I have two friends who live in NJ. One in S Plainfield uses indoor amplified rabbit ears. He can not get half of the NYC channels. He says WABC 7 comes in good in the morning and is gone at 11am. Why? Another friend moved to Toms River. He put up some small old ragged vhf uhf antennas in the attic. So far he can get a few NYC tv stations and most Philly stations. Since NYC and Philly are both 60 miles away, why is NYC much weaker? NYC is also along a partial water path to Toms River, so reception should be better. Are the tv stations in NYC going to the new World Trade Center soon? Also, I looked at the fcc digital tv reception site....the WJLP station does not show up at all even if I look for reception in the Newark NJ zip code. Does that station reach NJ at all?
-
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
NYC TV reception in NJ
- Thread starter stevations
- Start date
WJLP, WABC, WPIX, and WNET all broadcast on VHF. VHF signals tend not to penetrate as far as UHF and can be problematic with digital. I live in West Orange about 10 miles due west of the city and have no trouble picking up these stations, but the places you mentioned are much farther away and will require a larger or better antenna (specifically one that is built for VHF).
I live in WJLPs COL, Middletown NJ. I can see the NYC skyline from my house and its VERY difficult to receive WJLP with rabbit ears or the flat type "HD antennas". I'm aware that DTV VHF channel 3 is difficult to receive (or any low band vhf for that matter) but why would the FCC assign a channel when it doesn't realistically cover its COL?
I found out a partial answer to my question but I have another question. The answer why NYC TV is weaker in Toms River than Philly TV (even though they are both 60 miles away) is that many of the NYC TV stations are lower power. I researched sites like....antennapoint.....rabbitears.....the FCC DTV site......wikipedia.........W9WI.....(I am not sure if there are other sites) and it looks like WPIX WNET and WJLP are less than 10 kw. So my next question is.....why such low power? The antenna HAAT of the Philly TV and NYC TV are about the same......1250 ft. so that is not the reason why NYC is lower power. I will ask, is it to save electricity, because the digital RF in a highly populated area is dangerous, because NYC uses a few antennas to transmit many stations using a multiplexer to do this or maybe the stations don't care as long as they are on cable and satellite since fewer people use the free over the air signals. From my understanding the maximum strength of DTV is 45 kw low band vhf, 145 kw high band vhf and 1000 kw UHF. Is this right? If so then the NYC TV stations are low power for some reason. I have noticed researching the various website that list power that they do not all list the same power for any given station. So to research this is very time consuming and probably not accurate. Does anyone know which site is most accurate? My guess is wikipedia but I don't know.
You're oversimplifying, a lot.
First and foremost, the terrain path is actually more favorable from Philadelphia than from New York to Tom's River, at least according to the standard propagation models. Distance isn't everything; if you're blocked by an obstruction, there's really nothing you can do about that; distance doesn't matter at that point.
Second, the power levels in Zone I are:
305m 10 kW
305m 30 kW
365m 1000 kW
Scaled downward accordingly if over the height listing. And these are upper limits assuming that a station isn't limited sooner by interference. From this, you should immediately see a few things. First, WABC, WPVI, WNJB, and WBPH all have waivers of the power limits. Those stations have agreements with other impacted stations to receive excess interference and successfully received waivers of the power limits from the FCC.
WHYY, WJLP, WACP, and KJWP, by contrast, operate right at the FCC power limits, when adjusted for their heights.
The odd men out, here, are WPIX and WNET, which operate below the FCC power limit, which for their heights, would be 11.7 kW. This is due to interference restrictions, where WPIX and WNET could cause too much interference to other stations. And, for that matter, 7.5 kW and 9.3 kW aren't that much weaker; less than 3 dB.
As far as UHF, in a cluttered area like the northeast, it should come as no surprise that interference limits station coverage areas. Stations like WPXN/WPPX, WNYW/WMCN, etc. are co-channel to each other, which harms reception in the overlap areas, while even stations that aren't that close together may also have to restrict their power or operate directional antennas to avoid interference.
