A few ?'s about translators

[Stanislav]

-- When were translators first authorized as a service by the FCC, and what was (were) the first licensed translator(s) to go on the air?

-- Did translators from the start utilize the call letter format that became standard (W/K + two-digit channel # + 2 letters)?

-- Was the term "translator" used from the beginning, and how/why/by whom was the term coined? (It always struck me as a little clunky, though I assume the intent was to convey the concept to the viewing public that the signal would be "translated" to a different channel.)

 

[mjlarochelle]

According to old broadcasting yearbooks on David Eduardo's website, a large number of translators were in place by 1960. They used the current format of call sign. The only difference was that the television stations that they rebroadcast did not directly own them, they were owned by local TV associations. Not surprisingly, many of the early translators were in mountainous areas in the West.

Canada had these too by sometime in the 1960s, mainly in mountainous British Columbia but also in rural areas of other provinces. Some were owned by local TV associations (and still are to this day), while others were directly owned by the CBC or by the originating private station. Call signs then, as now, generally were a regular call sign with a number affixed to the end, although there has never been a set-in-stone convention for rebroadcast transmitter call signs in Canada.

Australia had translators early on as well, but I know little other than that ABC's translators tended to use six-letter call signs instead of the usual five (although the VL- prefix is almost never used as it is the same nationwide, so they typically appeared as 4 and 3 letters, respectively).

 

[Mr. Mike]

I was wondering if anyone would be willing to make a list of TV translator stations that were in existence in the United States since the 1960s and post it on this board. I know it's kind of a tall order, since it would be very long indeed. Just a suggestion of mine, that's all.

 

[KML0224]

The few I remembered in Connecticut:

W59AA channel 59 of West Haven and W79AA channel 79 of Torrington. Both relayed WVIT-TV (NBC) channel 30 of New Britain/Hartford. The Torrington station became redundant once WVIT increased their power around 1978. The West Haven station went dark to make room for WCTX-TV (MY) channel 59 of New Haven, who came on as WTVU-TV (WB) in the spring of 1995.

W61AC channel 61 of Waterbury relayed WEDH-TV (PBS) channel 24 of Hartford. The station moved to channel 12 when WTIC-TV (FOX) channel 61 of Hartford signed on in 1984. The channel 12 translator went dark when WCCT-TV (CW) channel 20 of Waterbury began their initial digital broadcasting on channel 12. (Channel 20 flash cut from channel 12 to channel 20 when the 2009 analog switch-off occurred).

 

[bpatrick]

I remember WLOS (Ch. 13) identifying itself by whatever
channel it was on in areas with translators (for example,
WLOS Ch. 2 in the Dellwood section of north Greenville, SC;
Ch. 5 in Middlesboro, KY, etc.) I also remember WRDC in
Raleigh/Durham identifying itself as "28/70"; 28 being its
assigned channel in Durham and 70 its translator in Raleigh
(and, I suppose, a few points east).

But I know the mountain stations still use the W(2 numbers,
2 letters) scheme; WSPA's translator in Burnsville, NC is
W02AT. WSPA's Wikipedia site has a list of translators, and
I'm sure you can find plenty more for stations in mountainous
terrain wherever you go.

 

[BRNout]

The few I remembered in Connecticut:

W59AA channel 59 of West Haven and W79AA channel 79 of Torrington. Both relayed WVIT-TV (NBC) channel 30 of New Britain/Hartford. The Torrington station became redundant once WVIT increased their power around 1978. The West Haven station went dark to make room for WCTX-TV (MY) channel 59 of New Haven, who came on as WTVU-TV (WB) in the spring of 1995.

I recall, back in the 70s, that WHNB (later WVIT after Viacom bought them) used to ID as channel 30, 59/79 with the "30" being in larger font and the two translators being side by side in smaller font. Back in the day, they emphasized that quite a bit.

Of course, nowadays, translators are still VERY common in the west with Salt Lake market stations still having tons of them and major channels from Reno, Boise, Denver, Phoenix and Spokane (among others) each have quite a fleet of them as well.

 

[KML0224]

The last show I had on VHS tape (now transferred to DVD) with "W59AA" mentioned was during Super Bowl XXVII in 1993. The ID popped up on the screen as "WVIT-TV New Britain/Hartford ... W59AA West Haven".

 

[firepoint525]

Channel 6 (WPSD-TV) in Paducah, Kentucky, has translator W10AH in Carbondale, Illinois.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WPSD-TV

 

[KML0224]

Very true, but what good would an analog translator do in this present day?

 

[BRNout]

Very true, but what good would an analog translator do in this present day?

Some of them are still analog - the digital switchover did not include translators. At least not yet.

 

[RadioDaze]

I also remember WRDC in
Raleigh/Durham identifying itself as "28/70"; 28 being its
assigned channel in Durham and 70 its translator in Raleigh
(and, I suppose, a few points east).

I'd love to know the call sign of the former WRDU-TV's channel 70 translator, but I haven't been able to locate it anywhere online. I'm guessing it went away when they moved from their Terrel's Mountain tower to the 1,300-foot tower in Apex (which is now in Rolesville supporting WCPE-FM).

