Videokarma.org

Go Back   Videokarma.org TV - Video - Vintage Television & Radio Forums > Flat Panels & Digital Format

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 03-28-2017, 12:51 PM
WISCOJIM WISCOJIM is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Grand Chute, Wisconsin
Posts: 2,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by centralradio View Post
Yes we got a screw job in 2009.
Yes, some got screwed, but I think a whole lot more benefited from the change. I had 7 analog channels, now I get 21 digital channels with better reception and picture than before. Gone is the snow, normal interference, and the flutter from the planes going to and from the local airport when I had the analog OTA. The digital OTA reception is far more reliable than the service I previously had from cable and satellite, with a far superior picture.

.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-28-2017, 03:09 PM
centralradio centralradio is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by kf4rca View Post
Most station management were hoping the digital thing would just go away. They had all their equipment paid for and they were making money.
If you think you got screwed, think about the cost the stations incurred. In some instances the entire tower had to be replaced.
Many felt this was an attempt to cull the herd, driving some stations out of business. And some would cry for subsidies allowing the government to control them further.
Got a point there.Yes stations suffer the cost of the upgrades.To bad the engineering design of DTV could not be multiplexed into the analog signal and we have a choice like Iboc on AM /FM radio.

They could find another band for the telecom and wireless communications instead of picking away of the current TV band.Leave it to greed and pockets filled with green grease and they can get away with it.Where is the emergency response channels as they were pitching when they were pushing for the switch over.No new emergency response channels here.
Probably mostly wireless it all went too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WISCOJIM View Post
Yes, some got screwed, but I think a whole lot more benefited from the change. I had 7 analog channels, now I get 21 digital channels with better reception and picture than before. Gone is the snow, normal interference, and the flutter from the planes going to and from the local airport when I had the analog OTA. The digital OTA reception is far more reliable than the service I previously had from cable and satellite, with a far superior picture.

.
Yes .You got a point there Jim.DTV has the sub channels and better reception better for some.It was great for 2 to 3 years of co-channel issues after the switch on cable before Comcast switched the all digital.Digital cable sucks here and its more out then on.I have to keep rebooting the cable boxes .I remember it was a complete mess when the New York channels co-channel with other stations.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-29-2017, 10:13 PM
benman94's Avatar
benman94 benman94 is offline
Resident Lunatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by centralradio View Post
Got a point there.Yes stations suffer the cost of the upgrades.To bad the engineering design of DTV could not be multiplexed into the analog signal and we have a choice like Iboc on AM /FM radio.
There was an experimental system at RCA in the 80s that would have provided something akin to HD 16:9 (or something near it) in an all analog system that was backward compatible to boot. You could have flipped on a 630TS and watched a show being broadcast in "HD" with no converter box.

The FCC pissed away 70 some odd years of compatibility for a DTV system that won't work 10 feet from the transmitter... it's absolute bullshit.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-29-2017, 10:50 PM
old_tv_nut's Avatar
old_tv_nut old_tv_nut is offline
See yourself on Color TV!
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rancho Sahuarita
Posts: 4,790
The RCA compatible system basically could not be made to work. It was the most technically competent proposal for a compatible system. It depended on adding additional resolution components in the "Fukinuki hole," as well as other places in the spectrum. The Fukinuki (Takahiko Fukinuki, at Hitachi) frequencies are interlaced with the luma similar to NTSC chroma, but with an opposite phase sequence. The result is flickering interference in both color and luminance on edges in existing sets, that supposedly could be integrated out by the eye - but they could never find an amplitude level that would both make the added resolution noise-free and keep the interference in existing sets to tolerable levels.

Once successful and superior digital picture quality was demonstrated, RCA and other analog proponents either dropped out of the running, or in the case of the Japanese 6 MHz MUSE system, were rejected even by the inexperienced viewers in subjective testing, who could plainly see the poor quality compared to digital coding.

