FCC initiates incentive auction of broadcast spectrum

[W9BU]

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission announced today that they plan to go forward with an auction of additional television broadcast spectrum. This was an unofficial announcement in advance of notices of proposed rule making and their public comment periods.

"(Washington, D.C.) – The Federal Communications Commission today voted to officially launch the incentive auction process, making the United States the first nation in the world to implement this major policy innovation, which aims to repurpose broadcast television spectrum for mobile broadband use. The concept was first introduced in the National Broadband Plan as part of the Commission’s multi-pronged strategy to meet skyrocketing demand for mobile Internet in the United States, and became the foundation for legislation that was signed into law in February 2012. As mobile device adoption continues to grow
around the world, this incentive auction will be a model for many countries facing similar spectrum challenges."

Specifically targeted is the 600 MHz band currently occupied by TV channels 36 through 51. The FCC will be looking at repacking TV broadcasters into the remaining TV channels.

The full text of the FCC's announcement along with downloadable copies of remarks from the Commissioners is available here:

FCC Initiates Incentive Auction Process | FCC.gov

[W2MR]

I wonder if they're aware that channel 37 (608-614 MHz) is unused. Those frequencies are used for radio-astronomy.

[dnchlson]

Oh surely the FCC wouldn't make a mistake and lay noisy bands on top of very sensitive bands would they?? *rolls eyes* lol

KF5QGF

[W9BU]

Originally Posted by W2MR

I wonder if they're aware that channel 37 (608-614 MHz) is unused. Those frequencies are used for radio-astronomy.

Actually, the press release talks about that:

"We invite comment on whether or not to relocate the Radio Astronomy Service and wireless medical telemetry systems now operating on channel 37..."

[clawhammer]

Hummm, wonder how this will effect the TV broadcast channel lineup. if I read it correct does that mean they can't use anything above CH-36 they will have to use those frequencies below CH-36. looks like its going to get pretty crowded.

[902]

Originally Posted by clawhammer

Hummm, wonder how this will effect the TV broadcast channel lineup. if I read it correct does that mean they can't use anything above CH-36 they will have to use those frequencies below CH-36. looks like its going to get pretty crowded.

Don't forget the VHF frequencies from 54 - 88 and 174 - 215 MHz still exist. There are a few HD transmitters that ended up operating here (although it's hard to know where a station really is with PSIP). The trick is to see how this realignment relates with the recent Congressional decision to auction T-Band. There's at least one industry talking head that says 470-512 MHz is less desirable to wireless carriers than 600 MHz because equipment would require a larger antenna in order to achieve the same efficiency. So, T-Band might end up being a mine-sweeper game in the end.

[dnchlson]

the lowest end of that, 470 mhz, is only 13 centimeters longer than 600 mhz even. meaning 1/2 wave is 6.5 cm (2 1/8 inches) and 1/4 wave is 1 1/16 inch difference between antenna sizes. not sure if that's applicable information, but food for thought.

[W9BU]

Originally Posted by 902

...although it's hard to know where a station really is with PSIP...

You can download a spreadsheet of all US digital TV stations here:

RabbitEars.Info

The spreadsheet includes RF and virtual channel numbers, callsign, location, network, ERP, HAAT, etc. It's an interesting download. There are still 39 TV stations in the Channel 2 to 6 segment.

[902]

Originally Posted by W9RXR

You can download a spreadsheet of all US digital TV stations here:

RabbitEars.Info

Oh, COOL!!! Thank you! This is a great reference and certainly beats searching the Media Bureau's website.

[Confuzzled]

Selling the public out to to corporatocracy.

[clawhammer]

Another site that I goto to get the TV stations of my area was TV Fool you just type in your address, city, state, Zip code and your antenna height and it will give you a complete list of TV stations based on your address and height of your antenna. worth taking a look at. will even give you the power the tv station is running too.

[W9BU]

Yeah, TV Fool is useful if you are researching what's on the air in your area. But that spreadsheet at RabbitEars lets you see how the spectrum is being used all over the country. I think I counted over 400 stations in the Channel 38-51 segment that the FCC wants to auction off. "Re-packing" those stations in with existing stations will be a challenge in some markets.

But, the bottom line seems to be that the FCC doesn't care about OTA TV broadcasting anymore. The FCC Commissioners seem to have drank the Kool-Aid that everybody wants to get their entertainment content via broadband, so, therefore, we need more broadband. Basically, the FCC is heading down the path of forcing everyone to pay for cable, satellite, or 4G rather than getting TV for free off-the-air.

[radioman2001]

It's also known as a taxable service. Yes you pay every month, but you also pay local, state,and maybe in the future a federal tax on all the services you get. Look what you pay now for telephone, internet and cable TV in taxes. In some cases, like POTS telephone service for instance there are more costs associated in taxes than the actual service costs. Hopefully with a change in administration this fall, this will all go away. I am losing my T-band channels in 10 years, where do they intend to put me? Probably they will tell me to get a cell phone, which I have and refuse to have data service. That's a whole another quandry, if you let your cell service lapse you are stuck with having to pay for cell service with data, whether you use it or not.

[902]

Seems like the FCC is completely bamboozled and awe-stricken by the broadband lobby. So is everyone else. It's a means of making revenue. New equipment with an accelerated lifecycle, Recurring radio bill. Third parties running this or that. Gotta take care of these guys. Those guys are a shell corporation of the carrier. Need databases. cross-connections. Dark fiber. All the 4.9 that 4.9 can afford. It can look just like the charlie foxtrot we call health insurance when it's mature.

It seems like every organization with even a peripheral link to land mobile radio is scurrying around trying to figure out how to skim a piece of broadband revenue off the top. Some of them fear that broadband implementation would severely impact their revenues. To me, though, it's almost like Jack and the Beanstalk. We'll trade you this cow (good for milk and meat) in exchange for magic beans (broadband). Is it worth the investment? The talking heads say so, but LMR can be hardened to local needs and budgets. In worst case, there's robust "direct" operation, even in most digital modes. "Broadband" completely dependent on infrastructure, and we know how well that does during and post-disaster. Granted, some high profile radio failures happened during disasters, as well, but like I said, there's simplex when things go to heck. There hasn't been any talk about making T-Band CR or SMR owners whole. It's like you guys are on your own. As for packing, I'm not even sure there is a model they can use to pack DTV. The OTA stations would be smart to cut their free broadcast bandwidth and use the rest like Qualcomm did for MediaFLO. They can partner with Lightsquared and use the ATC spectrum for terrestrial talk-in and we won't get trillions of dollars in commerce gazorched just for another stupid cellular data company.

In the spirit of the "everything's for sale" mentality we collectively have these days, I'll buy you guys a can of good old Linden, NJ air - bottled directly across the Turnpike from Exxon Bayway - when it comes out.

[zerg901]

Seems like the FCC has realized that huge amounts of spectrum are being used for not much good. Why use radio spectrum to feed a device that sits permanently on a TV table?

[902]

Because they give Congress nice things.

[karldotcom]

And hence taxable

Originally Posted by W9RXR

Basically, the FCC is heading down the path of forcing everyone to pay for cable, satellite, or 4G rather than getting TV for free off-the-air.