FAUX 6 Responds

[Tom Snyder]

Tom:

WITI is planning on being able to pass through the FOX digital signal (including wide-screen) by the end of the year. Our digital signal was on the air and met the FCC deadline. Currently, our transmitter is located at the station while we prepare our broadcast tower to receive the digital signal. This is scheduled to be completed next summer. You can email me back next spring and will be happy to give you and update.

Chuck Steinmetz
WITI - FOX 6
414-586-2200 (ph)
414-357-8937 (fx)



[This message has been edited by Tom Snyder (edited 11-16-2002).]

[Todd Wiedemann]

Ugh. This is disgusting on so many levels, I can't bring myself to comment.

[RRP]

Truly pathetic.

Richard

[Tom Snyder]

I can't bring myself to comment.

I had to take a breath, count to 10 and replied:

Chuck STEINMETZ wrote:

> Our digital signal was on the air and met the FCC deadline.

Thanks for your prompt response.

I'm hoping you can help me understand how an 800 watt signal at 125 ft that no one can pick up provides your market with coverage that qualifies as "on the air" and satisfies the FCC requirements. Despite the fact that your current antenna is the closest to my home of all the Milwaukee digital anteannae (I am only 11 miles away) and I get solid signals from 4, 10, 12, 30 and 58, I cannot get any signal at all from 6 digital.

Thanks in advance for your help.

- Tom

----
Tom Snyder
Milwaukee HDTV Users Group http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org

[Tom Snyder]

I think I'm getting more email from them this morning than everyone else has gotten here ever...

He replied:

Tom:

The answer is that the FCC requires that we cover our city grade....when we are able to move the antenna to our broacast tower our coverage will improve.

To which I responded:

I'm sure it will. Does the FFC require you to actually measure signal strengths in the field, or does it just require theoretical coverage on paper? At only 125 ft., I'm sure you know that there must be huge holes.

Sorry to be such a bother, but if I can get these answers, I can post them to our site and possibly keep some of our folks off your back. As you can understand, and probably already know, you guys are taking quite a PR beating there http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org/ubb/smile.gif

----
Tom Snyder
Milwaukee HDTV Users Group http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org

[StarvingForHDTV]

Originally posted by Tom Snyder:
Tom:

WITI is planning on being able to pass through the FOX digital signal (including wide-screen) by the end of the year.

Should I interpret this as: WITI-DT has never passed me the correct Faux Digital Signal? Now I wonder what they have been passing on to me during shows like 24. What a mess.

Starving

[ReesR]

Any idea what Chuck Steinmetz does?

[Kevin Arnold]

This is really strange. Fox owns WITI but drags their feet about really transmitting a useable signal. Thus, Faux 6 cannot transmit Fox's widescreen offerings because of power and equipment problems. The other stations in their market passed them by and left them in the dust including the WVCY, who has no use for a digital signal.

What a way to run a station.

[Tom Snyder]

Chuck Steinmetz is the Vice President and General Manager of the station, promoted from General Sales Manager when Carol Rueppel moved to KMSP/WFTC in Minneapolis. He's a native of Milwaukee and a UW-Eau Claire graduate.

We've continued to communicate this morning.

Here's his latest:

As long as you host a site - you might want to pass along that going forward I will be happy to communicate with viewers regarding these issues, but many people seem to take this so passionately that they write/call in a very non-professional manner. I understand the passion, but I will not put my employees in a position where they have to deal w/ viewers who write/speak in such a manner - those emails/messages will go unanswered.


I'm still working on my response.. but in the meantime, be nice, or you won't get a reply from them.

[techboywi]

Originally posted by Tom Snyder:
I'm still working on my response.. but in the meantime, be nice, or you won't get a reply from them.



This only further validates the point I made before, in the chat with Tim on Friday. Put yourself in the enineeers shoes, how would you respond if you got a insulting, mean spirted message? Would you want to respond to that?

Aside from passing the message on, these people have little power to do anything. As with any big corporation, any kind of capital expenditure requires a lot of paperwork, time, waiting for budgets, a little luck, and a sacrifice here and there.

In my job, I run a helpdesk, and do phone support. I have dealt with many angry customers. The ones who yell the most, especially when its not justified, make my job so much harder, because as much as I'd like to, I cant hang up on them http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org/ubb/wink.gif

Tom displayed an example of a very well written message, that was short, to the point, and was not insulting. As you can see, it yeilded the desired response.

[Tom Snyder]

these people have little power to do anything.

As a VP/GM Chuck Steinmetz is THE GUY who determines when Fox 6 digital goes on the air with a full-power signal. While Fox corporate has an anti-HDTV stance, the fact that WFLD-Digital in Chicago is already on the air indicates that there is local decision involved. Admittedly he wasn't the GM when the FCC mandated the timetable, and may only have been GM since last October, but he's been a part of the management team at WITI long enough to have an impact on their 2002 budget.

The ones who yell the most, especially when its not justified, make my job so much harder,

Two questions:

1.) What must a compnay do to provoke a customer to feel a need to yell
2.) And if there are times it's not justifed, when IS it justfied?

