KNTV

13 views
Skip to first unread message

ICl...@jps.net

unread,
Sep 19, 2005, 6:16:16 AM9/19/05
to
It's been years since I've seen a National Broadcasting Company
program.

I've just discovered that it's now broadcast on channel number eleven.
No, that's not right: I knew that. What I didn't know is that the
signal is now received here. Used t'wasn't.

When did a watchable signal start arriving here?

Was it announced? Where? When?

Where's the transmitter?

Where's the station?

On November 14, 1949, I saw the first three hours of programming on
KRON.
___________________________________________________________________
A San Franciscan in 47.452 mile² San Francisco.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net

Tiernan

unread,
Sep 19, 2005, 11:45:53 AM9/19/05
to


You jest of course this has been the topic of considerable discourse
here. As for announcements its been in the news for years.

You did know that NBC owns 11 and has for years right?

Please see the thread entitled KNTV 11 reception report.

dt

John Higdon

unread,
Sep 19, 2005, 12:12:14 PM9/19/05
to
In article <1127124976....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:

> When did a watchable signal start arriving here?

When it stopped being receivable in San Jose, KNTV's city of license.
That was about Wednesday of last week.

> Was it announced? Where? When?
>
> Where's the transmitter?
>
> Where's the station?

San Francisco. The transmitter in on Mt. San Bruno. They have a vehicle
storage lot in San Jose, as well as a mail drop there.

> On November 14, 1949, I saw the first three hours of programming on
> KRON.

And now, San Francisco has a "new" station that carries NBC. After fifty
years of broadcasting in San Jose, the station packed up and moved to
the "big time".

> A San Franciscan in 47.452 mile² San Francisco.
> < http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
> ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net

Enjoy your new station at our expense. We now receive NO network
stations here.

--
John Higdon | Email Address Valid
+1 408 264 4115 | Sana Zay, CA

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 1:34:21 AM9/20/05
to
John Higdon wrote:

> San Francisco. The transmitter in on Mt. San Bruno. They have a vehicle
> storage lot in San Jose, as well as a mail drop there.

KNTV no longer has studios and offices at 645 Park Avenue in SJ?

> Enjoy your new station at our expense. We now receive NO network
> stations here.

KTEH is a PBS affiliate.

KKPX is a Pax affiliate, actually an O&O, though the name "Pax" is out
and the Christians who run it (with NBC financing) have discovered that
tits and ass sell better than Jesus. Thus, they've changed the name of
their network to "i" and will feature T&A programming. They're also
selling their network time slots to the highest bidder.

KSTS channel 48 is a Telemundo affiliate.

So there, SJ has three network affiliates.

ICl...@jps.net

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 8:12:21 AM9/20/05
to
Tiernan said:

> Icono Clast said:
>> It's been years since I've seen a National Broadcasting Company program.
>
> You jest of course

No, I don't.

> this has been the topic of considerable discourse here.

I'm a member of the General Public with no particular interest in
broadcasting other than the programming broadcast. In fact, yesterday's
was probably my first post to this forum although posts of mine have
appeared as responses to posts cross-posted from other fora.

> As for announcements its been in the news for years.

Missed me. Probably on Fox.

> You did know that NBC owns 11 and has for years right?

Eleven stations? No, I thought they owned more. All I know is that, for
several years, KRON has not been a network station and that no National
Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.

> Please see the thread entitled KNTV 11 reception report.

I read a few of the posts, all having to do with sub-urbs found on the
way to Los Angeles.


John Higdon:
> Icono Clast asked:


>> When did a watchable signal start arriving here?
>

> When it stopped being receivable in San Jose, KNTV's city of license.
> That was about Wednesday of last week.

I knew nothing about it. I "discovered" it while turning the dial past
KQED heading for the "U" getting startled into "Whuzzat?!?"

>> Was it announced? Where? When? Where's the transmitter? Where's the
>> station?
>

> San Francisco.

D'y know where?

> The transmitter in on Mt. San Bruno.

Line of sight. The signal is strong and clear.

>> On November 14, 1949, I saw the first three hours of programming on
>> KRON.
>

> And now, San Francisco has a "new" station that carries NBC. After
> fifty years of broadcasting in San Jose, the station packed up and
> moved to the "big time".

