Lexington, KY - HDTV - Page 181 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #5401 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 07:25 AM
Member
 
tripelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb_ky1 View Post
WKYT ...800 kW and a new antenna as well...
Yes, interesting. At least WKYT seems to be trying to improve it's coverage.

Seems in the repack allocation, they were allowed 724 kW when moving from Ch 36 to 21. However, they are requesting 800 kW, which according to 'Rabbit Ears' extends their contour from 57.5 to 57.9 miles.

To some, that may not seem like much improvement. But at the fringes, makes a difference.

Compare that to WLKY (Louisville), changing from Ch 26 to 14. The FCC allocation apparently was 454 kW at Ch 14. WLKY is requesting 400 kW for Ch 14. According the Rabbit Ears, that will reduce their contour from 60.2 to 59.2 miles.

Seems, some like to improve things as they go forward, others take a different approach.

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

Note: Both stations, have a small decrease in antenna height, probably due to narrow band antennas being taller (for lower frequencies) and thus side-mounted extending slightly lower on the tower.
tripelo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5402 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 07:31 AM
Senior Member
 
jb_ky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yeah I don't see that making much of an improvement but you never know. I still think WDKY may try to improve its coverage since it never put a new antenna for channel 31 coming off channel 4.

Did see this. How WTVQ and WLEX will be working together.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/thewire/...pack/8471/view

Check out my TV design work!
https://jasonburnettky.wordpress.com
jb_ky1 is online now  
post #5403 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 08:57 AM
Member
 
tripelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb_ky1 View Post
Yeah I don't see that making much of an improvement...
True.

Not much improvement is better than not much worse.

To me, not knowing the full circumstances, it shows WKYT's concern for technical details. And, conversely for WLKY.

Quote:
...I still think WDKY may try to improve its coverage since it never put a new antenna for channel 31 coming off channel 4..
Would be good. However at this stage, it seems as FCC is limiting improvements to paraphrase as you say 'not much improvements'.

Maybe after the dust settles on the repack, WDKY could petition the FCC to again allow a better contour/pattern on Ch 19. But, very likely their opportunity has passed, the repack has changed other stations patterns and its a lot less likely now they can get away with increasing signal in Northern & Easternly directions.

Compare WDKY at channel 31 at Rabbit Ears 31,

to

WDKY at channel 19 at Rabbit Ears 19

A few years back, WDKY had a CP for an Omni antenna, looks less likely now.

Notice the greater potential for interference if WDKY increased coverage.

Quote:
Did see this. How WTVQ and WLEX will be working together.
Thanks, interesting.

Since WLEX and WTVQ will continue to share the same tower and antennas, seems reasonable that they have to work closely together.

.
tripelo is offline  
 
post #5404 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 09:36 AM
Senior Member
 
jb_ky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by tripelo View Post
True.

Not much improvement is better than not much worse.

To me, not knowing the full circumstances, it shows WKYT's concern for technical details. And, conversely for WLKY.

Would be good. However at this stage, it seems as FCC is limiting improvements to paraphrase as you say 'not much improvements'.

Maybe after the dust settles on the repack, WDKY could petition the FCC to again allow a better contour/pattern on Ch 19. But, very likely their opportunity has passed, the repack has changed other stations patterns and its a lot less likely now they can get away with increasing signal in Northern & Easternly directions.

Compare WDKY at channel 31 at Rabbit Ears 31,

to

WDKY at channel 19 at Rabbit Ears 19

A few years back, WDKY had a CP for an Omni antenna, looks less likely now.

Notice the greater potential for interference if WDKY increased coverage.

Thanks, interesting.

Since WLEX and WTVQ will continue to share the same tower and antennas, seems reasonable that they have to work closely together.

.

I'll take improvement for sure. I know WKYT doesn't want to lose any viewers.

Check out my TV design work!
https://jasonburnettky.wordpress.com
jb_ky1 is online now  
post #5405 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 10:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US
Posts: 15,408
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 733 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA
There's a bit of confusion here. Let me see if I can settle it.

We're inside the 90-day post-auction filing period, ending July 12. During this time, stations are only permitted to file for what they have now, within a 1% margin. In the case of WKYT, that meant due to change in antenna size and whatnot, they filed a slight increase in power versus the frequency-adjusted FCC-assigned power level.

For WLKY, a different issue arose. That station has a broadband antenna, and broadband antenna patterns vary slightly with frequency, as dictated by the laws of physics. Therefore, at the FCC-assigned power, the 1% limit would have been exceeded due to the change in antenna pattern caused by the change in frequency, and the power had to be backed off slightly.

Following the July 12 deadline, there will be two priority filing windows to allow stations to expand. The first priority window is for a subset of stations that either can't build what they were assigned or suffered an excessive loss. The second priority window is for any other repacked TV station. In both windows, stations can file for bigger facilities or an alternate channel, to the extent they can find one.

So WKYT filed for exactly what the FCC rules allow them to file at this time. I won't be surprised to see them come back in the second window and seek more power. In fact, I won't be surprised to see just about every repacked station file in one window or the other for more power or a different antenna or both.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.

