No logic and no connection whatsoever between DISH and ATSC 3.0.
The claim, as well as its constituent parts, is false. DISH isn't dissapearing and ATSC 3.0 has not been approved by the FCC. ATSC 3.0 hasn't even been approved by the ATSC!
Incentive Auction Discussion
- Thread starter Trip
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 560
- Views 59K
- Status
The claim, as well as its constituent parts, is false. DISH isn't dissapearing and ATSC 3.0 has not been approved by the FCC. ATSC 3.0 hasn't even been approved by the ATSC!
No matter how u receive they say we will all pay Atsc 3,0 ,! will be the way to go no one knowns yeat FCC gives!! green light !!!ATSC !!!3.0 testing ? Look for them signals you might find some broadcasting going on!!
I red some where they say a real good indoor antennas will work well.I don't think so maybe if you are close to tower's 25/35miles with low vhf ,
Most indoor antennas don't work well with VHF low unless they're old school.
Most of the mud flaps (fractal antennas) are designed primarily for UHF and you're doing good to dip into VHF high. Rabbit ear antennas may prove superior due to their ability to capture longer wavelengths.
Yes them good old rabbit ears , that's what I was using be for the 91xg,wine guard ,8200u, antnnacraft hi&low,vhf, 15,feet long,
Even a good old pair of VHF rabbit ears with a UHF bowtie (which was recommended by TV stations on channel 17, like WJKS-TV, now WCWJ, Jacksonville, Florida) attached to one of the "ears" will work.
Interesting article on "Repack Complexities". This could slow down the repack timeline.
http://www.tvtechnology.com/resources/0006/repack-complexities-abound/280362
http://www.tvtechnology.com/resources/0006/repack-complexities-abound/280362
Wow, thanks for posting that! Lots more things they'll have to deal with. They can't simply just "flip a switch" to change frequencies even if they are staying within their own band.
But you are rong about that state of the art on the tower's now a days just a flick of the switch, o yes!!!!!!!
You are wrong. Physics doesn't change with newer technology.
As the article makes clear, getting the same coverage pattern at different frequencies requires antenna modification and a change in power. You're assuming that you can use the same amplifier and depending on how far the move in frequency is, that may not be possible. Anyone moving from UHF to VHF will likely need a completely different transmitter, antenna(s) and a new elevation; perhaps on a different tower. None of these is a matter of flicking a switch.
Just as it is with your 91XG that is UHF-only, stations going to VHF (whether high or low) will have to do something entirely different to work with the VHF band where the wavelengths are much longer. The wavelength of RF13 is about 55.77" while the wavelength of RF14 is about 25.12" (less than half). The wavelength of RF2 is upwards of 17'.
This isn't entirely correct. KMJC, which is about 9 miles from my house, just came on the air last Fall, and their transmitter is ATSC 3.0 ready. I've been inside the station and visited with the engineer, who told me they are ready. So, while most stations probably aren't ready to go, some of the newer ones might be. There's a thread in the OTA forum with photos in case you're curious.
The transmitter doesn't much care what the modulation scheme is as long as the data fits in the pipe. The transmitter cares about its frequency and a nice steady input stream. This is a common misconception in the DBS forums where a surprising number of participants errantly believe that there is such a thing as an "HD satellite". I guess this also applies in the OTA forums where some believe that "HD antenna" or "digital antenna" has meaning.
The other side of that coin is that KMJC could move their DTV broadcast to a different setup and hit the ground running with the existing setup using ATSC 3.0. I would imagine there's going to be some excitement in the market for refitting transmitters to broadcast on lower frequencies than they were originally designed for.
Well for your info harsh my 91xg yes is UHF and my other haf is a hi&low wine 8200u and when you put the two antennas together work quite well ! The 91xg took over the UHF part of the 8200u, signal of 70% no dropouts
Vh
Vhf part is the same 70% go fish!!!¡!!
And Zzzzzip your Lip's, thanks,,,,,,
Vh
Vhf part is the same 70% go fish!!!¡!!
And Zzzzzip your Lip's, thanks,,,,,,
Last edited:
The "zip your lips" comment is uncalled for, and several posts are starting to cross a line that shouldn't be.
Just tone it down a bit please. Thanks.
Just tone it down a bit please. Thanks.
I see where this is going I QUIT you need to look at the hole pitcher first look at other trends of this person said to me thank you !!!!
Well, with everything beyond RF36 being cut for tv stations, IF you aren't going to have any channels higher than RF35 in your area, we can use these for LTE filters on our tv antenna systems. They don't pass anything above 600mHz:
Amazon product ASIN B00006JPE6
Amazon product ASIN B00006JPE6
Last edited:
So, it'll prevent me from getting my cell phone calls on channel 45 on my old ATSC tuner - bummer!
I am not trip so perhaps I should keep my mouth shut but all I have ever read is mid April. Not sure if that means as close as possible to the 15th or perhaps anytime from the 10th to the 20th.
- Status
