or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread - Page 245

post #7321 of 7384
They should have required the end of analog low power tv much sooner than 2015!

Hopefully Canada will require the end of analog full power tv in the "non mandatory markets" and the end of low power analog tv in all markets on the same date, and Mexico will require the end of all analog tv, full or low power, nationwide on the same date. That way tv manufacturers can start leaving analog tuners off of North American models starting with the 2016 model year. This would force Central American NTSC countries to get on board quickly also.
post #7322 of 7384
When will public safety have to vacate the T-Band?

http://urgentcomm.com/policy_and_law...owns-20120313/
post #7323 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Hawk View Post

They should have required the end of analog low power tv much sooner than 2015!.

That will be here before you know it. 2009 doesn't seem that long ago.
post #7324 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

Also don't forget that the FCC has a Sept 2015 shutdown date of analog LPs. Many analog PS either can't or won't switch to digital and will be shut down. So easy way to free up spectrum for them without having to cough up cash.

If a station is not Class A, the spectrum it uses is already free for theft use. LPTVs are secondary and can be forced to move or shut down altogether at any time without compensation. So, for a majority of LPTV stations, the 2015 deadline isn't holding up anything.

As for Class A stations, they were given primary status in exchange for certain obligations, such as minimum 3 hours locally-produced programming per week and filing reports for children's television. If they're not living up to their obligations, why should they continue to enjoy primary status? I'm with the FCC on this one.
post #7325 of 7384
Here's a hypothetical. I'll use the Dallas market only for illustration and this doesn't imply this would ever happen here.

Let's say Ion's KPXD/68 (RF-42) wishes to compensate Daystar's KDTN/2 (RF-43) to trade virtual channel numbers. The rationale might be that a general market station such as KPXD wants the "status" of being identified as channel 2 instead of the arguably less prestigious 68. Daystar would simply rebrand as channel 68 and perhaps pocket the money.

No facilities would change (they're both pretty comparable anyway). Would the FCC allow this under the ATSC rules for channel mapping?

I ask because long, long ago, I worked at GE's Nashville facility. A facility swap happened back in 1973 where our television station (WSIX-TV/8) worked out an arrangement with Metro's NCE WDCN/2 to switch facilities. WSIX-TV/8 became WNGE/2 and WDCN/2 became WDCN/8 (now WNPT).

Frankly, it was a wash since the move to channel 2 didn't really enhance the signal in the heart of the DMA. The idea was that moving from 8 to 2 would put us closer to the other big guys in the market, WSM-TV/4 and WLAC-TV/5. It never worked out to GE's benefit and as far as I know, channel 2 is still mired in third place.

A similar swap happened in New Orleans between the old WVUE/12 and WYES/8. I believe that was a win for WVUE.

Nowadays, the channel number is merely a virtual entity. Thus, it seems that unless prohibited by the commission, a trade of such a entity could be done should a station want to do a makeover.
post #7326 of 7384
From what I understand, stations under common control can share or exchange virtual channels. The ATSC rules otherwise bind the virtual channel to the previous analog, but I don't think the FCC is being too rigid about it. On the other hand, KUSI was going to move to 18-1 (they're RF18) when KDTF-LD was going to sign on as 51-1 (RF51) but ultimately did not do so.

- Trip
post #7327 of 7384
It would be so much simpler, easier and nicer if everyone would just use their real transmitter channel number...but that ain't going to happen.

A good change would be if a station wanted to use their transmitter channel number instead of their old analog channel number, they could if they wanted to. This requirement of having to use your old analog channel number for your virtual channel on digital is nothing more than something to appease the stations who want to keep their old image, i.e. FOX2, CBS5, ABC7, etc. Some stations would love to use their digital channel ID. A station that is transmitting on channel 8 but using virtual channel 52, for example, probably would love to ID as channel 8. If a station doesn't care if they keep their old analog image and wanted to change to a new digital image, why not let them?

This PSIP ID business is nothing but a pain in the you know what when it comes to trying to explain to users that to get channel 2 you need a UHF antenna. I've always thought that this virtual channel numbering was a crazy idea from the beginning.

And check this out... Here in the San Francisco Bay Area we have virtual 2 on RF 44, Virtual 44 on RF 45; 4 on 38, 38 on 39; Virtual channel 1 (yes one) on 42, 42 on RF 14, Virtual 14 on 51; 54 on RF 50, virtual 50 on 32, 32 on 33. It can really get crazy!

KAXT 1 got that because they and KRCB 23 were both analog 22. Some tuners couldn't handle both of them being 22.

Our NBC station, KNTV, transmits on channel 12, has a virtual channel of 11, but is channel 3 on cable. They never mention their channel number. They're simply "NBC Bay Area".

Larry
SF
post #7328 of 7384
The virtual channel scheme is a mess for anyone like me who lives in a fringe area. Most of the TVs don't have software designed to handle virtual channel conflicts.

For example, I have KLFB virtual and real 22, KRCB virtual 22 and real 23, KEZT virtual and real 23, and KBSV virtual 23 and real 15. No matter how they're scanned in, there's always one station I can't tune to.

I wish that every TV had an option for direct RF entry. At least there would never be any RF channels that you couldn't tune to.

Chuck
post #7329 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhett View Post

If a station is not Class A, the spectrum it uses is already free for theft use. LPTVs are secondary and can be forced to move or shut down altogether at any time without compensation. So, for a majority of LPTV stations, the 2015 deadline isn't holding up anything.

As for Class A stations, they were given primary status in exchange for certain obligations, such as minimum 3 hours locally-produced programming per week and filing reports for children's television. If they're not living up to their obligations, why should they continue to enjoy primary status? I'm with the FCC on this one.

So what does that have to do with what I posted since you quoted me.
post #7330 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhett View Post

If a station is not Class A, the spectrum it uses is already free for theft use

That's why I am so concerned about the fill-in translators that seem to be licensed only as LDs. The whole point of the fill-in translators is to provide reception that was lost because of the digital transition. If they are not protected as primary during the auction/repacking then that is proof that the government wants to screw the public.
post #7331 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

So what does that have to do with what I posted since you quoted me.

I think I misread your point; my bad.
post #7332 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammer View Post

That's why I am so concerned about the fill-in translators that seem to be licensed only as LDs. The whole point of the fill-in translators is to provide reception that was lost because of the digital transition. If they are not protected as primary during the auction/repacking then that is proof that the government wants to screw the public.

It all depends on how the LP stations are licensed. If they're "replacement translators", then they are inseparable from the full-service license. They share the same call sign and facility ID as the primary, are renewed along with the primary, and automatically go with the primary if the primary is sold. Replacement translators should have the same rights as the primary. Fill-in translators that are licensed as separate LPTV stations won't have any protection.
post #7333 of 7384
KAIL MYTV Fresno was analog channel 53. They were digital RF channel 7 pre transition and stayed there post transition. They now map to virtual channel 7, not 53. I think someone posted that they have a waiver from the FCC allowing them to do this. Does the FCC grant these kind of waivers to any station that asks for one, or do they sometimes deny them. Fresno was an all UHF market in the analog days (except for a few LPs starting in the 90s). I wonder if any other stations in Fresno protested KAIL's mapping to 7, since the other stations all have "UHF" virtual channel numbers, including one other real VHF.


Do any PBS stations promote themselves by channel number anymore? KVPT Fresno never advertises itself as "channel 18" (they used to many years ago). KCET, when it was PBS, didn't advertise itself as "channel 28" (they still don't). Apparently the station in New York City calls itself "Thirteen" as prominately displayed at the end of programs they produce.
post #7334 of 7384
A few, but not many. WLVT and WFWA both brand as "PBS39" but I can't think of any others off the top of my head. The reason is that so many PBS stations are carried on multiple channel numbers, whether through additional full-service signals or through translators. Plus, with cable being as prominent as it is, the channel number usually isn't consistent for the PBS station anyway.

