WGBH-TV coverage after August 2

[A Joseph Ross]

I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band 
entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV.

On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote:
> All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who
> are viewing off-air with receiving equipment
> that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal.   Maybe some of those people will
> switch to live streaming, but people
> viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined
> to avail themselves of that option.
>
> BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option.  The
> picture quality does not compare to off-air.
>
> -Bob
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 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
>>>>
>>>>

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D. · 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 · Newton, MA 02459
617.367.0468 · Fax:617.507.7856 · http://www.attorneyross.com