Silicondust LPTV

ATSC 3.0 Nextgen TV Forum
Post Reply
nickk
Silicondust
Posts: 20997
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 9:39 am
x 378

Silicondust LPTV

Post by nickk »

Last week we have applied for LPTV licenses in 4 cities:
Phoenix AZ
Tucson AZ
Hartford CT
Fort Myers FL

There are multiple applicants so we don't know yet if we will get all locations.

We have a technology plan, content plan, and lots of ways everyone can be involved.

More locations may be possible working with other licensees.

More info to follow...

AlbumMan
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:00 am
x 1

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by AlbumMan »

Interesting. Am anxious for more info when available.

signcarver
Expert
Posts: 11537
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:04 am
Device ID: 10A05954 10802091 131B34B7 13231F92 1070A18E 1073ED6F 15300C36
x 28

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by signcarver »

I'm about 5 miles (NNW) from the channel 7 proposal in Phoenix but it looks like I may not even be able to pick it up due to the heart shaped pattern. I just got a smartkom, which actually helped me out with several channels, and it seems to be begging me to attach a low vhf antenna to one of its inputs.

Cabal
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:53 pm
x 71

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by Cabal »

Come to Austin!

DigitalBrad
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:15 am

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by DigitalBrad »

nickk wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2026 9:48 pm Last week we have applied for LPTV licenses in 4 cities:
Phoenix AZ
Tucson AZ
Hartford CT
Fort Myers FL

There are multiple applicants so we don't know yet if we will get all locations.

We have a technology plan, content plan, and lots of ways everyone can be involved.

More locations may be possible working with other licensees.

More info to follow...
Awesome....
Raleigh / Durham, NC is an excellent ATSC 3.0 market

sdust
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:39 am

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by sdust »

I hope the plan is not to go with ATSC 3.0 which is DOA.

I am surprised seeing ATSC 3.0 infrastructure being build - AVSend. How did Silicon Dust end up on the wrong side? Advertising?

nickk
Silicondust
Posts: 20997
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 9:39 am
x 378

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by nickk »

sdust wrote: Sun Mar 22, 2026 5:05 pm I hope the plan is not to go with ATSC 3.0 which is DOA.
Hoping to do both ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 in Phoenix. With ATSC 3.0 we can demonstrate technology. With ATSC 1.0 we can get viewers.

Hartford will be ATSC 1.0.
Fort Myers we might go ATSC 3.0 as there are no ATSC 3.0 stations there.
Tucson is TBD and will depend on what channels we get.
sdust wrote: Sun Mar 22, 2026 5:05 pm I am surprised seeing ATSC 3.0 infrastructure being build - AVSend. How did Silicon Dust end up on the wrong side? Advertising?
Our AVSend service is good for stations and good for viewers... win-win. You are not being tracked by AVSend.

Cabal
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:53 pm
x 71

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by Cabal »

Will you be demoing some 4K content, like in Eugene, OR?

jasonl
Silicondust
Posts: 17704
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:23 pm
x 94

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by jasonl »

signcarver wrote: Sun Mar 22, 2026 7:25 am I'm about 5 miles (NNW) from the channel 7 proposal in Phoenix but it looks like I may not even be able to pick it up due to the heart shaped pattern. I just got a smartkom, which actually helped me out with several channels, and it seems to be begging me to attach a low vhf antenna to one of its inputs.
KAZT-DT's protected contour from Mingus Mountain extends well into the north part of Phoenix even though it isn't receivable in most of the area because of the Rim, so Shaw Butte with a directional antenna with a big null to the north is the best option for 7 to reach the largest part of Phoenix. There are a couple other sites that applications have been submitted for 7, one from the White Tanks, one from the Usery Mountains, and a couple from South Mountain with very little power to the north.

RickD_99
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 7:18 am
x 2

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by RickD_99 »

Come to Birmingham Alabama and give us some 4K OTA via ATSC 1.0!

cncb
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:56 pm
x 1

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by cncb »

What exactly is LPTV?

Cabal
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:53 pm
x 71

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by Cabal »


bobchase
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:25 pm
Device ID: 10810736
x 1

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by bobchase »

jasonl wrote: Sun Mar 22, 2026 8:39 pm
signcarver wrote: Sun Mar 22, 2026 7:25 am I'm about 5 miles (NNW) from the channel 7 proposal in Phoenix but it looks like I may not even be able to pick it up due to the heart shaped pattern. I just got a smartkom, which actually helped me out with several channels, and it seems to be begging me to attach a low vhf antenna to one of its inputs.
KAZT-DT's protected contour from Mingus Mountain extends well into the north part of Phoenix even though it isn't receivable in most of the area because of the Rim, so Shaw Butte with a directional antenna with a big null to the north is the best option for 7 to reach the largest part of Phoenix. There are a couple other sites that applications have been submitted for 7, one from the White Tanks, one from the Usery Mountains, and a couple from South Mountain with very little power to the north.
If you go with the Shaw Butte location be sure your lease agreement covers whatever you intend to do now and in the future. The reason we killed the FSN up there was that the tower owner decided that even though we only had one transmitter operating on one channel, they decided that we owed them 6X the original lease amount per month because we were re-broadcasting six stations on that one channel. They figured that every station on the 3.0 SFN owed them the full lease amount. So the SFN site for ch27 on Shaw is no more.

nickk
Silicondust
Posts: 20997
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 9:39 am
x 378

Re: Silicondust LPTV

Post by nickk »

bobchase wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2026 9:53 am If you go with the Shaw Butte location be sure your lease agreement covers whatever you intend to do now and in the future. The reason we killed the FSN up there was that the tower owner decided that even though we only had one transmitter operating on one channel, they decided that we owed them 6X the original lease amount per month because we were re-broadcasting six stations on that one channel. They figured that every station on the 3.0 SFN owed them the full lease amount. So the SFN site for ch27 on Shaw is no more.
Wow... thanks for the heads up.

Post Reply