Uplink Activity For The week of 06-06-06

goaliebob99

SatelliteGuys Master
Original poster
Supporting Founder
Aug 5, 2004
14,486
520
-.-. .... .. -.-. .- --. ---
Welcome to Team Summit week... and The day of the devil :D... Go see the OMEN LOL! Here is your uplink activity for today :)

Echostar 110

8047 (WBXH) Added to TP Frequency: 12.574 GHz TP 25

Now available for Puerto Rico locals

7780 WVXF
7789 WVGN
 
Last edited:
Now Avaib. to all subs with the approprate packages

7780 WVXF
7789 WVGN

Looks like our friends in PR get their "local" CBS & NBC. They have CBS & NBC from NY and these are just translator stations with "local" commercials.
 
Last edited:
Geez...my local NBC (where I used to work) was a "sister" station of KPNX- we had our own commercials AND local news. But DISH/DirecTV refused to carry us because we were "too similar"
 
M Sparks
The rule is they only have to carry one UNLESS they are licensed in 2 different states. Duluth, MN was able to weasel both of their NBC stations in via that rule.

KBJR (mothership) and KRII (satellite station) are the same except for an occasional commercial and a 5 minute news segment (KRII handles the "Iron Range" part of MN where KBJR does Duluth and Wisconsin). They got both added because KBJR is licensed to Superior, WI (even though station, transmitter, everything is in Duluth, MN) and KRII is licensed to Chisholm, MN.
Same programming

But as for PR I don't think the rules apply. New customers cant get NY anymore (expct for Fox & PBS) as they've been adding the stations. I do have to back up a little bit. WVXF doesn't carry NY news (they have syndicated programming). WVGN & WPRU (ABC) do carry the NY news
 
Now Avaib. to all subs with the approprate packages

7780 WVXF
7789 WVGN

Bob
I'd change this to "Now availble to Puerto Rico locals"..all subs people might think they should get them chanels :)
 
37...weird

Thats the channel number that no OTA chanels can have (that number is restricted to space or something)....but hey it works :)
 
INNNNteresting. I didn't know that channel 37 was restricted in the US. I did an FCC and CRTC search and found only two Mexican border channels in PUERTO PENASCO and CIUDAD GUERRERO. But when I checked in the Mexican database I found that these are ony channel allotments and not licensed TV stations.

This channel is not used anywhere in North America as far as I can tell.
 
TNGTony said:
INNNNteresting. I didn't know that channel 37 was restricted in the US. I did an FCC and CRTC search and found only two Mexican border channels in PUERTO PENASCO and CIUDAD GUERRERO. But when I checked in the Mexican database I found that these are ony channel allotments and not licensed TV stations.

This channel is not used anywhere in North America as far as I can tell.
//http://www.akdart.com/37/
 
Why does this guy have an issue with Radio Astronomy?

Tangible benefits (or in his world $$$$) is the only value he $ee$. I don't have an issue with Channel 37 being kept unallocated for Radio Astronomers to use.

From a practical perspective, there are enough channels in each market so that polluting the bandwidth used by Radio Astronomy

Then there's that whole science thing. None of our technological devices would be around without science.

Sorry, didn't mean to rant :)
 
OT reply:
John Kotches said:
Why does this guy have an issue with Radio Astronomy?

Tangible benefits (or in his world $$$$) is the only value he $ee$. I don't have an issue with Channel 37 being kept unallocated for Radio Astronomers to use.

From a practical perspective, there are enough channels in each market so that polluting the bandwidth used by Radio Astronomy

Then there's that whole science thing. None of our technological devices would be around without science.

Sorry, didn't mean to rant :)
I think you might be reading too much into his choice of words.
Quietly listening for signals from outer space doesn't seem "intensive." So it is surprising that the FCC has protected this channel because radioastronomy generates no revenue and appears to have no tangible end product.
I believe he is actually slighting the FCC here... rather than the use of the bandwidth.
 
UpAllNight:

I read that as having issues with lack of $$$, and as an issue with Radio Astronomy.

The signal levels are indeed barely > nothing and having a channel broadcasting in the US would muck up reception for the continent and possibly the entire hemisphere.

Cheers,
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts