more than "heavy duty enough" for my TV antennas, and I like it's dual speed control.

Do keep in mind these "heavier duty" rotors do tend to use more wires for the control cable however --- HD-73 uses 6 for instance, and another CDE/HAM rotor I've used on Ham antennas uses 8 or 9 control wires.

Update: Here's URL to Norm's rotor's for sale page :

http://www.rotorservice.com/prod1%20rotor%20sales.htm

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4337 of 6617 Old 03-10-2007, 05:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

I really enjoy this stuff both for my work and for my personal interests,

It is fun stuff!

edited : Removed portion of post -- Never mind, I see Andy is busy enough helping folks that have reception problems ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

Looks like you've done a great job on your homework!

Thanks. I've been following the DTV transistion for quite some time in some detail, including some of the "engineering" issues involved for many years now. As well as discussing it, and some of the problems which have occured with engineers and others(both here+on other forums as well as privately) interested in the issues involved.

It has gotten so "complicated" at times however, that I do tend to sometimes forget some of the details I had learned or come across on previous occasions ... And, at times have trouble digging up some of the references to the info again -- I should have indexed some of the ATSC white papers, FCC reports and articles+articles from TVtechnology and such a little better before I burn them to CD/DVD/etc .... Oh, well, we all only have so much time to spend on these things ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

In this particular case, the near channels are not that strong and the far channels are not that weak, so I actually don't think there's a problem here for most of the equipment people would typically use.

That's what I would think/would have thought as well as well, especially given some of what I've seen in a "seat of pants" manner, in some cases regarding weaker DTV DX via "tropo" on 1st adjacent channels to strong DTV locals --

However, if you scroll back in this thread a bit and read posts related to this issue by "paul210"(who is in a location as I recall a bit WSW of Campjae's location), it certianly seems like he likely has some difficulty with this issue, with several different models of DTV receivers ...

Quote:


Think of stargazing as an analogy. It's easy enough to see stars, even dim ones, using a telescope. However, if you try looking for the same star when the sun is out right next to it, it's near impossible.

Good analogy!

Quote:


In terms of radio technology, the adjacent channel rejection depends on how good the band-pass filters, automatic gain control (AGC), and analog-to-digital (A/D) converters are in the tuner's "front-end". Since most OTA tuner manufacturers don't tell you how their radios are designed, it's hard to tell how good or bad they are at handling these cases.

Yes, if you haven't already done so, you'll find some excellent articles related to these issues by Doug Lung and Charles Rhodes in TV technology. While I personally think it seems somewhat possible some of the Rhoades articles may be overstating the potential difficulies concerning some of the potential 3rd order intercept IMD/etc. issues involved for superHet receivers, nevertheless it's good to know about these things ....

It is too bad the manufacturers don't give us better info on these receiver's performance characteristics .... Remember when we used to get at least a decent "spec sheet" with FM tuners/receivers, for instance?

Quote:


Based on reasonable radio design principles, I've estimated where some tuners might have problems and include "adjacent channel warnings" with my radar plots. Some tuners may struggle with these channels while others will have no problem at all.

Yes, I noticed that addition -- Nice touch!


Quote:


As a whole, I don't think the situation for campjjae is all that difficult. There's a good chance he'll get all the channels he wants without going to exotic or unusual work-arounds.

Oh -- Just to clarify, I did not make my comments in an "argumentative" way, or to disagree with your "take" on campjjae's situation (as I agree with everything you said there) ...

Instead, given the signal strength predictions for campjae's location you provided regarding WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT, I saw it as an oppurtunity to further address/ comment on issues we've discussed a bit here previously. Or, In other words, my comments on the 1st adjacent channel issue/FCC rules were meant more as a "extension" to the discussion Paul and I were having earlier in thread(a page or two or so back) --- specifically, because, at the time I was wondering what the difference in field strength between WRGT-DT/WXIX-DT/WKRC-DT might actually be in a location such as Vandalia area.

Quote:


BTW, since this particular near-far case cannot be fixed with directional antennas (since they are all coming from the same direction), the next best way to fix these problems is with notch filters ...

Yes -- I don't need them for local reception -- but, for one antenna setup here ------ (which I mostly use for Cincinnati Reception but also for Dx'ing - I use a seperate antenna setup/on seperate feedline for dayton Reception with A/B switch before receiver(s) to switch between them) I do use several Blonder-Tongue+winegard tunable notch filters here to knock down some of the stronger Dayton analogs a bit when I have antenna aimed at/near Dayton.

It's Nice to be able to do things such as watch WJW 8 Cleveland fairly often, which for example, lies in same direction from my location as WHIO 7 Dayton ....

Quote:


Again, thanks for the comments and discussion.

Thank You !

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4338 of 6617 Old 03-12-2007, 07:51 PM
Member
 
campjjae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks again on the info. I just signed the contract for the house. I'll let you know how it turns out in a view months...

HOA rules are a bit funny. They say "No external antennas," then "Nothing hereinshall be construed so as to conflict with FCC regualtions." Looking at the charts and such, it shouldn't be a problem.
campjjae is offline  
post #4339 of 6617 Old 03-13-2007, 04:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
dc10forlife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Got confirmation today from WHIO that it will NOT be showing the Wright State, Miami, and Ohio State games in high definition because of CBS' alleged limitations on providing a constant feed in HD. It would be nice for WHIO to do the same thing WRAL is doing -- multicast four games OTA and provide the cable company with the HD feed.
dc10forlife is offline  
post #4340 of 6617 Old 03-14-2007, 05:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
browerjs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Beavercreek, OH
Posts: 1,994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc10forlife View Post

Got confirmation today from WHIO that it will NOT be showing the Wright State, Miami, and Ohio State games in high definition because of CBS' alleged limitations on providing a constant feed in HD. It would be nice for WHIO to do the same thing WRAL is doing -- multicast four games OTA and provide the cable company with the HD feed.

I guess we'll just have to hope that they all get beat in the 1st round

XBL GT: DMBFiredancer
browerjs is offline  
post #4341 of 6617 Old 03-14-2007, 08:32 AM
Senior Member
 
Lighting Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Berea, OH
Posts: 346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anybody else noticed TNT-HD via QAM that the soundtrack has been really off for quite some time now, meaning a week or more?

More specifically Law and Order in the evenings, because that's pretty much all I watch.
Lighting Guy is offline  
post #4342 of 6617 Old 03-14-2007, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton
Posts: 2,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I've seen others mentioning lipsync issues with TNT-HD from numerous providers.
hall is online now  
post #4343 of 6617 Old 03-14-2007, 06:15 PM
Senior Member
 
andy.s.lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

Never mind, I see Andy is busy enough helping folks that have reception problems ...

Jeff,

Sorry for the slow feedback. I was actually trying to work out all the details of my new FCC database parsing routines. Unfortunately, the "databases" the FCC makes available online are not exactly the most rigorously organized relational databases in the usual sense of the term. I've managed to work out most of the bugs with missing cross references, typos, and other weird glitches in the data and I'm ready to start test driving it. It looks like I'm able to successfully read in 13,087 active TV transmitter records (using yesterday's database snapshot).

I have no idea whether this in going to be an improvement over what I had before, but I guess I'll soon find out. I tried to add some intelligence to make better guesses as to which records match with the real world. The published databases don't have a good way to specify when records expire, so I've had to add several inferrence rules. We'll just see how this goes. I can tweak the rules or force manual overrides later.

I did see your coordinates from earlier and wrote them down. I don't have them with me now, but I'll create a plot when I get home tonight and post the results.


Best regards,
Andy
andy.s.lee is offline  
post #4344 of 6617 Old 03-14-2007, 08:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

other weird glitches in the data and I'm ready to start test driving it.

One weird glitch I can recall seeing in there once was a transmitting antenna height above sea level which would put it three times Higher than the tower it was on -- Noticed that one has been fixed, though, even though it involved a now expired DTV STA anyway ...

Quote:


I tried to add some intelligence to make better guesses as to which records match with the real world. The published databases don't have a good way to specify when records expire, so I've had to add several inferrence rules. We'll just see how this goes. I can tweak the rules or force manual overrides later.

Yeah ... in some cases It's really impossible to tell exactly what is going on using CDBS. You've got stuff such as expired STA's in there(which may or may not have been extended+currently in use - probably not, but sometimes there's no way to tell for sure), Stations which are operating under PTA and filed for license to cover a CP years ago which still hasn't been granted(at least according to that info), and multiple CP's and licensed facilites in some cases/etc/etc ...

Along with some info here+there from the local engineers, I try to keep an eye on the info(via the TV query+the CDBS links to their apps/etc. in that page) for the Cincy/Dayton area stations so at least for those I can usually pretty much figure out what is going on, so if you need any info on those I can probably help you out there ...

Hopefully, it will get a lot cleaner+easier to pull out accurate info as time goes on with the transistion ...

In any case, whatever you end up with in this regard with will surely be better than what for instance, antennaweb is doing in some(many?)cases-- for instance, they've had WPTO-DT at the location specified in their Original CP (which I don't think is even in CDBS anymore), and that is something that changed 5 years ago!

Many of the details aren't included(antenna patterns/etc) which would be necessary for your work, but I find the spreadsheets available for download here (about 7/8 way down the page) here quite useful tools - especially very handy during DX openings. For the U.S. stuff, He pulls the info out of CDBS and updates these about once a week.

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4345 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
andy.s.lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitewatchman View Post

Along with some info here+there from the local engineers, I try to keep an eye on the info(via the TV query+the CDBS links to their apps/etc. in that page) for the Cincy/Dayton area stations so at least for those I can usually pretty much figure out what is going on, so if you need any info on those I can probably help you out there ...

In any case, whatever you end up with in this regard with will surely be better than what for instance, antennaweb is doing in some(many?)cases-- for instance, they've had WPTO-DT at the location specified in their Original CP (which I don't think is even in CDBS anymore), and that is something that changed 5 years ago!

Here's the radar plot using the new FCC database code. I guess we'll just have to see how many errors are in there now.


Quote:


Many of the details aren't included(antenna patterns/etc) which would be necessary for your work, but I find the spreadsheets available for download here (about 7/8 way down the page) here quite useful tools - especially very handy during DX openings. For the U.S. stuff, He pulls the info out of CDBS and updates these about once a week.

Most of the antenna patterns I need are available in the database. There are some antenna IDs that are missing, but I think the majority of them are in there correctly. You would think this would be necessary for the FCC's own sake, otherwise they wouldn't be able to properly assess the coverage and interference of each broadcast.


Best regards,
Andy
LL
andy.s.lee is offline  
post #4346 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 04:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nitewatchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middletown, Ohio
Posts: 6,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy.s.lee View Post

Here's the radar plot using the new FCC database code.

Thanks! Very nice! I very much like that "KW ERP" shown obviously tells you the ERP as calculated via taking the antenna pattern into account ... I've been doing that manually by using the formula : [relative field value in your direction Squared] x Max ERP(erp equivlilent to relative field value of 1.000] = ERP sent in your direction ....

And --- The co-channel warning for W36DG is certianly right on the mark -- W36DG is still analog at this time(the app is for flash cut to digital), and about 1/2 the time, CCI from WTVQ 36 Lexington is apparent to some degree, and it's not exactly unusual for it to just be a mess ....

I'm also glad stations like WDKY-DT+WSYX-DT were included, as I see some sort of an indication of signal from those two stations the majority of the time, and it is fairly common to occasionally achieve a lock(on an almost, but not quite daily basis for a few mintues at a time) and be able to decode at least a few minutes of video now and then from WDKY-DT and WSYX-DT(in case I didn't mention it, VHF antenna is Winegard PR5030, at about 30FT AGL) ... The situation isn't that much different for WBNS-DT+WTTE-DT ... WCMH-DT is a little more rare(due to co-channel WPTO 14 being 18 miles away+off backside of antenna), and oddly enough, WWHO-DT is even more rare -- I'd thought that was probably due to the terrain issues being worse in WWHO-DT's direction, and them being on higher frequency/shorter wavelength involved, so I'm a little surprised to see the predicted signal strength for WWHO-DT similar to for instance, WBNS-DT. Perhaps there is something going on with WRGT 45 being 1st adjacent channel, as 46 still looks a little messy from WRGT on a analog TV with antenna aimed at WWHO.

