VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1] ]


For supporters of Translator broadcast television.
Welcome

Subject: People’s TV: Fairness for ALL the people of Soap Lake, Ephrata and Moses Lake


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wed, February 04 2004, 0:08:19 PST

Posted on Wednesday, January 28 @ 07:31:27 PST by SwedChef
http://www.sliderule.net/

POSL2004 writes:

"The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has an undisputable congressional mandate to ensure that access to Television services is available to all Americans regardless of their social and economic status, their ethnic background. or geographic location.

Delivery of telecommunication services over translator stations is critical to fulfilling this statutory mission in rural areas and will continue to be of critical importance in the digital revolution.

The average full-power television station spends over a million dollars to convert from analog to digital. This is the biggest obstacle in the government-mandated race to convert to digital.

The former PEOPLES TV ASSOCIATON, INC. "analog" translators, if bought today would have easily set the defunct group back between $100,000 and $200,000, especially of the FCC required 100-watt UHF transmitters.

Digital translators are so new that it is nearly impossible to get accurate pricing, but they are likely in the half million dollar range -- to accomplish what the FCC requires. And, the people who want to receive "digital channels" would have to purchase HDTV/digital off-air tuners to feed their VCRs or TV sets, at a present minimum cost of $300-$500 each.

Most readers probably don't fully appreciate the expense of doing something like this -- just to serve several thousand people unable to spend a monthly fee for the local stations. This, however, is not about money; it is about a congressional mandate to provide public telecommunications services to "all Americans regardless of their socioeconomic status, their ethnic background or geographic location."

The FCC needs to swiftly provide licensing of digital translator and on-channel repeaters so that rural Soap Lake, Ephrata and Moses Lake are not left behind in the digital revolution transforming this country’s media landscape. The people of rural America, such as Soap Lake, Ephrata, Moses Lake, must act and demand they not be left behind those who can afford cable and satellite TV.

Pursuant to Congressional directive, the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service awarded $15 million in grants to fund equipment in 2003 -- including digital translators -- designed to facilitate the delivery of digital television signals to rural areas.

Because the needs of rural America are greater than the funding available in 2003, Congress appropriated an additional $14 million for fiscal year 2004 in the current omnibus appropriations bill "to convert analog to digital operation of those television broadcast stations that serve rural areas and are qualified for Community Service Grants by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting under section 396(k) of the Communications Act of 1934, including associated translators, repeaters, and studio-to-transmitter links. Soap Lake, Ephrata, Moses Lake needs to speak up or we’ll be left behind this telecommunications revolution.

Members of the PUBLIC JURY: the fundamental issue at stake is one of fairness to ALL Americans in this digital television revolution.

To join the effort to bring analog and digital translator rebroadcast television back to Soap Lake, Ephrata and Moses Lake: write me at Martin D. Ringhofer, P. O. Box 216, Soap Lake, WA 98851. E-mail: Email: martinringhofer@aol.com
Subject: PTV - False and/or misleading information


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wed, February 04 2004, 11:56:43 PST

My name is Eve Runnels. I am the Executive Director and Registered Agent for Peoples TV Association in Grant County, Washington State, which is in the process of disbandment. I want to warn anyone who sees and reads information on this site that much of the information is false and/or misleading. There is a lot more to the story than just lack of community support. Two things which have happened on a national level which had a larger effect on this situation
than anything I see mentioned posted to this site so far.

1) The FCC mandate that the United States will become an all digital broadcast for TV, therefore necessitating the government through the FCC to grant every parent station a second channel for their digital rebroadcast during the transition period.

2) The sale of channels 52 through 69 to make money for the Federal Treasury to help balance the Federal Budget during the Clinton Administration.

These two actions affected all 10 channels that Peoples TV rebroadcast on. From day one of the television and translator industry, it has always been a Federal rule that translators are secondary to broadcast stations. That means if there is any reason a frequency is needed or used by a primary broadcaster then a translator on that frequency automatically is bumped off. There is no legal recorse for the translator. Before our nation became too pouplated, and before there were so many inventions to use up frequency spectrum (like cell phone, two way radio, etc.), that issue did not raise it's head in rural areas such as Grant County. But that has changed, and now our society has decided rural people have the right to cell phones and other inventions as much as populated areas. Thus our airwaves are now overcrowded and the original second place status of translators is having to be enforced. Translators are being bumped off the air all over the nation, not just in Grant County. We as a society can't have our cake and eat it too. If we are going to make room for improved television like HDTV and have room for the convienience of cellular telephone, then we are going to have to give up our rural translators. There simply is not enough spectrum out there to accomodate both.

If we as a nation could have stopped the decission to take channels 52 through 69 and sell them to make money for the Federal Treasury than a can or worms would have been opened somewhere else because cell phone, emergency broadcast (fire, police, ambulance etc.) private independent broadcast termed "low power" TV would have to be given spectrum somewhere. Beleive me, some of us who have been working in this industry 20 or more years tried. That forem was open for public comment back in 1996 and I did file objections with the FCC in behalf of PTV and rural translators in general. But we lost because we do not make money for the government. We provided a service to people who had no other means of receiving TV.

But the money aspect of our service is not the primary issue with the government or the FCC. The current accepted standard is that if TV is out there, and it is out there almost everywhere by satelite or cable or other means besides direct over the air broadcast, there is no mandate that it has to be free. It only has to be available and if you choose not to pay for the service and therefore not get TV, then that is your choice. No where does the government say that TV has to be free. It is nice if it is, but again, if you live in an area not reached by direct over the air broadcast from a parent station, that is a choice you are making because no one stops you from moving closer to a metropolitan area where you would get TV direct from the parent station.

People's TV Association is disbanding because we have lost our channels and there are not enough channels to move all 10 translators. We could have moved three or four, as those of you in the Soap Lake area know, we moved our two UHF units. But that was before we realized we were going to loose the VHF channels too, and at out Member's meeting both in 2002 and 2003, members present agreed with the board that if we could only stay on air with two out of five channels, the service would not satisfy the general public because everyone has a different favorite channel between the five major networks and how in the world would you settle the fighting over which two to pick and which three to elminate.

Our Wahatis site lost all five and we were sucessful in getting one channel to move down to, but there again, how do you decide which one of the five to leave on the air.

I hope anyone reading this will realize that the current Board of Directors and myself, the Executive Director, gave a lot of effort and planning into what we could to to save PTV, but it just is not in the cards. Even if we came up with greater support, and as one posting to this site reads, even if there is grant money out there to help buy digital equipment, what good is it going to do if there is no channels to move to.

Change is never easy, and for people who enjoyed the translator service it will be hard to make the adjustment to having to pay five times more to get TV service each year. But human nature dictates that if people want something bad enough, they will find a way to get it. Local area networks are available on satelite, by fiber optic cable, and by regular TV cable. No matter where you live in Grant County there is a way to get TV that provides local area news from Spokane. This change is no harder probably than the change our grandparents or great-grandparents had to make when horse and buggy's had to start yeilding the right of way to automobiles on the nation's road system.
Replies:
Subject: Peoples Television Returns to Life


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tue, February 03 2004, 23:57:36 PST

Peoples Television Returns to Life
Posted on Friday, January 30 @ 08:38:14 PST by SwedChef
http://www.sliderule.net/

For over 20 years the residents of Moses Lake, Ephrata, Othello, Royal City and other rural communities and farms have watched broadcast television over repeaters owned and operated by People's TV, Inc. Most of us didn't even know Mike Lanigan, the man who brought us these repeaters. When Lanigan died the directors of the Association voted to disband the organization (and turn off broadcast television for many Columbia Basin residents) effective January 3, 2003.

Now Soap Lake resident Martin Ringhofer has embarked upon an effort to bring this Association back to life. He has notified the Washington State Secretary of State that he is the new registered agent for the Association and that the Association will not be disbanded. He has also notified the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, DC to use him as the contact in his attempt to renew the licenses for the repeaters. The success of this effort, in the opinion of Sliderule.Net, is critical for our area.

Ringhofer's attempt to resurrect the Association is just one step to turning the repeaters back on. He will have to work to obtain Federal grants for rural community television corporations to fund the purchase of updated equipment. Equipment that has been mandated to be capable of rebroadcasting HDTV signals even though few television stations in our area transmit them.

Indeed, rural television organizations all over the USA will be facing financial problems as the licenses for their repeaters - one repeater (and license) for every channel they re-broadcast - come up for renewal. Some people believe that the economical impact of these renewal requirements will create enough of an outcry to cause the FCC to rethink the requirements altogether.

Many feel that the repeaters are outdated anyway and that cable television and the satellite systems are more capable of delivering these signals to the home. However, the removal of broadcast television from millions of rural homes means that a large segment of the population who cannot afford the costs of cable tv or satellite will be left with no access to national news or entertainment.

