cbs chicago whats up!!!  

Well, I don't think they chose channel 3 but were assigned it.

But this doesn't change the fact that we haven't received a satisfactory response as to why for a year and half now they were not able to get a different channel or just go ahead and broadcast on channel 3 and let AT&T cable deal with the problems.

I for one am beyond irritated that I have dished out nearly 4 grand for equipment and can't even enjoy the majority of the HD programming out there. Missing the Final Four will be unbearable.

I wonder if someone at the Tribune would be interested in printing a story about this fiasco (wishful thinking I'm sure)?? Maybe a little bad press would give them a bigger sense of urgency...

-Craig

If you search the archive you can find all the messages on this issue. We were assigned channel 3 - we have had the transmitter on the air - it caused more then 100,000 people to loose the analog WBBM signal (because of interference WBBM Channel 2 was moved to cable channel 3).

So the simple issue is --- run the transmitter and provide DTV for a hundred or maybe a thousand people - but at the same time wipe out and prevent a 100,000+ people from seeing the final four.

We have several new plans to try and get on the air.

Bob



------------------
CBS New York
rjross@cbs.com

I think some of the frustration would be relievied if WBBM/CBS would just please post the facts as to what's happening. I've contacted the station and have gotten zero response from them. There's been plenty of 'general' posts about what's going on from a number of different people but facts and dates would be nice. Something like we're building a transmitter site in (town XXX) and we expect it to be live on date xx/xx/xx. I've seen posts that they are waiting to get some fiber pulled to this site and that was a hold up. If the fiber pull is the biggest problem why not microwave for the STL, I would think the FCC would assist pushing this along since they played an important part in this foulup. OK either the telco or fiber provider has some idea of the date that will be completed. As Joe Friday said "Just the facts...").

Yes, I have read all the posts and understand you can't wipe out everyone's cable. I understand that you have plans to fix the problem.

But one thing I don't understand and have yet to receive an answer to is why you haven't been able to get a new channel for so long?? Why did it get to this point? Did you apply for a new channel? According to the FCC, no. Isn't there someone outside the city willing to switch channels with you? Every time I ask these questions they are ignored. If I just would get these questions answered perhaps it would relieve some of the frustration...

As always, we appreciate and thank you for your input Bob.

What I don't understand is how is it that 100,000 people can't watch OTA channel 2 when you are transmitting OTA DTV on channel 3. Yes it is true that channel 2 was moved to _cable_ channel 3, and that the DTV OTA channel 3 signal interfered with the _cable_ channel 2 (remodulated to channel 3 on the cable), and a result 100,000 or so people couldn't watch WBBM. But WBBM was still broadcasting OTA on channel 2, no?

So how is it that these 100,000 people that lost channel 2 (remodulated to channel 3) on _cable_ cannot pickup the channel 2 OTA signal? Especially considering that if they were close enough to the transmitter to be interfered with they are close enough to use simple rabbit ears to pick up that signal. Otherwise, it is still in the domain of "It's the cable providers problem".

Another solution that is much simpler could have been that the cable provider for these 100,000 people move the WBBM channel 2 remodulated signal to something other than _cable_ channel 3. Again, "It's the cable providers problem".

Either way, it must a LOT cheaper to use these solutions than to acquire a site and then build a whole NEW antenna! It seems to me your reasoning doesn't completely explain the situation. There must be more going on that hasn't been said in this forum from my point of view.

Rick.

Ok All,

Lets start at the beginning. WBBM is on OTA Channel 2

12 or 13 years ago WBBM installed a new transmitter and antenna on the JH building. The local cable companies had WBBM on Cable channel 2 - Guess what? We starting causing interference to ourselves - So the cable company solution to their signal ingress problem was to move WBBM onto cable channel 3.

Everyone was happy for many years...

When the FCC issued the table of channel allotments we knew we were in trouble. We filled comments twice at the time.

DTV is and will be an interference limited service until NTSC goes away. Remember we are using the "taboo" NTSC channels that could not be used by NTSC. Now we are adding 1600 new digitals signals. The channel assignments are a HUGE puzzle - To close together, you cause noise into a NTSC Signal or the NTSC Signal keeps the DTV from locking up. It is so tight that if you change one channel in NYC - it ripples all the way to Canada down to DC. The same thing happens in the Chicago area, it effects all stations in a 350 mile circle - Take my word for it - these are no unused channels anywhere in the area.

So we fired up our digital transmitter on channel 3. We blew ourselves out of the water. The digital signal was getting into the output circuits of the cable boxes, The cable boxes can not be changed (like all VCR's) to channel 4 from channel 3. We could move WBBM NTSC to channel 35 or something - but how many people would no longer find WBBM, After being moved from channel 2 to 3 we know we loose viewers, so how many viewers should we loose so a hunderd or 1000 people can see HDTV.