 

[Mr. Mike]

Channel 31 in Sacramento, back in the day when its callsign was KRBK-TV, operated translator station K51BP on Channel 51 in the town of Palermo, California.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

The only ones left around here are two translators in the northern corner of Northeast Ohio for WVIZ/25 (PBS):

W63CT/Eastlake (actually near Thompson)
W64AK/Conneaut (actually near Kingsville)

Both are analog, both have LD replacements on the way. I've actually seen W63CT as recently as a week ago.

 

[w9wi]

-- When were translators first authorized as a service by the FCC, and what was (were) the first licensed translator(s) to go on the air?

According to this paper: http://danielfaber.com/translators.pdf, the first translator went on the air in 1948. However, it wasn't licensed... and was shut down by the FCC.

The Commission finally began authorizing translators in 1956.

I doubt it's possible to know today which translator(s) were the first to go on the air. I think you can reasonably assume the first one *authorized* on each channel was the one with AA in the calls -- K70AA, K71AA, etc... I'll post a list below.

Don't underestimate the importance of early illegal translators. There were apparently *hundreds* in the rural West. And they were so popular that at least one Western state ordered its law enforcement people to not cooperate with the FCC in shutting them down.

-- Did translators from the start utilize the call letter format that became standard (W/K + two-digit channel # + 2 letters)?

Yes.

-- Was the term "translator" used from the beginning, and how/why/by whom was the term coined? (It always struck me as a little clunky, though I assume the intent was to convey the concept to the viewing public that the signal would be "translated" to a different channel.)

Not in the unlicensed days. The illegal units were generally called "boosters".

Today, a "booster" is a transmitter that relays the signals of a main transmitter on the same channel as the main transmitter.
A "translator" is one that relays the signals on a different channel from that used by the main transmitter.

It's not particularly clear to me whether the unlicensed "boosters" were boosters in the current meaning of the term.

The FCC did not initially authorize boosters in the current meaning.
- That could be because nobody (including the operators of the illegal stations) thought such a facility could be made to work.
- It could also be because the FCC had far too much experience with the illegal units malfunctioning, interfering with the station they were trying to relay - and/or other stations.

The first translators authorized on each channel, according to the 1958 Broadcasting Yearbook:
- Channel 70: Bishop, California // KNXT-2 (KCBS) Los Angeles
- Channel 71: Ellensburg, Washington // KIMA-29, Yakima
Channel 71: Newport, New Hampshire // WRLP-32 Greenfield, Mass. (primary no longer exists)
- Channel 72: Weed Heights, Nevada // KOLO-8 Reno
- Channel 73: Bishop, California // KRCA-4 (KNBC) Los Angeles
Channel 73: Palmerton, Pennsylvania // WBRE-28 Wilkes-Barre
- Channel 74: North Warren, Pennsylvania // WJAC-6 Johnstown
- Channel 75: Manson, Washington // KHQ-6 Spokane
- Channel 76: Prineville, Oregon // KLOR-12 (KPTV) Portland
- Channel 77: Bayfield, Colorado // KOAT-7 Albuquerque
- Channel 78: Orangeville, Utah // KTVT-4 (KTVX) Salt Lake City
- Channel 79: Blythe, California // KVAR-12 (KTAR) Phoenix
Channel 79: Claremont, New Hampshire // WRLP-32 (see ch. 71)
- Channel 80: Center, Colorado // KCSJ-5 (KOAA) Pueblo
- Channel 81: Benton, Washington // KHQ-6 Spokane
Channel 81: Lebanon, New Hampshire // WRLP-32 (see ch. 71)
- Channel 82: Kingman, Arizona // KOOL-10 (KSAZ) Phoenix
Channel 82: North Warren, Pennsylvania // WBEN-4 (WIVB) Buffalo, NY
- Channel 83: Redmond, Oregon // KLOR-12 (KPTV) Portland


There had presumably been a W70AA and K74AA at one time but they don't appear in the 1958 listing.

_________________________________________________

Here's an interesting tidbit...

Note that all the translators above were above channel 69. For many years, translators were only allowed in the 70-83 band. Of course, in the 1970s that became the 800MHz cell-phone and two-way bands. No new translators were allowed above 69, and nearly all the existing ones migrated below 70. One on channel 70 in Kansas was reported by DXers as recently as the beginning of the 21st Century 11 years ago -- but we assumed when that station went defunct, there was nothing left above 69.

Turns out we were wrong.

See this entry in the KTTC-TV DTV Blog:
http://addins.kttc.com/blogs/dtv/?p=46

Posted on February 17, 2009, the day this Rochester, Minnesota station shut down its analog signal, it indicates their Blue Earth, Minnesota translator K70DR was still operating on channel 70 in February 2009.

The translator holds a permit to convert to digital operation on channel 16. There is no license-to-cover yet, which means it is possible K70DR is still operating on channel 70.

 

[azumanga]

Posted on February 17, 2009, the day this Rochester, Minnesota station shut down its analog signal, it indicates [that KTTC's] Blue Earth, Minnesota translator K70DR was still operating on channel 70 in February 2009.

The translator holds a permit to convert to digital operation on channel 16. There is no license-to-cover yet, which means it is possible K70DR is still operating on channel 70.

If so, one would need an older TV capable of tuning in UHF 70 to 83 -- most TVs made following the 70-83 phaseout only went up to 69.

 

[firepoint525]

Posted on February 17, 2009, the day this Rochester, Minnesota station shut down its analog signal, it indicates [that KTTC's] Blue Earth, Minnesota translator K70DR was still operating on channel 70 in February 2009.

Wasn't that the date set aside (originally) for the switchover to DTV? Don't know if that has anything to do with anything, or just a coincidence.

 

[KML0224]

YES. It was then delayed until June 2009.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

I forgot to mention that over in the Youngstown market, WNEO/45 Alliance (PBS) has an in-market fill translator to serve Youngstown directly (in the middle of the Mahoning Valley, serving areas terrain shadowed from WNEO's site in suburban Salem).

It was analog W58AM, and flash cut recently to digital W44CR-D.

 

[Stanislav]

Note that all the translators above were above channel 69. For many years, translators were only allowed in the 70-83 band.

In fact, some manufacturers (Channel Master, Finco, Blonder-Tongue, etc.) offered antennas and pre-amps specifically geared to peak performance in the 70-83 range. These were used both for CATV head-ends and home reception, and were quite popular in the translator-rich West. These specialized items were pretty much a necessity for consistent reception, given the piss-poor state of UHF tuners (especially at the high end of the band), the low ERPs involved, and the fact that common broadband antennas and amps were essentially cut/tuned for best performance at the center of the more common lower channels (I believe peak performance used to be around ch. 30 or so) and functioned poorly in the lofty translator band.

Of course, in the 1970s that became the 800MHz cell-phone and two-way bands. No new translators were allowed above 69, and nearly all the existing ones migrated below 70.

I think the original intention was to shift translators from 70-83 down to 50-69, but it wasn't long before they started popping up on lower channels as well.

Which raises another question. Translators were originally limited to ERPs of (IIRC) 1 kw on UHF and 10 watts on VHF. At some point, the FCC began authorizing higher-powered translators (I used to call them "super-translators") under two conditions: that they operate on channels allocated to that market, and that they would be on a secondary basis, subject to being bumped if and when a full-power licensee signed on the channel. (One example was W33AA in North Miami, which provided coverage of WCIX-6 to that area, but had to leave the air when full-power WBFS signed on.) Anyway, the question: when were these higher-power translators first authorized?

 

[w9wi]

I think the original intention was to shift translators from 70-83 down to 50-69, but it wasn't long before they started popping up on lower channels as well.

I have a vague recollection of 55-69, but that's refutable.. The FCC had already allowed translators on VHF. (which they didn't initially do. But UHF was *so* unpopular in the 1950s and early 1960s that when UHF translators were legalized, many translators decided it was better to be illegal on VHF than legal on UHF...)

Once they were legal on 2-13, I suppose it was difficult to justify keeping them out of 14-54.

Which raises another question. Translators were originally limited to ERPs of (IIRC) 1 kw on UHF and 10 watts on VHF. At some point, the FCC began authorizing higher-powered translators (I used to call them "super-translators") under two conditions: that they operate on channels allocated to that market, and that they would be on a secondary basis, subject to being bumped if and when a full-power licensee signed on the channel. (One example was W33AA in North Miami, which provided coverage of WCIX-6 to that area, but had to leave the air when full-power WBFS signed on.) Anyway, the question: when were these higher-power translators first authorized?

I'd have to do more digging than I have time for, but I'm pretty sure those 1kw/10w figures were always transmitter output, not ERP. It was only after 2000 or so when LPTVs/translators began to be regulated in terms of ERP. Omnidirectional ERPs on the order of 50kw are not difficult to achieve with 1kw transmitter output; when a directional antenna is used, much higher ERPs are possible. (Miami is a great place for a directional antenna, with no point in radiating anything to the east and not much point in radiating much to the west) (There was briefly a permit for a LPTV with over 400kw ERP in upstate NY. I don't think it was ever built.)

My recollection is that the transmitter output for a UHF translator was limited to 100 watts, unless you used a channel allocated to your community in which case 1kw was permitted. That's why there were four analog channels allotted to Lowry, South Dakota. (pop. 6...) Of course, translators (and LPTVs) have always been subject to being bumped by new full-power service. I can't tell you when the 1kw-for-allocated-channels thing started.

_________________________________________________

(azumanga
If so, one would need an older TV capable of tuning in UHF 70 to 83 -- most TVs made following the 70-83 phaseout only went up to 69.

Yes, it does seem a bit pointless to operate a translator on channel 70 when the vast majority of TV sets can't tune that channel... I have to assume the point is to reach a cable system and/or to guarantee must-carry.

_________________________________________________

(firepoint525
Wasn't that the date set aside (originally) for the switchover to DTV? Don't know if that has anything to do with anything, or just a coincidence.

I'm sure it wasn't coincidence. Stations could always switch to DTV early. Obviously, most stations had already made plans to switch on February 12th, and some chose not to (or simply couldn't - due to tower lease expirations etc.) delay those plans.