Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
When the tower was originally built, it was just CJOH, CBOT, and CBOFT at the top, and I imagine a handful of FMs.

The first tower at Camp Fortune was built in the early sixties by Frank Ryan, then owner of CFRA 580 / CFRA-FM 93.9, and unsuccessful applicant for the TV license eventually won by Bushnel's CJOH.

It's not clear to me whether the CBC bought the tower from the Ryan estate in the mid sixties, or built a new one in the same place. Any oldtimers know the history?
Not an old timer, but according to Wikipedia, Ryan Tower "originally stood at the foot of the Carp Ridge in the town of Hazeldean, Ontario (present-day Kanata), and was disassembled in sections and relocated to its current location for superior coverage."

Not sure if it was moved when CBC bought it or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Did the CRTC approve CBOFT's application? I was planning on intervening against it (but ran out of time), not only because I thought Global was more deserving, but also because the lower HAAT would be problematic for those further north (on the Quebec side, where a large percentage of their viewers are). CBOFT's problems could have likely been resolved with more power and education on the need for a VHF antenna (CJOH on 13 is one of the easiest stations to receive).

If CBOFT's application did/does get approved, maybe Global could take over channel 9, as it would be much better than 6. This may require some shuffling as CBC may want to put a UHF antenna at the top of the tower (where the channel 9 antenna is) for both CBOT and CBOFT, but the channel 9 antenna could be moved down to where the channel 4 antenna is/was. Alternately, I think channel 50 is available instead (though they may need to move to Herbert's Corners).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
HWP, How well are you able to receive CBOT and TVO? CBOFT will be similar if/when they move to UHF.

BTW, how is your 10Y6S working? Can you receive Global with it? The elevation of Global's transmitter may be a problem for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Global is underpowered, but another factor is elevation. They are the lowest TV transmitter on the tower.

As for CBOFT, looking at your TVFool results, I would guess they will drop more than 10 dB when they move lower on the tower. I think this move will be problematic for their primary audience (they will drop from the strongest to the weakest French station for for many on the Quebec side).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
We are really getting off thread here, but CBOFT will not be the same as SunTV was. SunTV was on channel 20, but that is now being used by CJMT. CBOFT plan to use SunTV's post transition allocation of channel 33.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
I believe post transition Global has always had this SD sub-channel, but it is usually marked as hidden. It isn't so much to save the cable headends from downconverting, but to provide a stream with a 4:3 aspect ratio, allowing MC to choose when to letterbox or centre cut.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Interesting. Global is applying for DTV transmitters in Penticton for both CHKL (ch 30, 3000W) and CHBC (ch 32, 3000W). Both will be transmitted from the same tower with the same EHAAT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
^^^It could be that the CRTC hasn't posted all of the applications yet. These are ones they feel need a public proceeding. If they were approved without one, we won't see the application for several months. Or it could be that they just haven't processed all of them yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
The programming isn't identical. CHBC has some local programming (news). Maybe the thought is those from Vancouver with cabins in the area want the Vancouver station, where as the locals will want the "local" station.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
But it still seems to be a waste of bandwidth.
Spectrum efficiency is a non issue outside of major urban centres. It is not as if there are 15 transmitters in Penticton competing for spectrum with neighbouring cities. I do agree that it seems rather a strange decision by Global.

I wonder if they are hoping to make CHBC a CBC affiliate in August?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
^^^That certainly is strange. The 1 hour delay is only in the afternoon and primetime schedules. Between 12am & 12pm as well as 3 & 7 pm the schedules on both zap2it and Global's website agree, but they are quite different for CHBC for both early afternoon and primetime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Just because they are using RF14 in Ottawa doesn't mean they have to use the same channel in Paris. I have said all along that Global's Paris transmitter should be moved to Woodstock, but that may not happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Most likely there is. The CRTC released a bunch of applications from Shaw last week for BC DTV transmitters, so there is a good chance the application has already been filed and the delay is likely from the CRTC itself. If not, they could still be working out the details (co-ordination with several parties is often necessary).

Also, the Ottawa application is going through a public hearing. If the Paris application was rubber stamped, it would take longer for it to be published.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
By channel do you mean a new station, or just another re-transmitter of Global Toronto? I feel Global should have more stations in Ontario, especially now that they are no longer licensed as a regional station.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
The Engineering Brief in the application states that the proposed new transmitter in Ottawa will not "cause any area of possible interference to" the following stations:

Code:
Call Letters Channel Location
ON-PT-1343   14R     Barrie, ON
WUTV-PT      14R     Buffalo, NY
CBVU-PT      15R     Maniwaki, QC
and the interference caused to the following stations is within approved limits:

Code:
Call Letters Channel Location        Pop     Affected %
QC-PT-2086   14R     Sherbrooke, QC  481,900  7,861   1.6
WPTZ-PT3     14R     North Pole, NY  463,804  1,488   0.3
NY-PT-10793  14R     Syracuse, NY    942,446  3,209   0.3
It also includes interference maps, but none include Montreal.

Having said that, assuming you are using an at least somewhat directional antenna, I doubt if it will cause significant reception issues in Montreal. QC-PT-2086 in Sherbrooke would be a more significant source of problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Is it possible to receive WUTV Buffalo or WPTZ from Ottawa? Maybe, in tropo conditions. Moving CIII-DT-6 Ottawa to RF 14 will just make it impossible for Ottawa residents, and create interference for Montreal and Toronto markets during tropo conditions.
LOL. Buffalo is more than 350km from Ottawa, so receiving WUTV would require a pretty extreme tropo event! As for WPTZ, it was receivable in the most eastern parts Ottawa when the analog transmitter was on Terry Mountain in New York. The DTV transmitter was built on Mount Mansfield in Vermont and is now completely blocked by mountains and thus completely un-receivable in any part of Ottawa.

In reality central Ottawa is unable to receive any American broadcasts due to a hill south of the city. People in the far east, west and south ends can receive PBS (WNPI or WCFE) and if they are lucky, maybe CBS and FOX (on WNYF-LD). That's it.

As for causing problems for Toronto, that is also extremely unlikely since it is about 350 km away. That is just too far to cause any significant problems, especially if you consider Ottawa is in a totally different direction so their antenna will have considerably less gain.

Also, don't forget that analog channel 14 was used in Ottawa by CJMT-TV-2 up until the analog shutdown last August. If you didn't receive interference from it, you likely won't notice a problem with Global. Channel 14 is also being used in Foymount, ON by CBOT-TV-1 until July 31 (when they shut down all of their remaining network owned analog transmitters).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,332 Posts
Stampeder, in your Seattle example, both stations are broadcast from a similar location with a similar power so it isn't comparable. With ATSC, adjacent channel interference becomes a problem when there is a large difference in received power. Optimally the frequency plan should be overhauled to have all the stations from the same or nearby towers use sequential channels with similar ERPs.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top