Industry Canada does not have to comply with US max power level requirements.They often exceed US max levels.London is far enough from the US and VHF digital needs alot more power to be effective over the same range as analog.CFPL getting 45kw is good.
Canada and the US recognise international treaties governing the use of radio spectrum. The FCC and IC work together to maximize the use of spectrum for both countries. The countries have a documented border zone where frequency assignments and power levels are coordinated.

I disagree with your comment about digital vs. analog power levels. Digital VHF requires more power for building penetration and has problems in urban areas. Over long distances, VHF hi does quite well. For example, Iowa public television station KDIN, channel 11 Des Moines, reported reliable reception across flat terrain at 90 to 100 miles using an outside antenna located 30 feet in the air. The report was published in the Society of Motion Pictures and Television Journal. The long reach of VHF simply reflects lower propagation losses at lower frequencies.

Let's not get into a discussion here about necessary ERP levels for adequate reception.
We have an existing thread for that:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=130384
Cheers.

George simply pointing out the VHF digital is requiring more power than originally thought and has not worked very well in US.In rural area sure VHF should and could have a longer range.That is why CFPL is getting 45kw digital average to match CFPL analog peak 100kw.In my opinion VHF digital is a poor performer compared to UHF band.

CTV must have twisted someone's arm to get bumped from an allocated 10,100 watts to an approved 45,000 watts on VHF-hi. It also shows what a pile of manure their threats to close the station down were. This is especially odd considering some of the other allocations, such as TVO being cut from 38,300 to 1,200 watts on channel 18.

Over the past year, the problems with low power VHF have become very apparent. I speculate that IC has recognised the issue and started to accept requests for higher VHF power levels. In the case of CFPL, higher power will improve urban reception and extend the /A\ service much farther to the north. Speculating again, the improved channel 10 digital contour will replace a portion of the coverage currently provided by CKNX Wingham allowing /A\ to shutdown the transmitter rather than converting to UHF. The UHF replacement on channel 33 shows power at 1 Megawatt - not affordable for a rural station with a history of financial problems.

I don't think any arm-twisting was required nor does it show that CTV was not planning to close the station. If my speculation about closing CKNX is correct, the saving achieved is all the explanation required.

The other thing to consider is that the geography that makes it difficult for people in London to receive stations in the US will also make it difficult for London stations to reach the US.
But you are forgetting about CFPL's 300m tower that is on high ground and rises well above local terrain. It allows LOS to Erie PA and much of Lake Erie's south shore. Rogers once had antennas at 150m on the CFPL tower that provided reliable analog reception from Erie, Detroit and Cleveland.

higher power will improve urban reception
Higher power will not eliminate multipath and is unnecessary locally due to CFPL's location (2km from downtown) and 300m tower. London has only a handful of tall office buildings. If anything, CFPL's current high power levels make reception of all channels worse due to receiver overloading. I've seen receivers that had problems holding a signal on CFPL due to its high power level. I've also seen overloading at locations 30km away in St.Thomas.

Some stations already have patterns registered with the FCC or I've dug up from the CRTC site for them.

I get the impression that CFPL is omni now and I suspect they're planning to recycle the existing antenna. Using that assumption, I generated a map for CFPL last night. http://www.rabbitears.info/contour.php?appid=1282949&map=Y

I should send you a message again at some point, stampeder. I was going to ask again about adding the AGL data... :)

- Trip
Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but the database clearly shows CFPL-DT as directional, with 45kW Peak and 20 kW average (The post transition entry is in bold):
PROV CITY CALL FREQ CLASS LAT LONG BAN LIMIT NET ANT BC OFF OF_P B_LAT B_LONG BORDER CAN_L USA_L F_LD ST_CREAT ST_MOD OK_DP DOC_FLE DEC_N UNA CERT CC ALLOC BMTLT EHAATT ERPVAV ERPVPK ERPAAV ERPAPK ERPVTA ERPATA GRND OVRL_H RAD_CTR CHANNEL

ON London CFPL-DT 728.00 VU 425659 811552 AL O M F 425715 811558 83.6 29.1 94.3 1994.6 3/22/1999 7/8/2008 7/8/2008 0 0 N N 1 0.0 300.0 0 107000 0 0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 57
ON London CFPL-DT 192.00 R 425659 811552 AP D M F 0 0 82.2 29.1 94.3 1994.6 11/1/2010 12/8/2010 11/1/2010 3830 109999 N N 1 0.5 302.1 20000 45000 1 278.6 294.1 564.9 10
ON London CFPL-PT 192.00 R 425715 811557 AL O M F 0 0 2/19/2009 2/19/2009 2/19/2009 0 1476 N 2 0.0 304.8 0 10100 0 0 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
ON London CFPL-TV 192.00 R 425659 811552 OP INDE O S Z F 425715 811558 83.6 29.1 94.3 1994.6 1/9/1986 8/31/2010 7/8/2008 3830 950474 N TM0006 Y 1 0.0 304.8 325000 325000 43200 43200 0 278.6 298.7 566.9 10


Anyone can download the raw database as a zip file (http://spectrum.ic.gc.ca/engineering/engdoc/baserad.zip), and then open TVSTATIO.dbf in excel, if you don't have access to a database program.

20 kW is still better than 10.1 kW omni, as the post-transitional plan had it. To maintain the post-transitional power in accordance with the IC/FCC MOA, I'm sure there is a null towards the states so as not to exceed 10.1 kW in that direction.

If someone has a program with greater capacity (ie: dBase) the patterns for CFPL are numbers 8327, 8381 and 8382.

I managed to import 8382 into RabbitEars somehow.

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=ant_pat&ant_id=8382&rotation=0&erp=45

I've started my number crunching going for a new CFPL map, so it'll hopefully be up within the hour.

EDIT: In the time it took for this to be moderator-approved, since I have fewer than 5 posts, the map finished. It looks pretty similar. I also imported patterns for CHCH and CITS (both 11 and 18/35/36) and CFTO-54 (35). New maps are running as I type.

How did you relate those patterns to CFPL? I'm trying to figure out if there's a way I could load other patterns into my database.

EDIT: I've since figured it out. APATSTAT.DBF has it.

- Trip

Nice work with the antenna patterns Trip.

The 45 KW lobe is pointed toward Kitchener/Waterloo where population density is highest. It blows my theory about more power to the north to potentially eliminate CKNX.

...Higher power will not eliminate multipath and is unnecessary locally due to CFPL's location (2km from downtown) and 300m tower. London has only a handful of tall office buildings. If anything, CFPL's current high power levels make reception of all channels worse due to receiver overloading. I've seen receivers that had problems holding a signal on CFPL due to its high power level. I've also seen overloading at locations 30km away in St.Thomas.
As this thread is about CTV and /A\ digital signal availability, I would think that everyone would want Canadian stations to use as much power as possible to maximize the coverage area and increase service reliability. In keeping with the moderator's direction to take the ERP discussion outside, I am not reponding to the overloading comments.

Scarybob it looks like St.Thomas and Chatam will only get a weak signal.No CFPL into Erie.

http://www.rabbitears.info/contour.php?appid=1282949&map=Y

There's the map itself. It doesn't really look so bad toward St. Thomas.

- Trip

Hmm,
Theres my issue with CFPL numbers.
We should be looking at the PT row. Which is undefined.

I have study many of the proposals. Many of the proposals after Aug 31 are label "PT"

BTW, Looking at Trip contours map

Looks like Erie is on -6 Db Line. (11kW)
There also appears to be a -9 dB towards Cleveland. (5.5kw)

Hmm,
Theres my issue with CFPL numbers.
We should be looking at the PT row. Which is undefined.

I have study many of the proposals. Many of the proposals after Aug 31 are label "PT"

No, we look at the -DT row.

The PT rows ONLY refer to entries from the IC/FCC Letter of Agreement.
Any station that has made an appliaction to the CRTC to make use of a PT allocation, even if it has exactly the same parameters as the PT allocation, gets a new entry with -DT call letters.

CFPL is 83km from border in middle of lake Erie so atleast 100km to US shore.Surely they could and should just use an omni antenna and cover as much as possible with max power.

I believe the border zone is 200km. Tropo from a powerful station can easily travel that far.

It looks like I am directly in the path of the 45kw lobe but only 2.5 km away so no joy here. OTOH, it looks like it's not quite strong enough to provide a good signal for KW so no joy there either. Chatham also loses but they can get Detroit and Cleveland OTA so they don't care.

CFPL is 83km from border in middle of lake Erie so atleast 100km to US shore.Surely they could and should just use an omni antenna and cover as much as possible with max power.

Thats not happening. The issue is that WOIO Cleveland is also using RF 10.

WOIO tower is about 160km from CFPL tower.

I was reading an article where CFPL analog was ruining reception for WOIO in NE Ohio.

And if CFPL was to broadcast at 45kW towards Cleveland. There would be some nights where WOIO will not be watchable in NE Ohio.

Remember that CFPL is only listed as a 10kW. If they want to have higher ERP. Then directional Antenna will be needed.

The PT rows ONLY refer to entries from the IC/FCC Letter of Agreement.
Any station that has made an appliaction to the CRTC to make use of a PT allocation, even if it has exactly the same parameters as the PT allocation, gets a new entry with -DT call letters.

All I know. Is some of the DTV proposals use -DT and others use -PT.
Good to read.

Read ya l8r,
Al

Is some of the DTV proposals use -DT and others use -PT.

No. Only post transition allocations use -PT. All digital licenses (be they transitional or post transition) use -DT. Transitional allocations also use -DT, so you need to pay attention to the status in those cases.

According to Industry Canada's database, a digital transmitter for CHWI in Windsor (CHWI-DT-60) has been approved by the CRTC. It will be on channel 26 at 200 Watts. See stampeder's page for details:

http://www.user.dccnet.com/jonleblanc/Canada_TV_Stations/DT.html

Scarybob it looks like St.Thomas and Chatam will only get a weak signal.

Chatham will hopefully be able to receive CHWI-DT out of Wheatley instead.

Any updates on when they may go digital or HD?