Could some channels be going to low VHF after the signal auction?

Discussion in 'Over the Air TV By RabbitEars.Info' started by miguelaqui, Jan 16, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Don't forget the E-skip seasons, in the summertime on rf ch. 2 to 6 it's almost like shortwave radio band.:)
     
    k.r. and Nascarken 91xg like this.
  2. *** WELCOME TO SATELLITEGUYS! ***
  3. I hope nothing goes to VHF Low nearby. I like having a small compact antenna for VHF
     
    Nascarken 91xg and rglore like this.
  4. Don't get use to it!! lol
     
  5. I remember what a PITA it was to get WBBM-DT in Chicago when they were on channel 3.
     
    Nascarken 91xg likes this.
  6. U should have called them turn up the power ?? So now with all of this new stuff mobile TV & so on how well do u think it's going to work ,and if so the power that they will use? Will it mess with are OTA,receive signals? And if so can we stop it,
     
  7. Power is limited to protect other stations using the same frequencies. Cranking it up to 11 isn't always an option.
    The crowding of the band will create problems. Mobile TV is a joke and I suspect it will remain so even after the next generation modulation standard (ATSC 3.0?) comes on the scene.
    That depends on your location; mostly how many channels are in your area and the surrounding markets. They'll now have to fit in a pool of channels that has been reduced significantly and, in many cases, forced down into VHF low.
    No. It is federal law.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  8. They were at the max allowable power. The issue was they were assigned channel 3 and back in the day what also used channel 3, cable boxes. When they went on the air all the cable TV folks down town lost their signals so they had to dial the power way back until Comcast could fix things. Even then once back to full power any little EMI in the are would cause break ups.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  9. All I can say is lobbyist forcing pay TV on people. What a bunch of horse manure.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  10. They see themselves as "educators" but the National Association of Broadcasters is in the top 20 or so of groups that spend millions to "teach" legislative bodies about how they'd like to see things go.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  11. Huh? When did OTA become "pay TV"?
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  12. Some people are saying that ATSC 3.0 is going to be "pay tv".
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  13. I meant as in the PIA for people to install large VHF antennas. Most will bite the bullet and sign up with a provider instead.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  14. Yeah, but installing an antenna (or two) is a one time cost. Hardly "pay tv" as you've always needed some sort of antenna to get OTA tv signals.
     
    Nascarken 91xg and jamesjimcie like this.
  15. i my be wrong. i read or heard that the polarization my change for some station so it works better with cell phones. a vertical antenna will be need.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  16. You forget today's society. Easy and lazy.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  17. Vertical alignment won't work well for conventional OTA viewers so I kinda doubt it will go that way. Wanting something so badly you would kill for it doesn't change the physics of radio antennas -- lower frequencies require increasingly larger antennas -- so I wouldn't expect many changes to the broadcast or receive antennas for TV band.

    That wireless phones need some manner of sizeable tuner/antenna pack at this stage seems like a deal breaker. The "phone" that they showed at one of the Las Vegas demos was a pretty large stack of stuff and again, Physics doesn't offer much latitude in sizing of antennas even if they figure out how to incorporate the rest of the electronics into the phone's chipset.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  18. Just came across this thread so it's a little late but I decided to respond all the same. That above statement is completely false. Current FCC estimates are that 22 million households (representing 56 million viewers) receive their TV via an antenna and the FCC also indicates that roughly 2 million more a year are installing antennas. OTA is very far from dead. What is withering on the vine is cable/satellite TV.

    Now, as for ATSC 3 becoming Pay-Per-View; seriously? Who's the "they" saying this? Is there anything on network TV that you would pay to see? Yeah, I didn't think so, me neither.
     
    comfortably_numb and jamesjimcie like this.
  19. Columbia Broadcasting Systems appears to believe that they can sell their programming. I'm pretty sure that services like Hulu and iTunes are making some serious dollars selling network TV that has already run.
     
  20. Going vertical would be a nightmare for both public safety and TV broadcasters as a lot of channels share these frequencies.
     
    jamesjimcie likes this.
  21. What TV channel frequencies are shared with public safety?

    I have a fuzzy recollection of someone wanting to turn over some low VHF band (or maybe even a TV channel) to public safety but I don't think it went anywhere. With the repack, I can't imagine that's still on the table.

    In low VHF, LFIRE4 is at 45.8800MHz (well below TV 2 at 54Mhz). In high VHF, VTAC17 is at 161.8500MHz (well below TV 7 at 174MHz). UHF band has UTAC34 at 453.8625MHz; well below TV 14 at 470MHz. Other emergency services frequencies also sit in the gaps between TV bands.
     
    jamesjimcie and Nascarken 91xg like this.
SatelliteGuys.US
Other Television Providers Over the Air TV By RabbitEars.Info