Hi Folks!
We'll continue this on the two 50 MHz/6 Meter lists.
The proximity to channel 4 is more relevant - my mistake!
Thanks & 73,
Gordon Beattie, W2TTT
201.314.6964
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Subich, W4TV [mailto:lists@subich.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 10:25 AM
To: 'J. Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT'; donmar1234@aol.com;
towertalk@contesting.com; 50mhz@mailman.qth.net; 6meter@yahoogroups.com
Cc: W2TTT@arrl.net
Subject: RE: [TowerTalk] TV Channels 2-6 Post Transition
Channel 6 is 80-88 MHz - not 70 MHz.
70 t0 74 MHz is allocated to non-broadcast use in the US.
It is between TV channels 4 and 5 and would not be freed
by the reduction of low band VHF stations following the
DTV transition.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of J.
> Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT
> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 11:51 PM
> To: donmar1234@aol.com; towertalk@contesting.com;
> microwave@lists.valinet.com; 50mhz@mailman.qth.net;
> 6meter@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: W2TTT@arrl.net
> Subject: [TowerTalk] TV Channels 2-6 Post Transition
>
>
> Hi Folks!
> There are only two stations using channel 6 after the June cutover.
> Why are we not asking for a 4m band allocation, even with
> restrictions? Does anyone know the process of petitioning the
> FCC? In other countries there is a 70.0-70.5 allocation and
> while participation is small, more countries have made
> allocations in the last decade and there is activity. Anyone
> want to collaborate on a petition?
>
> Thanks & 73,
> Gordon Beattie, W2TTT
> 201.314.6964
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> donmar1234@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 2:54 AM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] TV Channels 2-6 Post Transition
>
> There are?20?Full Power TV stations listed for channels 2-6
> post transition and many Low Power TV stations. You can
> download the list from the FCC here:? www.dtv.gov?? lower rhs
> of the page.
>
> 73,
> Don
> KW7R
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 16:37:34 -0400
> From: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] New TV antennas
> To: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Cc: Tower Talk List <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <4A0F240E.9080803@tm.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 May 2009 04:01:22 -0400, Roger (K8RI) wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Even here in Michigan we will have at least two active digital
> >> stations
> >> on Ch 2. Nation wide I believe there will be on the order
> of 20-30.
> >>
> >
> > That is not accurate. Most broadcasters are abondoning Ch
> 2-6 channels
> >
> That map is quite different from the FCC channel listing I looked at
> about a month ago. Although they do have channel 2 showing up in the
> Kalamazoo area.
>
> There was a table showing present, or rather pre-change date channels
> before they changed the date and the projected channels. That to was
> quite different than what I have seen on the FCC page.
>
> They also had a Saginaw station with is currently about 12 miles from
> me, *currently* located in Badax which is way over in the thumb.
> > because, during the first years of DTV, they learned that
> the impulse
> noise
> > in this frequency range seriously degrades DTV performance.
> That used to be a problem but I doubt it is much of a one at present
> except maybe in Chicago. The big problem is propagation
> which could be
> a big problem with digital.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> virus signature database 4080 (20090515) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> virus signature database 4080 (20090515) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4080 (20090515) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4080 (20090515) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|