Multiple organizations had put their best efforts into analog or hybrid systems (23 were proposed at the start!), but none of them turned out to be feasible - either they weren't compatible or they didn't provide sufficient quality HD pictures, or both. One or two from less-than-competent proponents tried to defy the laws of physics in some way, and of course failed completely.
__________________
www.bretl.com
Old TV literature, New York World's Fair, and other miscellany
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-30-2017, 02:40 PM
centralradio centralradio is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by benman94 View Post
There was an experimental system at RCA in the 80s that would have provided something akin to HD 16:9 (or something near it) in an all analog system that was backward compatible to boot. You could have flipped on a 630TS and watched a show being broadcast in "HD" with no converter box.

The FCC pissed away 70 some odd years of compatibility for a DTV system that won't work 10 feet from the transmitter... it's absolute bullshit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_tv_nut View Post
The RCA compatible system basically could not be made to work. It was the most technically competent proposal for a compatible system. It depended on adding additional resolution components in the "Fukinuki hole," as well as other places in the spectrum. The Fukinuki (Takahiko Fukinuki, at Hitachi) frequencies are interlaced with the luma similar to NTSC chroma, but with an opposite phase sequence. The result is flickering interference in both color and luminance on edges in existing sets, that supposedly could be integrated out by the eye - but they could never find an amplitude level that would both make the added resolution noise-free and keep the interference in existing sets to tolerable levels.

Once successful and superior digital picture quality was demonstrated, RCA and other analog proponents either dropped out of the running, or in the case of the Japanese 6 MHz MUSE system, were rejected even by the inexperienced viewers in subjective testing, who could plainly see the poor quality compared to digital coding.

Multiple organizations had put their best efforts into analog or hybrid systems (23 were proposed at the start!), but none of them turned out to be feasible - either they weren't compatible or they didn't provide sufficient quality HD pictures, or both. One or two from less-than-competent proponents tried to defy the laws of physics in some way, and of course failed completely.
Too bad these system did not pull though.
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #51  
Old 03-30-2017, 08:17 PM
Jeffhs's Avatar
Jeffhs Jeffhs is offline
<----Zenith C845
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairport Harbor, Ohio (near Lake Erie)
Posts: 3,574
I was all but dead set against DTV at first, but now I see it completely differently. I get a much better picture and more channels (even with basic cable) than I ever did with analog NTSC. I live in a semi-fringe area for Cleveland TV (35-40 miles from the stations), but that doesn't seem to matter with digital; however, with analog, I could only get one channel with a picture good enough to watch. I now get eight stations (somewhat more with their subchannels), with picture quality easily 100 times better than I ever thought possible.

I don't use my cable connection for anything but to be able to get local TV on my Roku Spectrum application, as a cable account is a must to receive local channels on this app; the cable need not be connected directly to the TV, but the cable company must at least have, for your service address, a cable account on file. This is so the cable operator can pay for carrying an area's local TV channels, and is a requirement on all Roku installations with the Spectrum app anywhere in the US that has an option to stream local TV. In my area, the cable operator is Spectrum, formerly Time Warner, which does stream the locals (eight stations plus their subchannels), but other cable companies may not unless their own version of the Spectrum app, if available, has this capability.

The only problem I have with DTV right now, however, is I cannot get two important network affiliates on channels 8 and 19, using an indoor antenna. I have been told with the latter channel, the problem is its DTV assignment on a VHF channel (channel 10); with the former, the problem seems to be my sheer distance from the station's transmitter. I could get the missing channels with an outdoor antenna, but since my Roku seems to work so well with streaming video, I don't feel I need it.
__________________
Jeff, WB8NHV

Collecting, restoring and enjoying vintage Zenith radios since 2002

Zenith. Gone, but not forgotten.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-02-2017, 02:03 AM
Robert Grant's Avatar
Robert Grant Robert Grant is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Monroe County, MI
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffhs View Post
<snip>
The only problem I have with DTV right now, however, is I cannot get two important network affiliates on channels 8 and 19, using an indoor antenna. I have been told with the latter channel, the problem is its DTV assignment on a VHF channel (channel 10); with the former, the problem seems to be my sheer distance from the station's transmitter. I could get the missing channels with an outdoor antenna, but since my Roku seems to work so well with streaming video, I don't feel I need it.
Channel 8 (WJW/FOX) actually transmits on channel 8, which makes it a VHF-high station. It doesn't have as much power as its Detroit stablemate WJBK. It does benefit from having an omnidirectional pattern and infrequent co-channel interference.

