Mobile DTV on the cheap

Sun Jan 16 04:39:19 CST 2011

I was never able to get WUSA-DT on UHF or WJLA-DT on UHF.  I re- 
scanned after the cut, and got no one again.

I have tried 10 dB and 20 dB amplifiers as well.  My NTSC reception  
was OK, but not perfect.  I have absolutely no ATSC.

There are three ridges between me and DC.  The first is at Potomac  
View Road in eastern Loudoun County.  The next is at Georgetown Pike  
in Western Fairfax County, and the third is at Tyson's Corner, though  
it is not high enough to be an issue.

--chip

On Jan 16, 2011, at 12:13 AM, WB4JFI wrote:

> Have you tried to receive them since WUSA and WJLA went back to VHF  
> at the
> end of the transition?  WRC and WTTG are probably no better, but 7 & 9
> should be improved on VHF.
>
> We were able to easily pick up almost all UHF DTV stations way out  
> near
> Upperville around 2004, but that was on a hill.  The ridge near  
> Tysons seems
> to be an effective block at lower elevations to the west, unless you  
> can get
> high enough.
>
> Yeah, the lower power was never in the cards that I saw...  the  
> numbers I
> mentioned were averages from actual operations once everyone went  
> full-power
> DTV.
> Terry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tacos-bounces+wb4jfi=amrad.org at amrad.org
> [mailto:tacos-bounces+wb4jfi=amrad.org at amrad.org] On Behalf Of Chip  
> Fetrow
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 7:42 PM
> To: wb4jfi
> Cc: tacos at amrad.org
> Subject: Re: Mobile DTV on the cheap
>
> Terry:
>
> I am well aware.
>
> It was tong in cheek, though I admit that is hard to convey in e-mail.
>
> I wonder about the power costs as well.  One of the "Selling Points"
> of DTV was that with the lower power needed as a result of "digital
> gain," power bills would go down.
>
> Of course, everyone has applied for more power, and more power, and
> more power.
>
> I still saw my last OTA TV when NTSC went away.  I cannot receive any
> ATSC signals, and I am not quite as far out as Dulles Airport.
>
> --chip
>
> On Jan 15, 2011, at 6:19 PM, wb4jfi wrote:
>
>> Remember Chip that the first (primary) DTV stream (which replaces
>> the old analog signal) IS FREE.  It's only any additional channels
>> or services that can use another revenue method.
>>
>> Plus, at least in 2006 when I left, any additional revenue that
>> stations received from additional streams/services were subject to
>> federal government "fees", based on a percentage of that revenue.  I
>> think those fees were "off the top" of the income (not net profit),
>> but I'm not as sure about that.  So, if a station made money on an
>> internet data stream for example, using extras bits derived from the
>> DTV spectrum and made money, a portion of any additional income will
>> effectively be "taxed" and sent to the feds.  We used to have to
>> track that additional revenue.  They gets you comin', and they gets
>> you goin'....
>>
>> It costs stations much more to purchase, install and often run the
>> new DTV facility, with no additional revenue associated with those
>> costs.  If a station went from a VHF to UHF channel, their MONTHLY
>> electricity bill alone more than quintupled (typically under 10k to
>> over easily 50k).  Plus recurring tube costs, if now UHF.  Typical
>> DTV conversion costs were about $3.5 million, just for the first
>> part, not including a new tower, building, or other costs.  Many
>> stations had to rebuy even more equipment at the end of the
>> transition to make the "hard switch" overnight instead of a month or
>> two.  And, viewership is declining at the same time.  Not a great
>> business model in the long run.
>>
>> So much for making more money with DTV...
>> Terry
>>
>>
>> On 1/15/2011 3:49 PM, Robert Stratton wrote:Pay OTA services aren't
>> all that new, at least in the DC area.
>>> Channel 50 here in the the DC market used to sell a nighttime SSAVI-
>>> scrambled naughty movie service. Interestingly it happened to be
>>> the same type of scrambling (I won't dignify it by calling it
>>> "encryption") that Cox used for their local CATV service. My
>>> understanding is that when the pay service failed, the market was
>>> flooded with descramblers that didn't get returned. I wouldn't be
>>> surprised if that was a motivation for Cox to migrate to something
>>> a little more robust in the content protection department.It was
>>> fascinating to watch them flip the switch from their infomercial-
>>> saturated daily schedule. Some nights they would forget for a
>>> little while, which may well have been a marketing method. I should
>>> probably look to see how many FCC complaints were filed when that
>>> happened and people accidentally stumbled across people in
>>> flagrante delicto on their TV.--Bob S.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> So much for FREE OTA TV.
>>>>
>>>> --chip
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 8, 2011, at 10:19 AM, tacos-request at amrad.org wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Message: 4
>>>>> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 20:50:45 -0600 (CST)
>>>>> From: Robert Stratton<bob at stratton.net>
>>>>> Subject: Re: Mobile DTV on the cheap
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> One thing of which to be aware - some of the ATSC-M/H streams are
>>>>> encrypted. There are two competing ventures of content providers
>>>>> and
>>>>> broadcasters to try to develop pay services on top of Mobile DTV.
>>>>> It's possible that you'll see streams in the software that it  
>>>>> might
>>>>> not be able to render because of encryption.
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> --Bob
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tacos mailing list
>>>> Tacos at amrad.org
>>>> http://www.amrad.org/mailman/listinfo/tacos
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tacos mailing list
> Tacos at amrad.org
> http://www.amrad.org/mailman/listinfo/tacos
>