One Media Seeks expedited action on rolling out ATSC 3.0

Yeah, let's obsolete all those brand new HDTV tuners (and those new 4K TV's too) that everyone bought. We need this new broadcast standard to replace the current one that gives us 1080P. That's right, we aren't getting any 1080P broadcasts and none of the broadcasters are planning to give us any. What makes anyone think that the broadcasters will jump on 4K broadcasts?
 
I'd like to see a proposed timeline with an explanation of how they intend to defy the laws of physics and human nature. I can't see any way that this effort could be coordinated chronologically even if there were a congressional mandate. If I recall correctly, the FCC demanded dual tuners in all TVs offered for retail two years before the ultimate transition. Larger TVs had to include DTV tuners in July 2005 and all TVs 13" and larger had to feature a DTV tuner by March 2007.

http://www.dtvprimer.com/timeline.html

The cost to consumers for this mandate isn't easy to pin down, but the DTV conversion cost for broadcasters was estimated to be around $10 Billion ($1-2 milllion per station). Once the DTV transition was completed, the broadcast tower refitting industry that allowed it to happen largely moved on to wireless. In a study commissioned by the NAB last year, they found that where there were 7 manufacturers of transmitters during the DTV transition, there are now three. There used to be 30 qualified antenna and line installation crews and now there are 13 and they figure another three could be assembled. All the while the wireless industry is going to be using some of the same kind of talent to begin to take advantage of their newly acquired bandwidth.

The mandated transition, based on 85% consumer conversion, didn't happen until June 12, 2009; 13 years after the bill was signed into law (more than 29 months after the original deadline). From what I can gather, there are still some NTSC translators and other low power transmitters in use today (with an indefinitely postponed shut-off).

At this point in time, the market penetration of ATSC 3.0 capable tuners in TVs of any size would appear to be zero and the FCC's desire is to complete the repack in 39 months after the end of the auctions (some in the industry predict 8-12 years). At that point the ATSC 3.0 conversion to the repacked TV band must presumably be done and simulcasting ended as there's clearly not enough room for simulcasting in the repack goal bandwidth.

Because the public has to keep up somehow, we need a timeline, thresholds and the metrics upon which those thresholds are based. It seems to me that this can only come from some entity calling the shots at the highest levels. This will be especially important to develop the economies of scale necessary to make both the broadcast and consumer equipment affordable.
 
I just hope their would be some option available for me to occasionally downscale. I occasionally like watching simulated 3D (and it actually is quite good on my TV depending on the source) and the only way I can do that is with 1080p resolution or lower. It won't work in 4K (at least on my TV).
 
I just hope their would be some option available for me to occasionally downscale. I occasionally like watching simulated 3D (and it actually is quite good on my TV depending on the source) and the only way I can do that is with 1080p resolution or lower.
I would hope that such obscure uses don't get in the way of technological progress for the other 323,874,000 of us that don't employ 3D simulators.
 
I would hope that such obscure uses don't get in the way of technological progress for the other 323,874,000 of us that don't employ 3D simulators.
I'm just saying LET US PICK the resolution by somehow pressing a few buttons on our TV remote. I still would use 4K the vast majority of the time anyways. Simulated 3D is just an occasional enjoyment. Like on Thanksgiving I like watching the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade in simulated 3D. I never said that we shouldn't advance in resolution in OTA.
 
The only way it could possibly work is with a rollout of conversion boxes similar to the DTV changeover. There is no way the entire OTA viewing population is going to run out and buy new TVs just to get an ATSC 3 tuner. They didn't last time and they won't this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: . Raine
I'm just saying LET US PICK the resolution by somehow pressing a few buttons on our TV remote.
Making rules that raise the cost of receiving equipment for everyone to serve only one or two in a million viewers is unimaginable to me.

If enough people find value, someone will make such a solution available, but don't hold your breath. The additional luminance range and color gamut will likely more than make up for anything a 3D simulator can add.
 
ugh, i take my answer back. After reading the article again, maybe things should stay like it is, heck especially since I'm getting 3 plus ota subchannels by Sept. 1. I will admit I dont know diddly squat about this repack crap and all this atsc 3.0 and really even with a higher education diploma I would'nt know how it works if YOU ALL explained it to me 1000 times.
 
Yeah, let's obsolete all those brand new HDTV tuners (and those new 4K TV's too) that everyone bought. We need this new broadcast standard to replace the current one that gives us 1080P. That's right, we aren't getting any 1080P broadcasts and none of the broadcasters are planning to give us any. What makes anyone think that the broadcasters will jump on 4K broadcasts?
I agree after reading the article again, man I feel dumb posting that response above. I just dont wanna lose what I got, what I got yesterday and will get ota from now till Oct. 1. As for the 4K I wont waste my money on it unless the tuner could get 150 miles lol....
 
As for the 4K I wont waste my money on it unless the tuner could get 150 miles lol....
The idea of getting 75 miles with digital is pretty outlandish unless you live in a very sparsely populated locale and have an entirely unencumbered LOS. The mystery of ATSC 3.0 is that there is practically nothing concrete offered to support whether it will offer better, worse or similar reception and how much variation there might be based on atmospheric conditions.

As for your situation, DX is pretty much impossible regardless of modulation scheme as you're being assaulted from all directions and the band is going to get a whole lot tighter with the repack.
 
The idea of getting 75 miles with digital is pretty outlandish unless you live in a very sparsely populated locale and have an entirely unencumbered LOS. The mystery of ATSC 3.0 is that there is practically nothing concrete offered to support whether it will offer better, worse or similar reception and how much variation there might be based on atmospheric conditions.

As for your situation, DX is pretty much impossible regardless of modulation scheme as you're being assaulted from all directions and the band is going to get a whole lot tighter with the repack.
Yeah I know. I cant wait till all this mess is over, also living in a smaller market with less channels I should be good despite the fact that i live in NBC land
 
Last edited:
I think it would be in the best interest of the consumer, if both ATSC standards were used until everyone could afford to have ATSC 3.0 full time, just like when we transitioned from the analog NTSC standard to the digital ATSC standard.
 
I think it would be in the best interest of the consumer, if both ATSC standards were used until everyone could afford to have ATSC 3.0 full time, just like when we transitioned from the analog NTSC standard to the digital ATSC standard.
That's another mystery of ATSC 3.0: When will they cut over?

With DTV, it was legislated to happen when the ability of those dependent on OTA to receive DTV was projected to have reached 85%. That's why there was a many month delay in implementation. Without a congressional mandate signed by the President, the FCC can't contribute much. The FCC has been mandated to press on with their repack and it doesn't seem to matter whether all the channels fit or not.

With ATSC 3.0, it will be looking down the barrel of the repack (in that it must happen before a large portion of the existing channels go away) on the one hand and what the marketplace can come up with in terms of getting capable receivers into the hands of those that may not be able to pay a lot on the other.
 
It makes me wonder if they can only have a certain number of digital subchannels, that they might have to do secondary affiliations on certain TV stations in the future...
 
It makes me wonder if they can only have a certain number of digital subchannels, that they might have to do secondary affiliations on certain TV stations in the future...
There is no contrived limit to the number of subchannels so that's not the issue. During the transition, there will almost certainly have to be some sharing on the ATSC 3.0 channels but since it is unlikely that UHD will be part of the transition, that shouldn't be a problem. We'll have to see what they come up with for a practical limit to the number of streams based on the real-world performance of the encoders.

Of course convincing consumers that they need to upgrade their tuners without dangling something tangible is going to be the biggest issue. Much of what ATSC 3.0 promises is for the benefit of the broadcasters. I'd be interested in what the proponents really think is going to lure us to change because most of the excitement thus far seems to center around the idea that ATSC 3.0 might just work to deliver what we have now with DTV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Justin Hill
There is no contrived limit to the number of subchannels so that's not the issue. During the transition, there will almost certainly have to be some sharing on the ATSC 3.0 channels but since it is unlikely that UHD will be part of the transition, that shouldn't be a problem. We'll have to see what they come up with for a practical limit to the number of streams based on the real-world performance of the encoders.

Of course convincing consumers that they need to upgrade their tuners without dangling something tangible is going to be the biggest issue. Much of what ATSC 3.0 promises is for the benefit of the broadcasters. I'd be interested in what the proponents really think is going to lure us to change because most of the excitement thus far seems to center around the idea that ATSC 3.0 might just work to deliver what we have now with DTV.

If that is the case, I'll definitely look forward to this new next generation technology as soon as they roll it out.
 
What aspect(s) of ATSC 3.0 are driving your desire to spend money on acquiring and integrating suitable equipment?
I'm interested in five of the newest features of ATSC 3.0:

Advanced Emergency Alerting

IP Transport

Immersive Audio

Ultra High-Definition TV

Robust Mobile Reception
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts