WXXA-DT Objections Refused

[TXengineer]

WABC and WWNY's objections to the FCC's decision to move WXXA-DT from 4 to 7 were denied by the FCC saying that the 2% interference complaints are within the guidlines of the DTV transition.

So WXXA-DT keeps on plugging to diplex their DTV signal with WNYT's on the DTV tower in New Scotland.

 

[HughMorris]

> WABC and WWNY's objections to the FCC's decision to move
> WXXA-DT from 4 to 7 were denied by the FCC saying that the
> 2% interference complaints are within the guidelines of the
> DTV transition.
>
> So WXXA-DT keeps on plugging to diplex their DTV signal with
> WNYT's on the DTV tower in New Scotland.
>

I could understand objections from WKBW - 7 or WIVB - 4 from Buffalo, but from NYC...

The FCC was made a wise determinatin when they ignored the objections of less than two percent; they are trivial.

 

[dhett]

> I could understand objections from WKBW - 7 or WIVB - 4 from
> Buffalo, but from NYC...

Buffalo is almost 300 mi. from Albany - they wouldn't have anything to object to.

NYC (WABC) is only 150 mi. from Albany; Watertown (WWNY) isn't much farther.

You might be confusing WXXA Albany with WXXI Rochester?

 

[KML0224]

Actually, New York City is only 138 miles from Albany, based on straight line distance. Watertown is 140 miles from Albany, based on straight line distance.

 

[HughMorris]

> > I could understand objections from WKBW - 7 or WIVB - 4
> from
> > Buffalo, but from NYC...
>
> Buffalo is almost 300 mi. from Albany - they wouldn't have
> anything to object to.
>
> NYC (WABC) is only 150 mi. from Albany; Watertown (WWNY)
> isn't much farther.
>
> You might be confusing WXXA Albany with WXXI Rochester?
>
You are correct, many thanks for the clarification.
I am not too familiar with the geography of New York State.

 

[moedog1]

> Actually, New York City is only 138 miles from Albany, based
> on straight line distance. Watertown is 140 miles from
> Albany, based on straight line distance.
>
This will cause WABC big problems, both during the transition and after TV goes to all DT. For now, WABC/7 will have to contend with interferrence from WXXA-DT. Later WABC-DT will have to contend with interferrence from the same source since they have elected to return to 7 after the transition. The NYC and Albany markets are immediately adjacent, so there is no "buffer zone" which would allow for an area of interference that would not directly effect reception of both stations within their DMAs. Maybe WABC should reconsider, and request a new UHF DT allocation. Of course, WXXA should, by all rights be the one that goes to UHF for DT, but of course, it is a SINclair station, so that explains that.

 

[Mediabrat]

> Of
> course, WXXA should, by all rights be the one that goes to
> UHF for DT, but of course, it is a SINclair station, so that
> explains that.

Actually, WXXA is Clear Channel. Depending on how you look at things, that could be even worse.

 

[TXengineer]

> Actually, WXXA is Clear Channel. Depending on how you look
> at things, that could be even worse.

It's not. Believe me.

Clear Channel will actually buy tubes for your transmitter when they are dying, not hire some outsider to help "patch around things" to keep the station on the air for YEARS at a time...

 

[BerkSHireTim]

>
> Clear Channel will actually buy tubes for your transmitter
> when they are dying, not hire some outsider to help "patch
> around things" to keep the station on the air for YEARS at a
> time...
> So, poor sick and hobbling WGGB is never gonna get new hardware, huh? A Shame! If they were running at full power, I'd actually be watching them here in Adams. It would be nice to be able to keep up with the native neighborhood, so to speak. What I can pull in here now from them isn't really what one would consider watchable.