FCC To Repack Channels

[centralradio]

Check this broadcasting forum out.I've been a member for years there and its very informative with info on these topics with the current DTV outlook.

http://www.radiodiscussions.com/show...Auction-thread

http://www.radiodiscussions.com/foru...-Policy-Debate

[bgadow]

Central, thanks for those links....quite a bit of interesting reading I'll be doing over there!

[centralradio]

Originally Posted by bgadow

Central, thanks for those links....quite a bit of interesting reading I'll be doing over there!

No problem Bryan. Enjoy.

[jr_tech]

Looks as if we should have info on station moves in April.

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/1...nners-in-april

Blog on Rabbit Ears has some early info.

http://www.rabbitears.info/blog/

Stay tuned!
jr

[jr_tech]

More on repacking:

http://www.tvtechnology.com/resource...-abound/280362

jr

[centralradio]

Thanks Jr_Tech .Nice read. If I was one of those struggling stations with ratings in the toilet and wondering if I can pay next months electric bill and other bills.I will take the buyout option and close up shop for good.

[Electronic M]

As someone who operates VERY low power analog transmitters to feed signal to the tube sets in my collection I worry about more stations crowding into the VHF band...Most of my modulators (several are fixed channel, and all my TX antennas are fixed) are running on VHF...If VHF fills up it will be hard to wirelessly send signal to all my pre-1964 VHF only sets. I don't use channels that are occupied by DTV stations in the area since I don't want to interfere with reception, and also since DTV carriers can interfere with my system.

[benman94]

I just get an antenna design optimized with 4NEC2, physically constructed and mounted at my grandparents' place for 14-52, and they pull this garbage.... ugh, oh well, back to the digital drawing board.

[kf4rca]

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.

[old_tv_nut]

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.

[centralradio]

Originally Posted by benman94

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.

Originally Posted by old_tv_nut

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.

[old_tv_nut]

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.

[jr_tech]

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

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by jr_tech

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.

[jr_tech]

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

.