Channel 10 (WOIO/CBS, and soon to be joined by ) is not as lucky. It is short-spaced to CFPL in London, Ontario. Worse, most of this path is over Lake Erie, which often causes serious interference (from tropospheric refraction) in the spring and summer. As a result, WOIO has less power, has a directional pattern with less signal to the north, and is prone to having its signal trounced by CFPL.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-02-2017, 02:20 AM
Robert Grant's Avatar
Robert Grant Robert Grant is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Monroe County, MI
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffhs View Post
<snip>
The only problem I have with DTV right now, however, is I cannot get two important network affiliates on channels 8 and 19, using an indoor antenna. I have been told with the latter channel, the problem is its DTV assignment on a VHF channel (channel 10); with the former, the problem seems to be my sheer distance from the station's transmitter. I could get the missing channels with an outdoor antenna, but since my Roku seems to work so well with streaming video, I don't feel I need it.
Channel 8 (WJW/FOX) actually transmits on channel 8, which makes it a VHF-high station. It doesn't have as much power as its Detroit stablemate WJBK. It does benefit from having an omnidirectional pattern and infrequent co-channel interference.

Channel 10 (WOIO/CBS, and soon to be joined by WUAB's programs) is not as lucky. It is short-spaced to CFPL in London, Ontario. Worse, most of this path is over Lake Erie, which often causes serious interference (from tropospheric refraction) in the spring and summer. As a result, WOIO has less power, has a directional pattern with less signal to the north, and is prone to having its signal trounced by CFPL.

You may be able to get CBS with a modest VHF-capable outdoor antenna on the chimney, or, if that is not possible, in the attic.

In my case, the Detroit stations are fifty miles away*. The ABC affiliate is 1000kW ERP on channel 41, while the Fox station is 27kW ERP on channel 7. The ABC is the easiest Detroit station to get on the indoor antenna, but the Fox station is the easiest to receive on the outdoor antenna, despite the massive disparity in ERP.

*the NBC affiliate is 52 miles, while one independent station is 63 miles and on a short tower. The latter is only receivable when tropospheric refraction is in.

Last edited by Robert Grant; 04-02-2017 at 02:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-02-2017, 02:51 PM
Jeffhs's Avatar
Jeffhs Jeffhs is offline
<----Zenith C845
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairport Harbor, Ohio (near Lake Erie)
Posts: 3,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Grant View Post
Channel 8 (WJW/FOX) actually transmits on channel 8, which makes it a VHF-high station. It doesn't have as much power as its Detroit stablemate WJBK. It does benefit from having an omnidirectional pattern and infrequent co-channel interference.

Channel 10 (WOIO/CBS, and soon to be joined by WUAB's programs) is not as lucky. It is short-spaced to CFPL in London, Ontario. Worse, most of this path is over Lake Erie, which often causes serious interference (from tropospheric refraction) in the spring and summer. As a result, WOIO has less power, has a directional pattern with less signal to the north, and is prone to having its signal trounced by CFPL.

You may be able to get CBS with a modest VHF-capable outdoor antenna on the chimney, or, if that is not possible, in the attic.

In my case, the Detroit stations are fifty miles away*. The ABC affiliate is 1000kW ERP on channel 41, while the Fox station is 27kW ERP on channel 7. The ABC is the easiest Detroit station to get on the indoor antenna, but the Fox station is the easiest to receive on the outdoor antenna, despite the massive disparity in ERP.

*the NBC affiliate is 52 miles, while one independent station is 63 miles and on a short tower. The latter is only receivable when tropospheric refraction is in.

