I have no issue receiving CIII Paris analog 6, and I'm about 20km away. The image is perfect--no interference. But this will definitely change for those with rabbit ears in the vicinity (or a low antenna mount).
Right now I get CIII in Old South London without issue too -- if you don't consider my 12' long Winegard 7084P an issue. But still, the signal is receivable with a little effort... for now. I'm trying to find a contact at shaw to discuss the post-transition assignment, but I haven't heard back yet.

As one of the documents linked to in the Transitioning To A VHF-LO DTV Channel - Unwise and uncaring! (http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=129719) thread says, to maintain existing coverage patterns, 15 to 20dB (30 to 100 times) more power is needed than expected, and even then, many people who had a "watchable" picture in analog cannot get a picture with DTV.

Interference that only causes a little distortion in analog can kill the signal in DTV since current decoders were designed to deal with they types of interference common with UHF, not VHF.

So just because you can receive CIII now in analog does not mean you won't have problems when they flash cut to DTV.

No doubt, Roger1818. I'm certainly aware of the flood of complaints that happened state-side when stations went VHF-digital, especially with a low assignment.

I don't think that most people in the city would find it acceptable to install a Winegard HD 7084P to receive just one extra channel. Such a large antenna significantly increases the weight, wind resistance and cost over a solution such as a UHF/VHF-hi boom or UHF bow tie antenna. It also significantly increases the likelihood of complaints from neighbors or, in my case, the spouse. ;)

I don't think that most people in the city would find it acceptable to install a Winegard HD 7084P to receive just one extra channel. Such a large antenna significantly increases the weight, wind resistance and cost over a solution such as a UHF/VHF-hi boom or UHF bow tie antenna. It also significantly increases the likelihood of complaints from neighbors or, in my case, the spouse. ;)

No argument here! "if you don't consider my 12' long Winegard 7084P an issue" was supposed to come across as sarcasm -- it's ridiculous that I had to put that up in a city of nearly half a million to get another channel. If I ever do get ahold of someone at Shaw, I'll push for a local repeater too!

If I ever do get ahold of someone at Shaw, I'll push for a local repeater too!

Why not push for a local station? It is shameful that both Ottawa and London have repeaters of Global Toronto. It wasn't so bad when they first started as Global Ontario, but it didn't take long for them to focus all their attention on their largest market and ignore everyone else.

Well, Global certainly wasn't in the financial position to improve their network, including stations and such. Hopefully that will now change...

Why not push for a local station? It is shameful that both Ottawa and London have repeaters of Global Toronto.

We don't even have a local repeater. We have to go to great lengths to pick up CIII out of Paris, which is not what I would consider local! I figured it'd be cheaper and easier to start out with just a repeater in close range.

That's shameful, for a city the size of London. While the city is likely not large enough to accomodate another local TV station, they should at least have a repeater.

I may have mentioned this before, but it makes sense for Global to relocate their Paris transmitter further west, say to Woodstock. I currently receive their transitional digital signal very well from Toronto, at a respectable 60%. The post-transition Toronto digital UHF station at 100kW would most certainly be easily received in Kitchener-Waterloo, Paris, Brantford, Guelph, and other areas to the east side of the current Paris station's coverage footprint.

I may have mentioned this before, but it makes sense for Global to relocate their Paris transmitter further west, say to Woodstock. I currently receive their transitional digital signal very well from Toronto, at a respectable 60%. The post-transition Toronto digital UHF station at 100kW would most certainly be easily received in Kitchener-Waterloo, Paris, Brantford, Guelph, and other areas to the east side of the current Paris station's coverage footprint.

I agree with you on this one. I might even take it one further and suggest that it (along with CityTv's repeater) be moved to London to minimize the number of transmitter sites.

Too bad they aren't forum members or readers :(

The only market I think Global should really have a local affiliate (that it doesn't have one in) is Ottawa. All others are small and would most likely loose money, so it wouldn't be economically feasible for them to open shop in a small city like London.

If any market aside from Ottawa should have one it should be Sudbury, and they would do a regional newscast like CTV Northern Ontario does.

If I ever do get ahold of someone at Shaw, I'll push for a local repeater too!
Maybe Global will snap up that 600w post transition slot on channel 3. It ought to reach all the way to Komoka. ;)

The real reason why Global and CTV do not have a presence in London is due to the extraordinarily high cable TV penetration back in the 60s and early 70s when these transmitters were planned. If 95% of the city has cable for signal carriage, why put up a local transmitter? And remember, this was 25-30 years before small dish satellite TV and when most major US cities and Canadian cities near the border had little or no cable TV penetration. It was also a time when most stations had very high power and also had little or no interference from other stations. Reductions in tower heights, ERP and the proliferation of new stations and repeaters has changed that. It's time London got better coverage from CTV and Global. The DTV transition is a perfect opportunity.

It's time London got better coverage from CTV and Global. The DTV transition is a perfect opportunity.

Hear, hear!

global still in SD in toronto. way to go ciii

ScaryBob: Good point! London was, by far, one of the first cities in Canada to have cable TV service. When I worked for Rogers, I recall seeing some customer accounts dating back to the 60's. This has obviously created a situation (and a persistent culture) where there is low demand for OTA signals.

global still in SD in toronto. way to go ciii

Huh??? They are broadcasting in both SD and HD in Toronto. Are you upset that they haven't shutdown their analog transmitter yet?

The newcast cast is SD, while Global National and most primetime programming is HD.

DTV != HD

The newcast cast is SD, while Global National and most primetime programming is HD.

DTV != HD
Shouldn't be for much longer. The new sets are almost complete. (so they keep saying)

DTV does not = HDTV. There is SD digital channels out there.

DTV != HD

Agreed. I was just wondering what on earth you were talking about as it sounded like you thought they were only broadcasting in SD. There aren't many channels that are 100% HD.