We built out a complete DTV transmission system - to the tune of millions and we can't use it.

We tried to temporarily borrow a channel from someone not on the air. That failed. We are working on a new temporary site to come up on channel 3 (where there are no cable boxes that use channel 3)

Why can't I tell you when that might be worked out??? Lawyers... We need leases etc.

Everyone here at CBS wants to be on the air (OTA) but for now we are on a number of the AT&T cable systems.

Bob

------------------
CBS New York
rjross@cbs.com

[This message has been edited by BobRoss (edited 03-01-2001).]

Bob,

Thanks very much for your thorough explanation - I appreciate you taking the time to do this.

It's too bad that borrowing someone else's channel didn't work out - it seems like this would have been a good (temporary) solution. It's very unfortunate for everyone involved that you were assigned channel 3. I wouldn't care if the PAX network was having this problem http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif.

-Craig

Bob, thank you very much for your response. This is the first time that I can believe the response since it all now makes sense. Since it still appears that there is no timeframe when WBBM-DT will be on the air, and this is also a problem that should partly be owned by AT&T Broadband, do you know if there is a schedule for getting WBBM-DT on AT&T cable systems in the area ASAP? I've seen the list of cities currently served that are carrying WBBM-DT but I'm on one that doesn't carry the service at this time and if I call AT&T I get a CSR that doesn't know a thing about what I'm talking about.

Thanks Bob for your response.

I respectfully don't agree with your reasoning behind WBBM's decision to go dark with DTV-OTA on Ch 3, but it's not my money is it http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif!

I also understand that the arguments are not technical and are marketing based. I think moving the cable channel from 3 to 35 to use your example is not going to loose 100,000 customers. Programming, regardless of channel number attracts viewers, doesn't it? I am not very good in marketing, so even though I don't agree, I'll admit that my perspective is simplistic.

I am more appreciative of your honest answer though. I get WBBM HDTV from AT&T broadband, so I have nothing to complain about. Furthermore I commend CBS for their obvious commitment to be leaders in HDTV. It appears everyone else is treading water, while CBS is blasting ahead.

In my view, CBS is in a great position to eclipse their competition. Keep it up. While the Hollywood wallows in encryption technology and the other networks plays wait and see, I'll be spending my time watching the Final Four or The Masters in glorious HD on CBS. Frankly, the live sports material has blown away completely any other material I have seen and just may be the "killer app" for HDTV.

Way to go CBS!!!!

Rick.

Bob Ross,

I read your explanation for the problems with WBBM, and it makes a lot of sense.

There are some people in the Bay Area who have problems getting KPIX. I'm in the North Bay, and I get it but at a signal strength (or whatever those numbers mean) much lower than the other digital channels in the area. My friend, who lives in the city, gets every digital channel except KPIX. Others have complained about the signal as well.

Is it possible that these problems are similar, in some respects, to the situation in Chicago?

Thanks for educating all of us on these complex issues.

The issues at KPIX have been a LONG up hill battle. The KPIX engineering along with the Harris transmitter people have worked overtime to clear about a zillion problems. They finished a week or two ago and should now be in good shape.

Bob


------------------
CBS New York
rjross@cbs.com

Hey Bob,

Are the WBBM problems associated with ingress on the cable system, cable STB, or consumer's TV sets? (Or combination of the above.) The cable system itself should be tight enough to shield against DTV-3 ingress. That leads to ingress at the cable STB. They are supposed to built so that they don't cause interference, but the certification still requires them to accept (i.e., live with) the effects of any properly operating service. Could a better shielded STB be the answer? Ditto for the consumer's TV set. I remember modifying many TV sets to accept a direct cable connection to avoid "direct" off-air pickup through the poorly shielded 300-ohm connection (but this was before anybody ever thought of "cable ready" TVs.)

I agree that shutting down the DTV channel was the right thing to do, similar to WFAA going off the air when their DTV station interfered with unlicensed (but still legal) medical telemetry monitors. Unfortunately, there are more cable STBs and/or TVs in Chicago than there were medical telemetry monitors in D/FW.

I don't envy your situation. Problems seldom get solved when everyone is pointing their finger elsewhere.

The testing showed that the output circuitry of the STB was at fault. If you had the TV with no cable attached it was OK. But as soon as you tied the box to it - Bang. Some tuned circuit in the STB seems to go nuts. If you want more info email me and I'll have the engineers who worked on it get back to you

Bob




------------------
CBS New York
rjross@cbs.com