Tagged: ATSC 3.0
July 25, 2016 at 4:48 pm #21981
Broadband antennas have a nasty habit of re-radiation. Your channel 17 signal won’t be messed up by a close (up to 20 miles depending on ERP) neighbor’s tower broadcasting channel 31 but your broadband antenna will concentrate, re-radiate and extend neighbor’s coverage area.
OFDM is resistant to Rayleigh & Rician fade. But to say OFDM is immune or benefits is a myth promulgated by GSM Euro &%#*&@! UHF multi-path is more narking than VHF.
There are good indoor omni-directional UHF-TV antennas in the market now. RCA has a 16x16x1″ black box and claims 30dBi (Only natural phenomenon which may be isotropic is a thermal nuclear expansion in the vacuum of cold space. RF folks prefer dBd for dipole. It’s more accurate power / sensitivity comparison). Leaf also markets a clear plastic flexible sheet which will stick to walls and windows. Both are clever log periodic squares and rectangles. Did see at Fred Meyer another clear plastic curtain dipole array which is bi-directional. Clever.
Went through the exercise of developing 16:9 laptop/ computer monitor size 450 – 800 MHz broadband MIMO TX/RX antenna arrays. Waves too long – antennas too short. Even at 750 MHz half wave size, nasty things happen. So much for a Dick Tracy TV wrist watch.August 9, 2016 at 10:03 pm #22492
ION Media (KPXG 22 Salem) has requested a 90-day extension to consummate its pro forma transfers of control, claiming that setting up the transfer of 60 O&O stations in 34 states has been complex and time-consuming, plus some personnel has been diverted to evaluate and pursue opportunities presented by the FCC incentive auction.August 14, 2016 at 8:43 am #22564
FCC “reverse” Auction 1001 last month nets $89 billion for television broadcasters and licencees. FCC “forward” Auction 1002 for this soon to be vacant 600 MHz Spectrum is scheduled for this week. Expected $120 billion bids. That’s approx. $625 total per POP. Now y’all know why yer cellphone service bills are so expensive.August 14, 2016 at 11:32 pm #22578
Do I understand that this repacking moving that fast? In other words, the stations are going to have to start moving channels really soon? Out here on the Northern Coast there is only 1 translator above 29, KOIN is on 34. The rest are 17, 21, 23, & 26. I wonder if KATU and KOIN will move back to their old VHF channels?August 20, 2016 at 3:05 pm #22672
FCC forward Auction 1002 did not go well. There is no FCC price disclosures which may alter bid ask process. But scuttlebutt is $28B by 6 bidders for major metro markets only. While FCC prepares secondary reverse and forward auctions, at least three WADC broadcast law firms are preparing briefs. Expect more trouble in 2 – 3 months.
With secondary channel spacing, in at least three major markets there are more full and low power stations than UHF 14 – 36 will allow. FCC prefers no VHF or perhaps LPTV only. Interesting if public and education will be in low VHF 2 – 6.
Not all 600 MHZ has been cleared. Frankly, this repack is far superior than the 700 and 1900 MHz repacks. Perhaps the best attempt at anything the Commission has done for decades (700 MHz was a cluster#$%@). However, Commission relies on dated forecasts by economic PHDs and lawyers and under/over estimates bid/ask prices. Four cable television corporations with towers and two broadcasting companies benefit.
As with anything Fedzilla does, this could take years. Too bad. There are small start-ups popping up developing technologies and products right now.August 20, 2016 at 10:26 pm #22679
Does this mean, the spectrum is pretty much going to stay the same for the time being? I know Sinclair has been experimenting with ATSC 3.0. Some markets like LA has something on about every channel between the high powered stations, translators, LPTV, etc.August 21, 2016 at 2:30 am #22681
One of the main issues with full power UHF TV stations. That currently broadcast in the 600-699 Mhz range. Is there ability to retune there equipment to 470-599 Mhz range.
It maybe easy to do with any UHF Soild State or Tube transmitter. But the UHF antenna systems, weather it’s panel or slot are totally different.
One of the advantages of VHF/UHF LPTV stations. Is there equipment is smaller in size. And don’t require any large amounts of power. Most of not all LPTV digital antenna are usually side mounted to the tower.
Even thought LPTV stations are not in the spectrum action. There overall cost of operation. May be one of the best kept secrets. As the spectrum repack moves forward.August 21, 2016 at 1:29 pm #22682Andy BrownParticipant
Does this mean, the spectrum is pretty much going to stay the same for the time being?
Yes, unequivocally. It’s exactly what I told you last August.
As I wrote a year ago (on the first page of this thread) none of this is going to happen fast.
Whenever the government cooks up a big money making scheme, whether or not they include the industry involved in the planning, there is just no way a decision to displace/reconfigure assets of huge corporations will go smoothly.
In fact, there is an argument that this entire ‘repack’ is moving a lot slower then planned. Just this past June, the FCC was still saying it would take “39” months. I say if the FCC is saying 3 years, it will probably take five years. And that clock is not yet started.
Also, you will find more warts and scrapes over translators, LPTV’s and most importantly who is going to pay for this as well as the fact that there are not enough qualified tower crews nationwide to meet some of these ridiculous timeline claims made by some in this document:
Also: re retuning UHF transmitters. While retuning the exciters is as easy as a dip switch, at the PA level, klystron tuning can be a bitch. I’ve worked on 6 GHZ klystrons and they are finicky. How much, if at all, this has changed is unknown to me but I would venture an educated guess that this is going to cost some broadcasters a lot more money to do then the FCC rhetoric would indicate. Remember, the face of the FCC on this project are the commissioners, not the video division managers. So remember that the commissioners are politicians when the reports keep pushing off the finish line into the future.
‘Nuff said?August 21, 2016 at 7:30 pm #22687
Thank you Andy. 39 months to me at 67 years, it a drop in the bucket in time. At my age, I blink, 5 years have gone by. :-). We get our OTA signals out here on the coast via translators (17-KGW, 21-KPTV, 23-KOPB, 26-KATU, & 34-KOIN), so it is always a concern that some may go off, mainly KOIN on 34, but there are lower channels they could move down to. Several channels may be open. We have several CPs (15,24,28,36, & 38), so I wonder with the FCC in limbo on this, if any CP would be built out here? Anything above 29, unlikely, if the FCC would even license anything new above 29. We used to have no OTA out here until 1991 when 2,6, & 49 came on (49 changed to 12 later), then with digital, little by little the translators all changed giving us the great variety with 15 channels. Antennas have gone up everywhere. I do not want to lose that. Knowing the FCC, it always costs TV stations a ton of money, and there is always some casualties along the way. When the change over happened and translators started switching to digital, some translators went off, not switching to digital. TV stations only have so much money and there is always a concern.August 31, 2016 at 8:35 am #22779
FCC to Restart Auction at Lower Clearing Target
Next round to start around September/October 2016October 7, 2016 at 9:40 pm #23696
FCC Proposes DMA-Level Phased Repack
Sounds like a better plan for all TV stations in Eugene, Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, BC.October 14, 2016 at 12:11 am #23971
TV Stations Lower The Threshold For Bids In Spectrum AuctionOctober 18, 2016 at 8:26 pm #24101
TSPP is FCC response to litigation by Sinclair and others. Seems the FCC was unclear when and how to move TV channels around and, after the webinar, they still are. Hence, the emergency comment period(s).
The major television O&Os, Sinclair and Belo are negotiating to increase corporate TV station ownership in a market from two to three. Much like what happened to broadcast radio near 30 years ago. Perhaps with the same ‘unintended results’. Look for new regulations after the Presidential election. She owes corporate media big – time.
Another issue is ATSC 3.0. There are three chip sets ready to go. But set – top / box receiver retail is $300+ at the low end. There is a billion dollars legislated for consumer rebates. But its gonna take more money than that. TV Broadcasters lost major market share after the DBS transition almost 15 years ago and they don’t a repeat. Look for new legislation to increase the subsidies after the Congressional election. They owe corporate media big – time.October 18, 2016 at 8:49 pm #24102
It looks like it will be “sometime” until this is all worked out, maybe years. If TV stations will lose viewers over this, I think lessons learned. Where this will go is anyone’s guess. I think things will stay the same for a while.October 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm #24134
While we wait for the changes to happen with DTV RF channles in United States and Canada. Here are some of the changes that are happening South of the Board in Mexico.
On October 27th a new law in Mexico goes into effect, that says that Repeaters of XEW-TDT, XHGC-TDT, XHDF-TDT, XHIMT-TDT, and the new Channel 3 in Mexico City, Imagen TV, will have the same virtual channel as they do in the Mexico City. Which is the national capital and largest city in Mexico.
So here is how the new Mexican nationwide channel numbers will look like.
* Repeaters of XEW-TDT (Televisa CH 2) have to be on virtual 2-1…
* Repeaters of XHGC-TDT (Televisa CH 5) Have to be on virtual 5-1…
* Repeaters of XHDF-TDT (TV Azteca CH 13) have to be on virtual 1-1… (because That’s the Channel they chose to move to For some reason),
* Repeaters of XHIMT(TV Azteca CH 7) have to be on virtual 7-1 (unless that frequency is in use by the USA, along the border cities)
* Repeaters of Imagen TV have to be on virtual 3-1.
Azteca’s decision to move to virtaul CH 1 is because, well…it can be done. And Azteca 13 is closer to Las Estrellas and Imagen TV in terms of its programming (Estrellas is its direct competitor).
As to the virtual channel shuffle, some northern border markets do get weird. In Tijuana, BCN (San Diego/Los Angeles CA). Only Azteca 13 and Canal Once are moving because all the traditional full-power stations overlap with LA stations’ contours around Oceanside.
In Mexicali, BCN and Juárez City, Azteca 7 is remaining on virtual 20-1 (which has otherwise been protected nationwide for the benefit of a public broadcaster).
At least the USA stations in San Diego, Yuma, Tuscon, El Paso and Brownsville. Won’t have to change there virtual channels.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.