Tom displayed an example of a very well written message, that was short, to the point, and was not insulting. As you can see, it yeilded the desired response.

Aw, shucks, Bob. You say the kindest things. http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org/ubb/smile.gif I better not let you see the original e-mail I sent that got the first response. http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org/ubb/wink.gif

[Gregg Lengling]

I'm just ranting here, but I'm going to download the specs on the FCC website for the STA that WITI-DT has and plug them into my propagation software package to see if indeed they do meet the terms of their license. I doubt they do, but I'll give them the benifit of the doubt until I do the math. In the interest of fairness if I find they do not, I will forward this to WITI directly and ask for a response nicely. However I and any one of you have the option of filing a complaint with the FCC. The FCC has been going through a digital revolution for the last few years so it's very easy to file a complaint on the web. I used to file all my FCC license paper work via the US Mail or via my attorney in Washington, but guess what I can't do that anymore, I have to file on the Web. Kudos to the FCC they are one of 2 govt. agencies I know that actually make good use of the Web. (The other is The State of Wisconsin's Financial Dept., when I file a UCC lien against equipment that I lease to clients I now file on line and guess what it's not the like the DOT where they charge you extra to do it, they actually give you 50% off the filing fee).



------------------
Gregg R. Lengling
RCA P61310 61" 16x9
HiDTV Pro 2 computer reciever card
glengling@ameritech.net

[Tom Snyder]

I found it curious that he never answered my question about actual measurements. The reason I asked was that, back in the old days when I worked at an extremely directional AM radio station, we had to take actual measurements to prove to the FCC that we weren't fudging. Didn't matter what you said on your application, and your transmitter readings, while required, still weren't enough.

Do they require that any more?

[Gregg Lengling]

AM stations under certain rules have to have regular signal checks. Most stations nowadays have to have a proof of performance even when the engineering shows proper coverage. I'm not 100% sure about TV I'll have to check the rules. When channel 49 went on the air for the first 2 years they didn't have the proper equipment to prove in logs proper operation so I was contracted to do monthly readings...however that didn't include coverage profiles. I'm pretty sure to change the CP (construction permit) to a real license takes field proofs. I'll check into it.


------------------
Gregg R. Lengling
RCA P61310 61" 16x9
HiDTV Pro 2 computer reciever card
glengling@ameritech.net

[Gregg Lengling]

It's pretty harried the rules regarding this and you would have to find out also what WITI-DT filed with the FCC but here's a link to the rules on DTV coverage and antennas.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=47&PART=73&SECTION=625&YEAR=2001&TYPE=TEXT

[Gregg Lengling]

May 15, 2001 WITI-DT filed the following modification for Community Coverage to place their antenna below their channel 6 antenna on their main tower. Take a look at the coverage expected. It was granted June 6, 2002.
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=30758

An STA (Special Temporary Authority) was granted on Status Date: 04/04/2002
Expiration Date: 10/04/2002

And another one on Status Date: 05/24/2002
Expiration Date: 11/25/2002

Unfortunately for these actions there are no copies on line of what was filed for other than it was for channel 33. Anyway unless something changes the STA expires in 2 weeks.


------------------
Gregg R. Lengling
RCA P61310 61" 16x9
HiDTV Pro 2 computer reciever card
glengling@ameritech.net

[ReesR]

Further data:
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_sear.htm

Enter WITI into Call Sign and then scroll down and click submit.

Results in 31 applications which include both analog as well as digital.

[Gregg Lengling]

That is where all the information came from, it is incomplete as far as there is nothing to show the studio tower antenna documents...I can only guess that those 2 STA's relate to it...either way it expires in 2 weeks.

[ReesR]

Gregg:

Do you conclude that the auxiliary contour is for the digital coverage?

Interesting for that contour (if it is the digital one) to reach Sheboygan to the North, Winthrop Harbor to the south and Watertown to the west takes 980 Kilowatts for ch 33.

With an expire date of 11/25/02 I would expect to see something to extend that date by now.

Rees

[P a u l]

If you look in the bottom corner of that picture of the coverage area it says WITI TV not WITI DTV. So this appears to be the coverage area map for the analog signal.

[Tom Snyder]

This is for an auxiliary antenna. If for any reason, the main one fails (or needs to be turned off for maintenance, etc.), this is the one they use to remain on the air. It's mounted on the main antenna in Estabrook park. ERP is less, and coverage isn't as good, but it allows them to keep broadcasting.

The digital antenna is on a relay tower at that studio, so a map of that signal would show the siugnal originating from a point on Green Bay and Brown Deer roads.

And it's a construction permit. The date is the deadline to finish the construction. According to Sean, they've been doing work on the main 6 tower. This, may be what they were doing.

[This message has been edited by Tom Snyder (edited 11-12-2002).]

[ReesR]

So let me understand this.

Faux 6 has just spent a Million Bucks (per my conversations with their chief engineer) to re-enforce their tower to not only put up an antenna for their digital feed but also an aux feed?

How long has that tower been up so far? How many times has 6 been off the air because of their antenna or feedline problems?

For a million bucks I would have placed an aux at a different location. New York city tv stations certainly have come to that conclusion after 9/11. I was really shocked when you guys showed me the obvious that all that re-enforcement was for more than just the digital antenna installation.

I'm just shaking my head. Wouldn't have they been further ahead and spent that Million on putting their digital and aux at a different location? One of those community towers already up? No expensive re-enforcement would have been needed on their self supporting tower.

Am I missing something here?

Rees

[Tom Snyder]

After writing several drafts of a response to Mr. Steinmetz (which actaully spawned a thought process that developed into a commentary that I'll be posting later today in a separate thread), I slept on my last one and sent it this morning. Here it is:

As per your wishes, I have passed along your message. However, after having even courteous inquiries get ignored or responded to with pure spin for up to three years for some of us, I doubt that getting our emails and letters answered is much of a motivation for many of the guys in the group. As a loosely knit bunch, I can't promise that all future communications from HDTV owners will be "professional." However, I will certainly attempt to keep my communication on that level.

Now that I have your ear, I would like to once again extend our offer to be of assistance to your engineering staff (an offer that WTMJ, WDJT and WISN have all taken advantage of), to assist in realtime coverage, bandwidth, compression and picture quality feedback tests.

I believe a good first step would be to have someone from your engineering staff provide us with a copy of the predicted coverage map of your digital signal. New people are coming to our site every day, and the question they all have is "why can't I get Digital 6?" If we had a coverage map, that would help us answer that question.

Thanks!

[mcq]

You are probably going to get back a map of OZ, or is it you may have to be in OZ to get a response.... Hm......


(editorial note) Ok this post doesn not live up to my new code... But I have to inject a little levity now and again.......

[Tom Snyder]

Chuck actually called me this morning, and we spent a good half hour on the phone. I'll post the details in new thread tonight...

[StarvingForHDTV]

Faux 6-DT's signal last night was no longer stretched. They switched to the 16:9 signal which consists of the 4:3 surrounded by built in black sidebars. Which seems to be the most popular way for Networks to send out their non-HD signals. Could they have actually read the email I sent them? I wouldn't know as there was no response.

Now the part that I could never understand. Why would 1.1, 4.1, 6.1, and 34.1 put out a 16:9 signal with built in sidebars for 4:3 content in the first place? Why not just send it out as 4:3 like 1.2,1.3,10.1,10.2,10.3,10.4,10.5,and 22.1? This makes much more sense to me. Anyone have a clue?

By the way, it's now clear that Faux 6-DT does not pass along the "Faux Widescreen Enhanced Resolution" signal. As one of the widescreen shows was shown in 4:3 last night. No more stretch illusions. Hopefully they can hurry up and get the real digital signal from the Faux network to me and the other person who gets their digital signal at home. Maybe that will clear up some of the flickering in their pictures. I was scared some of the text would jump off my screen last night. Very annoying and extrememly difficult and fatiguing to watch. Hopefully all of these issues will be solved by the time they transmit a stronger signal from a main tower.

Starving

[P a u l]

Tom,

I believe the inner circle on the map is the auxiliary antenna and the outer is the primary coverage area for the main antenna, both for the analog signal.

ReesR,

Every tower that is going to have a digital antenna put up on it must have the tower reinforced to hold the weight of the antenna and transmission line running up to the antenna. Our antenna weighs somewhere in the neighborhhod of 4000 lbs. then add the weight of the transmission line which is at least another 1500lbs. thats a lot of weight. It's a very dangerous business for the companies that do the work. Check this link here: http://www.fybush.com/site-021003.html As far as the community tower issue. Why would we, or any station, want to put up our antenna on someone elses tower when we have our own? I hope you don't think they would just let us put up our antenna and call it a day. We would have to lease the space for the equipment. So reinforcing the tower in the long run will save money.

[ReesR]

Point taken Paul.

But having an aux system tied to the same main tower complex disregards the possibility that what happened to New York would (God forbid) happen to Milwaukee. If ch 6's tower came down what good is an aux system if it's on the same exact tower as the main? That was one of my main points I was trying to communicate.

I personally believe the community antenna locations would be excellent backup aux locations.

Rees

[Ty Zucker]

Tom, kudos on your on-going conversations with Chuck Steinmetz and your last email response to him. His email that said:
As long as you host a site - you might want to pass along that going forward I will be happy to communicate with viewers regarding these issues, but many people seem to take this so passionately that they write/call in a very non-professional manner. I understand the passion, but I will not put my employees in a position where they have to deal w/ viewers who write/speak in such a manner - those emails/messages will go unanswered.
sounds a little bit like an excuse to me.

In other words, if Fox6 didn't answer viewers emails with spin and technical truths (ie, "technically we met the FCC requirement"), they wouldn't get emails quite so nasty. Your email response to him was well-worded.

What was his response to your comment about the spin they've been speaking for the past few years?

[Tom Snyder]

He actually began the discussion with a promise to enter a "no-spin zone." I've been promising to post the details.. and I will. But we talked for a very long time, and discussed a bunch of issues. I'm writing the post in my word processor and will post it when it's done. I apologize for the delay, but I need to get it right.

[Tom Snyder]

Finally finsihed. This post has now been posted in On/Off topic Chit Chat.