Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

OTA Station Status: Ottawa, Watertown NY, S. Colton NY

755K views 3K replies 314 participants last post by  Trip 
#1 ·
It's interesting that Rogers is applying for two out-of-town DTV signals, and no sign of when CHRO-DT, which is local to Ottawa, will build their DTV transmitter. Rogers built a large media complex a few years ago in the Byward Market, two blocks from our place, and I have to wonder whether or not there was any consideration given at the time to DTV broadcasting.
 
#52 · (Edited)
Guys, I have lived in Ottawa since school and remember when cable first started in the late 60's. Ottawa has always been a cable town because receiving US TV signals OTA around here is not really worth the effort. Back then people used to buy all kinds of expensive antenna gear, rotors, high towers, splitters etc. They came to the conclusion that cable was the only way to go.

Originally the cable cos tried it with local banks of really high antennas which brought in two US channels somewhat reliably and other channels that were marginal. They then went with a microwave link to someplace west of Kingston on the lake which brought in reliable US channels. Today of course we get the Detroit stations and reliability isn't an issue.

So the reason I'm telling you this is that you are wasting your time and money trying to receive US HD stations reliably. What you are trying is at best a hobby so please keep that in perspective.:)
 
#53 ·
So how high should the antenna be?

Now that I have discovered my biggest problem maybe my physical location, in the deep Ottawa valley near the Ottawa River. I guess my only choice would now be to get a higher tower for my antenna. Now the big question is how high should it be?

I'm not inrested in Rogers nor Satellite. I prefer the over the air free service, even with all these problems. I will live with whatever I get from OTA (HD or no HD).

Marc
 
#54 · (Edited by Moderator)
Blackburn Hamlet

mxg123 said:
I now feel I'm facing a huge roadblock, and can not move forward, unless I moved south of Ottawa. The Ottawa valley seems to be a death trap for any HD signal from the US. People that might have success around here, are outside the Ottawa metro area, in the southern region, which is on a higher plateau. Being on this higher plateau, might be the simple reason why people in this forum had sucess with HD.
I agree that the valley is the major road block that prevents us from getting signals from the US. Mountains would be the 2nd.

I'm in Blackburn Hamlet (map: http://www.blackburnhamlet.ca/Blackburnmap.jpg) and get WNPI almost all the time, and WCFE most of the time. There has to be some people within the city of Ottawa that have had success with this.

Speaking of traps, I believe I get better results when I use an FM trap. If I had braces, I could get 90.7 and other CBC stations...

-gmd
 
#55 ·
elevation

Using Google earth, I was able to determine my topographical elevation. My house sits at about 192 ft above see level. My house, being at about 27ft high, and the antenna adding about another 7ft, so it would place my antenna at about 226ft.

Norwood, NY, sits at around 330ft. I just do not know how high the WNPI broadcasting tower goes. So this means a lot of flat land between these two points, and a slight elevation in between could mess things up. There is a small plateau in between which goes up to about 291. So I just do not know if all this simply means that I'm doomed in ever receiving a clear HD signal from the US.

Otown47 comments seem to indicate that I'm simply wasting my time and money, so I just do not know where to go from here now.

Again last night I was able to receive the flashing HDTV signal off and on, with a weak signal followed by an intermittent strong signal. I was able to get this for both channels 23 and 38.

Marc
 
#56 ·
Just for kicks I did an elevation profile from Gatineau to Norwood. I used an atmospheric correction factor of 1.3 and approxiamte end coordaintes and elevations. If you get more precise numbers (tower/house elevation above ground or MSL and lat/long) for me I can whip up another plot.

But you are all corect. That big hunk of land about 15-30km south of Gatineau is going to impact the signal.
 

Attachments

#57 ·
mxg123 said:
Using Google earth, I was able to determine my topographical elevation. My house sits at about 192 ft above see level. My house, being at about 27ft high, and the antenna adding about another 7ft, so it would place my antenna at about 226ft.

Norwood, NY, sits at around 330ft. I just do not know how high the WNPI broadcasting tower goes. So this means a lot of flat land between these two points, and a slight elevation in between could mess things up. There is a small plateau in between which goes up to about 291. So I just do not know if all this simply means that I'm doomed in ever receiving a clear HD signal from the US.
According to w9wi.com the WNPI-DT[23] tower is 241.6m (792.7ft) above average terrain and the WNPI-TV[18] tower is 243.0m (797.2ft) above average terrain and according to Google Earth the Elevation at the tower is 1226ft.

The other factor you will have to consider is the curvature of the earth. Others on here might be able to tell you the easiest way to compensate for that.
 
#58 ·
Using Roger's numbers and the lat/long in the URL (plus the lat/long of Canal/Bank St.) it is telling me you would have to have your antenna at about 450 ft above sea level to clear the hills to the south. I took into account the curvature of the earth and atmospheric refraction. That is not to say you will not get a signal at a lower elevation though. You just will not get a direct signal.
 
#59 ·
antenna height

Jake said:
Using Roger's numbers and the lat/long in the URL (plus the lat/long of Canal/Bank St.) it is telling me you would have to have your antenna at about 450 ft above sea level to clear the hills to the south. I took into account the curvature of the earth and atmospheric refraction. That is not to say you will not get a signal at a lower elevation though. You just will not get a direct signal.
Thank you Jake for all your input.

I had so much trouble in getting someone here to install my current antenna, that I just do not know who would install it for me at that height. Do you know anyone in this area that could install me at that height?

Again I do not want to spend other hard earned money, to then not get better results. Otown47 warned me about all this, and I just do not know if I should just listen to him.

Although I would love to get an antenna at a higher height, and do start to enjoy real HD signals, and no more ghosts in all the other ones, I do not want to spend hundreds of dollars (possibly thousands), to end up with the same receptions I'm presently having.
 
#60 ·
mxg123 said:
I do not want to spend other hard earned money, to then not get better results. Otown47 warned me about all this, and I just do not know if I should just listen to him.
I think given your specific situation it is best for you to decide if you want to have:
  1. a regular, reliable TV source
  2. a hobby, acknowledging that your particular area requires heroic measures for OTA DTV
If you want the first with OTA, you will need a really tall mast and deepest fringe gear, and even then your results may not be satisfactory. If you want the second, build the OTA system that will give you the best performance but meanwhile acknowledge that reliability and performance may or may not be satisfactory. Local HAMs would be able to point you to an antenna mast installer.

If you want the first, go with satellite or cable. I hope this helps to clear things up for you.
 
#61 ·
Jake said:
Using Roger's numbers and the lat/long in the URL (plus the lat/long of Canal/Bank St.) it is telling me you would have to have your antenna at about 450 ft above sea level to clear the hills to the south. I took into account the curvature of the earth and atmospheric refraction. That is not to say you will not get a signal at a lower elevation though. You just will not get a direct signal.
450 ft above sea level??? If you consider that Marc said that his house is 192 ft above sea level that means he would need an antenna that is 258 ft high (or about 230 ft if he put it on his roof). I am not sure if his neighours would appreciate the asthetics of such an antenna.

He will probably have a better chance of picking up WCFE-DT[38] from Plattsburgh when it goes full power. The tower is 737.0 m above average terrain and it is at an elevation of 3676 ft above sea level. In good weather I can pick up WCFE-TV[57] in Stittsville and I am even further away and don't have a very good antenna for deep fringe reception.
 
#62 ·
I assumed when I mentioned the tower height you would immediately realize it is out of reach. :p I admire your determination though.

Plus my software is only a starting point. I don't know enough about specific 'ground effects' and multipath at those frequencies to say whether the numbers are realistic. I suspect they are close enough.
 
#63 ·
He will probably have a better chance of picking up WCFE-DT[38] from Plattsburgh when it goes full power.
You mean it's not full power? (huh???)

BTW, HD w/5.1 sure looked nice yesterday. Can't wait for the transition to take place.

I hope together we figure it out and why you don't get it. These elevation maps sure look neat!

-gmd
 
#65 ·
more kw needed

If WCFE is broadcasting at 100kw, how come WNPI is only at 40kw? That's if I'm readying the database charts well (I'm a newbie with all this, in case anyone noticed before.)

As for me it does not seem to matter, because I'm unable to get any of these two stations' analog or digital channel. Maybe if they broadcasted higher watts? I just do not know if that would make any difference since I'm so far north, in a deep valley near the Ottawa River. (191ft see level)
 
#68 ·
The software is Global Mapper. You can get US and Canadian digital elevation maps freely from the respective government website. GM runs in trial mode so you can only load 4 layers at a time. I just started using it myself and discovered it has a Transmitter Line of Sight Tool. Basically, you enter the lat/long of the transmitter plus height of tower and it will generate a coverage map using the supplied DEMs.

I wanted to point out that many of the transmitters mentioned in this thread are directional so power is not going to help you if it directed to the south. Stampeder I recall a website that showed the various lobes for each transmitter. Do you remember it?
 
#70 ·
FCC TV Query site: tv station database

The FCC uses that Tiger database tool for their own purposes too. I find it really slow.

Here's the official FCC way to get more specific station info, including contour maps:

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/tvq.html

Hint: you don't need to fill in all the blanks. You can just put the call sign letters in. Entering WCFE led me to this map:



Note that the map does not give the absolute finite coverage area of the station. It gives a specific expected range at a specific strength (in this case 41dBu) so the actual range is much further. Basically any tv receiver within the circled area should get a clear and reliable signal assuming all is set up properly.
 
#74 ·
stampeder said:
Based on where you are and your current reception of CBOT, any predictions on what reception of CBOT-DT will be like for your location?
Probably CICO-TV-24 (TVO) is the best station to predict reception of either CBOT-DT or CBOFT-DT as they are close to the same frequency and are broadcast from the same tower.

Regardless, I suspect I won't have any troubles at all as both CBOT and TVO come in well, even with rabbit ears.
 
Top