Like a Homer Simpson fool, I read the article. It mentioned, as an aside, that the equipment that is being used to serve up DTV is Next-Gen compliant. It isn't being used for ATSC 3.0.read the article
It also doesn't explain why a more powerful signal requires a "larger antenna".What the article doesn't say is what they are increasing their power to?
What the article doesn't say is what they are increasing their power to?
It also doesn't explain why a more powerful signal requires a "larger antenna".
As noted in the other thread, I moved a collection of non-ATSC 3.0 posts to this thread.
300 kW. From 142 kW (on a higher channel).
It's not a technical blog post, as far as I can tell, and so is vague since the presumed audience wouldn't understand it anyway. But their old antenna was a mid-power model running at 142 kW ERP. The new one is a high-power model at 300 kW ERP.
- Trip
It also features a vertical component -- how common is that?But their old antenna was a mid-power model running at 142 kW ERP. The new one is a high-power model at 300 kW ERP.
In order to double the signal; at your location the station would have to quadruple their wattage, you may see an increase of about 1.4X in signal strength assuming all other factors stay the same.
If they also dropped down in RF frequency, the ability to cover more ground comes with that.I said “doubled their power.” Which they did, no?
Actually, the article uses the phrase "one or more".On edit: Wikipedia seems to say one subchannel must go.
Woof!All the subchannels will almost certainly move to WTTG, as happened in Chicago and Charlotte.
Woof!
Two 720 and six SD. Must be some pretty awesome multiplexing hardware (or a really awful viewing experience).
I suspect that it is a combination of things:This just proves some care zero about OTA viewers and quality.
The Portland market is probably a poor example as it covers a lot of territory with a significant number of translators. The market is perhaps 250 miles across at its widest point and covers southwest Washington and a small oddly-placed part of Idaho.
Due to two mountain ranges (Cascade Range and Coast Range), more power out of the Portland-area towers gets you mostly just a higher electricity bill.
I'm thinking of the more common situation where stations are packed in much tighter or where one market has most of the frequencies tied up (like NYC or the SoCal situation).
The move towards directional arrays surely isn't going to be appreciated by those who prefer OOM TV stations to their own.