WFXT-DT power increase?

[Peter Q. George]

I agree with Jeff.  Putting two full-powered DTV's a little more than 100 miles away from each other is asking for trouble.  I think that they (WFXT-DT) would be better off by returning to their original dial position on Channel 25.  They've already have an antenna cut to Channel 25 on their old analog system.  It would be relatively simple to replace their old Channel 25 transmission line (which failed a few weeks ago) and connect their new DT transmitter to the old antenna.  It should be broadband enough to handle it (and then some).  Similarly, I believe WGGB (DTV Channel 40) in Springfield is planning to revitalize their old analog antenna system cut for Channel 40 and to use their new DT transmitter on it on Feb 17th.  It's cheaper to do this and they would get nearly the same coverage they had as an analog station. Smart move. 


Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts
"Scanning the bands since 1967"
radiojunkie1@yahoo.com
radiojunkie3@yahoo.com
***********************************************************


--- On Tue, 12/23/08, Jeff Lehmann <jjlehmann@comcast.net> wrote:

> From: Jeff Lehmann <jjlehmann@comcast.net>
> Subject: RE: WFXT-DT power increase?
> To: "'Garrett Wollman'" <wollman@bimajority.org>, "'Alexander Svirsky'" <as@shawsheen.com>
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 1:42 PM
> > I think Boston to Hartford (or rather, Needham to
> Farmington) is a
> > much tougher case than Needham to Ascutney, as I think
> the UHD
> > Candelabra is tall enough to diffract over much of the
> terrain
> > blockage in the Worcester hills, and the top of the
> tower in
> > Farmington is one of the highest points in the state
> (2048 feet AMSL).
> 
> I still don't understand why they are letting WFXT and
> WTIC stay on the same
> channel, at full power after the transition. When you look
> at the coverage
> maps on the FCC website, there is significant overlap. Does
> anyone know how
> these signals will act with two stations on the same
> frequency? We all know
> how it looks with analog signals, but digital is obviously
> a whole new
> world. 
> 
> How in the world did this happen... was someone at the FCC
> asleep at the
> switch when these channel assignments were decided on?
> 
> Jeff Lehmann
> Hanson, MA