Charles W. Rhodes

In its recent Report and Order, the FCC revealed 11 scenarios under consideration for a 600 MHz Band Plan following the spectrum auctions.

Now that the FCC has established its timetable for broadcasters to elect which channel to return, I believe these same broadcasters will seek to maximize their DTV facilities.

The future is digital, 16:9 and gigantic. And I believe the future is now.

With repacking now in the future for many UHF broadcasters, the problems of interference between DTV signals crammed into Channels 14–29 for example, need to be reconsidered.

Tests demonstrated that DTV-DTV interference will happen.

Additional testing set for January was to involve prototypes of GPS receivers and active GPA antennas for commercial aircraft

The FCC recently released details of how it will repack remaining TV spectrum in the UHF band.

Last month we discussed the restrictions that the FCC must work under in repacking UHF broadcast spectrum.

His trouble started suddenly one evening when he discovered interference across the high VHF band that he had never had before.

Last month, this column introduced a scheme for allocating UHF band channels by analyzing a set of contiguous channels for a given community.

The FCC regulates co-channel and adjacent channel interference by its channel allotment plan. It does not regulate “taboo channel interference,” a term left over from analog television.

My simulations indicate the spectrum which may be generated in GPS receivers by LightSquared signals.

The first time I received an e-mail about DTV reception only during daylight hours, I was dubious.

It is a little early for ghost stories, but let’s hope single frequency networks don’t come to haunt broadcasters.

Lagging echoes are more the serious problem

Could an SFN support our ATSC standard, or would we have to change our DTV standard to embrace COFDM and thereby obsolete millions of receivers?

As many DTV signals are radiated in the UHF band with more than this power, they enjoy some signal level margin within their coverage area.

Such second-order distortion products may be generated by strong local FM radio signals in the front end of DTV receivers and downconvertors.

My concern is the interference such signals may cause to reception near the secondary transmitters

Reducing the distances between transmitters on the same channel would increase DTV-DTV interference if each transmitter continued to operate at its present power and height of its antenna.

The FCC suggests that by adopting a Single Frequency Network topology, the present minimum distances allowed between DTV transmitters could be substantially reduced.