Denver and Albuquerque mux 101 103 C band

[jvvh5897]

Say, I have an odd question. There are city mux for Denver and Albuquerque--not viewable, on C band on a couple of sats, and I seem to recall seeing a couple of others over at Lyngsat site. Does anyone know why these cities send the mux to a sat? I can sort of see NM needing a way to get signals out to rest of the state from the "big" town. And maybe I can see it for CO too. But is that what is going on?

[Gold]

Say, I have an odd question. There are city mux for Denver and Albuquerque--not viewable, on C band on a couple of sats, and I seem to recall seeing a couple of others over at Lyngsat site. Does anyone know why these cities send the mux to a sat? I can sort of see NM needing a way to get signals out to rest of the state from the "big" town. And maybe I can see it for CO too. But is that what is going on?

This is just a guess, but they might be uplink cities where they are trying to help with broadcasting OTA, giving them a greater selection then just locals. I am too far away from Kansas City to receive a constant signal, but I pick up Tropo channels all the time from KC, two regulars are an Ion mux & a "This TV" channel...

Whatever is on "This TV" (AMC 3 TP 3833 H 2734), when I can pick it up from KC is exactly the same. I haven't checked Ion on AMC 1 to compare the Mux from KC, but I will next time I can pick it up

[jvvh5897]

A feed for OTA was what I was suggesting in my post. Most of the translators require that you get your signal from the original transmitter, so no need for sat link. And for most needs it is cheaper to build microwave links than to pay month after month for sat bandwidth. But while thinking last night I started wondering if cable headends might be the target.