Senior citizens on a fixed and often inadquate income, the disabled on tiny pensions and people who have lost their jobs in this economy will not get information on events such as weather, school closures (often broadcast on only one television station), political issues and election results.
Some of the people at Sliderule.Net, such as Craig Jungers our Vice-President who holds engineering licenses from the FCC, have already volunteered their services to the reconstituted People's TV Association.

We urge you to contact Mr. Ringhofer either by email (martinringhofer@aol.com) or in writing (P.O. Box 216, Soap Lake, WA 98851) or by telephone (509-246-0679) and pledge any help you can to his efforts to bring back broadcast television to the Basin.
Replies:
Subject: Free-to-Air Digital: a "quiet" revolution


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thu, February 05 2004, 22:28:52 PST

Those around in the early days will remember the variety of programming available free of charge before HBO first scrambled their signals in 1986. Free movie channels have long since vanished, and many of those early dishes have become lawn ornaments. DirecTV entered the landscape ten years ago, followed by DISH Network in 1996.

People have been trained into paying for TV, and the monthly bills are escalating ever upward. Most cable & satellite subscribers are paying big dollars and not really watching that many channels. As many other things in life, it has become too complicated (and some dare say "civilized").

About the same time that DISH Network appeared on the scene, a quiet revolution was starting. It involved a few dozen channels that began to appear in a new transmitting format called MPEG-2 Digital. In North America, the first adopters of this technology were foreign language channels trying to help their expatriates now working in America reconnect with home. Most of these channels were government or ad-supported, and many are still on the air today transmitting both television and radio programming free of charge to a worldwide audience. There are also many more subscription options, but the tendency is for more of both types to appear as the months pass by. Free channels are known as FTA digital, or Free-to-Air Digital format.

There is very little logic as to the number and type of FTA channels now available on various satellites. Many transmit to a very small audience that is finally economical to serve, thanks to the lower transmission costs of digital formats. Some channels are up there as internal feeds to normally be received by broadcasters and private organizations.

Since none of these channels are using a subscription mode, there is no control of who watches them, and also no recourse if they decide to encode their signals or go off the air without notice. If you are not paying for something, nobody will listen to your complaints if it suddenly becomes unavailable. But the overall tendency is for more and more channels of all interests to go on the air, and while many of these channels do not compare to the typical "Cable" fare, there is enough variety to suit a considerable number of people. And the price is right.

Unless you have a large (8 to 10 foot) C-Band or C/Ku-Band big dish system already in place, it may be much more cost-effective to pick a few groups of channels and install several non-moving (fixed) dishes to receive just the satellites in question. Each separate satellite antenna can be wired into an electronic switch, and the signals in turn are cabled to a digital receiver, which can be programmed to automatically receive all channels available on those particular satellites.

Most Ku-band satellites use a 30 or 36 inch (that's 75 or 90 cm in metric) solid offset dish. DBS satellites can use a smaller 18 or 24 inch (45 or 60 cm) solid antenna. Many individual C-band satellites can get away with 6 to 8 foot diameter antennas, which can be mesh or solid type. It is suggested to use the larger size recommended, especially on Ku-band and DBS-band, because smaller sizes are often not enough to collect adequate signals during bad weather.

A little extra antenna can go a long way towards having a very reliable system, which experiences few if any weather related outages.

Source: http://www.global-cm.net/
Subject: favorite channels vs life line


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sat, February 07 2004, 9:59:32 PST

I understand the thinking that two out of five channels was not enough when thinking of people with choices. And that is fine when you have it to offer. But there are people out there that simply cannot afford to pay a monthly bill to receive a television signal. Without the translators they are simply disconnected from the world. For those people...a $25 yard sale television and a two channel translator system is sufficient enough to keep them connected to what is happening in the world and entertained at home when they can afford nothing else.

Duane Nycz
Soap Lake
Replies:
  • Life Line -- Anonymous, Sat, February 07 2004, 23:56:17 PST
Subject: Conflicting Info


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sun, February 15 2004, 16:59:16 PST

Craig Jungers at www.sliderule.net, and information on this board says that Martin Ringhofer is the new registered agent for People's Television Association. Ms. Runnels says SHE is the executive director and registered agent for the Association. She says there is no hope, get used to it, and that this site is full of misinformation.

Mr. Jungers and Mr. Ringhofer say there IS hope, and much has been done and more will be done. Curious.

Also, is Galaxy 10R digital? I have a C band dish which is analog only.

--Jerry Wright
NetPlus Consulting
Replies:
Subject: Forum Stats - Phenomenal # of hits in 4 days


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sun, February 08 2004, 0:10:50 PST

Forum ID: 172145
Forum Name: Peoples' TV in the Columbia Basin, WA.
Counter start date: Tue, Feb 3, 2004
Forum accesses since start date: 159
Total forum accesses on the 1st: 27
Days: 4
Hits so-far this month: 132
Average hits per day: 39.75
Projected total hits this month: 546

To put the number of hits in four days in perspective, the Peoples' TV Association, Inc., last had 334 paid members, of which 5 attended the March 2003 Members Meeting. In just four days since this site went public, with few even knowing it exists, we've averaged 40 hits a day.

To each of you visiting, please post. No need to identify who you are. We want your thoughts, comments, ideas, feedback... and more importantly -- we want you to have your friends and acquaintances visit, read and post as well.

This forum's mission is simple - to give you an opportunity to find out what happened to the TV reception you no longer receive, to allow you to express your thoughts, to get answers to your questions, and to help spread the word that NO-ONE need do without TV reception. With a satellite dish, point to Galaxy 10R, at 123 degrees West in the sky -- and you will tune in 100's of channels to watch.
Replies:
Subject: Grant County Journal Letter to the Editor


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sun, February 15 2004, 22:40:35 PST

Dear Mr. Ringhofer.

I read your letter in the Grant County Journal about the TV services being turned off.

The seniors are on fixed income and low retirement. They probably have to do without.

I was a COPES Caregiver for 11 1/2 years and a live-in. I know how much the cancer medicine is. It is very high priced. And some of other meds the state & government do not pay for.

When they have to pay utilities, rent, food & other expenses, they probably don't have any money for TV. Probably the only entertainment they have. Which is sad. I feel very sorry for them.

When they were working, they paid an aweful lot of taxes like the rest of us. And they sure did not choose to get these aweful sicknesses.

I think something should be done to help them.

Sincerely Yours,

Betty Pomeroy
PO Box 663
Soap Lake, WA 98851
Replies:
Subject: TV Translators and the DTV Transition


Author:
Anonymous
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tue, February 17 2004, 22:05:32 PST

TV Translators and the DTV Transition
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/dtv-tvtx.html

The Commission has received a number of inquiries from licensees and other parties representing the interests of TV Translator stations regarding the impact of the Commission’s digital television (DTV) transition policies on TV translator stations. This paper provides information on a number of important questions to assist TV translator licensees others in understanding how the DTV transition will affect TV translators and how to plan for and the continued operation these stations in the rapidly advancing digital age.

Question: What is the FCC’s policy with regard to TV translators and Low Power TV (LPTV) stations in the DTV transition?

In the Sixth Report and Order in the DTV proceeding, the Commission adopted a Table of Allotments for DTV service that provided a second channel for each existing full service to use for DTV service in making the transition from the existing analog (NTSC) TV technology to the new DTV technology. These second channels were provided to broadcasters on a temporary basis -- at the end of the DTV transition, which is currently scheduled for December 31, 2006, they must relinquish one of their two channels. In developing the DTV channels, the Commission maintained the secondary status of TV translators and LPTV stations. In order to provide all full service TV stations with a second channel, the Commission found it necessary to establish DTV allotments that will displace a number of low power stations, particularly in the larger urban market areas where the available spectrum is most congested.

The Commission also provided for recovery of a portion of the existing TV spectrum so that it can be reallocated to new uses. Specifically, the Commission provided for immediate recovery of channels 60-69 stations and for recovery of channels 52-59 at the end of the DTV transition. As required by Congress under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, the Commission has completed the reallocation of channels 60-69. Existing analog stations, including TV translators and LPTV stations, and a few DTV stations will be allowed to operate on these channels during the DTV transition. At the end of the transition, all of analog broadcast TV stations will have to cease operation and the DTV stations on channels 52-69 will be relocated to new channels in the DTV core spectrum.

Question: How many TV translator and LPTV stations will be displaced?

Because TV translators are located primarily in rural and other similarly less congested areas, we expect that only a relatively low number, approximately 10 to 20 percent, of these stations will be affected by DTV stations. On the other hand, LPTV stations, which tend to be located in larger markets and more congested areas, will be affected to a greater extent. We estimate that about 35 to 45 percent of the LPTV stations will have to either change their operation or cease operation to protect DTV service.

Question: What steps has the FCC taken to reduce the impact on TV translators and LPTV stations?

The Commission understands the effect of its DTV decisions on low power television service and the unfortunate impact that these decisions will have for some of TV translator and LPTV stations. In this regard, it has sought to minimize this impact through a number of administrative and technical measures. First, the Commission has stated that low power stations will be permitted to operate until a displacing DTV station or a new primary service provider is operational. Low power stations will not have to take any actions to protect a DTV station until such time at the DTV station actually begins operation. The Commission will also allow low power stations displaced or affected by DTV stations to seek replacement channels in the same area without being subject to competing applications (displacement relief). Applications for replacement channels will be considered on a first-come, first-served basis, without waiting for the Commission to open a low power application window. Such applications may be submitted at any time during the transition process. The Commission afforded applications for displacement relief priority over applications for new low power stations and requests for modification of existing low power stations, including any such applications and requests that may be pending at the time the displacement relief application is filed.

In the technical area, the Commission relaxed the technical criteria for determining when low power stations cause interference. First, the Commission deleted the UHF taboo restrictions on the use of channels 7 channels below and 14 channels above the channels of other UHF stations in the low-power TV service. It also eliminated the requirement that low power stations consider the existing full service UHF taboo restrictions on channels +/- 2, 3, 4, or 5 removed from existing analog TV stations. In addition, the Commission allowed low power stations affected by DTV implementation to make use of terrain shielding, Longley-Rice terrain dependent propagation prediction methods, and appropriate interference abatement techniques to show that their stations will not cause interference to other stations. The Commission further stated that it will entertain requests to waive the low power TV protection standards where it can be demonstrated that proposed TV translator or LPTV stations would not cause any new interference to the reception of TV broadcast analog stations. The Commission also indicated that it will consider waiving the low power TV interference protection standards where the applicant obtains the written consent of the potentially affected NTSC or TV licensee or permittee to the grant of the waiver.

Question: How will TV translators and LPTV stations make the transition to DTV service?

The Commission has not yet adopted general rules for DTV operation by TV translators and LPTV stations. It has, however, indicated that it will consider requests by low power stations to operate DTV service on replacement channels on a case-by-case basis under its displacement relief policy prior to its adoption of such rules. We anticipate that in many cases TV translators will make the transition to DTV by simply changing from analog to DTV operation on their existing channels at some point in time. In other cases, new translators will be added to provide DTV service on new channels. The Commission has indicated that it will initiate a rule making proceeding to address issues relating to the general authorization of DTV service by low power stations in the near future.

Question: What will happen to TV translators and LPTV stations operating on channels 60-69?

TV translators and LPTV stations operating on channels 60-69 will be secondary to existing analog stations, DTV stations, and stations of any other primary services operating on those channels. Low power stations will be allowed to continue broadcasting on these channels up to the end of the DTV transition as long as they do not cause harmful interference to primary services. In this regard, we anticipate that TV translators and LPTV stations operating in rural areas will generally be able to continue broadcasting throughout the transition because demand for spectrum by new services, both public safety and commercial applications, is likely to be less in rural areas than in urban areas. In both rural and urban areas, some low power stations displaced by primary stations will be able to find replacement channels below channel 60 during the DTV transition, and many more replacement channels will be available in the core DTV spectrum at the end of that period, when analog stations stop transmitting. The Commission has indicated that it will consider whether there are any other steps that may be beneficial to TV translator and LPTV operations as it develops services for the commercial spectrum, i.e., channels 60-62 and 65-67.

Where to find additional information: Additional information on the above subjects is available on the FCC Internet Site, at www.fcc.gov, in the following documents: the Sixth Report and Order in MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 97-115 (released April 21, 1997), the Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Fifth Report and Order and the Sixth Report and Order in MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 98-24 (released February 23, 1998), Additional Application Processing Guidelines for Digital Television (DTV), Public Notice released August 11, 1998, and the Report and Order in ET Docket No. 97-157, FCC 97-421 (released January 6, 1998). Information on how the DTV transition will affect TV translators is also available from the National Translator Association, Byron St. Clair, President, telephone: (303) 465-5742; and website: www.tvfmtranslators.com.
Main index ] [ Archives: [1] ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.