- Trip
First and foremost, the terrain path is actually more favorable from Philadelphia than from New York to Tom's River, at least according to the standard propagation models. Distance isn't everything; if you're blocked by an obstruction, there's really nothing you can do about that; distance doesn't matter at that point.
Second, the power levels in Zone I are:
305m 10 kW
305m 30 kW
365m 1000 kW
Scaled downward accordingly if over the height listing. And these are upper limits assuming that a station isn't limited sooner by interference. From this, you should immediately see a few things. First, WABC, WPVI, WNJB, and WBPH all have waivers of the power limits. Those stations have agreements with other impacted stations to receive excess interference and successfully received waivers of the power limits from the FCC.
WHYY, WJLP, WACP, and KJWP, by contrast, operate right at the FCC power limits, when adjusted for their heights.
The odd men out, here, are WPIX and WNET, which operate below the FCC power limit, which for their heights, would be 11.7 kW. This is due to interference restrictions, where WPIX and WNET could cause too much interference to other stations. And, for that matter, 7.5 kW and 9.3 kW aren't that much weaker; less than 3 dB.
As far as UHF, in a cluttered area like the northeast, it should come as no surprise that interference limits station coverage areas. Stations like WPXN/WPPX, WNYW/WMCN, etc. are co-channel to each other, which harms reception in the overlap areas, while even stations that aren't that close together may also have to restrict their power or operate directional antennas to avoid interference.
- Trip
Thanks for your informative answer Trip. I did not know digital tv signals were using the zone systems (like FM radio with class A, B and C zones). That does explain a lot of the power output differences in Miami vs. NYC as an example. Is there a site where citizens can write to the FCC about questions like these? Although you mentioned increasing power output a few kilowatts only increases receiver reception by 3db doesn't that 3db mean the difference between seeing a picture or not at all to some viewers...... since digital reception is an all or nothing situation? How many more miles away would you expect to get a signal with an extra 3db? I looked at wikipedia and it lists WPIX as 7.5 kw and WNET at 3.5 kw. Where are the stations they are trying to protect by using such low output? Shouldn't NYC which is one of the most populated areas in the world have priority to provide good tv signals and smaller cities should take a back seat? What stations are on Ch 11 and 13 that are being protected? During summer months stations can interefere with each other but 98 percent of the time ground wave signals do not interfere with each other. Should power output be based on interference during 2 percent of the year? Why is WABC given preference, just because they are one of the three big networks? Is that fair? If Philly stations radiate better than NYC stations......why are most Philly UHFs around 350kw while most NYC UHFs are about 250kw? It seems that reception across trees from Philly to Toms River would be tougher than signals from NYC to Toms River up along the coast with few trees and some water in its path. Since the FCC is encouraging tv stations to go to vhf isn't this going to mean most vhf stations will have to run low power since they will be all in jeopardy of interfering with each other? Although it may seem like I am over simplifying these reception issues it is because it is how I see things as an average citizen / consumer / tv viewer. Most people are not RF engineers and are probably asking themselves the same questions. My friends in NJ are asking themselves why they got over the air reception of WPIX TV all of their life and now they never see them. I went to research this and asked myself.....why are there so many power differences in tv stations. Another question is why several sources of TV power information have different numbers? Should the FCC try to contact these sites like wikipedia and tell them their information is wrong ....if it is incorrect? I think so.
I did see wikipedia is listing WNET 13 as 9.3 kw....must have been another site that had it listed as 3.5. I guess any NYC DTV station moving to the new WTC Building is going to lower their transmitter power? Any news on stations moving to the WTC? Another question is what are the rules concerning stations city of license compared to where they actually transmit. One example is Ch 40 in Atlantic City which is on Ch 36 now that transmits from near Avalon NJ. I think some NJ stations are transmitting from Waterford Works NJ but identify as Atlantic City / Philadelphia. Seems like a stretch of distance there. NJTOM mentioned WJLP reception problems in the actual city of license.
I am going to answer some of my own questions here and add a few more questions. I found out Scranton PA WBRE is on Ch 11 now....listed on wikipedia as 471m above average terrain and 30 kw power. WPIX is listed on wikipedia as 405m above average terrain and 7.5 kw power. So it looks like smaller cities have stifled tv in one of the biggest cities in the world. I don't see any listing for Ch 13 near NYC or Scranton but here is an excerpt from my friend and tv viewer in Plainfield NJ about reception.....he is using an amplified indoor antenna on the second floor of his house....
This doesn't answer the question as to why I was getting both WPIX and WABC for a couple of hours a day around 11 a.m. and no sign at any other time. AND THIS HAS STARTED AGAIN AFTER BEING ABSENT FOR ABOUT TWO WEEKS. And Sunday morning we had high winds. Overnight to 55, at the time when some signals like 11.2 were solid as a rock, we were still getting winds to 35 in gusts - so no way was this atmospherics. And, FYI, I understand they, the brain trust running this, put two Scranton-Wilkes-Barre stations on 11 and 13. What's that? 100 miles from NYC although it is on the other side of the Poconos and I suspect they are directional up and down the valley there. (That, by the way, was an idea kicking
This doesn't answer the question as to why I was getting both WPIX and WABC for a couple of hours a day around 11 a.m. and no sign at any other time. AND THIS HAS STARTED AGAIN AFTER BEING ABSENT FOR ABOUT TWO WEEKS. And Sunday morning we had high winds. Overnight to 55, at the time when some signals like 11.2 were solid as a rock, we were still getting winds to 35 in gusts - so no way was this atmospherics. And, FYI, I understand they, the brain trust running this, put two Scranton-Wilkes-Barre stations on 11 and 13. What's that? 100 miles from NYC although it is on the other side of the Poconos and I suspect they are directional up and down the valley there. (That, by the way, was an idea kicking
An "indoor amplified antenna" or "some small old ragged vhf/uhf antennas in the attic" are the REAL ISSUE here. Generally speaking, broadcast engineers do everything possible to deliver the best possible signal to their customers. Indoor antennas and/or attic antennas, regardless of price or design, are hampered by the building in which they operate, electrical interference, signal obstruction due to height, etc, etc. The problem rests with your friends reception devices and not the television stations/transmitters. Expecting indoor antennas to perform consistently while delivering all channels at more than 5-10 miles is unrealistic.
I would suggest they consider installing an outdoor antenna from a reputable manufacturer such as Winegard's HD 7694P or Channel Master's Ultra 60 or STEALTH antennas. The difference will be amazing!
Last edited:
WPIX is limited by WTNH-10, WWLP-11, WBRE-11, and WHYY-12. WNET is limited by WHYY-12, WPRI-13, and WYOU-13.
3 dB doesn't really make a big difference, no. And this is less than that. Signals can easily fluctuate by 3 dB during a 24-hour period just due to atmospheric variability. 3 dB could make an unstable signal stable, or turn no signal into an unstable signal, but I'm not sure it would make the difference between no signal and perfect. And if someone's not watching now because there's no signal, would they start watching an unstable one that became available? And, of course, both of those power differences are LESS than 3 dB.
WABC wasn't given preference; they got an agreement with other stations involved and got a waiver from the FCC. WPIX and WNET could have done the same, but they did not. On the UHF side, the power levels are pretty comparable in general.
UHF stations have to put a 48 dBu signal over their community of license, which actually isn't all that strong. For low-VHF, that number is, I believe, 35 dBu.
The FCC isn't responsible for what random users put on Wikipedia, nor should it be.
I agree with Prescott Joe.
- Trip
3 dB doesn't really make a big difference, no. And this is less than that. Signals can easily fluctuate by 3 dB during a 24-hour period just due to atmospheric variability. 3 dB could make an unstable signal stable, or turn no signal into an unstable signal, but I'm not sure it would make the difference between no signal and perfect. And if someone's not watching now because there's no signal, would they start watching an unstable one that became available? And, of course, both of those power differences are LESS than 3 dB.
WABC wasn't given preference; they got an agreement with other stations involved and got a waiver from the FCC. WPIX and WNET could have done the same, but they did not. On the UHF side, the power levels are pretty comparable in general.
UHF stations have to put a 48 dBu signal over their community of license, which actually isn't all that strong. For low-VHF, that number is, I believe, 35 dBu.
The FCC isn't responsible for what random users put on Wikipedia, nor should it be.
I agree with Prescott Joe.
- Trip
I agree an outdoor antenna would help. My friend is using an 8 bay UHF antenna and a 7 element VHF antenna in the attic with low noise high gain amps (over a hundred dollars each) with low loss coax. So it is not like he isn't trying his best. Since there are no other "regular" outdoor tv antennas on any roofs in his area he is concerned about complaints from the homeowners association but I think he should go with an rooftop antenna. It does seem WPIX and some other stations are content with low power output. I think VHF high band station output was 316kw no matter what the antenna HAAT was during the analog days. So 7.5 kw it a lot lower than 316 kw. I am surprised tv stations have to be concerned with other tv stations a channel above or below at 100 miles away. The people who live in apartments or rent a house that does not allow outdoor antennas are being denied tv reception unless they pay for cable tv or internet tv. It does not sound fair and I wish we lived in the analog era again. So I guess some tv stations do not care about their over the air reception and we can not turn back the clock to the analog days plus life is unfair. So I wonder what is the expected range of WPIX with an indoor amplified antenna? About 15 miles? Any news about NYC TV moving to the new WTC Bldg would be appreciated.
It certainly is interesting all the reception challenges faced by those in major radio and television markets. Here in the rural areas our challenges are quite different..... We face vast distances, sometimes in excess of 100 miles to the nearest translators or transmitters. Most of the time, those translators operate on a shoe string budget with ERP's less than ONE (1) kw. Those translators are perched high on the mountains were they take a beating from the weather. They frequently are damaged and fail, leaving areas without any service at all for long periods of time. Sometimes if you are fortunate, you can receive duplicate
translators which help provide "backup" during storms and outages. In addition to having a well engineered and properly installed outdoor antenna, there are several other factors to consider in television reception. Modern televisions vary widely and significantly in their
ability to capture signals and provide consistent, quality audio and video. Since most modern televisions do not provide their specifications, finding a good performer from a poor performer can be a trial and error exercise. A very good television will recognize entry of RF channels AND virtual channels. This is extremely important in Northern Arizona and elsewhere. In my zip code, 86301, I can receive most of the Phoenix stations from 4 or 5 different broadcast locations. For example, KTVK, virtual channel 3 in Phoenix is seen on RF Channel 11 on Mt Francis in Prescott, channel 38 on Mingus Mtn, Channel 25 in Flagstaff and channel 15 in Williams. On a good set, you can enter any one of those actual RF channels and have the set go directly to that RF channel. On a poor performing set, you can only enter the virtual channel. You have no idea which translator you are viewing.
Those poor performing sets rarely receive the weaker stations and when they do, they often tend to "error" and go berserk. In rural areas we consider ourselves lucky to have television and radio service available to us and appreciate the broadcasters that help connect us with the world.......
translators which help provide "backup" during storms and outages. In addition to having a well engineered and properly installed outdoor antenna, there are several other factors to consider in television reception. Modern televisions vary widely and significantly in their
ability to capture signals and provide consistent, quality audio and video. Since most modern televisions do not provide their specifications, finding a good performer from a poor performer can be a trial and error exercise. A very good television will recognize entry of RF channels AND virtual channels. This is extremely important in Northern Arizona and elsewhere. In my zip code, 86301, I can receive most of the Phoenix stations from 4 or 5 different broadcast locations. For example, KTVK, virtual channel 3 in Phoenix is seen on RF Channel 11 on Mt Francis in Prescott, channel 38 on Mingus Mtn, Channel 25 in Flagstaff and channel 15 in Williams. On a good set, you can enter any one of those actual RF channels and have the set go directly to that RF channel. On a poor performing set, you can only enter the virtual channel. You have no idea which translator you are viewing.
Those poor performing sets rarely receive the weaker stations and when they do, they often tend to "error" and go berserk. In rural areas we consider ourselves lucky to have television and radio service available to us and appreciate the broadcasters that help connect us with the world.......
Last edited:
- Status