I never could fathom a reason for a network to leave town. Guess after
a
few years of absence, so could they.


David Kaye said:
> John Higdon wrote:
>> Enjoy your new station

Thank you. There's probably something on it I might want to see. Last
night, around 03:00, got t'see "Meet The Press".

>> We now receive NO network stations here.
>

> SJ has three network affiliates.

John Higdon

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 12:02:16 PM9/20/05
to
In article <1127194461.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> John Higdon wrote:
>
> > San Francisco. The transmitter in on Mt. San Bruno. They have a vehicle
> > storage lot in San Jose, as well as a mail drop there.
>
> KNTV no longer has studios and offices at 645 Park Avenue in SJ?

Moved out some time ago.

> So there, SJ has three network affiliates.

They're certainly NOT ABC/CBS/NBC.

John Higdon

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 12:12:23 PM9/20/05
to
In article <1127218341.2...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:

> Tiernan said:

> > this has been the topic of considerable discourse here.
>
> I'm a member of the General Public with no particular interest in
> broadcasting other than the programming broadcast. In fact, yesterday's
> was probably my first post to this forum although posts of mine have
> appeared as responses to posts cross-posted from other fora.

It is good manners and good netiquette to check a few weeks back for
previous discussions on your topic before blaring in asking a really
stupid question, particularly in light of the mountain of discussion
that has taken place.

>
> > As for announcements its been in the news for years.
>
> Missed me. Probably on Fox.

Do you read the Chronicle, Mr. San Francisco?

> > You did know that NBC owns 11 and has for years right?
>
> Eleven stations? No, I thought they owned more. All I know is that, for
> several years, KRON has not been a network station and that no National
> Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.

KRON is not the only station in Northern California.

> > Please see the thread entitled KNTV 11 reception report.
>
> I read a few of the posts, all having to do with sub-urbs found on the
> way to Los Angeles.

We in this newsgroup dispensed with those pithy little putdowns of the
nation's tenth largest city some years ago. But then, you don't bother
to familiarize yourself with a newsgroup before barging in with your
ignorance.

> John Higdon:

> > When it stopped being receivable in San Jose, KNTV's city of license.
> > That was about Wednesday of last week.
>
> I knew nothing about it. I "discovered" it while turning the dial past
> KQED heading for the "U" getting startled into "Whuzzat?!?"

This is a newsgroup for people with more than a passing interest in
Greater Bay Area broadcasting. We cannot be responsible for your
obliviousness and your provinciality.

> > San Francisco.
>
> D'y know where?

Yes I do. I know precisely where it is.

Tiernan

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 12:47:09 PM9/20/05
to
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:
> Tiernan said:
>
>>Icono Clast said:
>>
>>>It's been years since I've seen a National Broadcasting Company program.
>>
>>You jest of course
>
>
> No, I don't.
>
>
>>this has been the topic of considerable discourse here.
>
>
> I'm a member of the General Public with no particular interest in
> broadcasting other than the programming broadcast. In fact, yesterday's
> was probably my first post to this forum although posts of mine have
> appeared as responses to posts cross-posted from other fora.
>
>
>>As for announcements its been in the news for years.
>
>
> Missed me. Probably on Fox.

No actually, Chronicle, Mercury.


>
>
>>You did know that NBC owns 11 and has for years right?
>
>
> Eleven stations? No, I thought they owned more. All I know is that, for
> several years, KRON has not been a network station and that no National
> Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.

That's cute and worked. Please describe the channel number where you
found NBC programming was it Higher than 9 and Less than 12? Please see
11 on the dial it is a channel position, this system of number channels
rather than identifying specific frequency positions was done before I
was born so I will assume familiarity with that.

Kron has not been a network station since the former owners and the
National Broadcasting Company failed to come to terms of a sale. The
Chronicle/KRON owners wanted lots of money, NBC decided as a bit of
leverage to threaten huge network fees if KRON was sold to someone else.
Noone flinched and NBC bought KNTV (ch 11 on your dial) and took the NBC
programming to the former ABC affiliate.


>
>
>
> I knew nothing about it. I "discovered" it while turning the dial past
> KQED heading for the "U" getting startled into "Whuzzat?!?"
>
>
>>>Was it announced? Where? When? Where's the transmitter? Where's the
>>>station?
>>
>>San Francisco.
>

> D'y know where?
>
>
>>The transmitter in on Mt. San Bruno.
>
>
> Line of sight. The signal is strong and clear.
>
>
>>>On November 14, 1949, I saw the first three hours of programming on
>>>KRON.
>>
>
>

> I never could fathom a reason for a network to leave town. Guess after
> a
> few years of absence, so could they.

Well in Sacramento, the stations flipped networks CBS went to the ABC
affil and vice versa. I believe this to be more than a decade ago.


btw there are very good program listings on the internet, most even list
the network affiliations and what is avail off air, cable and satellite
in your local market.

Dean

Patty Winter

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 2:35:12 PM9/20/05
to
In article <1127218341.2...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
<ICl...@JPS.Net> wrote:
>Tiernan said:
>
>> As for announcements its been in the news for years.
>
>Missed me. Probably on Fox.

If that's a snide comment about KTVU, are you really not aware that
they have one of the best newscasts (if not *the* best) in the Bay Area?

I don't specifically recall whether they've covered KNTV's antics,
but avoiding their newscasts just because the station became a Fox
affiliate some years ago is stupid. Tune in at 9:59:59 and you won't
have to see any Fox programming.


Patty

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 7:44:14 PM9/20/05
to
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:

> All I know is that, for
> several years, KRON has not been a network station and that no National
> Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.

Not true. I live in SF and have received KNTV channel 11 from the air
all along. Granted it's better now that they've moved the xmtr from
Loma Prieta to Mt San Bruno, but I've always been able to get it, even
when it was running a lower power as an ABC affiliate.

John Higdon

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 10:32:27 PM9/20/05
to
In article <1127259854.3...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Not true. I live in SF and have received KNTV channel 11 from the air
> all along. Granted it's better now that they've moved the xmtr from
> Loma Prieta to Mt San Bruno, but I've always been able to get it, even
> when it was running a lower power as an ABC affiliate.

Wish I could say the same in reverse.

ICl...@jps.net

unread,
Sep 21, 2005, 6:28:31 AM9/21/05
to
John Higdon said:
> Icono Clast wrote:

>> Tiernan said:
>>> this has been the topic of considerable discourse here.
>
>> I'm a member of the General Public with no particular interest in
>> broadcasting other than the programming broadcast. In fact, yesterday's was
>> probably my first post to this forum although posts of mine have appeared as
>> responses to posts cross-posted from other fora.
>
> It is good manners and good netiquette to check a few weeks back for
> previous discussions on your topic before blaring in asking a really
> stupid question, particularly in light of the mountain of discussion
> that has taken place.


Indeed it is. I read ba.general where it was not mentioned. I don't
read
ba.broadcast 'cause of its special interest orientation. The cross-post
was an afterthought.

> Do you read the Chronicle, Mr. San Francisco?

Yes.

>>> You did know that NBC owns 11 and has for years right?
>>

>> Eleven stations? No, I thought they owned more. All I know is that,


>> for several years, KRON has not been a network station and that no
>> National Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.
>

> KRON is not the only station in Northern California.

What's your point?

>>> Please see the thread entitled KNTV 11 reception report.
>

>> I read a few of the posts, all having to do with sub-urbs found on the way
>> to Los Angeles.
>
> We in this newsgroup dispensed with those pithy little putdowns of the
> nation's tenth largest city some years ago. But then, you don't bother to
> familiarize yourself with a newsgroup before barging in with your ignorance.

As I said, I cross-posted it from ba.general. You could have denied me
the benefit of your wisdom had you just ignored it. In stead, you chose
to help cure my ignorance. Thank you.

>> John Higdon:
>>> When it stopped being receivable in San Jose, KNTV's city of license. That
>>> was about Wednesday of last week.
>

>> I knew nothing about it. I "discovered" it while turning the dial past KQED
>> heading for the "U" getting startled into "Whuzzat?!?"
>

> This is a newsgroup for people with more than a passing interest in Greater
> Bay Area broadcasting.

Precisely the reason for the cross-post. Y'wanna know sumpin', going to
those who probably are authoritative isn't a bad idea.

> We cannot be responsible for your obliviousness and your provinciality.

In the the good ol' days of small and versatile off-line readers, one
of my taglines was "Provincial? Parochial? C'est moi!" David Kaye
probably saw it yea long ago. My obliviousity is, I hope, extremely
limited.

> Please describe the channel number where you found NBC programming

Did in my original post.

> Kron has not been a network station since the former owners and the National
> Broadcasting Company failed to come to terms of a sale. The Chronicle/KRON
> owners wanted lots of money, NBC decided as a bit of leverage to threaten
> huge network fees if KRON was sold to someone else.

Knew that.

> Noone flinched and NBC bought KNTV (ch 11 on your dial) and took the NBC
> programming to the former ABC affiliate.

Didn't know that.

> there are very good program listings on the internet,

Yes. Yesterday I re-configured TitanTV <http://ww2.titantv.com/> to
show
the programming on KNTV. I've been using it for years because, as far
as
I know, it's the only one with a "Now" option for time.

Patty Winter
> Icono Clast said
>> [the announcements] Missed me. Probably on Fox.


>
> If that's a snide comment about KTVU,

No, it isn't.

> are you really not aware that they have one of the best newscasts (if
> not *the* best) in the Bay Area?


I'm quite aware of KTVU's quite-good news program. Am acquainted with
one of the on-air personnel as well as one who works in the technical
department, both dancers.

> I don't specifically recall whether they've covered KNTV's antics, but
> avoiding their newscasts just because the station became a Fox affiliate some
> years ago is stupid. Tune in at 9:59:59 and you won't have to see any Fox
> programming.

The rare evening that I'm home that early, such as this one, and not
finding something more compelling, such as this evening, I do tune in
to KTVU's ten o'clock news program. I've been doing so for many years.
It has far fewer nits to pick than the local "news"shows(!).


David Kaye said:
> Icono Clast said


>> no National Broadcasting Company signal has reached San Francisco.
>

> Not true. I live in SF and have received KNTV channel 11 from the air
> all along. Granted it's better now that they've moved the xmtr from
> Loma Prieta to Mt San Bruno, but I've always been able to get it, even
> when it was running a lower power as an ABC affiliate.

Perhaps it was available in my part of town, too, but I never noticed
it 'til a few days ago indicating that the signal here was probably too
weak to notice. Before the KDTV/KCSM switch, both were watchable. Now
KDTV is difficult to watch and KCSM, that had an excellent signal, has
just plain disappeared. But I'm still a member of the radio station.
___________________________________________________________________
One of (as of 2003) 751,682 residents of San Francisco.

John Higdon

unread,
Sep 21, 2005, 12:27:12 PM9/21/05
to
In article <1127298511.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:

> Indeed it is. I read ba.general where it was not mentioned. I don't
> read
> ba.broadcast 'cause of its special interest orientation. The cross-post
> was an afterthought.

Perhaps you should have paid more attention.

> > Do you read the Chronicle, Mr. San Francisco?
>
> Yes.

But not very thoroughly, it would appear. There was a major story on
KNTV's transmitter move nearly two weeks ago.

> > KRON is not the only station in Northern California.
>
> What's your point?

You might learn about other stations in the market.

> As I said, I cross-posted it from ba.general. You could have denied me
> the benefit of your wisdom had you just ignored it. In stead, you chose
> to help cure my ignorance. Thank you.

I am sick and tired of people posting faux pax crap and then when called
on it saying "you could have ignored it". How about using a little sense
up front?

> Precisely the reason for the cross-post. Y'wanna know sumpin', going to
> those who probably are authoritative isn't a bad idea.

And you didn't find any answers in the archives?

> I'm quite aware of KTVU's quite-good news program. Am acquainted with
> one of the on-air personnel as well as one who works in the technical
> department, both dancers.

And you knew nothing of KNTV's migration to San Francisco? I'm starting
to smell a rat, or at least a put-on.

> Perhaps it was available in my part of town, too, but I never noticed
> it 'til a few days ago indicating that the signal here was probably too
> weak to notice. Before the KDTV/KCSM switch, both were watchable. Now
> KDTV is difficult to watch and KCSM, that had an excellent signal, has
> just plain disappeared. But I'm still a member of the radio station.

I see. A troll.

<PLONK>

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 21, 2005, 3:45:27 PM9/21/05
to
ICl...@JPS.Net wrote:

> Before the KDTV/KCSM switch, both were watchable.

When KDTV and KCSM switched, KCSM simply took over the existing KDTV
transmitter on the southernmost tower on Mt San Bruno. So, KCSM's
signal after the switch would have been exactly, *exactly* the same as
KDTV's had been before the switch.

The former KCSM transmitter and tower were dismantled (and probably
given to a museum, given the age of the equipment).

KDTV is licensed to SF, not San Mateo, so they have no obligation to
provide a good signal into San Mateo, and thus operating from the old
KCSM site was not an option.

John T

unread,
Sep 21, 2005, 5:31:27 PM9/21/05
to

Of course they operate from the South Bay now, while still licensed to SF.

BTW, KCSM-TV currently does have a low power signal on ch. 60. It
probably covers *most* of San Mateo, but not much else. I get it like a
very distant signal across the bay in Union City.

JT

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 4:41:55 AM9/22/05
to
John T wrote:

> Of course they operate from the South Bay now, while still licensed to SF.
>

Y'know I never realized that. I just assumed they'd gotten a space on
Sutro. I'm surprised (but not surprised given their programming) that
they're on Mission Peak. According to the FCC database they put out a
perfect signal covering the Bay Area, too. Looks like nothing's
wasted.

> BTW, KCSM-TV currently does have a low power signal on ch. 60. It
> probably covers *most* of San Mateo, but not much else. I get it like a
> very distant signal across the bay in Union City.

I can't get it on my TV. Perhaps I need to invest in a rooftop
antenna.

Icono Clast

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 7:34:24 AM9/22/05
to
John Higdon wrote:

> Icono Clast wrote:
>> ba.broadcast 'cause of its special interest orientation. The
>> cross-post was an afterthought.
>
> But not very thoroughly, it would appear. There was a major story on
> KNTV's transmitter move nearly two weeks ago.

Stories about KNTV were of no interest to me. Well, I didn't know they were.

>>> KRON is not the only station in Northern California.
>>
>> What's your point?
>
> You might learn about other stations in the market.

Since I've lived here before there were television broadcasts, I'm as
familiar with the local stations as any person of the general public is
expected to be.

>> As I said, I cross-posted it from ba.general. You could have denied
>> me the benefit of your wisdom had you just ignored it. In stead,
>> you chose to help cure my ignorance. Thank you.
>
> I am sick and tired of people posting faux pax crap and then when called
> on it saying "you could have ignored it". How about using a little sense
> up front?

You're over-reacting, John.

>> Y'wanna know sumpin', going to those who probably are authoritative
>> isn't a bad idea.
>
> And you didn't find any answers in the archives?

Obviously I didn't look. 'Sides, "discovering" the station when I did
the existence of any history or archives didn't occur to me. It was
suggested I look but all the posts I saw were about sub-urban, not
local, reception. They were not answers to my questions.

> And you knew nothing of KNTV's migration to San Francisco? I'm starting
> to smell a rat, or at least a put-on.

Your olfactory sense is faulty.

>> Perhaps it was available in my part of town, too, but I never
>> noticed it 'til a few days ago indicating that the signal here was
>> probably too weak to notice.
>

> I see. A troll.

Your vision is also faulty.

> <PLONK>

Well, that gives me an average one one plonk every two years.

David Kaye said:


> Icono Clast said:
>> Before the KDTV/KCSM switch, both were watchable.
>

> When KDTV and KCSM switched, KCSM simply took over the existing KDTV
> transmitter on the southernmost tower on Mt San Bruno. So, KCSM's
> signal after the switch would have been exactly, *exactly* the same as
> KDTV's had been before the switch.

My recollection is that KCSM's signal improved and KDTV became
unwatchable. I defer to your expertise saying I'm wrong. But is it
possible that my location could account for the changes?
___________________________________________________________________
Un San Francisqueño en San Francisco.

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 8:23:35 AM9/22/05
to
Icono Clast wrote:

> My recollection is that KCSM's signal improved and KDTV became
> unwatchable. I defer to your expertise saying I'm wrong. But is it
> possible that my location could account for the changes?

I believe you said that both KDTV and KCSM were watchable before the
change and afterward both KDTV and KCSM became unwatchable. I said
that KCSM was using KDTV's old transmitter and site. In other words,
channel 60 never changed. The programming and callsign on channel 60
changed.

Eric C. Weaver

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 11:12:19 AM9/22/05
to
David Kaye wrote:
> John T wrote:


>>BTW, KCSM-TV currently does have a low power signal on ch. 60. It
>>probably covers *most* of San Mateo, but not much else. I get it like a
>>very distant signal across the bay in Union City.
>
>
> I can't get it on my TV. Perhaps I need to invest in a rooftop
> antenna.
>

You'd need a 500-ft mast. It's a low-power tx on the roof of the
engineering bldg. (19) and doesn't make it past 'Bruno. In fact I'd be
surprised if it made it TO 'Bruno. Purely a license-holder.


--
He worked in local radio, which he always used to tell his friends
was a lot more interesting than they probably thought. -- D. Adams

Tiernan

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 12:16:14 PM9/22/05
to
*********snipps have occured for brevity and cause I can, not all are
noted, cause I'm too darned lazy**********************

Icono Clast wrote:
> John Higdon wrote:
>
>> Icono Clast wrote:
>>
>>> ba.broadcast 'cause of its special interest orientation. The
>>> cross-post was an afterthought.

And let that be a lesson about cross posting.


>>
>>
>> But not very thoroughly, it would appear. There was a major story on
>> KNTV's transmitter move nearly two weeks ago.
>
>
> Stories about KNTV were of no interest to me. Well, I didn't know they
> were.
>
>

> Since I've lived here before there were television broadcasts, I'm as
> familiar with the local stations as any person of the general public is
> expected to be.

Actually I don't believe there is any expectation of the general public,
here, however posters may think of checking the topic which has been
under discussion for weeks on the same list. It seems polite, when you
jump amidst and ongoing conversation. Not that I'm known for polite.


>
>>> As I said, I cross-posted it from ba.general. You could have denied
>>> me the benefit of your wisdom had you just ignored it. In stead,
>>> you chose to help cure my ignorance. Thank you.

***snip*****


>
> You're over-reacting, John.
>
>>> Y'wanna know sumpin', going to those who probably are authoritative
>>> isn't a bad idea.
>>
>>
>> And you didn't find any answers in the archives?
>
>
> Obviously I didn't look. 'Sides, "discovering" the station when I did
> the existence of any history or archives didn't occur to me. It was
> suggested I look but all the posts I saw were about sub-urban, not
> local, reception. They were not answers to my questions.
>
>> And you knew nothing of KNTV's migration to San Francisco? I'm
>> starting to smell a rat, or at least a put-on.

There were any number of articles in the Chronicle (you weren't in SF
before the printing press I hope?) going back years to the acquisition
of KNTV by a subsidiary of NBC and the speculation began that the tx
would move, cause after all NBC is an eastern establishment company
(owned by GE, you know lightbulbs and stuff?) and they do NOT know the
way to San Jose and I would warrant all but the high tech could not tell
you the major city in the Santa Clara Valley. Actually this speculation
began as it became obvious that NBC and KRON negotiations would not be
fruitful.

>>
>> When KDTV and KCSM switched, KCSM simply took over the existing KDTV
>> transmitter on the southernmost tower on Mt San Bruno. So, KCSM's
>> signal after the switch would have been exactly, *exactly* the same as
>> KDTV's had been before the switch.
>
>
> My recollection is that KCSM's signal improved and KDTV became
> unwatchable. I defer to your expertise saying I'm wrong. But is it
> possible that my location could account for the changes?
>

YES.

Dean

John T

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 12:55:42 PM9/22/05
to
Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> David Kaye wrote:
>
>> John T wrote:
>
>
>
>>> BTW, KCSM-TV currently does have a low power signal on ch. 60. It
>>> probably covers *most* of San Mateo, but not much else. I get it like a
>>> very distant signal across the bay in Union City.
>>
>>
>>
>> I can't get it on my TV. Perhaps I need to invest in a rooftop
>> antenna.
>>
>
> You'd need a 500-ft mast. It's a low-power tx on the roof of the
> engineering bldg. (19) and doesn't make it past 'Bruno. In fact I'd be
> surprised if it made it TO 'Bruno. Purely a license-holder.
>
>

Here's a case for Public TV broadcasters being able to stream over the
Internet like the public stations in Europe do. It might not be the
absolute best thing, compared to a previously receivable full power
signal, but it would allow more people to see the station in some form
or other- and without subscribing to Comcash Cable.

OTOH, I have a DTV receiver, so I get them on ch. 43 just fine. In fact,
they're usually one of the more stable signals. But then, I haven't
turned on my TV in weeks, except to briefly check up on my own station.

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 6:53:20 PM9/22/05
to
Eric C. Weaver wrote:

> You'd need a 500-ft mast. It's a low-power tx on the roof of the
> engineering bldg. (19) and doesn't make it past 'Bruno. In fact I'd be
> surprised if it made it TO 'Bruno. Purely a license-holder.

Well, the least they could do is put up their old xmtr and mount the
antenna back where it used to be on the pole outside the library. It
got decent southbay coverage.

Eric C. Weaver

unread,
Sep 22, 2005, 9:29:27 PM9/22/05
to
David Kaye wrote:

Believe me, they DID the least they could do.

Can't get re-licensed for full power from there now, due to RFR rules.

The current setup's coverage is power-limited and the power is limited
by RFR.

st...@chooseone.net

unread,
Sep 23, 2005, 1:07:59 AM9/23/05
to
When did channel 60 reactivate it's analog signal. I thought it was
gone for good. How low power is channel 60 now? Are they transmitting
from the FM Tower?

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 23, 2005, 2:19:15 AM9/23/05
to
Eric C. Weaver wrote:

> Believe me, they DID the least they could do.
>

heh...well, thankfully they didn't just let the channel lapse.

> Can't get re-licensed for full power from there now, due to RFR rules.
>

Dang! Plus I completely confused myself. Channel 60 had never
operated from the campus before (duh); it was channel 14 that operated
from that tower.

David Kaye

unread,
Sep 23, 2005, 3:03:20 AM9/23/05
to
Eric C. Weaver wrote:

> Believe me, they DID the least they could do.
>

heh...well, thankfully they didn't just let the channel lapse.

> Can't get re-licensed for full power from there now, due to RFR rules.
>

Dang! Plus I completely confused myself. Channel 60 had never

Icono Clast

unread,
Sep 23, 2005, 7:01:58 AM9/23/05
to
Tiernan wrote:
>>> Icono Clast wrote:
>>>> ba.broadcast 'cause of its special interest orientation. The
>>>> cross-post was an afterthought.
>
> And let that be a lesson about cross posting.

>> John Higdon wrote:
>>> There was a major story on KNTV's transmitter move nearly two
>>> weeks ago.

Icono Clast said:
>> Stories about KNTV were of no interest to me. Well, I didn't know
>> they were.
>>
>> Since I've lived here before there were television broadcasts, I'm
>> as familiar with the local stations as any person of the general
>> public is expected to be.
>

>>>> Y'wanna know sumpin', going to those who probably are
>>>> authoritative isn't a bad idea.
>>>
>>> And you didn't find any answers in the archives?
>>
>> Obviously I didn't look. 'Sides, "discovering" the station when I
>> did the existence of any history or archives didn't occur to me. It
>> was suggested I look but all the posts I saw were about sub-urban,
>> not local, reception. They were not answers to my questions.
>>
>>> And you knew nothing of KNTV's migration to San Francisco?

I did not.

> There were any number of articles in the Chronicle (you weren't in SF
> before the printing press I hope?)

I'll get back t'y on that.

>> My recollection is that KCSM's signal improved and KDTV became
>> unwatchable. I defer to your expertise saying I'm wrong. But is it
>> possible that my location could account for the changes?
>
> YES.

Ah, then perhaps I remember correctly.

Thanks to each of you who has helped to answer my questions as I shall
now return to my usual haunts where I answer more question than I ask,
some of them correctly, too.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages