Biggest Market that waited longest to get a PBS Station?

[w9wi]

Getting a little off-topic on Dubuque, despite the history of KFXB-40 there (ABC 1970-95?, Fox as translator of KFXA-28 Cedar Rapids 1996?-2006, independent/religious ever since) but considering the terrain and bluffs of that tri-state area of Iowa/Illinois/Wisconsin, should more analog allocations had been allocated to Dubuque and in essence, give the possibility of the city having its own television market (even though it would have taken several eastern Iowa counties away from the CR/Waterloo DMA, Jo Daviess and perhaps Carroll counties from the Quad Cities market, and at least Grant and Lafayette counties from Madison)? I think with some engineering trickery (although I am no engineer), it might have been possible to allocate at least 2 reduced power V's to Dubuque (channels 5 and 11) to avoid interference with Chicago and Des Moines/Ames (perhaps put them on the Wisconsin
...

In the analog era, the FCC never allotted channels for reduced-power operations. To get a channel allotted, you had to show there was a site where you could put a transmitter operating at the maximum permissible ERP/tower height [1] without interfering with any other pre-existing allotment or station.

I'd imagine at least one fairly high channel (above 50) could have been added at Dubuque if there had been interest. Off the top of my head, I'd think channel 59 or 64 would have worked. (you couldn't have both) That would have been enough to provide all 3 major commercial networks (in the pre-Fox days) plus a non-commercial station.

I don't think the lack of a Dubuque market has much to do with FCC actions. (or inactions) I think it's because nobody thought they could make a go of it with a TV station there. (and eventually, KDUB proved them right) It's not *that* big of a city, and much of the surrounding rural terrain isn't that heavily populated. (a lot of the Wisconsin side is too hilly for effective agriculture, compared to areas further north and east)

[1] 100kw/2,000' for channel 5, 316kw/2,000' for channel 11

 

[w9wi]

Channel 33 in DeKalb would seem to be very close to Channel 32 in Chicago.

(everything below is written from the standpoint of the old analog rules in effect at the time, much of has changed now with digital

Separation between adjacent UHF channels must be at least 54.5 miles. A quick & superficial scan of the Rand McNally indicates the center of DeKalb is 58 miles from the Loop. So, the channel 33 allotment could be made with no site restriction - the transmitter could be put at the reference coordinates in the center of DeKalb - of course, in practice if it were used for a station intended to serve Rockford the transmitter would be even further from Chicago.

Channel 65 at Freeport would of course have even greater separation from the Loop transmitter site of WGBO-66. The necessary distance separation from a channel 66 site at the reference coordinates of Elgin would have fallen among the existing Rockford tower farm (?!) so a channel 65 facility might not have been able to site on an existing TV tower. I *think* once the channel 66 assignment was in use in the Loop, that would have become the site to be protected, and there would have been no problem in meeting separation minima to a Loop site from the Rockford tower farm. (WQRF-39 of course already does, vs. WCPX-38)

Since Chicago also has a Channel 66 (well it does now but not then, but Channel 66 was unusual as it was asigned to BOTH Joliet and Elgin). If the transmitter would've been in Chicago, as it is now, (Channel 66 is licensed to Joliet but the transmitter is in Chicago) that is probably far enough away, but if Channel 66 was asigned to Elgin, and the transmitter was there, that could've been an issue.

The Elgin channel 66 assignment bears the notation "This channel is not available for use at Elgin unless and until it is determined by the Commission that it is not needed for use at Joliet, Ill." Besides channel 66, channel 14 was also allotted to Joliet, but with another notation, "Following the decision in Docket No. 18261, channels so indicated will not be available for television use until further action by the Commission." There are nine channels so indicated, all in the 14-20 band and near Top 10 markets - I believe Docket No. 18261 had to do with the assignment of channels 14-20 to land mobile in these markets.

I suppose when someone filed an application for a station at Joliet at a time when channel 14 had not been declared available, that the Commission determined that channel 66 was needed for use at Joliet. Thus, leaving Elgin in the lurch{grin}.

I see Channel 48 is also allocated (or was allocated) to DeKalb for non-commercial use. That seems to be a better option.

The copy of the allotment table I was using yesterday didn't show that allotment, but I found a slightly newer copy that lists both channels. (I'm surprised an additional non-commercial channel got allotted to DeKalb at a time when the channel they already had was unused...)

On channel 48 they'd have had to worry about channel 47 in Madison. A site midway between DeKalb and Rockford would have still worked - the Rockford tower farm wouldn't, though I'm not too sure they could get a city-grade across DeKalb from there anyway. I think they'd probably rather have any adjacent-channel interference area fall to the east (and outside the intended service area) rather than to the north. (and in Rock County, Wis. which until the mid-1980s was in the Rockford market)

I wonder if anyone ever tried to make use of Channel 54 assigned for non-commercial use in Kankakee?

An application was filed in 1996. I don't know by who, and it appears to be dead.