Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

ATSC 3.0 Forum
Post Reply
N5XZS
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:37 pm
x 1

Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by N5XZS »

Out of curiosity, has anyone with ATSC 3.0 reciever managed to pull KBRO-LD in, on rf ch. 2 out of Denver via E-skip on VHF low band?

Just wanted see how robust ATSC 3.0's signal survive the E-skip compare to ATSC 1.0?😎

Thanks!🙂

jsmar
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jsmar »

That's a fairly low power station (275W). Sporadic E season is coming up, and back when I had a low VHF TV antenna I used to get a few different far away stations on Channel 3 (which would interfere with my reception of KWGN on channel 2), but most people don't have good low VHF antenna's anymore, since almost no DTV channels use it; i.e. why have an antenna with such large elements when a decent high VHF antenna is so much more conveniently sized. In fact, most people just have UHF antenna's because even the number of DTV stations on high VHF channels is not that great (and early in the digital transition many stations that started on high VHF petitioned to switch to UHF). Of course, many people don't even know about the different types of antennas nd just buy a "digital" antenna. :)

Then throw in the fact that not many people are constantly scanning for DX TV signals. That is at least one advantage that low VHF stations have, in that there are not that many stations using that range. I run some software that scans all the TV channels 24 hours a day, and I used to get some DX UHF DTV stations fairly regularly, but after the repack that pretty much never happens, since there is a local station on just about every TV frequency in the UHF range in the Denver area, and probably most other major TV markets.

Sporadic E can do some amazing things, but I have serious doubts about the likelihood of receiving KBRO that way. You are correct in that if it was going to happen at all, ATSC3.0 increases the chances, because a decode of an ATSC1.0 signal after a bounce like that might prove difficult.

jasonl
Expert
Posts: 15581
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:23 pm
x 33

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jasonl »

Tough ask. Most of the area that might get it via skip is just empty land or at most farmland, and KNOP and KHME are going to clobber it for a lot of places too.

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

Since there isn't a dedicated ATSC 3.0 thread for Denver, CO. Does anyone know what the QAM16 signal for KWGN?

jsmar
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jsmar »

It's QAM256 with a LDPC code rate of 11/15.

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

jsmar wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 3:25 pm It's QAM256 with a LDPC code rate of 11/15.
So there is no QAM16 stream at all?

jsmar
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jsmar »

No. There is only one PLP.

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

jsmar wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:45 pm No. There is only one PLP.
So they put all their lighthouse channels on one PLP?

kyl416
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 12:09 pm
Device ID: 1080DB11
Location: Tobyhanna, PA
x 36
Contact:

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by kyl416 »

The "Lighthouse" term refers to ATSC 3.0 stations that share their signal with other stations in the market.

KBRO-LD isn't a "lighthouse", it's a standalone ATSC 3.0 LPTV operation run by Dish currently carrying promotional channels like Dish Studio, Hopper Promos, PPV Previews and some audio channels.

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

kyl416 wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:44 am The "Lighthouse" term refers to ATSC 3.0 stations that share their signal with other stations in the market.

KBRO-LD isn't a "lighthouse", it's a standalone ATSC 3.0 LPTV operation run by Dish currently carrying promotional channels like Dish Studio, Hopper Promos, PPV Previews and some audio channels.
I know. I was asking about KWGN.
Does anyone know what the QAM16 signal for KWGN?
I went on further to say I used this thread since there wasn't one made for Denver, CO. KWGN is a Lighthouse, and is sharing with other 3.0 channels from one RF transmitter.

jsmar
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jsmar »

xmguy wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 9:56 am So they put all their lighthouse channels on one PLP?
Yes, each of the four stations (KDVR, KWGN, KMGH and KUSA) are equally sharing the bandwidth and all are contained in one PLP. The only major network that is not participating is KCNC (a CBS station).

I haven't seen any changes in what they are sending since I've been monitoring them other than the electronic service guide (They made a small change about 4 weeks ago, and then completely stopped updating the service guide 2 weeks ago, i.e. they are continuing to provide guide data for the 3 days from 5/23 - 5/26)

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

jsmar wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 10:30 am
xmguy wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 9:56 am So they put all their lighthouse channels on one PLP?
Yes, each of the four stations (KDVR, KWGN, KMGH and KUSA) are equally sharing the bandwidth and all are contained in one PLP. The only major network that is not participating is KCNC (a CBS station).

I haven't seen any changes in what they are sending since I've been monitoring them other than the electronic service guide (They made a small change about 4 weeks ago, and then completely stopped updating the service guide 2 weeks ago, i.e. they are continuing to provide guide data for the 3 days from 5/23 - 5/26)
Got it. Thanks. I assume long range/robust signal isn't a concern for this station? Most I've read about or seen in my Nashville, TN market use a 16bit modulation scheme for the "robustness" claimed as a selling point to 3.0. But with all of these being in testing. No idea what will happen to these signals in the far future.

jsmar
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jsmar »

xmguy wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:06 am Got it. Thanks. I assume long range/robust signal isn't a concern for this station? Most I've read about or seen in my Nashville, TN market use a 16bit modulation scheme for the "robustness" claimed as a selling point to 3.0. But with all of these being in testing. No idea what will happen to these signals in the far future.
I guess it depends on your definition of long range / robust signal. QAM256 is the sweet spot for roughly matching the same broadcast coverage as an ATSC 1.0 signal. Since this is a full power broadcast, I'm receiving it just fine 60 miles away, but I have antennas on the roof. As Nick mentioned in one of his posts, most ATSC3.0 stations that aren't doing a lot of testing of variations (which the Sinclair stations appear to be doing a lot of) are choosing a modulation that duplicates their existing ATSC 1.0 coverage. I'm glad they chose QAM256 because I'd prefer they use the bandwidth for video quality rather than signal range.

xmguy
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 am
Device ID: 10815046, 1037F17E
Location: McMinnville, TN
x 5

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by xmguy »

jsmar wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 12:10 pm
xmguy wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:06 am Got it. Thanks. I assume long range/robust signal isn't a concern for this station? Most I've read about or seen in my Nashville, TN market use a 16bit modulation scheme for the "robustness" claimed as a selling point to 3.0. But with all of these being in testing. No idea what will happen to these signals in the far future.
I guess it depends on your definition of long range / robust signal. QAM256 is the sweet spot for roughly matching the same broadcast coverage as an ATSC 1.0 signal. Since this is a full power broadcast, I'm receiving it just fine 60 miles away, but I have antennas on the roof. As Nick mentioned in one of his posts, most ATSC3.0 stations that aren't doing a lot of testing of variations (which the Sinclair stations appear to be doing a lot of) are choosing a modulation that duplicates their existing ATSC 1.0 coverage. I'm glad they chose QAM256 because I'd prefer they use the bandwidth for video quality rather than signal range.
I have BETTER performance on 1.0 from stations on the same tower/farm, at the same power level as the near by 3.0 station via 256. 16 is great and never has issues. I do have issues with a full power 3.0 station, and it's QAM256 signal coming and going. Where its 1.0 RF neighbor comes in stable and fine. Using CM3020, Antenna 20' off ground. 1000' above sea level. 62-68 miles away.

jasonl
Expert
Posts: 15581
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:23 pm
x 33

Re: Has anyone managed to DX ATSC 3.0 KBRO-LD on rf ch. 2 via E-skip?

Post by jasonl »

Denver's stations transmit from ~2400' above the populated area, vs. the ~950' or so Nashville's towers are above you. Also, despite the large mountains to the west, Denver and its suburbs are mostly flat.

Post Reply