Quote:
Originally posted by compson
In Winston-Salem, with an indoor antenna, I have not been able to get any signal. By that, I mean that in trying to lock onto a new channel on my Dish 6000, I get no reading at all. I am able to pick up the other Triad digital channels to varying degrees.
I assume you must be referring to WGHP. At the present we are running at reduced power of 4200 watts (4.2 kW). There is no set date to increase power yet, so an indoor antenna, unfortunately will not pick us up unless you are at the tower. I am on the north side of Greensboro with a modest antenna setup, Channel Master 4228 and a small preamp on a 15 ft pole, yields good results. When the FCC set its standards for DTV, indoor rabbit ears were never considered, but an antenna located at 30 ft on the outside was used for all measurements.
We will have to make substantial modifications to increase power and we have been moving in that direction for several years and are continuing to do so, even now.
*** The following is my view and opinion and is not the view or opinion of my employer.***
I read in the forums people jumping up and down demanding stations be pulled because they are not at full power or haven't made it on air or because they only send up-converted signals.
The truth is, up until now, the FCC has not been very realistic in its view of what it takes to make the DTV transition a success. Only the broadcasters have been required to make this work, and it will take every player from the broadcasters to set manufactures to make this roll out a success. The current FCC sees this and is making strides to work with broadcasters and now is applying pressure on the other players as well. If you read the broadcast rags, the broadcasters applaud this and I think broadcasters would be more inclined to spend the extra if they knew that it all wasn't up to them, as it should be.
Had the FCC in 1995/96 come out with a complete DTV roll out plan that included the current broadcast timetable and mandated timetables for cable must carry, receiver conversion, and programming, we might be able to make the 2006 deadline, but the former FCC chairman walked around carrying a big stick demanding broadcasters do this and that and ignored the rest of the industry on this issue and was, IMHO, more inclined to criticize broadcasters than to help them. The current FCC chairman, who wants DTV, also understands the whole thing is so screwed up, it will take time to straighten out and get it going again, and he is trying to, by NOT carrying a big stick, but working with the broadcasters and addressing the other issues. He is getting more response now, than his predecessor did, but it is now 6 years down the road.
This DTV issue is a classic case of the government getting involved to force change when there was no real driving force. Would DTV have happened? Absolutely! Would it have been more orderly transition without the government? Yes. Would we have been further along in the transition had all the issues been addressed and not just the broadcast side? Yes.
It is ashamed that DTV holds so much promise and yet, it isn't happening, but I think the FCC sees its mistakes and it has sent a message to the effected industries, and they have received it. It will take some time to get DTV roll out back on track, because it is now derailed in a ditch and it is trying to get back up.
Right now the only people benefitting from DTV are the broadcast manufacturers and consumer manufacturers, because it costs money to convert whether you are a broadcaster or viewer. Until that scale is tipped by some factor (the FCC in this case), expect more of the same.
An analogy I have been using is this is 1946. In 1946, the FCC opened television to the masses. It was a rocky start, just like DTV. It was bleeding edge technology with few transmitters and fewer receivers. Stations came on sporadically and then left the air. Until the FCC made some hard and fast choices, TV floundered around until the early 50's, when it took off. The technology got better, and the industry got focused. DTV is in the same boat. In comparison, 2002 is DTV's 1946. The digital technology is still being proven and some is still vaporware, even today. I have heard others call DTV still a science project in the works, and it is. We the pupblic (me included) have gotten so use to turning on a device and it works first time, and DTV isn't there yet. As early adoptors, you are seeing a new technology develop before your eyes. DTV was only lab stuff 6 years ago and now it is in you home. A short time for R&D for an entire industry. Something that most people believed would never happen again. Remember you are the pioneers. So enjoy what little you receive right now. In years to come you can tell people how you SAW DTV develop. It will get better, but probably not as fast as we all would like it to.
The preceding has been my view and opinion. It is not the view or opinion of my employer.