I live in an apartment building, so using an outdoor antenna anywhere is out of the question (as my apartment is on the first floor of a two-story building, I do not have an attic, and there are no chimneys easily accessible on the roof of the building). Moreover, I am not about to get into any kind of discussion with my landlord as to the FCC's rules regarding outdoor television antennas in apartment buildings; he probably wouldn't understand or care about them.

Channel 19 has 3.720 megawatts of power, so there is (or should be) no excuse for it not reaching my area, even today (although that doesn't concern me, for reasons I will explain at the end of this paragraph). I do not believe for one second they decreased their output when they went digital, but the fact that most of their signal goes over Lake Erie may have something to do with my reception problems. However, all of this makes no difference to me, as I watch TV exclusively via streaming video, not OTA.

BTW, your explanations of why certain Detroit TV stations do not reach your area went right over my head. I have an amateur radio license, but I have been away from the hobby so long, except for Echolink, an amateur radio linking app, and 2-meter FM (due to lease restrictions forbidding me to put up any kind of antennas, and the changes that have occurred in the hobby since I started in 1972), I have forgotten most of what I used to know about signal propagation or whatever it is. Since television went digital in 2009, I haven't the foggiest idea of how my flat screen TV works--all I know (or care about) anymore is that it does work with my Roku streaming video player, VCR, and DVD player.

If you have such trouble as you mention getting certain Detroit television stations at your home, why are you bothering with antennas at all? I'd suggest getting cable or satellite, unless your area of Michigan is so far out in the boondocks even these services won't work. Many cable companies do not provide service to extreme fringe areas, and satellite signals reach only so far.

I am leaving all the technical explanations to the experts and engineers (think wa2ise) on VK. I am beginning to think VK has changed so much since I joined these forums 15 years ago (with all the present or former TV technicians/dealers and engineers now posting here) that I don't belong here anymore. One VK member in Arizona told me, in a recent reply to one of my posts, he is about ready to stop reading my messages anyway, so maybe it's just as well.
__________________
Jeff, WB8NHV

Collecting, restoring and enjoying vintage Zenith radios since 2002

Zenith. Gone, but not forgotten.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-02-2017, 04:33 PM
old_tv_nut's Avatar
old_tv_nut old_tv_nut is offline
See yourself on Color TV!
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rancho Sahuarita
Posts: 4,790
Displayed/Identified channel 3, WKYC, is on physical channel 17 with 868 kW ERP at 1007 feet height above average terrain (HAAT).

Displayed/identifed channel 19, WOIO, is on physical channel 10, 9.5 kW ERP, 997 feet HAAT.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf WOIO SHAKER HEIGHTS, OH.pdf (205.2 KB, 7 views)
File Type: pdf WKYC CLEVELAND, OH.pdf (208.5 KB, 7 views)
__________________
www.bretl.com
Old TV literature, New York World's Fair, and other miscellany
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #56  
Old 04-02-2017, 09:03 PM
jr_tech's Avatar
jr_tech jr_tech is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,843
Jeffhs said:

"Channel 19 has 3.720 megawatts of power, so there is (or should be) no excuse for it not reaching my area, even today "

No! The transmitter that you are talking about was SHUTDOWN a few years ago when most analog TV stations were turned off. As indicated in the above post, WOIO now transmitts on channel 10 at much lower power, although it kept its channel 19 "branding" as its virtual channel.

73,
jr
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-02-2017, 11:20 PM
Jeffhs's Avatar
Jeffhs Jeffhs is offline
<----Zenith C845
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairport Harbor, Ohio (near Lake Erie)
Posts: 3,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by jr_tech View Post
Jeffhs said:

"Channel 19 has 3.720 megawatts of power, so there is (or should be) no excuse for it not reaching my area, even today "

No! The transmitter that you are talking about was SHUTDOWN a few years ago when most analog TV stations were turned off. As indicated in the above post, WOIO now transmitts on channel 10 at much lower power, although it kept its channel 19 "branding" as its virtual channel.

73,
jr
I don't know what you are talking about. I remember when channel 19 went on the air in Cleveland, in 1985; at that time the station had 3.720 megawatts ERP and came in just fine at my former residence in suburban Cleveland. I do not remember reading or hearing anything to the effect that the signal was being reduced to 9.5 kW ERP, but then again, I wouldn't notice it anyway if it had dropped by such a huge amount since I watch that station, and all other Cleveland TV stations, via streaming video on my Roku player. The only reason I can come up with for channel 19 having such a tremendous drop in ERP output is that the station's transmitter was hit by lightning six months after its initial sign on; the station's signal has not been the same since.

Channel 19's move to DTV channel 10 was a huge mistake, and the station is paying a high price for it since its OTA signal now does not reach anywhere east of the city of Cleveland; in fact, the further east of Cleveland you go, the worse the reception becomes until you get to my area (38 miles from all Cleveland TV transmitters) and beyond, at which point the signal simply disappears or is so weak as to be unwatchable. This means the station is losing fully half of its viewing audience; however, I do not believe the station's licensee or owner even cares. If they did, they would have put their DTV signal on a UHF station, not channel 10. They could have done the same thing channel 23 in Akron did when that station went digital--they simply put their digital signal on channel 23 and did not look back.

Why channel 19 did not do the same thing is beyond me. If they had, there would be no reception problems east of Cleveland. They put up a translator for the Akron area; why on earth didn't they do the same for the area east of the city of Cleveland? The station is operated by Raycom Media, which I am sure could have afforded to put up a translator for 19 to cover the dead zone east of the city.

Oh well. This just means more business (and money) for the cable and satellite providers, not to mention TV antenna manufacturers. The ones in the area east of Cleveland and the Akron area are probably getting more business these days than they can shake a stick at.

BTW, the PDF files showing channel 3's and 19's technical information are well over my head. Please remember, I am not a television engineer or television expert; in fact, my TV "repair" skills were limited to changing tubes, back when televisions were built using them. The beginning of the solid-state TV era, and later the flat-screen era, brought my limited TV "repairs" to an absolute, screeching halt. What is the use of knowing anything about how a flat screen television works, anyway? These things are designed to be throwaways when they develop the least little bit of trouble after the warranty expires.
__________________
Jeff, WB8NHV

Collecting, restoring and enjoying vintage Zenith radios since 2002

Zenith. Gone, but not forgotten.

Last edited by Jeffhs; 04-03-2017 at 05:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-13-2017, 04:13 PM
jr_tech's Avatar
jr_tech jr_tech is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,843
Repack plan on Rabbitears:

https://www.rabbitears.info/repackchannels.php

jr

FCC tally of the $$$$ involved:

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Rele...C-344398A1.pdf

More from the FCC:

https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-ann...tive-auction-0

.

Last edited by jr_tech; 04-13-2017 at 07:06 PM. Reason: add fcc info
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-14-2017, 11:03 PM
Jeffhs's Avatar
Jeffhs Jeffhs is offline
<----Zenith C845
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairport Harbor, Ohio (near Lake Erie)
Posts: 3,574
The repack auction is over, according to TV Technology. I found that the CBS channel in my area on channel 19 (VHF 10) is staying on that channel (which surprised me, as I thought they would have requested a move to a UHF channel), but the station's licensee, Raycom Media, has instead requested an immediate increase in ERP transmitter power. Whether this will improve reception of the station to the east of Cleveland (especially in the "dead zone" east of the Cleveland suburb of Euclid, where the station is received poorly or not at all), however, remains to be seen.

BTW, Cleveland is not the only city to have a TV station on a VHF DTV channel. There are several other cities in other parts of the US as well that have at least one station still on a VHF DTV channel after the transition, and which probably have the same reception problems Cleveland's channel 19 (DTV 10) has had since the digital transition.

Why these areas' TV stations have been assigned VHF DTV channels is far beyond me. It makes no sense, especially in Cleveland, where the CBS station is now on a VHF DTV channel that doesn't reach half the station's coverage area. CBS is America's most-watched TV network, after all (they announce this every chance they get (!)), so it makes no sense for any of its local affiliates not to reach all, as in every square mile, of their cities/areas of license; in fact, the Cleveland station is probably losing advertising revenue left and right because of the huge dead zone east of town.

Channel 19 in Cleveland has lost fully half its viewing audience due to its owner's wrong-headed decision to put its DTV signal on VHF channel 10, instead of moving to another UHF channel, as they should have done in the first place. Other cities may have been able to get away with putting their stations on VHF DTV channels without losing viewers, but this does not work well in northeastern Ohio due to the area's geography and the fact that most of the station's signal on channel 10 goes over Lake Erie, rather than being beamed to the east; another problem is co-channel interference six months of the year with channel 10 in Ontario, Canada, sixty miles directly across Lake Erie.

I thought (in fact, I was sure) Raycom Media would have seen this problem immediately, and moved its Cleveland station to a UHF channel right from the beginning; if they had, this co-channel and reception problems monkey business would never have become an issue. The reason they did not do this may be because Raycom's technical staff did not take Cleveland's proximity to Ontario, Canada into account when they were trying to find a suitable DTV channel. They could have left 19's DTV signal on channel 19 instead of moving it (a technique known as "flash-cutting"), as a TV station in Akron, Ohio did shortly after the DTV transition.

I don't know. Maybe Raycom figures the area east of Cleveland, for whatever reason they may have, is not worth the trouble to put a decent signal into. I would remind these people, if I could, that their station happens to be affiliated with a television network (CBS) which is presently America's most-watched television network, and that they absolutely cannot afford to lose viewers; no commercial TV station can.

Sheeesh. If they (Raycom Media) do not seem to care that their Cleveland station does not reach all of northeastern Ohio since the digital transition, perhaps, IMHO, they should sell it to a media group that does.

While there are ways available to viewers east of town to get around this problem, such as cable, satellite or streaming video, to name but three, the licensee and/or owners of channel 19 absolutely cannot ignore the over-the-air reception difficulties in Cleveland's suburbs and outlying areas east of the city. There are many people who cannot afford cable or satellite, some people cannot, for whatever reason, put up outdoor TV antennas, and the popular Roku player's cable app (in my area the Spectrum app) will not receive an area's local TV channels without the account holder having at least a cable account (the cable need not be physically connected to the TV); this is a function of their billing system, and is necessary so the cable operator can pay for the privilege of having local TV channels available via the application.
__________________
Jeff, WB8NHV

Collecting, restoring and enjoying vintage Zenith radios since 2002

Zenith. Gone, but not forgotten.

Last edited by Jeffhs; 04-14-2017 at 11:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-15-2017, 02:12 AM
old_tv_nut's Avatar
old_tv_nut old_tv_nut is offline
See yourself on Color TV!
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rancho Sahuarita
Posts: 4,790
There was a long, tortuous path to the VHF DTV problem, mainly due to the fact that the original coverage equations used by the FCC did not take into account the actual full amount of ambient noise in the spectrum at VHF, which apparently has only increased over the years. As a result, some stations chose VHF where they could because of the predicted wide coverage and the much lower transmitter power bill - the VHF signal does refract further over the horizon than UHF. So, signal levels at VHF are as predicted, but noise levels are higher than predicted. The solution would be for all VHF stations to increase power simultaneously, thereby overcoming atmospheric noise and keeping the co-channel ratios constant - BUT, since many of the stations were built to the predicted required power, such a simultaneous increase is just not practical. Hopefully this will be rectified with ATSC 3.0, both by coding gains and power increases; but with the need to co-exist with ATSC 1.0 for a time, the power increase may need to be phased in.
__________________
www.bretl.com
Old TV literature, New York World's Fair, and other miscellany
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ęCopyright 2012 VideoKarma.org, All rights reserved.