- Trip
post #7335 of 7384
I wonder if TV stations will follow the lead of FM stations and brand themselves with all sorts of names? The only station I know doing that around here is KOTR which calls themselves "The Otter." They also advertise as "My 11" because of their cable channel even though they are still analog on RF 2.

Chuck
post #7336 of 7384
I suspect that if radio stations had network affiliations the way TV stations do, they would not use those names. If you look around at some of the independent (and My Network TV) stations, you'll see some odd names floating around. My Network TV in Seattle is KZJO "Joe TV." WCIU in Chicago is "The U." WMOR in Tampa is "More TV." WJTC Pensacola is "UTV44." KUBE Houston is (shockingly) "The Kube."

- Trip
post #7337 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Hawk View Post

Do any PBS stations promote themselves by channel number anymore?

WTTW in Chicago still calls itself "Channel 11" and has "wttw11" in one of its on-screen bugs.
post #7338 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Kenney View Post

A good change would be if a station wanted to use their transmitter channel number instead of their old analog channel number, they could if they wanted to.

Larry
SF

It can't be done with stations like WPCW (RF 11, Virtual 19.1) unless stations like WPXI (RF 48, Virtual 11.1,11.2) are willing to permanently give up their analog channel number. IMHO every other full service licensee should be given the discretion to permanently choose their RF channel number rather than their old analog number.
post #7339 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Hawk View Post

Do any PBS stations promote themselves by channel number anymore?

KAET 8 Phoenix almost exclusively brands as "Channel 8" and seldom displays the call letters apart from the legal ID.

Its signal is sent to 13 translators statewide, seven of which are still analog, so for OTA, it's still necessary to tune to a different channel number to get "channel 8" in those communities. However, since DTV rules allow a translator to use its primary station's channel as its major channel number, the six translators that are now digital are also "channel 8" on OTA tuners in their communities.

It appears that most cable companies in the translator communities also have KAET on channel 8 on their systems, as do the satellite providers, except in Yuma, which is a separate Nielsen market, but has no PBS station of its own.
post #7340 of 7384
I too like using the actual frequency rather than a virtual channel. But I can see why the FCC disallowed this. The biggest problem isn't the branding, after all TV stations and networks have survived rebranding, it was the fact that some of the stations would've had to rebrand and others wouldn't have.

Also some stations used old analog channels for their new digital channel.

For instance in Chicago WGBO, was analog 66 and digital 53. Since they couldn't stay on 53 nor move back to 66, both channels being reallocated, they had to use channel 38. This would confuse people as WCPX was analog 38 and now on digital 43.

It makes no sense to abandon the old analog number either and rebrand to a digital. If you hit channel 38 in it'll automatically bring up virtual 66. And if you hit 66 in the TV it brings up virtual 66 as well. That is two chances to get to your channel.

The only fair way was if everyone had to move to a new channel, which would never have happened.
post #7341 of 7384
Not sure why this is such an issue. For example in my area on Charter Cable FOX 17 is on channel 3 and CW 58 is on channel 12. Obviously people can figure out where to find these channels. So the fact that with OTA virtual is not always the same as real is basically the same thing.
post #7342 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markxxx View Post

It makes no sense to abandon the old analog number either and rebrand to a digital. If you hit channel 38 in it'll automatically bring up virtual 66. And if you hit 66 in the TV it brings up virtual 66 as well. That is two chances to get to your channel.

That depends on how your TV works and was one the things I was complaining about. Some TVs will allow this and some won't. My Sony will allow this, my DVR accepts only virtual numbers, and my portable will accept direct RF entry if you preface the number with the minus (-) sign but there's no way to get to anything other than the -1 sub channel that way. It's a mess.

Chuck
post #7343 of 7384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markxxx View Post

For instance in Chicago WGBO, was analog 66 and digital 53. Since they couldn't stay on 53 nor move back to 66, both channels being reallocated, they had to use channel 38. This would confuse people as WCPX was analog 38 and now on digital 43.