RabbitEars

"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is online now  
post #5406 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 11:36 AM
Member
 
tripelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post
There's a bit of confusion here. Let me see if I can settle it...
Quote:
...We're inside the 90-day post-auction filing period, ending July 12...
Thanks Trip.

That's pretty much as it seemed when reading the FCC 'Engineering Exhibit' for each station.

Thank you for filling in details that are important for better clarity.

Quote:
...Following the July 12 deadline, there will be two priority filing windows to allow stations to expand. The first priority window is for a subset of stations that either can't build what they were assigned or suffered an excessive loss. The second priority window is for any other repacked TV station. In both windows, stations can file for bigger facilities or an alternate channel, to the extent they can find one.
Interesting.

Quote:
...I won't be surprised to see them come back in the second window and seek more power. In fact, I won't be surprised to see just about every repacked station file in one window or the other for more power or a different antenna or both.
That would be good news.

Probably there many interference agreements between stations to be worked out.

Quote:
...So WKYT filed for exactly what the FCC rules allow them to file at this time.
Questions arise:

Did WLKY file "for exactly what the FCC rules allow them" ?

Did WLKY currently not have any regulatory options with respect to loss of population served?

Population loss of : 1,911,303 to 1,887,281, about 24,000 people



------------- Other Thoughts -------------------

Quote:
...broadband antenna patterns vary slightly with frequency, as dictated by the laws of physics..
Understood. But, patterns vary with design choices. Likely, there is more than one design of broadband antennas available.

Speculation; maybe WLKY and WAVE selected among choices and decided to not fight the battle now, but maybe later.

.
tripelo is offline  
post #5407 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 11:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US
Posts: 15,408
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 733 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by tripelo View Post
Questions arise:

Did WLKY file "for exactly what the FCC rules allow them" ?

Did WLKY currently not have any regulatory options with respect to loss of population served?
Understood. But, patterns vary with design choices. Likely, there is more than one design of broadband antennas available.

Speculation; maybe WLKY and WAVE selected among choices and decided to not fight the battle now, but maybe later.
Yes, WLKY ran right up to the 1% limit. You can see it in their filing on page 8. You can see where the blue (proposal) runs up against the dashed red (1% limit) in the WNW direction.

WLKY will have the option of filing in the second priority filing window, as far as I know. I fully expect them to do so.

Broadband antennas are generally made by putting collections of panels together in different configurations. Panels, like any other antennas, have different patterns at different frequencies, so there's plenty that can be done with them, but there are limitations. My guess is that given the very wide spread in frequency, they did the best they could to match the existing pattern of both stations involved and the match was not perfect. When WAVE is filed, we'll see how close they got.

EDIT: Just for good measure, I went ahead and tested it, and WDKY-19 at 1000 kW ND passes the interference test as of right now. That doesn't rule out the possibility that another station could ask to increase power at the same time (second priority window) and create a conflict that isn't there today, but then they would both be motivated to work out an agreement.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.

RabbitEars

"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"


Last edited by Trip in VA; Yesterday at 12:00 PM.
Trip in VA is online now  
post #5408 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 12:13 PM
Member
 
tripelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post
Yes, WLKY ran right up to the 1% limit. ...
WLKY will have the option of filing in the second priority filing window, as far as I know. I fully expect them to do so...
Thanks.

Quote:
...When WAVE is filed, we'll see how close they got.
Will be interesting.

Quote:
EDIT: Just for good measure, I went ahead and tested it, and WDKY-19 at 1000 kW ND passes the interference test as of right now. That doesn't rule out the possibility that another station could ask to increase power at the same time (second priority window) and create a conflict that isn't there today, but then they would both be motivated to work out an agreement.
Thanks, much appreciated.

Certainly would not (did not) have guessed that to be the case.

.
tripelo is offline  
post #5409 of 5410 Old Yesterday, 04:04 PM
Senior Member
 
jb_ky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

EDIT: Just for good measure, I went ahead and tested it, and WDKY-19 at 1000 kW ND passes the interference test as of right now. That doesn't rule out the possibility that another station could ask to increase power at the same time (second priority window) and create a conflict that isn't there today, but then they would both be motivated to work out an agreement.

- Trip
Interesting! Thanks for the info Trip and tripelo!

Check out my TV design work!
https://jasonburnettky.wordpress.com
jb_ky1 is online now  
post #5410 of 5410 Old Today, 10:18 AM
Senior Member
 
jb_ky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Also with the application of WKYT new antenna setup... is it going to replace the existing 36 antenna or going on the side?

The proposed Channel 21 operation will employ a new antenna system to be
side-mounted on a mast atop the WKYT-TV tower in lieu of the existing Channel 36 antenna.
The tower structure corresponds to FCC Antenna Structure Registration number 1030383. No
change to the overall structure height will result.


I remember driving by when the tower guys were taking down the analog 27. Plus they still have the former digital channel 13 on the side.

Check out my TV design work!
https://jasonburnettky.wordpress.com
jb_ky1 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Local HDTV Info and Reception



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