On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:09:24 -0500, Ann wrote:

What a mess - particularly SE of Pittsburgh. If there are hills between
the transmitters and that area, the probable cause of loss of signal is
WTAE going from VHF to UHF.

So the loss, if there actually is one, is due to the station changing from VHF
to UHF and has nothing to do with digital? There are at least 100 hills between
me and the nearest tower. I'm still getting a decent signal.

This situation is reported nationwide

So are UFOs and Bigfoot sightings. I find it hard to believe that people are
complaining about losing coverage in a conversion that hasn't happened yet.
Methinks it's more a matter of not wanting to change anything than actual loss.

I didn't want to change and I probably wouldn't have changed anything if I
hadn't seen a demonstration of what was out there vs what the map said was out
there. I was working on a scheme to move one of my dish boxes to my campground
to provide TV for my customers. Forget that. I'll put up an antenna and they
can watch the same thing I'm watching.

Same here with three stations that went from VHF to UHF.

Again, this has nothing to do with digital vs analog but has everything to do
with the different wave propagation of two very different frequencies.

I just found out
last weekend that one of the two remaining stations is moving their
transmitter 11 miles.

11 miles is nothing unless you're already on the very extreme edge of coverage
and they move 11 miles in the opposite direction. As a very last resort,
amplifiers are available to boost the signal and vastly increase the quality of
reception in fringe areas. I had a leftover amp from the days when I subscribed
to Comcast cable. Hooking it up adds two more channels that previously were
undetectable.

The FCC map shows it where it is now, on the same
tower as the transmitter for the other station.

Unless they've started transmitting from the new tower, then the map is correct,
no?

Have you tried a litter to the editor?

Puppies or kittens?

--
Jack