OTA Stations available in Austin, TX


#41

Between VHF 2-6 (lo) and 7-13 (hi), UHF 14-30 there are 30 frequency slots available. So a full channel repack is possible. In my area there are 15 full power stations available (not counting sub-channels). That’s about 50% of the frequency spectrum used that will be allocated for OTA by the FCC. I’m not sure OTA has to suffer at all.


#42

As far as I’m concerned the infomercial stations can go, and anything wasting spectrum such as 23-1 in Austin which is just broadcasting a Spanish radio station. UT has an OTA station with two sub channels.


#43

Agree! All these stations broadcasting radio occupying television frequencies have to go in the repack. That’s ridiculous - if they want to do radio, have them go to…radio and occupy an AM or FM frequency. There’s a ton of them in my area.


#44

That’s the main reason I have an antenna…for the subchannels.


#45

Came across this,

“Some stations in upper UHF Band will be forced to start broadcasting on VHF channels 2-6 as part of the ‘voluntary’ and much later ‘mandatory’ channel repacking.”

Get those lo VHF antennas (big honkers) ready… :grin: Maybe that’s where all those infomercial stations should go. On the other hand, VHF is easier to get than UHF with the appropriate antenna. I never liked those tiny, itsy-bitsy, anorexic UHF wavelengths. In days of yore, antennas were big and manly (stations were mainly VHF then). Even the channel numbers sounded right then - channel 2 or channel 6. Who the heck ever heard of channel 49 in those days?


#46

hmmm… I disagree that VHF is “easier”… it’s too pinpoint. I can usually get UHF with a simple indoor loop vs. a large outdoor directional VHF thingy… that’s my experience anyhow. (or did I simply misread sarcasm?)


#47

VHF waves are larger so they need larger antennas. However that gives them a broader beamwidth for antennas to detect. To give an example, PBS (VHF) is 30 degrees off axis for my antennas (the direction they point towards) yet it is the most easily picked up with the strongest signal strength.

UHF wavelengths are smaller which is why they are detected by smaller antennas. This is why I surmise mobile providers want these frequencies given that mobile devices are small. Which is why the FCC wants to reallocate only that part of the UHF spectrum for smaller devices.

In the future lo VHF channels will be picked up by old fashioned rabbit ears that extend outwards with the long whiskers appropriate for the VHF wavelength. Back to the good ole days of rabbit ears…

So you’re right that VHF is not easier to handle given its largeness and bulkiness (equipment). But once the right antenna is in place, its relatively easier to receive. However that is mitigated by circumstances such as mileage, etc.

BTW that part of the UHF spectrum the FCC is not reallocating has the largest UHF wavelengths (close to the hi VHF spectrum the FCC is not interested in).


#48

There was some sarcasm intended. The FCC forced stations to migrate from VHF to the UHF band during the digital cutover period (some stations refused). Now they’re forcing a re-migration back to VHF. Good ole Washington….

I used to have a big, old honker of a VHF antenna from Radio Shack that spanned it seems the whole roof! So there is some irony and sarcasm… I had to snap it into pieces when I took it down so I could fold it up and throw it away. It was a real museum piece.

BTW should there be a lo VHF station in Atlanta in the future I’d be interested in, rather than getting a large VHF Yagi type antenna (the long arrow thing), I’d prefer to make a loop antenna (which I’ve detailed elsewhere at this forum). More compact and easier to handle.


#49

I do not understand how channel 23 can make any money broadcasting a radio station, when there are major diginets that could replace it and would make the station a profit. Same with channel 19 showing QVC and religious programming. The amount of viewers has to be very low.


#50

17-4 is for lease. MICASSA didn’t renew their lease.


#51

I have a feeling you will be running your own local TV station soon with all your insider information on the market…


#52

I wasn’t getting anything and tracked down the owner. I told them I liked 17-4 and 17-5. They asked where I live and antenna i’m using for research


#53

We still don’t have 54.2 or 54.3. Rabbit Ears says .2 will be Grit and .3 will be Laff. Nothing was mentioned about 14.2.


#54

That’s what I heard from the engineer…


#55

54-2 and 54-3 on Jan 29. 7-4 “by end of month” is what I was told and it will be METV


#56

A new channel was added but for now it’s just the color bars, 19.5. If it’s like the same programming on the 1st four then it’s not worth adding.


#57

I’m sort of surprised to see how far behind Austin is (wow). But still, nice to see.


#58

How can Austin be “far behind?” It’s the only progressive part of Texas.


#59

Just keep repeating that over and over and eventually it will be perceived as truth.


#60

Still no AntennaTV, or HEROES and our RETROTV and REVN went off the air.

At least we have MOVIES!, METV, GRIT, and the major networks. There’s plenty of infomercial stations and stations in Spanish. I wish Tablo had the English soundtrack for Unimas.