I have noticed that lowering the antenna a few feet makes quite an apparent difference in signal strength from the Cincy LP analog stations -- And, due to terrain I expect, the same is actually true for Dayton as well, especially on the higher UHF frequencies - to the extent that with my Dayton antenna(which is 31 element UHF yagi/corner reflector side mounted to tower about 8 feet lower than the XG91), Signal from WPTD-DT 58 seems to about match what I get from WCVN-DT(requires only about 15~20db extra attenuation added in feedline to get down to threshold levels) with the XG91, but with more fading+multipath issues with WPTD-DT ... Whearas, with the XG91 aimed at Dayton, it takes about 50db extra attenuation added into feedline to get down near threshold for WPTD-DT ....

I don't know if your software can show "terrain profiles" for the paths - in case not, Farther below I have attached terrain profiles(using Delorme's Topo USA) to WXIX-DT+WHIO-DT from my location(using NAD27 coordinates for the transmitter site as shown on FCC TV query from CDBS info+for my receive antenna location) ... I've drawn in a rough estimate of the TX antenna heights based on the "scale" you see for this+the height in AMSL given on FCC site. This doesn't take curvature of earth into account, so I've roughly estimated it with the "lower" line on each profile ... As you can see, the "LOS" for Dayton is a very "near" thing ....

So, in other(shorter) words - as should be evident by the "terrain profile" plots I've included -- there are certianly circumstances when terrain is involved when raising antenna a few feet can make a big difference!

Quote:


I guess we'll just have to see how many errors are in there now.

As far as the stations listed on my "radar plot" -- The only thing I see that "might" be off is the ERP for WKRC-DT ... While this STA for 330KW ERP was shown as "granted" by FCC in 12/06 (and supposedly expired on 3/8/07) :

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/w...ion_id=1142636

-- WKRC Transmitter engineer told us in Cincinnati thread last summer that the request for STA was due to a failure of a transmitter component, and that they expected to have it replaced by sometime late last summer ... And, they told the FCC this when they filed for the STA in Late July as well, as you'll see in the info exhibited in the text described in "exhibit 21" near bottom of app, in the actual application which was filed, which can be accessed here :

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/w...ility_id=11289

Now, while I don't know for sure whether or not they are currently using that STA or not ... However ,given what their engineer told us+what they told the commission(that they expected it would be 8 weeks from end of july 2006 before they were back to full power) I suspect they are not and are back to their 800KW ERP licensed facility(non D/A). In fact, I suspect they were probably back to full power before FCC granted the STA in December, LOL. Doesn't matter much for my location, though, as all we're talking about here is a little bit less than 4db difference between 330KW ERP+800KW ERP ...

Besides that -- AFAIK, Everything on the list looks to be right on, including involving the ERP/antenna patterns(and me being in the biggest null for WHIO-DT, and a pretty good "null" for WBDT-DT as well), and distances/azimuth headings to the transmitters from my location.

I do wonder however why W36DG and W27CT's (for channel 6DT) LD apps are "showing up", but WOTH-LD Cincinnati's CP for Channel 47 isn't showing up (see here) :

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

There are a couple of others I might expect to see on there as well, given that W27CT's app for 6 is showing up -- Especially This one (for digital companion channel for W20CL, Springfield) - The others (such as W23DM-D LD translator) either probably wouldn't show up in a plot for me anyway as they'd probably be too weak, or haven't yet gotten beyond the "mutually exclusive apps" stage, to the extent that an actual "app" or CP shows up -- such as WBQC-CA Cincinnati digital companion channel app for 20, which just shows up as "new" with no app attached) :

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


Quote:


Most of the antenna patterns I need are available in the database.

Oh yes, I was just saying that the fellow who operates the dxfm website filters out some of that data(antenna pattern info/etc) from CDBS in his spreadsheets -- As I recall when he talked a little about how he does it(and what he filters out concerning "bad"/incorrect records/etc) -- he does download the CDBS info+use it with DBMS software(I think he uses MS Access, not sure) first before exporting it to excel spreadsheet - not sure where exactly he "filters out" the antenna info/etc.

Quote:


There are some antenna IDs that are missing, but I think the majority of them are in there correctly. You would think this would be necessary for the FCC's own sake, otherwise they wouldn't be able to properly assess the coverage and interference of each broadcast.

Yes -- I'm trying to remember though, does that database show the beam tilt info in every case?

And, I suppose the big question is whether or not the antenna pattern shown in the FCC data/operating permits *actually* matches the performance of the "real" antenna in any/every given case .... I suspect, in some cases, there may be some differences in the "real world" involved .....

Also -- I'm sure you're aware of this, but in case not/in case it helps --- you can sometimes dig up more "detailed" info from elsewhere on FCC site, in PDF attachements to applications for CP's or CP mods/etc as submitted as interference studies supporting the applications themselves .. for instance, sometimes you can find info on the detailed longely-rice studies performed to support the applications, as well as more detailed info, such as on beam tilt/etc ....

Here's one for a CP mod from 2003 for WDKY-DT, entitled "comprehensive technical exhibit ---


http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs...ibit_id=178781

The way to dig some of those up is to use TV query with the "detaled info+CDBS links" option, then click on the "application list" link (which in WDKY case takes you here) :
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/w...ility_id=64017

Then click on the blue "application" link for the app your interested in(in this case, this one is for file # BMPCDT 20020716AAI as granted by FCC on 9/29/2004), and in this case you'll get that app here, and if you scroll to the bottom of that app, you'll find the link to the lengthy "compreshensive techincal exhhbit" for which I included a link farther above :

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/w...ility_id=64017

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

Unfortunetly, that sort of detailed technical information isn't available for All stations on FCC site, only some of them .... I assume FCC has all the necessary info, however ....


Anyway, thanks again Andy -- hope some of this is useful to you in some way.
LL
LL

Jeff
Nitewatchman is offline  
post #4347 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 04:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
Paul210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc10forlife View Post

Got confirmation today from WHIO that it will NOT be showing the Wright State, Miami, and Ohio State games in high definition because of CBS' alleged limitations on providing a constant feed in HD. It would be nice for WHIO to do the same thing WRAL is doing -- multicast four games OTA and provide the cable company with the HD feed.

I'm not sure of their reasoning on this. The Ohio State game IS HD. They had a combination of HD/SD programming on earlier today. I called them a couple times this evening just to raise hell anyway. At least they know somebody is watching. I also informed them WKRC had the game on in HD but I would rather watch it on WHIO, and I really would. On WHIO, everything isn't green and they have DD 5.1. The lady that answered the phone informed me that several people had called already.

Panny Plasma Junkie: TC-P50VT20, TC-P50G15, TH-42PX60U
Paul210 is offline  
post #4348 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 05:22 PM
Member
 
woodsptw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc10forlife View Post

Got confirmation today from WHIO that it will NOT be showing the Wright State, Miami, and Ohio State games in high definition because of CBS' alleged limitations on providing a constant feed in HD. It would be nice for WHIO to do the same thing WRAL is doing -- multicast four games OTA and provide the cable company with the HD feed.

Well since WHIO can't deliver the (HD) service we expect - there are alternatives...

I switched to the Antenna (away from the Time Warner input) for my HD OTA and I'm watching the games on WKRC in Cincinnati. Thank you WKRC.

What is it with our Dayton market? We still don't have NBC HD through Time Warner!
woodsptw is offline  
post #4349 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 05:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Paul210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
The lady at WHIO that answered the phone explained that it was some sort of agreement they had with CBS. I don't understand why it wouldn't be it CBS's or WHIO's best interest to carry what IS available in HD. I've got to be missing something here.

Panny Plasma Junkie: TC-P50VT20, TC-P50G15, TH-42PX60U
Paul210 is offline  
post #4350 of 6617 Old 03-15-2007, 05:53 PM
Member
 
woodsptw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul210 View Post

The lady at WHIO that answered the phone explained that it was some sort of agreement they had with CBS. I don't understand why it wouldn't be it CBS's or WHIO's best interest to carry what IS available in HD. I've got to be missing something here.

I found this article...

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...0339/1025/LIFE
woodsptw is offline  
Reply Local HDTV Info and Reception

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off