I've always wondered why that KATV, one of the leading stations in the state, has let there building in downtown LR go to pot. Heck, last time I was by there a couple of months ago, they still had Paul Eells picture in the window. You would think that the station would have a little more pride in itself than to allow that to happen! That also makes me question if maintenance, to follow up on what the previous poster said, has been allowed to go over the last few years. KATV is owned by the ecentric, multi-billionaire Washington D.C. banker Joseph Albritton, so it's not like the company is broke!
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
KATV-Channel 7 tower collapses
- Thread starter wpiv926
- Start date
Media Mogul said:
Heard yesterday afternoon that AETN will have a new antenna and transmitter installed within the next 10-days to two weeks in an effort to resume their analog service.
Was told that it would not be at full power so those of us that monitored AETN for the EAS alerts might have to come up with another solution.
I started using AETN yesterday off of cable. That may be the only solution for some.
> I started using AETN yesterday off of cable. That may be the only solution for some.
There is one other option. Within the next few weeks, stores should be flush with DTV conversion boxes, allowing analog TVs to receive digital TV. A nice overview: http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/01/government-begi.html
And, as the article points, out, Uncle Sam is even kickin' in $40 to help defray your costs. While it won't make your TV HD, it will allow snow-free picture and multi-casting, if available.
KETS's DTV signal remains trucking along unaffected. Over the air channel 5.
DE
There is one other option. Within the next few weeks, stores should be flush with DTV conversion boxes, allowing analog TVs to receive digital TV. A nice overview: http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/01/government-begi.html
And, as the article points, out, Uncle Sam is even kickin' in $40 to help defray your costs. While it won't make your TV HD, it will allow snow-free picture and multi-casting, if available.
KETS's DTV signal remains trucking along unaffected. Over the air channel 5.
DE
Depending on where you are and how you pick it up, you might try to see if you could pick up one of the other AETN stations. KEMV-Channel 6 -Mountain View should be able to be picked up in the northern part of the usual KETS-Channel 2 coverage area. Also, KETG-Channel 9-Arkadelphia might come in over part of the western and southern parts of the usual Channel 2 coverage area.
wpiv926 said:
When KATV moved to the 2000 ft tower at Redfield, I believe AETN was actually given the shorter tower at Jefferson. KETS used this tower until the 1980's, when KATV allowed them to move onto the Redfield tower, which in turn was freed up for 92.3 KFXE. Foxy 92 then changed format from pop to country and began trying to compete with KSSN...
For those of us who no longer live in Arkansas, is there any news on replacing the tower??
When KATV moved to the 2000 ft tower at Redfield, I believe AETN was actually given the shorter tower at Jefferson. KETS used this tower until the 1980's, when KATV allowed them to move onto the Redfield tower, which in turn was freed up for 92.3 KFXE. Foxy 92 then changed format from pop to country and began trying to compete with KSSN...
For those of us who no longer live in Arkansas, is there any news on replacing the tower??
[/quote]
KETS went on the the tower in 1965 when AETN was signed on. KATV was initially permitted to build the tower by the FAA because they allowed KETS to be on the tower for $1 per year. The story goes that after they agreed to the terms with former Senator Lee Reaves a phone call was made and the site was no longer in the flight path of Little Rock National Airport.
Don't know about replacement yet, word is that they are looking at a temporary tower for now. The site is still crawling with insurance people, lawyers and 24 hour security to stop scavengers and sightseers.
D
dave388
Guest
i wonder what exactly made the tower collapse. to many antennas? weak base? hmm.
D
dave388
Guest
another thing im suprised. i havent seen any video of the actuall colapse.. with all the cell phone video, im suprised it isnt all over youtube
http://www.masonatkinson.org/post/23950719
If this article is correct, the tower won't be replaced as it was. Will be replaced with a smaller tower. Although I don't quite get the quote of how a 2000 foot tower is suddenly obsolete. Unless physics has changed, you still need height with distance.
Hmm, wonder where all that extra insurance money is going to go? Building a 1000 foot or less tower would certainly cost less than a 2000.
If this article is correct, the tower won't be replaced as it was. Will be replaced with a smaller tower. Although I don't quite get the quote of how a 2000 foot tower is suddenly obsolete. Unless physics has changed, you still need height with distance.
Hmm, wonder where all that extra insurance money is going to go? Building a 1000 foot or less tower would certainly cost less than a 2000.
D
dave388
Guest
i bet the x-tra $ ends up in someones pocket
Cable systems will still need to be able to recieve the digital signal, and as we all know, with digital it is either there or not. Also, I figure that recently, many people have been getting the HD signal over-the-air. As far as insurance money, I figure the insurance company will try everything in the book to try and get out of paying it, resulting in litagation and delays.
With all of their discussions about moving to Shinall Mtn or building a shorter tower, there are a few things to consider. First, they are licensed to Pine Bluff, not Little Rock so a move to Shinall would involve changing their city of license. As far as building a shorter tower, that would seriously hamper their coverage in area to the north where there are a lot of viewers and cable headends. There are fundamental reasons that 2000 footer was built where it was in 1965 that haven't changed. Simply put, taller tower equals better coverage.
Certainly, the rules of physics haven't changed. When dealing with VHF and UHF signals, the three most important things (in order of importance) are:
1. Height,
2. Height, and
3. Height.
It also helps to get the antenna as high as possible.
Now, that being said, here is what is meant by 2000' towers being obsolete. When the tower was constructed in the 60s, people received signals over the air. Period. So, covering more ground = more viewers, especially when your transmitter is 20 miles out of town. Today, the vast majority are not watching OTA. So, there is a cost/benefit calculus here. And the costs of constructing a 2000' stick are just not justified, particularly if the station can construct on the mountain just west of town. That site, in fact, will give KATV better coverage in-town, which with digital is critical, considering cliff factor.
Now, just to clear the Record, KATV is not licensed to Pine Bluff. There were so licensed years ago. But, the FCC license is Little Rock alone.
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?list=0&facid=33543
If I were KATV, I would construct 1000', or so west of town (assuming that is possible) and be done with it. And, likely, I would NOT build a full-power channel 7 plant. Put a few watts out on channel 7 until next year, and erect the new tower with channel 22 on top. It all makes sense.
As far as the insurance company lawyers? That's another story. Don't trust lawyers. Don't trust ANY of them. They lie.
DE
http://applezombies.wordpress.com/
1. Height,
2. Height, and
3. Height.
It also helps to get the antenna as high as possible.
Now, that being said, here is what is meant by 2000' towers being obsolete. When the tower was constructed in the 60s, people received signals over the air. Period. So, covering more ground = more viewers, especially when your transmitter is 20 miles out of town. Today, the vast majority are not watching OTA. So, there is a cost/benefit calculus here. And the costs of constructing a 2000' stick are just not justified, particularly if the station can construct on the mountain just west of town. That site, in fact, will give KATV better coverage in-town, which with digital is critical, considering cliff factor.
Now, just to clear the Record, KATV is not licensed to Pine Bluff. There were so licensed years ago. But, the FCC license is Little Rock alone.
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?list=0&facid=33543
If I were KATV, I would construct 1000', or so west of town (assuming that is possible) and be done with it. And, likely, I would NOT build a full-power channel 7 plant. Put a few watts out on channel 7 until next year, and erect the new tower with channel 22 on top. It all makes sense.
As far as the insurance company lawyers? That's another story. Don't trust lawyers. Don't trust ANY of them. They lie.
DE
http://applezombies.wordpress.com/
DeadElvis said:
One thing that may or may not factor in here, is that KETS, the other station that was on the collapsed tower, is moving their DTV operation to channel 7 after transition. So a rebuilt channel 7 facility would not be completely useless, provided a modern transmitter (that could be converted to digital operation) was used. The allocated DTV power for KETS is about 8kw, I would estimate a transmitter of that size would deliver about 20-30kw the way analog power is measured. Stick that on a reasonably tall tower (1,200' HAAT or thereabouts) and most area viewers wouldn't notice the difference. Especially if they could put it on Shinall, closer to the city. Obviously KATV and AETN have some kind of relationship & I wouldn't rule out cooperation on a permanent channel 7 facility.
I'm not certain the former COL of Pine Bluff is the only reason KATV was down there. There's an analog on channel 7 in Pittsburg in southeast Kansas, Shinall is probably short-spaced to the Kansas station. And the Kansas operation is moving their DTV to channel 7 after transition. The FCC might waive the short-spacing though, especially if KETS agrees to limit power or use a directional antenna. I would imagine KAFT and KEMV would cover most of the area such a directional antenna might miss.
According to Arkansas Business, KATV-Channel 7 plans to build a new, 1269 foot tower on Shinal Mountain to replace it's 2000 foot tower at Redfield which collapsed back in January. The Little Rock zoning board must approve the move, since the mountain is in the city limits. This should obviously be a formality since many other towers are located there.
- Status