Jump to content

frequency list


tbs123456
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've googled this and can't come up with anything that really makes sense. I was wondering if anyone could point me to a list of what frequencies are used by what. Like over the air tv uses xxx-xxx frequency and radio uses these and these frequencies are used by cell phone companies. Just a generic list(not what company uses what frequency). And if possible what each block of fequencies is called. Like I know that aws is 1700mhz. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a google search and that chart looks pretty awesome. One thing I ws looking at yesterday was the 5XX-6XX reverse spectrum auction of 2014/2015 where TV providers from ch. 39-51 will voluntarily be able to give up spectrum for cash. And Cell phone providers will buy that spectrum. The low band at least as far as I know of 700 came from tv blocks as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I ws looking at yesterday was the 5XX-6XX reverse spectrum auction of 2014/2015 where TV providers from ch. 39-51 will voluntarily be able to give up spectrum for cash. And Cell phone providers will buy that spectrum. The low band at least as far as I know of 700 came from tv blocks as well.

 

That is correct. And back in the 1980s, SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz also emerged from recycled UHF TV spectrum. The UHF TV band used to extend way up there and contain many more channels.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys! Thats one hell of a chart!

 

You probably already know this if you've read many of wiwavelength's posts, but in an FDD arrangement, the uplink and downlink are often in separated even in different bands. Also there's multiple AWS as it's just kind of the name they give to all the new spectrum they free up in that 1700-2100 range, except of course the 1900 stuff that was already allocated, as that's PCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a google search and that chart looks pretty awesome. One thing I ws looking at yesterday was the 5XX-6XX reverse spectrum auction of 2014/2015 where TV providers from ch. 39-51 will voluntarily be able to give up spectrum for cash. And Cell phone providers will buy that spectrum. The low band at least as far as I know of 700 came from tv blocks as well.

 

And there goes the local TV channels... want to watch TV? Pay up! ;) That's going to be a huge mess, even worse than the last big step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there goes the local TV channels... want to watch TV? Pay up! ;) That's going to be a huge mess, even worse than the last big step.

 

I've heard LA will no doubt be the hardest city to clear. They must have a ton of over the air channels there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the government really need/use all that "exclusive" spectrum? Rather than give up more OTA TV, how about the Feds look internally for some spectrum to auction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the government really need/use all that "exclusive" spectrum? Rather than give up more OTA TV, how about the Feds look internally for some spectrum to auction?

 

A lot is for military use, and no, it wouldn't be easy or safe to give it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard LA will no doubt be the hardest city to clear. They must have a ton of over the air channels there.

 

And there's the wrong mentality. Clearing them out is bad for everyone. There goes your ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, NBC, CW, etc. Peace out! Most satellite TV POPs use OTA to pick up the signal and send it out via spotbeam. Some cable co's use OTA for some TV channels where they could not obtain it via fiber economically. I use OTA all the time as the quality is better than what you can get over the cable or satellite signal, 19 megabits per OTA mux. Straight from the source. I know a few people who have gone to OTA only (even DVRs) with some sort of streaming supplement, like Netflix. You really can't beat that combination for $8 a month. I have a little rechargeable LCD panel that picks up all my OTA channels works great out at the camp, boat, and best of all hurricanes when there is no power or cable TV.

 

And there are a TON of signals there. 52 muxes, some contain one HD, and one or two SDs. Some have many SD channels. Too bad they didn't mandate MPEG4 during the conversion instead of just MPEG2. That would save two folds on things. Could have gone with 3mhz wide instead of 6mhz.

 

http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?mktid=2

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there's the wrong mentality. Clearing them out is bad for everyone. There goes your ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, NBC, CW, etc. Peace out! Most satellite TV POPs use OTA to pick up the signal and send it out via spotbeam. Some cable co's use OTA for some TV channels where they could not obtain it via fiber economically. I use OTA all the time as the quality is better than what you can get over the cable or satellite signal, 19 megabits per OTA mux. Straight from the source. I know a few people who have gone to OTA only (even DVRs) with some sort of streaming supplement, like Netflix. You really can't beat that combination for $8 a month. I have a little rechargeable LCD panel that picks up all my OTA channels works great out at the camp, boat, and best of all hurricanes when there is no power or cable TV.

 

And there are a TON of signals there. 52 muxes, some contain one HD, and one or two SDs. Some have many SD channels. Too bad they didn't mandate MPEG4 during the conversion instead of just MPEG2. That would save two folds on things. Could have gone with 3mhz wide instead of 6mhz.

 

http://www.rabbitear...ket.php?mktid=2

 

I'm a cable cutter, totally with you on OTA broadcasts, but beyond ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, NBC, CW, how much etc. does each market really need? The FCC obviously believes less than they currently have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there goes the local TV channels... want to watch TV? Pay up! ;) That's going to be a huge mess, even worse than the last big step.

 

That is an overreaction. Most TV markets do not need greater than 6-7 OTA channels. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, and PBS affiliates, maybe an independent or two. Although, really, outside of the major affiliates, most OTA is cheap crap not worthy of a 6 MHz swath of spectrum.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot is for military use, and no, it wouldn't be easy or safe to give it up.

 

I understand it is for military, I agree it wouldn't be easy, but safe i disagree with. You can maintain current levels and consolidate spectrum between branches of the military and/or government. You cut the Government reserved prime spectrum by 15% and then sell off the "Prime Real Estate" to mobile vendors. Put that money towards the budget or deficit.

 

And there's the wrong mentality. Clearing them out is bad for everyone. There goes your ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, NBC, CW, etc. Peace out! Most satellite TV POPs use OTA to pick up the signal and send it out via spotbeam. Some cable co's use OTA for some TV channels where they could not obtain it via fiber economically. I use OTA all the time as the quality is better than what you can get over the cable or satellite signal, 19 megabits per OTA mux. Straight from the source. I know a few people who have gone to OTA only (even DVRs) with some sort of streaming supplement, like Netflix. You really can't beat that combination for $8 a month. I have a little rechargeable LCD panel that picks up all my OTA channels works great out at the camp, boat, and best of all hurricanes when there is no power or cable TV.

 

And there are a TON of signals there. 52 muxes, some contain one HD, and one or two SDs. Some have many SD channels. Too bad they didn't mandate MPEG4 during the conversion instead of just MPEG2. That would save two folds on things. Could have gone with 3mhz wide instead of 6mhz.

 

http://www.rabbitear...ket.php?mktid=2

 

I wish I could like this post 100 times. OTA should not be going away, and if mpeg4 had been mandated, then wow, OTA would be in much better shape. Actually I'd rather see the lower channels that have interference with powerlines eliminated and allow those channels to move to better space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is an overreaction. Most TV markets do not need greater than 6-7 OTA channels. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, and PBS affiliates, maybe an independent or two. Although, really, outside of the major affiliates, most OTA is cheap crap not worthy of a 6 MHz swath of spectrum.

 

AJ

 

Unfortunately, MPEG2 was the standard so 6Mhz is the requirement.

 

Or

 

We could have the government do Digital Conversion 2: Electric Bugaloo and go to MPEG4 and 3Mhz channels. That would only take 12 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and if mpeg4 had been mandated, then wow, OTA would be in much better shape.

Unfortunately, MPEG2 was the standard so 6Mhz is the requirement.

 

Guys, this is all wishful thinking. MPEG4 was not even a pipe dream when ATSC standards were formulated back in the early 1990s.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, this is all wishful thinking. MPEG4 was not even a pipe dream when ATSC standards were formulated back in the early 1990s.

 

AJ

 

Agreed, but that is were the FCC is at fault, as ATSC was evolving, the standard should have been updated to support or mandate MPEG4. MPEG4 has been around since the late '90s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, but that is were the FCC is at fault, as ATSC was evolving, the standard should have been updated to support or mandate MPEG4. MPEG4 has been around since the late '90s.

 

Nah, for several reasons, the FCC is not at fault. First, ATSC, not the FCC, set the standards. Second, the run up to these types of conversions takes years. Once MPEG2 was selected and broadcasters started to prepare accordingly, that was it.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is an overreaction. Most TV markets do not need greater than 6-7 OTA channels. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, and PBS affiliates, maybe an independent or two. Although, really, outside of the major affiliates, most OTA is cheap crap not worthy of a 6 MHz swath of spectrum.

 

AJ

 

I fully agree on the 6-7. All you really need a the major players for the HD's and news. I disagree on the crap though, lots of good stuff on OTA even on some of the SDs...maybe it's the sense of pride that I get it over the air. I'm not into watching all that Honey Boo Boo and Jersey Shore garbage on other networks. Oh I miss the days of C-Band when you could pick which channels you wanted instead of having to buy packages. Hell, I miss the days of C-Band when most stuff was in the clear. That's a whole other thread...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully agree on the 6-7. All you really need a the major players for the HD's and news.

 

My point with the 6-7 necessary OTA channels per market proposal is that it should allow for the number of VHF/UHF to be contracted down to roughly 40 and still employ a viable frequency reuse plan -- yep, just like GSM, OTA DTV requires frequency reuse planning to mitigate co-channel and adjacent channel interference in and among TV markets.

 

That said, ironically, I do not support auctioning off additional UHF TV spectrum for mobile use. We are getting far too auction happy. We are just throwing any and all spectrum at the mobile space and seeing what sticks. The result is outrageous mobile spectrum fragmentation and balkanization, both of which work to keep the dysfunctional contract-subsidy system in place.

 

Instead, we really need to force similar band consolidation (e.g. SMR/Cellular, PCS A-F/PCS G) and better utilize the spectrum that we already have. (And I really need to finish the research and write up my Cellular 850 MHz band reformation article.)

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Cool find! Been there since 2018 according to Cellmapper. The only other time I've seen them leave up a temp site like this for a long period of time was when a nearby site is temporarily inoperable like the one in Red Hook Houses. That doesn't seem to be the case here and it's pretty much a GMO site at this point. My best guess is that T-Mobile wanted to put a site there to fill in coverage but because it's on LGA's grounds getting the actual permission to do so is extremely complex so they worked out a deal with the Port Authority to put up a COW in the meantime.  
    • Would this be a T-Mobile COW outside LGA Terminal A? eNB 49106 seems to line up to its position, plus the arm for the trailer to hook onto a truck says T-Mobile. Here is the NYC streetcar view the image was pulled from.     For all the years I have been monitoring the DAS, I have never gotten -55 or better, even after passing by every antenna in a station that is deep enough to have 0 outside macros reaching in. The SNR is still 20+, so its probably designed that way on purpose.
    • From a few days back: https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/deutsche-telekom-aims-50-t-mobile-ownership-2024 DT Chief Executive Timotheus Hoettgas said buying the majority stake in T-Mobile US was the group's most important strategic project at present, according to Reuters. He said that stake should top 50% much sooner than its previous projection of 2024. Earlier this year, DT paid $2.4 billion to SoftBank Group to increase its stake in T-Mobile US to 48.4%.
    • 5.9GHz finally approved by a court: https://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/court-upholds-fccs-decision-59-ghz.  This should be added to 5GHz wi-fi.  considering wi-fi 7 will be included in the qualcomm x70 and related SOCs, doubtful they will be able to add this now, unless designed to be added later.  5.9GHz will given us a third 160MHz unique carrier iirc, a major improvement.
    • waiting for about 400 with demand > supply, or 95% to look again in some detail.  Until then : https://www.sashajavid.com/FCC_Auction108.php#county_details_table_overlay
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...