Which local TV station in your home market has an inadequate over-the-air signal? In the GSP market, I can pick up Digital OTA signals of WHNS-21, WNEH-38, and WMYA-40 mostly. But I can pick up WYFF-4 and WYCW-62 off and on. Once I get WGGS-16 OTA, and I can't get WSPA-7, WUGA-32, and WLOS-13 over the air via my indoor antenna. The latter is to me considered inadequate OTA signal, same story for WNEG 32 (now WUGA and non-commerical).
-
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
Which local TV station has an inadequate OTA signal in your market
- Thread starter spencerkarter85
- Start date
If you talk full-powered stations only, all 3 high-VHFs in Phoenix (KAET/8, KSAZ/10, & KPNX/12) have problems, at least on a part-time basis. I live 5 miles SE of the South Mountain towers and have problems with all 3 at various times of the day - usually in the afternoon, especially between March and September.
I live in an apartment and have a Terk antenna that has rabbit-ears for VHF but a good directional UHF antenna. Cheap $10 rabbit-ears are useless for all channels. Part of the problem is FM. The 2nd harmonics of FM stations fall in high VHF, and intermod/overload from 14 100 kW sticks is a killer, to the point where I have to put ferrites on all my PC speaker leads so I don't hear them, so maybe an FM trap will help.
Some of the UHF LPTV/Class A stations also have problems, but being low power, that's probably just the way it goes.
I live in an apartment and have a Terk antenna that has rabbit-ears for VHF but a good directional UHF antenna. Cheap $10 rabbit-ears are useless for all channels. Part of the problem is FM. The 2nd harmonics of FM stations fall in high VHF, and intermod/overload from 14 100 kW sticks is a killer, to the point where I have to put ferrites on all my PC speaker leads so I don't hear them, so maybe an FM trap will help.
Some of the UHF LPTV/Class A stations also have problems, but being low power, that's probably just the way it goes.
F
FreddyE1977
Guest
the only one I notice ongoing problems with is WPCB-40 the local Christian station.
Their transmitter is located substantially to the east of all the others.
Their transmitter is located substantially to the east of all the others.
WACH FOX 57, CW 47 in Columbia.
KeithE4 said:
We've discussed this several times before. 10.1 is such a train wreck I no longer even try watching it preferring the UHF sub 10.2 instead. 8 seems to have cleaned up its act but to be honest I don't watch it enough to notice and when I do it is almost always after dark. 12 is intermittent but again, I don't watch it very much. I have discovered that moving my indoor combo loop/ears just a few inches one way or the other makes a big difference in 12's reception (and tends to kill 10 at the same time).
Interestingly, I have no problems with the assortment of LPTV stations (although I seldom watch anything but 44.4).
landtuna said:
OTOH, I live between the two of you and have only a batwing antenna installed in the attic feeding two TVs, and I never have a problem with any of the full-power stations, whether VHF or UHF. Occasionally, I can't get the class A Spanish station on channel 35, but that's about it. I'm nearly dead center between Chandler and Ray, 56th and Kyrene.
Can I ask why this is on the Classic TV board? Anyways...
In Hartford/New Haven, WTNH-TV (ABC) channel 8 of New Haven is on VHF-high channel 10 for digital. WEDN-TV (PBS) channel 53 of Norwich is on VHF-high channel 9. However, not receiving WEDN-TV is fine, since WEDH-TV (PBS) channel 24 of Hartford, on UHF channel 45, is within 5 miles of my place, transmitting from Rattlesnake Mountain in Farmington, CT.
The problems I have are with Avon Mountain, on the Avon/West Hartford town line. That's home to Hartford stations WFSB-TV (CBS) channel 3 and WUVN-TV (UNI) channel 18. I never once received a clean signal of channel 18 in the analog days. The scenario was always the same back when WEDH-TV had their site there. They moved their analog channel 24 transmitter to Rattlesnake a year or so before the digital switch of 2009. The reception was like night and day.
Lastly, despite being about 35 air miles from Springfield, MA, I don't receive any hint of the digital signals from their market, whether it be Provin Mountain from Agawam (WWLP) or Mount Tom in Holyoke (WGGB and WGBY).
In Hartford/New Haven, WTNH-TV (ABC) channel 8 of New Haven is on VHF-high channel 10 for digital. WEDN-TV (PBS) channel 53 of Norwich is on VHF-high channel 9. However, not receiving WEDN-TV is fine, since WEDH-TV (PBS) channel 24 of Hartford, on UHF channel 45, is within 5 miles of my place, transmitting from Rattlesnake Mountain in Farmington, CT.
The problems I have are with Avon Mountain, on the Avon/West Hartford town line. That's home to Hartford stations WFSB-TV (CBS) channel 3 and WUVN-TV (UNI) channel 18. I never once received a clean signal of channel 18 in the analog days. The scenario was always the same back when WEDH-TV had their site there. They moved their analog channel 24 transmitter to Rattlesnake a year or so before the digital switch of 2009. The reception was like night and day.
Lastly, despite being about 35 air miles from Springfield, MA, I don't receive any hint of the digital signals from their market, whether it be Provin Mountain from Agawam (WWLP) or Mount Tom in Holyoke (WGGB and WGBY).
In Rochester, NY, all of them.
therealjm12 said:
Where you are, yes. For those outside the market: all five full-power Rochester signals broadcast from Pinnacle Hill, a 700-foot rise of land just a couple of miles southeast of downtown Rochester. It would be a great spot to put a dense signal over the entire core of the market, but for two things:
There's an active flight path (the approach to the Greater Rochester International Airport) running along Elmwood Avenue, just south of Pinnacle Hill, and that (plus local zoning) limits the height of towers on Pinnacle Hill severely. The towers up there are only 300 feet or so and can't go any higher. That means there's lots and lots and lots of RF down low for those of us who live near the towers. It also means the antennas on Pinnacle can't see over "the Ridge," the edge of the glacial escarpment that runs east to west along the northern part of the market, a few miles south of the Lake Ontario shore.
Anyone living between the Ridge (roughly the path of Ridge Road/Rt. 104) and the lake is shadowed from direct reception of the Pinnacle signals. This affects areas such as Webster, Irondequoit and northern Greece, up where jm12 is, and there's no easy way to resolve it. (With unlimited funds to throw at the problem, you might be able to build a system of DTS boosters, but that's beyond the budgets of any of the stations in town, I suspect.)
Oh, and there's a third problem, too: the need to coordinate DTV allocations with Canada forces several stations to directionalize, which means nulls to the north that further reduce signal in that "dead zone."
In Albany (or for me about 10 miles from the antenna farm) that would be ANALOG ch. 15 (Antenna TV) ... which also operates on digital 51.2 (RF 13) and MyTV, on 51.1 Our CBS afil (ch. 6) on 6.1! used to give us headaches until they duped it on ch. 45, it's still there, but power was raised on 6.1 and with the new Lava indoor antenna I bought, it's much better now. ;D
KeithE4 said:
The high VHF's are a challenge, but I've found ION (KPPX-51) to be unreliable too. They might get better if they take advantage of their outstanding permit to operate at a full 1 MW, but being on RF 51, they may have to move frequencies as well, which might cost too much for them.
In NW Indiana, WYIN Gary Indiana has always been a challenge to get. They were much worse to get in the analog days on 56, that their signal couldn't be picked up clearly in the COL. For digital, they're on 17, but some people still can not get them. For those like m, who live in Gary Indiana, low power station WHNW-LD on channel 18 (same as their analog channel) interferes with WYIN at times. For analog, even aiming an antenna at their tower in unincorporated Lake County Indiana (Lake Dalecarlia) didn't help at getting their station (at least it didn't for me). For digital, I need a second antenna aimed at Lake Dalecarlia in order to keep the station locked in, or it goes in & out. It's a shame that they don't earn enough money in CPB funding, & pledge dollars to locate their antenna in Chicago, like they wanted to. Despite WTTW & WYCC's objections to WYIN locating in Chicago, the FCC denied those stations request to block WYIN from locating in Chicago, as they meet the programming requirements for their license, & would have had no problem keeping interference to a minimum with WVTV Milwaukee on channel 18. But the cost to lease space on a Chicago skyscraper is what's keeping WYIN from locating their antenna to Chicago. As a result of that, their signal willl always be difficult for people in Chicago's northern suburbs & in the city of Chicago, & for people who don't aim their antenna toward Lake Dalecarlia in South Lake County Indiana (regardless of what part of WYIN's broadcast area).
WJYS used to also be difficult to get in the analog days on channel 62. Due to being short-spaced with channels 60 & 66, WJYS could not locate their antenna in Chicago, & had to settle for locating their antenna in Tinley Park, IL (station licensed to Hammond, IN). They had a translator placed on the Sears Tower to cover Chicago & the northern suburbs (until they were forced to place a null toward Milwaukee, WI for WISN's digital signal, when it was later converted to Class A status). At least for me, I couldn't get them, even after pointing my antenna toward Tinley Park, IL. Their digital signal is on channel 36, & that is broadcasting on top of the Sears Tower, while the studios are still located in Tinley Park, IL. They had to wait until WMVT turned off their analog signal, before they could remove most of the null toward Milwaukee, & cover the northern suburbs. So they no longer have problems with people getting their station, since locating on top of the Sears Tower.
For both of these stations, I have always used an outdoor antenna that was optimized for both VHF & UHF. I used a combo antenna before, but now use seaparate VHF & UHF antennas.
WJYS used to also be difficult to get in the analog days on channel 62. Due to being short-spaced with channels 60 & 66, WJYS could not locate their antenna in Chicago, & had to settle for locating their antenna in Tinley Park, IL (station licensed to Hammond, IN). They had a translator placed on the Sears Tower to cover Chicago & the northern suburbs (until they were forced to place a null toward Milwaukee, WI for WISN's digital signal, when it was later converted to Class A status). At least for me, I couldn't get them, even after pointing my antenna toward Tinley Park, IL. Their digital signal is on channel 36, & that is broadcasting on top of the Sears Tower, while the studios are still located in Tinley Park, IL. They had to wait until WMVT turned off their analog signal, before they could remove most of the null toward Milwaukee, & cover the northern suburbs. So they no longer have problems with people getting their station, since locating on top of the Sears Tower.
For both of these stations, I have always used an outdoor antenna that was optimized for both VHF & UHF. I used a combo antenna before, but now use seaparate VHF & UHF antennas.
In Louisville, we have great problems receiving WBNA-DT, RF Channel 8 over most of the core city. Their problems are many...a short tower that can't be raised due to its proximity to the approach zone of the main runways at Louisville International Airport (the world's busiest cargo airport at night due to the UPS Worldport air hub), low ERP, the inherent problems with propagation on high band VHF digital, and terrain shielding due to a ring of hills between the antenna site and the core city. A move to one of the city's established antenna farms is an absolute must to correct this.
Not to mention ownership that is clueless and doesn't see the need to operate the station properly. They need to get their RF act together and transmit a signal that covers their full city of license or face station license challenges in the future. The situation is entirely correctable, but the religious group that controls the station license sees it as a license only for fund raising and not as a mandate to serve the public by operating with the pattern filed with the FCC.
Not to mention ownership that is clueless and doesn't see the need to operate the station properly. They need to get their RF act together and transmit a signal that covers their full city of license or face station license challenges in the future. The situation is entirely correctable, but the religious group that controls the station license sees it as a license only for fund raising and not as a mandate to serve the public by operating with the pattern filed with the FCC.
B
Bob1370
Guest
You could argue that they ALL do in every market. In setting up initial standards for digital TV, the FCC repeated the same mistake they made in setting up analog TV between 1941 and 1952--designing a TV system on paper based on theoretical specs, assuming everyone would have an outdoor rooftop antenna (which only homeowners are allowed to install in the first place) and failing to allow enough ERP to cover an entire metro area.
They'll have to do once more what they did in 1952--allow stations to operate with more power, regardless of channel. A good guide would be to let stations ratchet their digital ERP back up to the visual power level that was allowed on the channel in question during analog days (100 kW for low-band VHF, 316 kW for high band VHF, 1000 to 5000 kW for UHF). That would assure saturation coverage within a market area while still avoiding objectionable interference with co-channel stations more than 170 miles away. It will put all stations on all bands from 54 to 600 mHz on a substantially equal footing--giving stations on Channels 2-6 enough power to beat the noise, on channels 7-13 enough range. and 14-40 (where TV will probably soon stop) enough signal footprint to match lower-band stations. (Adjacent channel interference is no longer an issue for digital TV like it was for analog signals--that allows stations to be spaced far closer together on the dial all the way from Channel 2 up to Channel 40.)
They'll have to do once more what they did in 1952--allow stations to operate with more power, regardless of channel. A good guide would be to let stations ratchet their digital ERP back up to the visual power level that was allowed on the channel in question during analog days (100 kW for low-band VHF, 316 kW for high band VHF, 1000 to 5000 kW for UHF). That would assure saturation coverage within a market area while still avoiding objectionable interference with co-channel stations more than 170 miles away. It will put all stations on all bands from 54 to 600 mHz on a substantially equal footing--giving stations on Channels 2-6 enough power to beat the noise, on channels 7-13 enough range. and 14-40 (where TV will probably soon stop) enough signal footprint to match lower-band stations. (Adjacent channel interference is no longer an issue for digital TV like it was for analog signals--that allows stations to be spaced far closer together on the dial all the way from Channel 2 up to Channel 40.)
Here in Nashville, I can seldom ever get MY-TV 30 (isn't really "my" TV if I can't get it, is it?) and its subchannel, The Cool TV. However I can receive their sister stations, CW 58 (and its country music video subchannel) and Fox 17.
firepoint525 said:
What part of town are you in?
My has a null to the west -- they're protecting the (now-defunct) analog signal of the Kentucky Educational TV station in Murray. They're the weakest of the Sinclair stations at my place in Pleasant View. (although if I orient the antenna properly I do receive them reliably)
Pegram. Feel free to let me know if I am missing anything! ;Dw9wi said:
The one station I could say locally that has an inconsistent signal is our former PBS affiliate, KCET. I have an amplified indoor antenna, and I have it turned towards Mount Wilson (the main TV/FM transmitter location in L.A., and about 25 miles NE of where I live)...I can pull in all the other local signals just fine, as far as the stations I care about watching. Hell, since they lost PBS, there isn't much I want to see with their current lineup of programs anyway.
Here in Dallas-Ft. Worth, they're all fine at my location some 40 miles north of the Cedar Hill antenna farm.
With one notable exception: KFWD/52 on RF-9.
They are short-spaced to co-channel KCEN in the Waco market, a scant 92 miles stick-to-stick. Whenever fog develops late at night, the interference is so bad that KFWD vanishes completely, particularly annoying since they have some good programs airing around midnight.
KFWD operates with 13 kW from 1791' HAAT. They have a CP (expiring this May) to increase to 55 kW but I'm not sure that would have been enough to combat the co-channel QRM. It will be "interesting" this summer when they reduce power to 546 watts via an STA while tower work is done on their stick.
Unlike others, I have no problem with high-VHF. In fact, from some 60 miles north of here, KXII/12 with 36 kW also at 1791' HAAT is solid 24/7, breaking up just a tad during nearby thunderstorms. Likewise, the other high-Vs from Cedar Hill (WFAA/8 with 55 kW at 1673' and KTVT/11 with 23 kW at 1707') are always reliable. Neither 8, 11 nor 12 have to contend with co-channel QRM.
With one notable exception: KFWD/52 on RF-9.
They are short-spaced to co-channel KCEN in the Waco market, a scant 92 miles stick-to-stick. Whenever fog develops late at night, the interference is so bad that KFWD vanishes completely, particularly annoying since they have some good programs airing around midnight.
KFWD operates with 13 kW from 1791' HAAT. They have a CP (expiring this May) to increase to 55 kW but I'm not sure that would have been enough to combat the co-channel QRM. It will be "interesting" this summer when they reduce power to 546 watts via an STA while tower work is done on their stick.
Unlike others, I have no problem with high-VHF. In fact, from some 60 miles north of here, KXII/12 with 36 kW also at 1791' HAAT is solid 24/7, breaking up just a tad during nearby thunderstorms. Likewise, the other high-Vs from Cedar Hill (WFAA/8 with 55 kW at 1673' and KTVT/11 with 23 kW at 1707') are always reliable. Neither 8, 11 nor 12 have to contend with co-channel QRM.
- Status