WGBH-TV coverage after August 2

[Paul B. Walker, Jr.]

I wouldn’t want to turn back this digital tv stuff like Gary said earlier.
The picture is MUCH better then in the analog days, in my experience unlike
what gary suggests

And even though all I get for tv in laramie Wyoming  is a Digital PBS LPTV,
a digital nbc/CBS LPTV and an analog transmitter ... I wouldn’t turn things
back.  And I don’t have cable

On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:37 AM Ken VanTassell <kenwvt@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are really
> sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called locast.org
> that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 per month
> suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we have
> resurgent times for OTA TV ahead.
>
> -Ken
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia <bob.bosra@demattia.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas.
> > Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until
> > now was
> > on VHF-HI.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce <
> npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are
> > > numbered.
> > >
> > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF
> > > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done
> > > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them
> to
> > > do on that channel.
> > >
> > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline
> > > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as
> > > 7,633,586.  In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new
> > > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of
> 7,669,250
> > > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to
> > > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic
> > > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see
> > > §73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because
> > > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN
> > > parameters for a station that changes bands (see §73.3700(b)(1)(iii)).
> > >
> > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population
> > > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the
> > > problems with DTV on VHF?  Will it really reach an over-the-air
> audience
> > > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable
> > > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from
> > > gross optimism?
> > >
> > > Norm Pierce
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3
> > >
> > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet"
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx
> > >
> > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice"
> > > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314)
> > > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf
> > >
> > >
> >
>