OTA Stations available in Austin, TX


#21

go to http://www.titantv.com/profile/lineups.aspx
Click on Edit Channels
Click on Add Channels
Click on Find Channel To Add By Name
Type network name “ION”
Fill out screen as below and click on add channel


#22

hey - thxs for the info - titan does not have the best UI


#23

Thanks! I’m going to SA for Thanksgiving and Christmas. IF Roku is ever able to be used remotely, I might think about getting a second Tablo and placing it in SA. If we had user names, then we could share Tablos and only have watching ability instead of adding channels and changing anything. I do hope @TabloTV goes in that direction, but fixing the existing problems in LPW is more important.


#24

I might have found your problem for 12-2. What antenna do you have? KSAT-TV, virtual and VHF digital channel 12,


#25

I use a Clearstream 2V. It’s weathered and not as good as it was when new. Channel 12 doesn’t have the power like 7 and it is 62 miles from me. It comes in fine most of the time but I wish 12 went UHF.


#26

Kind of how 62 does for me. It is actually in Killeen and is broadcast on VHF 13


#27

I just read on tvnewscheck.com that 14.2 will be Laff and one of the 54’s will be Grit. Both are nice but I get those two out of San Antonio now.


#28

@TabloTV of course you know as soon as broadcast begins on 54-2 and 14-2 that i’ll let you know. Wonder if 36-3 missing from EPG will be fixed prior to these two new stations.


#29

Part of the process is actually getting data from those stations… If you’re chatting with the engineering staff there you can mention it :slight_smile:


#30

36-3 itendentifies itself as IONTV so why can’t the guide provider just plug it is, like apprenty Titan TV did. They are the only one of a group I found that has it. I’ll email Mark.


#31

Just emailed and learned it will be 54-2 and 54-3 but near the end of the year. They need some equipment.


#32

i added GritTV and LAFF to my TitanTV lineup (BEFORE they are really there) just so I can get an idea of the kind of programming they carry. I can’t wait for “Walker Texas Ranger” and other shows.


#33

Will there be a new 14.2 station then?


#34

I think so, since Mark said there would be, but those stations will be 54. I emailed him asking about the EPG for 36-3. But he didn’t way what it would be. He only said by the end of the year for 54-2 and 54-3.


#35

http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?mktid=65 According to this, it will be the way you said. Guess we just have to wait and see. Meanwhile, I STILL don’t have EPG for 36-3. Tonight I called IONTV and told them. I’ve also contacted Zap2it on Facebook. Hopefully soon


#36

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/mobile/index/link/id/90232

I found this article interesting. It’s about San Antonio stations and the future of OTA.


#37

Here’s a quote from another article discussing the fate of NPR (notice the reference to “TV stations”):

“The bad news, however, is that the radio part of public radio may be in slow and irreversible decline, a fate faced by newspapers, TV stations and other kinds of legacy media in the digital age.”

I was asking myself this question last year - how long would OTA last? It costs money for electricity\power to daily transmit RF signals. What is the incentive for a TV station to do so as the OTA population is small?

The problem is that the FCC, a public organization, is doing this auction to benefit private corporations. The end result is to drive viewers towards these corporations. Why is the government doing this - when has that become its function? And this is happening during a Democrat administration!

If however, stations converted their signal to VHF from UHF (as has been surmised since the auction is for the 600-700 MHz band or UHF) to release their current frequencies to the FCC, then this might be a blessing in disguise. VHF is easier to receive (both my VHF stations have the highest signal strength) but would require a change in antennas for some viewers. I believe that these corporations are more interested in the UHF spectrum.

The question is would stations be willing to convert to VHF if they can still retain a viewership through cable minus transmission costs?

“The Commission is considering reallocating UHF TV channels 31-51 for mobile data, compacting the nation’s over the air TV stations onto VHF channels 2-13 and UHF channels 14-30.”

In my case, PBS and NBC are already VHF, CBS is channel 19 and FOX is channel 27. So none of my majors would be affected except ABC which is 37 and falls within the auction spectrum. The majority of my stations falling within the auction spectrum are minor stations. If ABC were to move to lo VHF (channels 2-6), that would mean a lo VHF antenna for me, probably a loop antenna in addition to what I have already.

This BTW has also become known as “channel repack” and affects Canada as well (especially stations along the US-Canadian border).

“It will be the largest spectrum auction since 2008, and could earn the U.S. treasury billions, tempered by payouts to television stations agreeing to shut down their transmitters, and to compensate remaining stations for the cost of moving operations to a new channel number, when necessary.”

This frequency reallocation exercise also occurred in the digital cutover period when in the US the UHF band for television was redefined downward from 69 to 51. So now it is being squeezed even more to make room for mobile video.

“To ensure ongoing innovation in mobile broadband, we must pursue several strategies vigorously: freeing up more spectrum for both licensed use and for unlicensed services like Wi-Fi; driving faster speeds, greater capacity, and ubiquitous mobile Internet coverage; and taking additional steps to ensure that our invisible infrastructure for mobile innovation can meet the needs of the 21st century,” the agency’s chairman, Julius Genachowski, said in a statement.

Fun times ahead… :hushed:


#38

Channel Repack

The FCC predicts stations could effectively share channels and still retain HD service. For example, a local CBS station could agree to surrender its license and broadcast instead over the transmitting facilities of the local NBC station, splitting one station’s allocated channel bandwidth in half. Other stations will be relocated on the dial or moved to different transmitter sites to reduce potential interference from stations in nearby cities.

Stations that do not require an HD service could share space with those serving several standard definition channels to the public. These are typically public, educational, or ethnic-oriented broadcasters.

As a consequence, the FCC says many stations might have to give up on their “multicast” standard definition secondary services — the 24 hour local weather or news channel, Me-TV, This TV, Retro TV, Antenna TV, and Bounce, for example, because there would be insufficient bandwidth when two services sharing one channel are transmitting in HD.

I want my “Happy Days” and “Rawhide” dammit!!!


#39

That could explain why the two new Austin stations will be 54-2 and 54-3 instead of 14-2 like the press releases said. Guess we’ll know next month.


#40

Something like this is already being done in Atlanta. Television stations now share a broadcast tower instead of each one building their own. So facilities are already being shared to some extent. This is what allows Atlantans to face their antennas in one direction (in my case 205 degrees).