We had stations in that same situation here in the San Francisco Bay Area. KTVU 2 was on 56 digital. Didn't want to go back to 2 and couldn't us 56, so they're on 44 now. KRON 4 was on 57, and like KTVU, they didn't want to use the low VHF channel and ended up on 38. I can see where using the digital channel number wouldn't mean a thing in those cases. Both 38 and 44 were analog channels before the transition to digital.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markxxx View Post

If you hit channel 38 in it'll automatically bring up virtual 66. And if you hit 66 in the TV it brings up virtual 66 as well. That is two chances to get to your channel.

That depends on what tuner you have. You're lucky if you can do that. Some will not recognize the RF channel number so you have to enter the virtual channel number. It only recognizes information picked up from PSIP. Unless it picks up the PSIP information when it scans there's no way to see that channel. Some allow you to enter the RF channel and will give you the station on the transmitter channel. It doesn't switch to the virtual channel. I've also got one tuner that doesn't pay any attention to the virtual channel. You have to know the RF transmitter channel because that's all it shows. There are so many variations from tuner to tuner.

Larry
SF
post #7344 of 7384
Looks like KGUN and KCFG reached an interference agreement that will allow KGUN to raise power to 36.5 kW.

- Trip
post #7345 of 7384
My Vizio is strictly virtual channel only. All of my other digital tuners will allow tuning by RF channel except if that RF channel is another station's virtual channel. My 15 inch Coby I use outdoors mostly OTA is very flexible: for example I can tune KGET by entering either 17-1 (virtual channel) or simply 17 or 25-1 (real channel) or simply 25. KBFX-CA, however, must be tuned by it's virtual channel 58-1 or 58, since it's real channel of 29 is the virtual channel of KBAK (real channel 33).
post #7346 of 7384
http://blog.broadcastengineering.com...ters-cry-fowl/

Here are some highlights from Michael Grotticelli's article linked above:

Quote:
Verizon Wireless said it might conduct an open sale of the wireless spectrum it purchased late last year, which could be worth billions of dollars. That statement, included in a proposal it sent to the FCC, caused an angry outcry from the broadcast industry and consumer advocate groups that think the Telco industry clearly has all of the wireless spectrum it needs. Broadcasters are locked in a bitter dispute with the Telco and computer industries over the availability of wireless spectrum and the government's plan to reclaim frequencies now used by terrestrial TV stations and auction it off to the highest bidder.

Until today's announcement, Verizon denied that it was hoarding spectrum, said S. Derek Turner, research director of Free Press, a public interest group. This sale demonstrates that Verizon has in fact warehoused spectrum and the company will likely profit handsomely from this spectrum speculation strategy. The undeniable truth is a disproportionate amount of the country's most valuable spectrum is concentrated in the hands of Verizon and AT&T, who enjoy market shares that dwarf other sectors of the American economy,
post #7347 of 7384
"Verizon’s proposal is contingent on the company getting government approval for three deals to buy spectrum from cable companies and Leap Wireless for a total of about $4 billion."

Note that there are reasonable people who believe the real deal Verizon is making with cable companies is an unspoken agreement not to expand FiOS (and the competition it would bring cable) in Verizon areas that don't already have FiOS.
post #7348 of 7384
If anyone's looking for an HDHR3, they're at Woot.com today for $70.

- Trip
post #7349 of 7384
Sinclair didn't even let the ink dry on the Freedom deal before petitioning the FCC to allow a waiver of the freeze so that WRGB can be moved from channel 6 to channel 19.

EDIT: Reading further, included in the document is a statement of support from WPVI, who says they would request an increase to 62.9 kW on channel 6 if WRGB is granted the move to channel 19.

- Trip
post #7350 of 7384
The FCC has started trying to figure out how to clear stations off of channel 51. See here. http://www.rabbitears.info/tvq.php?c...est=list&sort=

- Trip
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread