• 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

Round Two Channel Elections are OVER

Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

> The Texas and New Mexico Senators have already had a say in
> trying to extend analog as a lot of their constituants speak
> mainly Spanish and are likely to continue to watch Mexican
> stations

Yeah, I've heard about that. I'm sure it comes down to money more than anything else, though they use the "helping Spanish speakers" to justify it. Although allotments are being selected, digital TV still has its share of problems. Some stations will lose half or more of their coverage areas as a result of the transition. WAVE in Louisville comes to mind rather quickly as a station that will lose a large portion of its coverage as a result of the switch. There was a station out west (Reno, I believe) that estimates indicated would lose about 60% of its coverage area. It's not as bad as some predicted, but there are still major problems in some cases. I tend to think a lot of stations will be begging the FCC for more power.

> When I lived in the Florida Keys about once a week I could
> pull in Havana with TV rabbit ears. The funny things was the
> baby monitor use to pull in Radio Havana all the time.

The only surprising thing there is that you couldn't pick up Havana TV more often!
 
Mexican DTV

> The last word I've seen about Mexico is that it could be
> 2025 before analog goes away across the country, but that's
> not holding up coordination issues along the border. At
> least one DTV operation (XETV-DT 23) is on the air in
> Tijuana, and San Diego's mostly up at full power, too. I
> don't know as much about the situation along the rest of the
> border.
>

I think XETV-DT is the only Mexican DTV station along the border. The Mexican gov't site shows no DTV as of 6/30/05. Fred Cantú's site shows XETV-HDTV 23 but no others in border states at this time. XHUPN 49 Tecate/San Diego has on their website that they plan to have HDTV up on ch. 53 soon. Both are English-language stations with American network programming.

Mexican coordination hasn't been much of a problem, if at all. Almost all of Phoenix's and Tucson's DTV stations are on and I think Yuma/El Centro is as well.
 
Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

> Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will!), but
> another issue, as I understand it, with Canada and Mexico is
> that we will be finding a new use for spectrum above either
> channel 50 or 51. Our government has to get permission from
> them to use those frequencies for something other than TV
> within the 200 miles, or whatever the exact distance is,
> from their border. Mexico, especially, doesn't seem all too
> receptive to us using that spectrum for something else.
>

I don't believe that Mexico has posed any problem there either. Aloha Partners is planning on rolling out wireless broadband service in Phoenix and Tucson on the frequencies used by channels 54 and 59. They haven't rolled out yet in Phoenix, as they demanded that an LPTV station on ch. 53 clear out by 9/15/05 - that station is still running. They were held up in Tucson, however, as full-service KWBA broadcasts on ch. 58 and the FCC wouldn't let them roll out in Tucson on ch. 59, IIRC.
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> There's a bit of a misconception here. It's actually NOT
> preferable, all things being equal, for a station to keep
> its analog frequency after the conversion, because the FCC
> is giving protection priority to stations' DTV allotments.
>
> Here's an example that may help make more sense of this:
>
> WTTW Chicago has analog 11. WLFI Lafayette IN is analog 18
> and was allotted 11 for its DTV. It's only 116 miles from
> WTTW to WLFI, which makes for some pretty bad short-spacing
> between WLFI-DT and WTTW analog.
>
> The FCC's policy in this case is to give WLFI-DT protected
> status on 11 once the transition is complete, allowing WLFI
> to go full power, nondirectional. Anything that operates on
> 11 in Chicago after the transition has to protect the
> WLFI-DT signal, so you can see now why WTTW is eager to keep
> its current DTV allocation on 47. (There are similar, if not
> quite as dramatic, situations in most other crowded markets
> around the country.)
>
> Another reason why it's desirable for many stations to
> abandon their current analog channel for their DTV channel
> is simply that they've already spent the money to build out
> DTV on the new channel. Why change that? It won't matter to
> viewers - remember, they don't know what the actual RF
> channel being used is, just what it remaps to on their
> tuners.
>
> One more note on Chicago: as undesirable as 11 may turn out
> to be, it's still preferable to WBBM's analog 2/DTV 3
> assignments, which is why WBBM entered into a negotiated
> arrangement with WTTW that will find WBBM-DT moving to 11
> when the transition is over. It will presumably have to use
> a directional antenna to provide the needed protection to
> WLFI-DT.
>

Thanks for the clarification on all this. I didn't realize that priority would be given to those stations that are already on their digital signals. Also didn't realize that there seems to be a higher probability of co-channel interference with dtv vs analog.

So...how do you think some of these stations will brand themselves once the signal is flipped for full-power dtv? Obviously stations with an (old) analog 2 - 13 allocation will likely continue to brand themselves as such (ie: KTRK-13 will still be referred to on air as "ABC-13," but in reality is remapping from digital channel 32; WCBS-2 will still be "CBS-2" even though it may be mapping from dtv channel 7), since PSIP makes it possible to retain their original identification. But would a station, such as the aforementioned WLFI-18 take the opportunity to rebrand on-air as "WLFI-Channel 11" to match thier dtv signal and adjust their PSIP output accordingly?

In the mind of a lot of viewers, the 2 - 13 range (on analog) is considered a better frequency than 14 and below (whether it truly is or not). Why else would Fox have moved so aggressively to get up on the VHF band in the early-to-mid 90s? I think a lot of stations that were analog UHF and are/were allocated dtv frequencies on 7 - 13 will simply rebrand to that new allocation (unless another channel in the market already claims the branding because they were on that analog frequency) so as to appear "stronger/better" to the average viewer.

Don't really know if I want/expect an answer to this, just mind mindless ramblings.
 
Direct answer

> >
> > Little Rock, AR
> > KETS-2/5 (PBS) Elects 7/10
> >
> > Detroit, MI
> > WJBK-2/58 (Fox) Elects 7/20
> >
> > New York, NY
> > WCBS-2/56 (CBS) Elects 33/7
> >
> > Tulsa, OK
> > KJRH-2/56 (NBC) Elects 8/38
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > - Trip
>
> I don't quite understand what the election is about, either.
> I think I've read on this board before that because of
> spacing on the spectrum and/or the way dtv works, a lot of
> stations are vacating their VHF channel assignments for the
> stronger (?) digital UHF band.
>
> Anyway, in the markets listed above, wouldn't KATV-7-Little
> Rock, WXYZ-7-Detroit, WABC-7-New York and KTUL-8-Tulsa be
> given priority choice of their existing channel ahead of
> these elections? Or have these stations already made their
> dtv channel allocation preference made?
>

The stations currently on those channels have already indicated in the first round that they intend to vacate those channels at the end of the DTV transition, freeing up the channels for use by the second round electors.

KATV chose 22 for their DTV, freeing up 7.
WXYZ chose 41, freeing up 7.
WABC chose 45 after a conflict on 7; the choice hasn't yet been approved. This is the contingent selection for WCBS anyway; they most likely will be approved on their primary choice, 33.
KTUL chose 10, freeing up 8.

Stations are vacating low-VHF (chs. 2-6) due to interference problems. Stations that vacate high-VHF do so usually because of finances or because their high-VHF now interferes with another station.
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> So...how do you think some of these stations will brand
> themselves once the signal is flipped for full-power dtv?
> Obviously stations with an (old) analog 2 - 13 allocation
> will likely continue to brand themselves as such (ie:
> KTRK-13 will still be referred to on air as "ABC-13," but in
> reality is remapping from digital channel 32; WCBS-2 will
> still be "CBS-2" even though it may be mapping from dtv
> channel 7), since PSIP makes it possible to retain their
> original identification. But would a station, such as the
> aforementioned WLFI-18 take the opportunity to rebrand
> on-air as "WLFI-Channel 11" to match thier dtv signal and
> adjust their PSIP output accordingly?

There won't be any branding issues. Stations are supposed to identify by their old analog channel, so WLFI will continue to brand themselves as channel 18, even though they're actually broadcasting on channel 11. The reason is that the actual channel will be unknown to the viewer. If you punch 1-8 on your remote in that market, you will get WLFI. If you punch 1-1, you may get WTTW, but more likely, you'll get nothing. (WTTW is probably out of range.)

> In the mind of a lot of viewers, the 2 - 13 range (on
> analog) is considered a better frequency than 14 and below
> (whether it truly is or not). Why else would Fox have moved
> so aggressively to get up on the VHF band in the
> early-to-mid 90s? I think a lot of stations that were
> analog UHF and are/were allocated dtv frequencies on 7 - 13
> will simply rebrand to that new allocation (unless another
> channel in the market already claims the branding because
> they were on that analog frequency) so as to appear
> "stronger/better" to the average viewer.

A lot has changed since the early '90s. UHF is no longer considered the stigma it used to be. And again, even though a station may be broadcasting on a VHF frequency, it is required to map itself to the old analog channel. Likely, it will keep the old UHF branding, unless it does away with channel numbers in its branding altogether, as some stations have done.
 
Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

> The last word I've seen about Mexico is that it could be
> 2025 before analog goes away across the country, but that's
> not holding up coordination issues along the border. At
> least one DTV operation (XETV-DT 23) is on the air in
> Tijuana, and San Diego's mostly up at full power, too. I
> don't know as much about the situation along the rest of the
> border.

The Mexican government released a DTV plan earlier this year which called for the phasein of digital operation by 2015. It didn't have any "drop-dead" date for analog. Disclaimer: my Spanish isn't all that good, I don't *guarantee* I understood the document properly!

To my knowledge XETV-DT is the only DTV station in regular operation in Mexico, but there have been test and demonstration stations elsewhere.

I'm not aware of any "drop-dead" date for analog in Canada either.
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> There won't be any branding issues. Stations are supposed
> to identify by their old analog channel, so WLFI will
> continue to brand themselves as channel 18, even though
> they're actually broadcasting on channel 11. The reason is
> that the actual channel will be unknown to the viewer. If
> you punch 1-8 on your remote in that market, you will get
> WLFI. If you punch 1-1, you may get WTTW, but more likely,
> you'll get nothing. (WTTW is probably out of range.)

Actually, that's not true, at least with the DTV box I played with. For instance, channel 4 here is on 48 for DTV. I could access the channel by punching in either "4" or "48".

I'm not sure what would happen if you had a real channel and a virtual channel using the same numbers.
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> I'm not sure what would happen if you had a real channel and
> a virtual channel using the same numbers.
>
I know in some places in Delaware they are simply able to get TWO of the same channel number. It depends on your tuner and it's sophistication.

In Delaware, some people can pull in WCBS-TV (Virtual)Channel 2 and WMAR-TV (Virutual) Channel 2 from Baltimore. The tuner will give them TWO channel 2s, even though neither WCBS or WMAR broadcasts on Channel 2. A newer tuner will allow TWO virtual channel 2s. The older ones may just be unable to cope and get nothing.

I have also read, depending on the tuner, that if you simply punch in numbers you will get ONE virtual Channel 2 but if you allow the tuner to auto-complete, it will map BOTH the virtual Channel 2s. So a lot I would say depends on the tuner.

I kind of forgot going back as far as 1985 I had a TV come with a "FINE TUNER" for VHF. When is the last time you saw any TV with a FINE tuner.<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> > One more note on Chicago: as undesirable as 11 may turn
> out
> > to be, it's still preferable to WBBM's analog 2/DTV 3
> > assignments, which is why WBBM entered into a negotiated
> > arrangement with WTTW that will find WBBM-DT moving to 11
> > when the transition is over. It will presumably have to
> use
> > a directional antenna to provide the needed protection to
> > WLFI-DT.
>
> I'm not convinced that it will be THAT much better. WMSN-DT
> in Madison is also on 11 (changed their election to resolve
> a conflict) and IIRC that's less than 100 miles from
> Chicago. That means HUGE null to the northwest for WBBM.
>
> - Trip
>
I agree and isn't there another Channel 11 in Michigan. I know people think that is far away, but if DTV is anything like Analog when I lived in Arlington Heights (about 10 miles NW of O'Hare Airport, which is on the NW side of Chicago) on the second floor; in the summer; I routinely and VERY strongly got WZZM Channel 13 and WOOD Channel 8 from Grand Rapids as clear as any Chicago station. Weird I only got it in the summer.

I reckon this will be like the days of the early 50s, once the stations are up and running they will have to see how the interference ACTUALLY comes up, when stations run full power.
 
Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

Thanks man!

Hey, but since I am truly just a "Listener and viewer", there are a few terms I didn't understand. But I think I got the jist (sp?) of things.

But I do have one question.


> In Fall 2004, in the first round election, stations
> submitted their choice of which channel they wanted. In
> Houston KPRC 2/DT35 elected ch. 35, while KHOU 11/DT31
> elected 11. In Dallas, KDFW 4/DT35 elected ch. 35, while
> WFAA 8/DT9 elected 8. Stations could also release their
> assigned DTV channel and elect to participate in the second
> round. KAJB Calipatria CA did that.

Wait, so does this mean that FOX 4 will not exist, and it will be FOX 35 in 2009? Or is the 35 just for their DTV broadcast?

Thanks.

CTL<P ID="signature">______________
"Welcome to radio-info.com...where we hate everything!!!!! You people are radio's equivalent to the two old guys in the balcony on the Muppet show!"
~FoReal?</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> > There won't be any branding issues. Stations are supposed
>
> > to identify by their old analog channel, so WLFI will
> > continue to brand themselves as channel 18, even though
> > they're actually broadcasting on channel 11. The reason
> is
> > that the actual channel will be unknown to the viewer. If
>
> > you punch 1-8 on your remote in that market, you will get
> > WLFI. If you punch 1-1, you may get WTTW, but more
> likely,
> > you'll get nothing. (WTTW is probably out of range.)
>
> Actually, that's not true, at least with the DTV box I
> played with. For instance, channel 4 here is on 48 for DTV.
> I could access the channel by punching in either "4" or
> "48".
>
> I'm not sure what would happen if you had a real channel and
> a virtual channel using the same numbers.
>


I stand corrected.
 
Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

> Thanks man!
>
> Hey, but since I am truly just a "Listener and viewer",
> there are a few terms I didn't understand. But I think I
> got the jist (sp?) of things.
>
> But I do have one question.
>
>
> > In Fall 2004, in the first round election, stations
> > submitted their choice of which channel they wanted. In
> > Houston KPRC 2/DT35 elected ch. 35, while KHOU 11/DT31
> > elected 11. In Dallas, KDFW 4/DT35 elected ch. 35, while
> > WFAA 8/DT9 elected 8. Stations could also release their
> > assigned DTV channel and elect to participate in the
> second
> > round. KAJB Calipatria CA did that.
>
> Wait, so does this mean that FOX 4 will not exist, and it
> will be FOX 35 in 2009? Or is the 35 just for their DTV
> broadcast?
>
> Thanks.
>
> CTL
>
Thanks to PSIP technology, WDFW-DT's Channel 35 signal can be, and probably is, remapped to Channel 4 on most OTA DTV tuners within range of the signal, and so KDFW can remain "Fox 4" long after it says goodbye to use of the official RF Channel 4.<P ID="signature">______________
This is AirwaveSurfer, reminding you that portions of this post have been prerecorded.</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> > > There won't be any branding issues. Stations are
> supposed
> >
> > > to identify by their old analog channel, so WLFI will
> > > continue to brand themselves as channel 18, even though
> > > they're actually broadcasting on channel 11. The reason
>
> > is
> > > that the actual channel will be unknown to the viewer.
> If
> >
> > > you punch 1-8 on your remote in that market, you will
> get
> > > WLFI. If you punch 1-1, you may get WTTW, but more
> > likely,
> > > you'll get nothing. (WTTW is probably out of range.)
> >
> > Actually, that's not true, at least with the DTV box I
> > played with. For instance, channel 4 here is on 48 for
> DTV.
> > I could access the channel by punching in either "4" or
> > "48".
> >
> > I'm not sure what would happen if you had a real channel
> and
> > a virtual channel using the same numbers.
> >
>
>
> I stand corrected.
>
It's my understanding that if Station A keeps its original DTV channel and remaps to its analog channel, and later a DTV Station B launches on Station A's old analog channel, Station B would actually have to remap to Station A's digital channel. That being said, what I've read in another thread is that the ATSC/FCC PSIP guidelines allow a station that doesn't move its DTV signal to its analog channel to map to either the analog channel or the digital one.

In Lafayette, Indiana, for instance, if WLFI keeps remapping its Channel 11 DTV signal to Channel 18 and, sometime after the transition, Lafayette gets a new DTV station on 18, the upstart would need to remap to 11. Thus, WLFI would be facing a huge dilemma: should it retain its traditional branding and still remap to 18, or should it start mapping to 11 so that its new rival cannot "co-opt" a Channel 11 brand identity?<P ID="signature">______________
This is AirwaveSurfer, reminding you that portions of this post have been prerecorded.</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> > One more note on Chicago: as undesirable as 11 may turn
> out
> > to be, it's still preferable to WBBM's analog 2/DTV 3
> > assignments, which is why WBBM entered into a negotiated
> > arrangement with WTTW that will find WBBM-DT moving to 11
> > when the transition is over. It will presumably have to
> use
> > a directional antenna to provide the needed protection to
> > WLFI-DT.
>
> I'm not convinced that it will be THAT much better. WMSN-DT
> in Madison is also on 11 (changed their election to resolve
> a conflict) and IIRC that's less than 100 miles from
> Chicago. That means HUGE null to the northwest for WBBM.
>
> - Trip
>
According to the FCC's TV Query database (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html), WBBM-DT will be nondirectional on 11, so there will be no nulls per se, but its ERP will be only 1.18 kW. Therefore, WLFI-DT, WMSN-DT, and probably also the Channel 10 DT signal of WWTO in La Salle, Illinois should all get adequate protection from a Channel 11 WBBM-DT without the Chicago station needing to spring for a directional antenna (which it does use right now on 3).<P ID="signature">______________
This is AirwaveSurfer, reminding you that portions of this post have been prerecorded.</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> According to the FCC's TV Query database
> (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html), WBBM-DT will be
> nondirectional on 11, so there will be no nulls per se, but
> its ERP will be only 1.18 kW. Therefore, WLFI-DT, WMSN-DT,
> and probably also the Channel 10 DT signal of WWTO in La
> Salle, Illinois should all get adequate protection from a
> Channel 11 WBBM-DT without the Chicago station needing to
> spring for a directional antenna (which it does use right
> now on 3).

Recall that on channel 3 right now, WBBM-DT is doing 4.4 kW. They'll be moving UP the band and DROPPING power (recall that the higher you go the more power you need). Will coverage get better or worse?

- Trip<P ID="signature">______________
Visit my website, www.rabbitears.info! It's eventually going to be your one resource for television info! Digital television, histories, and technical information for the entire USA from one source!</P>
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> I agree and isn't there another Channel 11 in Michigan.

Yes, actually, now that you mention it. WGVU-DT 11 in Grand Rapids.

- Trip
<P ID="signature">______________
Visit my website, www.rabbitears.info! It's eventually going to be your one resource for television info! Digital television, histories, and technical information for the entire USA from one source!</P>
 
> What's going on??
> What are these "elections"?
> and why is my market, Dallas, not on the list?
>
AFAIK, Chris, the only D/FW DMA station that would have had to make a Round Two election was KLDT, whose current analog and digital channels (55 and 54, respectively) are both in the out-of-core part of the UHF band. Fortunately for KLDT, the FCC approved its Negotiated Channel Election Arrangement with KXTX back in Round One, so KLDT-DT is now set to replace the KXTX analog signal on Channel 39 after the transition and KXTX-DT will stay on Channel 40.<P ID="signature">______________
This is AirwaveSurfer, reminding you that portions of this post have been prerecorded.</P>
 
Re: Elections clarified for both Tim and Chris (long post)

> Thanks man!
>
> Hey, but since I am truly just a "Listener and viewer",
> there are a few terms I didn't understand. But I think I
> got the jist (sp?) of things.
>
> But I do have one question.
>
>
> > In Fall 2004, in the first round election, stations
> > submitted their choice of which channel they wanted. In
> > Houston KPRC 2/DT35 elected ch. 35, while KHOU 11/DT31
> > elected 11. In Dallas, KDFW 4/DT35 elected ch. 35, while
> > WFAA 8/DT9 elected 8. Stations could also release their
> > assigned DTV channel and elect to participate in the
> second
> > round. KAJB Calipatria CA did that.
>
> Wait, so does this mean that FOX 4 will not exist, and it
> will be FOX 35 in 2009? Or is the 35 just for their DTV
> broadcast?
>
> Thanks.
>
> CTL
>

American analog full-service stations will cease to exist after 4/7/09 if the Senate rules are adopted, or 12/31/08, if the House rules are, or possibly some date in between if there is a compromise.

That means that KDFW will only have one channel. It will broadcast on channel 35's frequency range and it will be digital only. However, you will access the signal on your TV from channel 4, just as you do now. Channel 4 is called the "virtual channel" and your TV will automatically know when you tune to channel 4 that it should pick up the signal on 35. If they wish, they can still brand as FOX 4 and most people won't know any different. Their DTV channels will be listed as 4.1, 4.2, etc., although I don't know how television guides plan to list them.

It sounds a little confusing, but the truth is, with few exceptions, it will be completely transparent to most people. Joe Sixpack will continue to get KDFW on channel 4, just as he does now. He may wonder why he needs a converter box all of a sudden, but probably won't care too much if the government is paying most of the cost. OK, he might grumble about the extra $10 he has to lay out (assuming the tentative subsidy doesn't change). But if the gov't plays their cards right, they'll blitz the airwaves with "this is for the first responders - our police and fire department and ambulance drivers", and - aw shucks! - who can turn them down? - we can afford $10 extra for our first responders.
 
Re: A further clarification on one point

> It's my understanding that if Station A keeps its original
> DTV channel and remaps to its analog channel, and later a
> DTV Station B launches on Station A's old analog channel,
> Station B would actually have to remap to Station A's
> digital channel. That being said, what I've read in another
> thread is that the ATSC/FCC PSIP guidelines allow a station
> that doesn't move its DTV signal to its analog channel to
> map to either the analog channel or the digital one.

Nope. FCC rules now say that stations have to identify with their old analog channel. It's in another thread on this board, as a response to my asking pretty much the same thing.

Start reading the thread from <a target="_blank" href=http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=575593&Board=tv-usa>here</a> on down.

> In Lafayette, Indiana, for instance, if WLFI keeps remapping
> its Channel 11 DTV signal to Channel 18 and, sometime after
> the transition, Lafayette gets a new DTV station on 18, the
> upstart would need to remap to 11. Thus, WLFI would be
> facing a huge dilemma: should it retain its traditional
> branding and still remap to 18, or should it start mapping
> to 11 so that its new rival cannot "co-opt" a Channel 11
> brand identity?

Simply put, under the new FCC rules, WLFI is, was, and will always be, "Channel 18". So they do not have the "dilemma" you envision.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom