Full-power stations that exist only to retransmit other stations

[charlestondxman]

Yeah, all but 3 of ETV's stations are relayed from Columbia. It is usually the same programming, and even those 3 stations might run a couple hours or so of separate programming each week.

At least here in Charleston, WRLK's feed is simulcasted on satellite channel 7.

 

[w9wi]

I don't know if it's 'FCC official' or not, but WFPX 62 Lumber Bridge/Fayetteville NC rebroadcasts WRPX 47 Rocky Mount/Raleigh/Durham.
I imagine there are other Ion stations doing that too?

Jacksonville relaying Greenville is the only Ion satellite officially on the books in NC. While I can't remember the last time I've seen the Nashville station carry anything that didn't come from the network, they *do* have a "studio" somewhere in the market. Indeed, at least the Nashville and Milwaukee stations have carried small amounts of local programming in the past. (though in Milwaukee's case, produced by another local station)

 

[Poledo]

Just in case someone is trying to compile a complete list... add PBS, WFSU Tallahassee, FL and it's little brother satellite repeater WFSG Panama City, FL. They have a little signal overlap, but FSU built WFSG specifically to improve reception and extend the coverage area of WFSU throughout the Panama City DMA and over to Destin, FL (in the Mobile, AL DMA).

 

[dave73]

If only Tribune were willing to sell WTTV to LIN, then it could be possible. It could still be possible the 2 could be split if the creditors of Tribune sell off the company in pieces.

No, LIN can't operate any more stations in the Indianapolis market due to the FCC's duopoly rules.

Then Tribune shouldn't be allowed to own both WTTK & WTTV (especially now that WTTK was allowed to move their transmission to Indianapolis, & have major overlap in Grade A coverage of both stations), while owning WXIN. So if Tribune can own 3 stations with 2 of them simulcasting each other, then it's possible LIN could do the same if they could get a station to simulcast WNDY. WTTV & WTTK no longer need the simulcast.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Then Tribune shouldn't be allowed to own both WTTK & WTTV (especially now that WTTK was allowed to move their transmission to Indianapolis, & have major overlap in Grade A coverage of both stations), while owning WXIN. So if Tribune can own 3 stations with 2 of them simulcasting each other, then it's possible LIN could do the same if they could get a station to simulcast WNDY. WTTV & WTTK no longer need the simulcast.

Point taken. WTTV could become a satellite of WNDY because satellite stations don't count.

 

[sdwulfdawg]

"There are lots of 'state-run' PBS stations where the same programming is duplicated state-wide. Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Louisiana come to mind."

Oregon. Everything there's a satellite of KOPB.

When I lived in Portland, OPB used to run Salem KVDO as a separate station....

I always remember when they would announce the flagship station as KOAP-TV (ch. 10) Portland, KOAC-TV (Corvallis) and their station down the Willamette Valley in La Grande (can't remember the call letters).

 

[Bluenoser]

I always remember when they would announce the flagship station as KOAP-TV (ch. 10) Portland, KOAC-TV (Corvallis) and their station down the Willamette Valley in La Grande (can't remember the call letters).

KTVR 13, which relayed KTVB Boise in a previous life. OPB acquired the station in August 1976, switching programming to PBS in February 1977. First relaying programs from KWSU Pullman and KSPS Spokane, OPB took the station dark in September 1977 for tx repairs, relaunching it as an OPB station in January 1978.

 

[markwooldridge]

In Soviet Britain, it's a case of what broadcast TV station is *not* part of a network? BBC Television have always had local opt-outs, never opting in. ITV used to be local, now all networked, opting out for the adverts.

But others have summed it up well already - there are some stations that use two full-power transmitters to cover their broadcast area - in TV and radio. Non-Commercial broadcasters tend to have the large network of full power transmitters, yep UNC-TV is the perfect example.

 

[tmanokc]

Then Tribune shouldn't be allowed to own both WTTK & WTTV (especially now that WTTK was allowed to move their transmission to Indianapolis, & have major overlap in Grade A coverage of both stations), while owning WXIN. So if Tribune can own 3 stations with 2 of them simulcasting each other, then it's possible LIN could do the same if they could get a station to simulcast WNDY. WTTV & WTTK no longer need the simulcast.

Point taken. WTTV could become a satellite of WNDY because satellite stations don't count.

Between WTTV and WTTK, if Tribune were to keep one of the two stations, it would have to be WTTV due to its longer history (WTTV signed on in 1949, WTTK didn't debut until 1983). However, in order for that to work, the smart move would be for Tribune to first file to reassign the channel 29 transmitter on the northern side of Indianapolis currently used by WTTK to the WTTV license (effectively resulting in a swap with WTTK that would have WTTV's city of license moved to Kokomo from Bloomington). In turn, WTTV's channel 48 transmitter in Trafalgar would be reassigned to the WTTK license (moving WTTK's CoL from Bloomington to Kokomo). That's what should have been done in the first place.

For historical purposes, WTTK and WTTV's station backgrounds would remain the same regardless with WTTV even on RF channel 29 (which would most likely have to be remapped to PSIP 4.1) would still be considered to be the same station as it was before the swap, and the same with WTTK even on RF channel 48 (which also would have to be remapped to PSIP 29.1). Although for license purposes, if WTTV swaps licenses with WTTK's, the FCC would consider WTTK to be legally the same entity as WTTV and vice versa.

If LIN weren't able to acquire the channel 29 transmitter (as WTTK) from Tribune to become a WNDY satellite and I would see no reason that wouldn't happen given that the FCC counts a satellite station as the same entity as the station whose programming it repeats, it would more or less have to become an independent station - of which currently isn't a general entertainment independent in the market - by default under another owner, since all six networks already have existing affiliation contracts (due to Tribune's strong ties to The CW and This TV and both networks' existing affiliation agreements with WTTV, both The CW and This would have to be dropped from WTTK under the above scenario). An owner (that doesn't have ties to one of the four that already own full-time commercial stations in the Indianapolis area), would have to decide whether to move the divested station's city of license closer to Indy to allow a transmitter in the city proper or its immediate suburbs.

 

[tripinva]

WTTV and WTTK wouldn't have to swap licenses or anything like that. WTTK would begin mapping to 4.1 (legal), swap its call sign to WTTV, and thus would accomplish the same thing (WTTV on RF 29) with a lot less paperwork. WTTV would map to 29.1 or something similar and become WTTK.

- Trip

 

[KeithE4]

WTTV and WTTK wouldn't have to swap licenses or anything like that. WTTK would begin mapping to 4.1 (legal), swap its call sign to WTTV, and thus would accomplish the same thing (WTTV on RF 29) with a lot less paperwork. WTTV would map to 29.1 or something similar and become WTTK.

You sure about that? Analog Channel 4 was allocated to Bloomington, while 29 was Kokomo. I don't think that's changed with PSIP even though the RF channels are now different. IIRC, the Bloomington-licensed station (and transmitter with city-grade coverage of B'town) must ID as Channel 4.x, unless the FCC is getting more lax about these things. They can change the call letters, although I have no idea why they would, but not the PSIP numbers.

If they could change PSIP channel numbers at will, what stops WXIN from "going lower on the dial" and using, say, Channel 7.x and branding themselves as "Fox 7?" Even though they physically mean nothing, lower numbers are still better, preferably the "VHF-sounding" 2-13. I'm guessing that the FCC doesn't allow such things.

 

[KML0224]

Here in Connecticut, we have "MY-TV 9". It's actually WCTX-TV (MY) channel 59 of New Haven. Their digital channel is 39. Many systems in the market carried them on analog cable channel 9, hence the name. They also did it to pair up with their sister station, WTNH-TV (ABC) channel 8. Both stations are licensed to New Haven and shar a site on Madmere Mountain in Hamden, a few miles to the north. The only stations in the market who are in their old analog slots, but broadcasting in digital are:

WCCT-TV (CW) channel 20 of Waterbury (channel 12 pre-transition)
WHPX-TV (ION) channel 26 of New London (channel 34 pre-transition)

As for satellite stations here? Just CPTV, a.k.a. Connecticut Public Television.

 

[tmanokc]

WTTV and WTTK wouldn't have to swap licenses or anything like that. WTTK would begin mapping to 4.1 (legal), swap its call sign to WTTV, and thus would accomplish the same thing (WTTV on RF 29) with a lot less paperwork. WTTV would map to 29.1 or something similar and become WTTK.

You sure about that? Analog Channel 4 was allocated to Bloomington, while 29 was Kokomo. I don't think that's changed with PSIP even though the RF channels are now different. IIRC, the Bloomington-licensed station (and transmitter with city-grade coverage of B'town) must ID as Channel 4.x, unless the FCC is getting more lax about these things. They can change the call letters, although I have no idea why they would, but not the PSIP numbers.

If they could change PSIP channel numbers at will, what stops WXIN from "going lower on the dial" and using, say, Channel 7.x and branding themselves as "Fox 7?" Even though they physically mean nothing, lower numbers are still better, preferably the "VHF-sounding" 2-13. I'm guessing that the FCC doesn't allow such things.

It is possible for stations to change PSIP channel numbers, KCEN-TV in Waco actually mapped its PSIP virtual channel as 9.1 (matching its digital RF channel) for one year after shutting down its analog signal on VHF channel 6. Around the time it upgraded its newscasts to HD in February 2010, the station remapped its PSIP to virtual channel 6.1, to match its former analog channel pre-transition.

As for the license swap, that idea was intended for historical reasons, given that WTTV's longer and richer history than that of WTTK. If only the callsigns and PSIP channel were changed without swapping licenses and legally reassigning WTTV the stronger Bloomington transmitter, wouldn't RF channel 29 historically and legally be considered the same station as the former WTTK if only the WTTV callsign and PSIP 4.1 moved there, and vice versa with the WTTK callsign and PSIP 29.1?

Historically, WTVJ and WFOR in Miami are considered the same stations as they were prior to their 1995 swap of licenses, network affiliation and other intellectual property (WFOR traded its Homestead transmitter to WTVJ, which in turn, got WFOR's transmitter on the border of Broward and Dade counties), though the FCC legally considers WTVJ to be the same station as the WFOR (WCIX before the swap) and WFOR to be legally the same station as the old WTVJ. In the case of WBME-CA and WMLW in Milwaukee, those stations only swapped programming and callsigns, but WMLW moved to a full-power digital signal and WBME to low-power analog and digital signals without swapping licenses or switching PSIP channels, meaning that for all intents and purposes, WBME is effectively considered to be the same station as the former WMLW on analog 41/RF digital 24 and WMLW the same station as WBME on RF channel 48.

 

[tripinva]

You sure about that?

Yes, I am. http://atsc.org/cms/standards/a_65-2009.pdf

Annex B, Section B.1.1, numbers 5 and 7.

- Trip

 

[w9wi]

WTTV and WTTK wouldn't have to swap licenses or anything like that. WTTK would begin mapping to 4.1 (legal), swap its call sign to WTTV, and thus would accomplish the same thing (WTTV on RF 29) with a lot less paperwork. WTTV would map to 29.1 or something similar and become WTTK.

You sure about that? Analog Channel 4 was allocated to Bloomington, while 29 was Kokomo. I don't think that's changed with PSIP even though the RF channels are now different. IIRC, the Bloomington-licensed station (and transmitter with city-grade coverage of B'town) must ID as Channel 4.x, unless the FCC is getting more lax about these things. They can change the call letters, although I have no idea why they would, but not the PSIP numbers.

If they could change PSIP channel numbers at will, what stops WXIN from "going lower on the dial" and using, say, Channel 7.x and branding themselves as "Fox 7?" Even though they physically mean nothing, lower numbers are still better, preferably the "VHF-sounding" 2-13. I'm guessing that the FCC doesn't allow such things.

They can't change major channel number at will, but they can share numbers among commonly-controlled stations. (I forget the exact nomenclature but I'm pretty sure it's in the link Trip posted) WTTK can't use major channel 2.x but they certainly can use 4.x.

tmanoke: the 9.1 mapping for KCEN was not technically legal. I'm of the sense the FCC doesn't get too bent out of shape about it as long as the violation doesn't create duplicate numbers among stations that are not commonly-controlled. A LPTV station in California has been reported using 1.x for several years.....

 

[radiorob2.0]

WSIL Harrisburg, IL uses KPOB in Popular Bluff to help cover the wide Paducah,Cape Girardeau, Harrisburg market. If not mentioned yet, Kentucky Educational Television maintains full power transmitter across Kentucky.

 

[fybush]

As for the license swap, that idea was intended for historical reasons, given that WTTV's longer and richer history than that of WTTK. If only the callsigns and PSIP channel were changed without swapping licenses and legally reassigning WTTV the stronger Bloomington transmitter, wouldn't RF channel 29 historically and legally be considered the same station as the former WTTK if only the WTTV callsign and PSIP 4.1 moved there, and vice versa with the WTTK callsign and PSIP 29.1?

Historically, WTVJ and WFOR in Miami are considered the same stations as they were prior to their 1995 swap of licenses, network affiliation and other intellectual property (WFOR traded its Homestead transmitter to WTVJ, which in turn, got WFOR's transmitter on the border of Broward and Dade counties), though the FCC legally considers WTVJ to be the same station as the WFOR (WCIX before the swap) and WFOR to be legally the same station as the old WTVJ. In the case of WBME-CA and WMLW in Milwaukee, those stations only swapped programming and callsigns, but WMLW moved to a full-power digital signal and WBME to low-power analog and digital signals without swapping licenses or switching PSIP channels, meaning that for all intents and purposes, WBME is effectively considered to be the same station as the former WMLW on analog 41/RF digital 24 and WMLW the same station as WBME on RF channel 48.

You're mixing apples, oranges, a couple of kumquats and possibly a stapler, here...

When you say WTVJ and WFOR "are considered the same stations as they were" before 1995, it begs the question: considered by whom? As you note, the FCC disagrees with you on that. It considers the station that's now WFOR to be "facility ID #47902," and if you follow that ID number back to 1995 you find that it changed ownership (from NBC to CBS) and callsign (from WTVJ to WFOR-TV), while remaining on channel 4; the reverse being true for "facility ID #63154" on channel 6, which changed ownership from CBS to NBC and callsign from WCIX to WTVJ.

Milwaukee was a call and programming swap between co-owned stations, nothing more.

To Joe Average Viewer, of course, it's a different story: WTVJ/NBC "moved from 4 to 6" in 1995, and WBME "moved from 49 to 41."

Want to have your mind blown a bit more? Consider Honolulu, where a complicated shared-services-agreement/duopoly deal could only happen if Raycom (which owned NBC affiliate KHNL) could acquire a station that was not in the top 4 in the market. So it picked up facility ID #34445, channel 5, which had been MyNetwork affiliate KFVE...and entered into a shared-services arrangement with ID #36917, channel 9, which had been CBS affiliate KGMB-TV...and moved the KGMB-TV calls and CBS programming to 5 and the KFVE calls and MyNetwork to 9.

Except that nobody in Honolulu much noticed, because everyone there has cable, and the cable company kept "KGMB" on 7 and "KFVE" on 5.

There are maybe half a dozen people in Hawaii who know or care that the CBS affiliate known as "KGMB" is now operating on a license that only dates back to the 1980s, while it's "KFVE" that's on the license that goes all the way back to 1952.

I agree with w9wi and trip - the much easier way to arrange things in Indy, if it's really necessary to rearrange things at all, would be to have the current "WTTK" facility in NW Indy change its PSIP to 4.x and its calls to WTTV, while "WTTV" from Trafalgar could change calls to WTTK and could either become 29.x or could use 4.3/4.4. Because both stations are commonly-operated, they can share the use of a single "major channel." For that matter, WXIN could be 4.59 if it wanted to be. (There's precedent for this: indie KSTC in Minneapolis was analog 45, but because it's commonly owned with KSTP-TV 5, it does PSIP as 5.45 so that OTA viewers scanning up and down will find it right between KSTP and Fox's KMSP 9, instead of way up at the end of the dial.)

Yes, that would mean that "WTTV"'s history would legally be that of WTTK and vice versa, but only in the most narrowly technical sense. It would be completely transparent for viewers, who would continue to see "WTTV" on "channel 4," just as they have since the 1950s.

As for the question about WXIN becoming "Fox 7" and using "7.x," A/65 requires that you use your former analog channel as your major channel number, or alternatively the major channel number of a commonly-controlled station in the same market. You can't just randomly pick a new major channel number, and that's for a very good reason - it could invite chaos if you end up with conflicting major channel numbers in a market.

 

[tmanokc]

When you say WTVJ and WFOR "are considered the same stations as they were" before 1995, it begs the question: considered by whom? As you note, the FCC disagrees with you on that. It considers the station that's now WFOR to be "facility ID #47902," and if you follow that ID number back to 1995 you find that it changed ownership (from NBC to CBS) and callsign (from WTVJ to WFOR-TV), while remaining on channel 4; the reverse being true for "facility ID #63154" on channel 6, which changed ownership from CBS to NBC and callsign from WCIX to WTVJ.

That's what makes that particular license swap more complicated, essentially both owners and likely the viewing public in Miami that remembers it happened consider WTVJ as the same station on channels 4 as it was on 6, and WFOR as the same station on channels 4 as it was on 6, even though the FCC considers that the opposite truth, so essentially its considered only a half-truth, I guess.

I think it's because of how it was promoted by the stations and how the whole thing was arranged: WTVJ kept the calls, NBC ownership and network programming, while WFOR kept the CBS ownership and network programming (but dumped the WCIX calls in order to keep the callsign reflective of their channel allocation as an analog station; yes, the old callsign didn't use the proper spelling of "six", but what is now WKRN in Nashville was using the WSIX calls at the time WCIX signed on, even though that station was on channel eight). Both WTVJ and WCIX/WFOR kept their studios, syndicated programming and staff. So when the licenses were exchanged, the stations hammered it into the public conciousness that the only things different were the transmitter locations and channel numbers.

This is even reflected in both stations' articles on Wikipedia for that matter, as the WFOR article has the history of the station as channels 6 and 4, and WTVJ's article has that station's history as channels 4 and 6, rather than the WTVJ article having the WCIX history pre-1995 and the WFOR article having the WTVJ history pre-1995.

 

[fybush]

This is one of the fun things about being a broadcast historian: all through the industry's history, there have been examples like this where a station's intellectual property goes one way and its FCC license goes another. Consider this one: in 1953, WNAC, one of Boston's oldest stations, sold off its 5 kilowatt facility on AM 1260 to a new owner and bought a newer 50 kW facility on AM 680 that had been WLAW. As far as listeners were concerned, WNAC "moved" from 1260 to 680 with more power - same programming, same studio location, only the frequency changed. As far as the FCC was concerned, the 1260 license got new calls and a new owner, as did 680. WNAC on 680 eventually became today's WRKO; 1260 became WVDA and then WEZE and then WPZE and then WMKI. When last I looked in Broadcasting Yearbook, both WMKI and WRKO claimed WNAC's 1922 start date as part of their own histories. (Oh, and just to add to the confusion - WEZE's "intellectual property" moved from 1260 down to 590 after Salem bought 590 - and 590 had been WEEI before its intellectual property moved to the former WHDH 850!)

So who's right? What constitutes "the station" - is it the FCC license? the call letters? the network affiliation? the ownership?

The real answer, I think, is that there is no real answer. We deal with a lot of intangibles in broadcasting; it's a business that's literally built on thin air. Even the tangible physical aspects change - studios move all the time, and transmitter sites move, too. About the best you can do - or at least the best I've ever figured out how to do - is to try to tell the whole story. The station now known as WRKO in Boston incorporates pieces of the histories of both WNAC and WLAW. Today's WFOR is built on the foundations of both WTVJ-4 and WCIX-6. What's now WEZE 590 in Boston is cobbled together, in a way, from the pieces of the original WEEI 590 (straight line on the license) and WNAC (where the 1260 license began) and arguably even WLAW, sort of.

 

[tripinva]

A LPTV station in California has been reported using 1.x for several years.....

That one actually has FCC permission.

- Trip