Newsgroups: rec.video.satellite.tvro Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 10:27:35 -0400 Sender: TV RO Satellite Technology From: Larry Van Horn To: Multiple recipients of list TVROSAT Mike Reynolds wrote: >Now my two questions to the net are: >(1) what is the FCC's definition of a grade B "intensity"? 47 CFR Part 73.683 Field Strength Contours. (a) In the authorization of TV stations, two field strength contours are considered. These are specified as Grade A and Grade B and indicate the approximate extent of coverage over average terrain in the absence of interference from other television stations. Under actual conditions, the true coverage may vary greatly from these estimates because the terrain over any specific path is expected to be different from the average terrain on which the field strength charts were based. The required field strength, F (50,50), in db above one micro-volt per meter (dBu) for the Grade A and Grade B contours are as follows: Grade A Grade B (dBu) (dBu) Channels 2-6 68 47 Channels 7-13 71 56 Channels 14-69 74 64 73.684 goes into - Prediction of coverage and would also be required reading for anyone wanting to fight this stupidity by a local network affiliate. The Part 73 rules for local TV stations are quite clear. They have to file contour maps with Grade A and B contour lines with the FCC. Those maps must be made available at the local station for public viewing. They have to show them to you. That would be the first thing I would check if I was going to fight a subscription revoke. Second, if the local affiliate is on channels 2-6, you might be able to make a strong case for continued service via satellite based on an argument of strong E-skip interference. E-skip is the lovely propagation mode that causes the strong interference bars on your TV set from late April to September and around December each year. It can get so strong at times to render local TV signals unusable. One minute your watching your local car dealer, next minute you have a Mexican soup from XEW in Mexico City. It can be a blast. Anyway I hope this helps add a little to the discussion. If you have anymore specific questions, I will try to answer them. >(2) what lobbyist(s) represented the satellite home viewers in the writing of >this anti-competion, restraint of trade, anti home viewer, preservation of big >monopoly act? There was no lobbyist representing us. As always, big money reins supreme and the consumer be damned. Enough, of this have a nice TVRO day: Larry Van Horn Managing Editor Satellite Times magazine