With Quebecor Inc.'s Sun TV channel struggling in Toronto, the CRTC has concerns about further saturating the market.

If there is room on the dial (showing my age ) give them both licencenses and let them compete. The looser will probably be Global. I have never understood this whole guaranteed to make a decent profit thing.

Keep in mind the power levels are set by Industry Canada (which regulates spectrum), and NOT the CRTC (which regulates content).

OK guys, now I am starting to think differently and stop blaming only our stations for low signal strength.
Now I think that our government is definitely to blame, and that it has a (secret) agreement with US government about it all (yeah, I admit, it is kind of paranoid) :eek:
After last time we had a discussion about it here, I started thinking if perhaps it is possible that CRTC is in some kind of agreement with US authorities never to grant a license for 'regular' or 'high power' digital transmitter here, in order to prevent Canadian stations to ever reach or interfere with US territory, for the purpose of US reassigning of channels above 50, perhaps also for other reasons, like not bringing competition to existing US broadcasters in those regions, or God knows what else.

I just read the application for license by "HDTV Networks Inc" to CRTC, which made me think about all this issue again and rethink:HDTV Networks would broadcast 100% HD programming on the following channels with the following effective radiated power (ERP):

Service Area / Channel / ERP (watts):

Vancouver / 18 / 300

Calgary / 25 / 10,000

Edmonton / 50 / 100,000

Winnipeg / 40 / 15,000

Toronto / 26 / 160

Ottawa / 50 / 9,500

Montréal / 15 / 450

Halifax / 14 / 15,000http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Hearings/2007/n2007-17.htm#1

Notice that in Vancouver, the new HD channel has a proposed power output identical to that of CTV (also Channel M, I think, should have a similar one).
Also, notice that 'proper' (high) power output (ERP) is given in those tv markets (areas) that are farther from US border. Looks to me that this plan is solely based on the proximity to US border. Notice that the lowest power is proposed for Toronto, where the super-high CN tower compensates for much by it's hight alone, and therefore seems more threatening to neighbouring US markets by it's signals.

Now I start thinking why only CBC has ERP of 30 kW (much higher than average). Perhaps because it is a public broadcaster (not commercial) and it almost never shows stuff seen on US networks. Also, it is already seen on Comcast cable in Washington state, which makes its OTA broadcast less painfull.
Call me paranoid, but it kind of makes some sense to me.

Well I think any agreement would be between fcc and Industry Canada scince they are the ones that seems to have aprovales on things first.

Like I learned the unknown dtv 37 frequentcy is for radio telescopes.

A while back I complained to the CRTC about the power levels and like other posters here I found out it's Industry Canada we have to complain about in droves.
This is what the CRTC told me:
" Industry Canada, not the CRTC approves the technical parameters under which broadcasting stations operate."

I agree with the comments that there is something up with the low power output on Canadian OTA stations. But, my theory has nothing to do with US authorities. I beieve Industry Canada, the CRTC, & the broadcasters themselves are using this low power output to force the Canadian public to subscribe to Cable & Satelite. This way, the Canadian Broadcaster can use the rules related to a US station & a Canadian station running the same show at the same time to block the US station. Example, Global TV gets Industry Canada & CRTC protection on the Super Bowl by blocking the US Broadcaster out of the Canadian market place. And we the viewers are forced to watch the awful Canadian ads, and even worse Global promo ads.

They know, on a one to one bases, the average Canadian viewer would watch the US broadcaster. And why in God's name would Americans watch the second rate production values of the Canadian station. The same thing is happening with not allowing us to subscribe to DISH Network & Direct TV. These are protectionist actions against the interests of the Canadian public & US industry.

But, this madness can be fought by the Canadian public. Just cut your Cable & Sat subscriptions and put up a OTA antenna if you are close to major US markets. The new ATSC signals provide a perfect image when it locks in on any station transmitting a ATSC (HD & DT ) signal. This will force the Canadian Broadcasters to change there ways.

Also, one other thing to think about. The FCC is suppose to take back Channels 52-69 for other purposes. So no US channels on those frequencies. Now, if the CRTC doesn't follow and continues to issue licenses on those channels... does that mean that new TV sets for the Canadian market will have to provided a different ATSC tuner than those of the US market. Will they charge Canadians extra? Will a TV bought in the US due to a great deal not be able to tune into stations past Ch. 51. Well, if so, then too bad for the sucker Canadian Broadcaster with a Channel assignment past Ch. 51. As long as I get the US channels, who cares about the Canadian ones.

The situation with low power levels is a technical and financial.Shared antennas,adjacent to analog and other interference issues are resulting in low power levels.When Canadian analog ends we will see if Canadian broadcasters are really interested in OTA coverage.There will be no reason for such low power levels.Toronto proposed 160 watts on 26 will reach 10km if its on the CN tower.In Mississauga I receive analog 26 from the U.S just fine so there will be interference issues with using channel 26.The FCC list the Toronto digitals at proposed 1000kw CBLT-dt so it has nothing to do with the Americans .

Channel allocations and power levels for border areas are set by agreements between Canada and the US. Digital signals are likely at low levels due to lack of available high power frequencies. This situation will get worse when the US stops using channels above 51 because those frequencies will be used for other services which precludes high powered Canadian stations on those frequencies. When Canadian stations stop broadcasting analog signals, they will be able to move their digital transmissions to the high powered frequencies that are freed up. That is when Canadian border cities will get higher powered digital broadcasts.

Also, many of the digital channels are currently interim licenses. These are typically low power. Once they become full time licenses, higher powered frequencies will likely be allocated.

I wish. :(

Vancouver: 300 watts: Pathetic.
Toronto: 160 watts: Pathetic.
Montréal: 450 watts: Pathetic.

The three largest metro areas in Canada being proposed to being served with such low power than I could best describe it as resembling a campus transmitter. Some of the larger plasmas actually consume more power (peak) than that. Pathetic.

I will be putting in an intervention on this one.

Points for others contemplating filing an intervention:
Be sure to read the instructions on how to file very carefully. See How to Participate in a CRTC Public Process (Broadcasting) (http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/INFO_SHT/G4.htm)
Don't wait until the last day to file an intervention online. I have learned this the hard way in the past.

I believe Global doesn't even bother with OTA for HD.

If stations are selecting OTA just to ensure space on primary cable then the rules ought to be changed.

I like the idea of additional choice -- and additional HD choice -- but it's not clear to me what this new network is offering. They've already said a local presence is not what they are planning: this is, basically, a pacific coast network. Bravo. But what do they offer Winnipeg? Halifax? Montreal? Toronto? Repeater signals in prime time? Reruns the rest of the day? Why not a single channel "network" like a typical "superstation"?

Channel allocations and power levels for border areas are set by agreements between Canada and the US. Digital signals are likely at low levels due to lack of available high power frequencies. This situation will get worse when the US stops using channels above 51 because those frequencies will be used for other services which precludes high powered Canadian stations on those frequencies.
Actually, the situation will get MUCH BETTER, not worse.

Currently there are 67 available channels (2..69 minus channel 37).
That will effectively drop to 44 channels . In addition to losing 52..69, broadcasters do NOT want VHF-LOW (2..6).

BUT there are positive factors that outweigh the loss of 1/3rd of available channels...

Most TV stations are currently running duplicate NTSC and ATSC channels. With the analog shutdown, 40 to 50 percent of channels will go off the air, without any loss of content. That'll clear up a lot of spectrum.
ATSC stations can be adjacent in the same market. E.g. in Buffalo, UHF channels 32, 33, and 34 are in use for ATSC. This means a potential 44 channels on the dial, as opposed to 34 NTSC channels on the old 2..69 spectrum.
SDTV reruns can be stuffed into sub-channels, rather than occupying full channels just by themselves.

Accept the low-power transmitters as a temporary compromise during the digital transition
Insist that the CRTC make it a condition of the licence that HDTV Networks switch to a reasonable power level at the first available opportunity. They may choose the same or different channel, depending on spectrum availability in the area."

You took the words out of my mouth. To tell HDTV Networks that we don't want them to broadcast at all if Industry Canada is unable to give them a high power station in all markets is not the correct approach in my mind. From reading the application (how many of you have actually read it?) it sounds like they want to become a real OTA broadcaster (not a poser like some stations) and will want a high power station where and when ever possible.

Besides on pg 322 of their application they state:

SELECTION OF DTV CHANNEL 26 TORONTO
In Toronto Channel 26 has been selected for use as a transitional DTV channel until such time as analog shut down has occurred in Canada. It is proposed that HDTV Network's Toronto station operate on Channel 26, through the transitional period. There is also the potential for this channel to be utilized post analog transition. Industry Canada is currently compiling a post transition DTV plan (not publicly available). The post-transition plan is likely to be completed prior to public gazetting of this application. In the event that the post-transition plan is publicly available prior to the public hearing to consider this application, we will file a technical brief for Toronto, for the use of a post-transition channel. Based upon our discussions with the consulting engineers, the First Canadian Place broadband DTV antenna (proposed for Ch. 26) would support an alternative DTV channel.

18 to 24 months from now is mid-June 2009, approx 4 months after the planned US analog shutdown, which opens up a bunch of channels.

That is true, but don't forget that HDTV Networks started writing the application in January 2006 and submitted it to the CRTC on December 14, 2006. I don't think they expected this process to take so long and were hoping to start broadcasting in 2008. To further support this, the estimated contours in their application show possible interference with US analog stations that will be shut down in Feb. 2009.

I count 14 high powered DT broadcasters in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellingham area. Apparently there are no high power channels available to Vancouver broadcasters in the current transitional period. Why would Industry Canada allow this to happen? I don't get it.

I count 14 high powered DT broadcasters in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellingham area. Apparently there are no high power channels available to Vancouver broadcasters in the current transitional period. Why would Industry Canada allow this to happen? I don't get it.
Probably because nobody asked (Global :rolleyes:). Also remember that the switchover was supposed to be done by now, so that space was to be available for Canadian stations.

As of Feb 17,2009 (assuming no further delays) all USA analog stations shut down, opening up spectrum.. Some of the analogs and transitional ATSC stations may be in channels 2..6 or 52..69. so that won't all count as extra spectrum, but there will be some. In addition, with ATSC, you can have adjacent-channel high-power stations in the same area. So there should be some breathing room for Canadian broadcasters.

It's a safe bet that the CRTC and Industry Canada will put high powered Canadian stations adjacent to every distant US station, making the US stations almost impossible to receive for most Canadians. That's what they did here. They even wiped some stations off cable with that tactic.

It's a safe bet that the CRTC and Industry Canada will put high powered Canadian stations adjacent to every distant US station, making the US stations almost impossible to receive
Adjacent DT channel do not affect each other.

Adjacent DT channel do not affect each other.Exactly - there are adjacent DTV channels all over the U.S. now and the ATSC/8VSB standard was formulated with that in mind.

That also depends on signal strengths. Strong local signals can interfere with weaker signals regardless of carrier type. Better receiving equipment is more immune but an overloaded receiver won't pick up digital or analog. Adjacent channels are not an issue if the signals are similar in strength.

Without delving into the IC database, I can't recall any Cdn DTV stations that have been given high powered licenses. All of the GTA DTV transmitters are under 40 kW (with most being significantly lower than that), vs. US stations also receivable in the GTA transmitting at up to 1.0 MW.
As well, in most markets only a small number of antennas would be on a common azimuth for US and local Cdn DTV transmitters making tuner overload even less likely.
If anything, it would be US residents worried about tuner overload while trying to get Canadian stations.

Roger1818 the use of channel 26 will not work even after analog shut down because the WNYB has selected to return their digital signal to 26 after analog shutdown.I suspect this is to reuse their antenna at the top of their tower.They should select another freq. like 17 after U.S. shutdown.160 watts is just a token to get priority on cable.