Presented SMPTE 2014 Washington DC Section’s

“Bits by the Bay” Annual Technical Conference

Benefits of a Broadcast Centric Heterogeneous Network in an ATSC 3.0 Broadcast Topology This paper presents the most economic and expedient first step a future ATSC 3.0 broadcaster can use to establish service inside the home as an enabler of many new diverse broadcast business models

Mike Simon, Sinclair Broadcast Group 5/22/2014

1

Contents

Preface ...................................................................................................................................................... 2

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 2

Example of LTE HetNet and Efficacy of existing LTE Broadcast Services .................................................. 4

Broadcast Centric HetNet Architecture Proposed by ONE Media for ATSC 3.0 ....................................... 5

Link budgets and Propagation study under Heterogeneous Network ..................................................... 8

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................. 10

Appendix: HetNet Propagation Studies Plots WNUV Channel 40 Baltimore ......................................... 11

About ONE Media, LLC ONE Media 1 was established as a joint investment between Coherent Logix and Sinclair Broadcast Group with a vision to build the “Next Generation Broadcast Platform,” enabling broadcasting to be Competitive across all platforms. Solving the associated business, technical, and political challenges while supporting mobile video broadband services (wired & wireless) provides for the greatest business opportunity in the broadcast / communication / media industry today -- providing premium video anytime, anywhere without a data cap. To be competitive, this broadcast platform will support all business models, whether fixed services (i.e. Ultra High Definition) to the home, portable services within the home (i.e. laptops, tablets and other media enabled devices), or nomadic services outside of the home (i.e. tablets, cellphones, etc.). This solution envisions and supports tomorrow’s converged environment consumers expect.

1 ONE Media, LLC to Design “Next Generation Broadcast Platform” – Coherent Logix

2

Preface This “White Paper” is written with the intent to bring Broadcasters an increased understanding of some of the potential opportunities unlocked in a future where a “Next Generation Broadcast Platform” (NGBP) can exploit the opportunity of existing within a Heterogeneous Network (HetNet). It is in the concept of developing ‘a platform’ that Broadcasters may begin to understand that the individual elements of a platform (a new “ATSC 3.0” Broadcast transmission standard for example) take on new importance in the ability to interoperate in a future environment. In today’s increasingly complex world of distribution, the real opportunity is unleashed through taking advantage of commonalities, and wrapping simple tools and applications together to weave a fabric which supports the many and varied business applications (use cases) that can then wield our unique content and distribution platform as a unified whole.

In this paper I will expand on one example of a HetNet, and show how an implementation of such an approach may more readily allow Broadcasters the ability to provide portability to handheld and tablet devices within the home environment without the large capitalization requirements of building out a fully mobile, SFN (Single Frequency Network) topology. Think of this example as one of many that underscore the central important concept. It’s not about a single thing…it’s about a platform!

Introduction Let us get comfortable with the term HetNet (Heterogeneous Network). When we hear wireless HetNet used today it usually indicates that dissimilar wireless access technologies using licensed and unlicensed spectrum are being used together in a coordinated or managed way to improve the consumer quality of experience (QOE) and to enable new business models in wireless environments.

One example to be briefly discussed in this paper is that of a LTE Mobile Network Operator (MNO) offering managed Wi-Fi as a means to augment (or offload) the LTE payload (or service) given the widespread availability of Wi-Fi access supported in devices today. In the future broadcasters must have the technology and a network topology to similarly leverage both licensed and unlicensed spectrum that is today viewed by FCC as complementary. 2 ONE Media believes terrestrial broadcasting as a wireless medium should leverage the same tools as other successful wireless providers and also evolve to remain competitive and with the goal of meeting the consumer’s expectations of a wireless service in the 21st century. Today, the existing terrestrial television broadcast topology in use since the dawn of television in 1950’s must evolve for the medium to remain relevant.3

The purpose of this paper is to inform and provide a new perspective for broadcasters considering the future and ATSC 3.0. This approach should also be of interest to broadcasters pondering a wide variety of new fixed and/or nomadic broadcast service business models. Recognizing the ubiquitous use of IP protocols for network transport today, a new broadcast centric heterogeneous network (HetNet) design

2 DOC-326341A3 | FCC.gov (3/31/2014) Statement of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler: In 2014, licensed and unlicensed spectrum is

more complimentary than competitive. They are less oil & vinegar and more like peanut butter & jelly. Today, virtually every smartphone has two unlicensed technologies, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, with a third – near field communications – beginning to be added for mobile transactions. And wireless carriers are using Wi-Fi to offload more than 45% of smartphone traffic to fixed networks. In this order, the Commission is taking 100 MHz of unlicensed spectrum at 5 GHz that was barely usable – and not usable at all outdoors – and transforming it into spectrum that is fully usable for Wi-Fi. 3 The ATSC 3.0 effort represents a “green field opportunity” for broadcasters to redefine themselves in the Internet age

3

(using licensed and unlicensed spectrum) is conceptualized for delivering ATSC 3.0 broadcast services in a proficient, economic and expeditious way4 into the home as a first step.

We will illustrate the idea of a HetNet conceptually by using it to solve for a problem. The problem we shall solve is “how might Broadcasters provide in-home portability for content Broadcast over-the-air?” A broadcast HetNet design may offer a cost effective and expedient way of introducing ATSC 3.0 broadcast services in the home. As well, it may be possible to do such over the largest portion of a broadcast station’s existing coverage area.

On the broadcast transmitter side of the transmission network there is a new (ATSC 3.0) Software Defined “parameterized OFDM waveform” modulator. This is to be used within the existing transmitter and tall tower infrastructure to make the most effective use of the available broadcast signal saturation of large areas (ERP and geographically defined). A new ATSC 3.0 receive node is introduced that includes a “Software Defined Radio Head” (SDRH) for receiving OTA and transporting broadcast services into the home via IP and integrating with both wired and wireless infrastructure. Wi-Fi inside the home can easily serve IP bits to various Wi-Fi enabled wireless devices (tablets, etc.) in addition to U/HDTV over various interfaces (such as Ethernet or HDM1 to Smart TV devices). The new SDRH is normally located outside of the home and can be controlled via IP by users using established (W3C) protocols on various wireless devices. Several users in the home (using Wi-Fi enabled devices) can simultaneously request separate ATSC 3.0 broadcast OTA services. Having configurable hardware on both ends of the channel (software defined in nature)5 to be commanded or directed to process ATSC 3.0 broadcast and other waveforms under direct broadcaster control (via signaling) is the pinnacle in flexibility and a true enabler in today’s competitive market. It ensures that terrestrial broadcasting may remain relevant and develop into a prosperous business that serves the public interest in the 21st century in a multitude of ways.

This broadcast HetNet design also offers the most cost effective and expedient way of introducing ATSC 3.0 broadcast services into the home and over the largest portion of the broadcast station’s coverage area for goals such as U/HDTV.6 This ATSC 3.0 HetNet design additionally offers greater than 50 dB savings7 (link budget) for delivering broadcast services (all IP data delivered) to wireless devices in the home controlling a remote SDRH. It is the alternative to delivering and receiving the broadcast signal directly in the home on an ATSC 3.0 device, and having to build out the sparse SFN network ‘up front’ to be able to do so.

One axiom in terrestrial broadcasting is that a tall tower (antenna height) and higher ERP is always an advantage in a system optimized for broadcast. The axiom can be found to be true in this design of a broadcast centric heterogeneous network for fixed and nomadic devices in indoor environments such as

4 Time to market is a key factor in the evolving technical landscape today, ATSC 3.0 broadcasters need to first put a stake in the

ground and then evolve in a consumer driven manner that the market determines, when software is flexibly coupled with the correct hardware architecture in the control of the broadcasters this becomes key to evolving the business in the future 5 http://www.coherentlogix.com/

6 This is a first step only (biggest bang for the buck) approach that can enable significant benefits depending on the business

model of the individual broadcaster. But, obviously the laws of physics still apply (terrain) in some market may require supplemental transmitters to reach the targeted audience and this should be a business decision for each broadcaster driven by their business model in a second phase, not to be discussed in this paper. The bottom line is each broadcaster needs to maintain their existing coverage area defined by OET-69 into which new services can be engineered in a market driven manner that is effective and easy for consumers to embrace 7 The comparisons used in the paper are for nomadic service in the home and for nomadic UHF outdoor service, VHF broadcast

services can also be delivered in home given the proper engineering of Software Defined Radio Head (SDRH)

4

the home. Note: Variants of this SDRH approach are also envisioned to enable broadcast services in other indoor environments and venues as well as outdoors, but the focus here is on the home.

It is commonly reported that the majority of wireless data today is actually consumed indoors. Therefore, for this and many other reasons, any new terrestrial broadcast business model in today’s competitive marketplace to be a success mandates the establishment of a wide area service available in the home as a foundational first step. Furthermore, establishment of in home service is also important for successful nomadic and or TV everywhere services to be launched, with the relationship with the consumer starting in the home under the control of broadcasters. Inclusive of this first step, there should be the establishment of an “anchor point” or Home Gateway in the home under the control of the broadcaster that can enable a personal relationship with consumers (viewers) in their own coverage area on various devices. 8

To learn about the potential benefits of a HetNet Topology for broadcasters, seven link budgets are calculated and presented (Table 1) to derive the minimum required field strengths (dBµv/m) for several types of services including traditional ATSC A/53, UHDTV and Nomadic services. These were calculated by using DVB-T2 and the EBU-Tech 33489 document for the planning factors in various environments as a proxy to the future ATSC 3.0 system. Then using these link budgets the results of propagation studies, using traditional propagation tools such as Longley Rice, were conducted for WNUV-DT channel 40 Baltimore to get some relative comparison of the service areas predicted for the seven link budgets studied with and without benefit of the SDRH (Appendix Figures 4-10).

Example of LTE HetNet and Efficacy of existing LTE Broadcast Services As stated in the introduction, the term wireless Heterogeneous Network (HetNet) is typically used today to indicate dissimilar wireless access technologies (physical layers) are being used together in a coordinated or managed way to improve the consumer quality of experience (QOE) and to enable specific business models in wireless environments. To use a wireless carrier example; an LTE network operator can provide an Evolved Packet Core (EPC) managed Wi-Fi access point to augment LTE service indoors and in public hotspots and/or at targeted venues. This can also include automatic authentication to achieve service to and from the LTE and Wi-Fi access networks for an effortlessly, seamless consumer experience. This is but one example of a wireless heterogeneous network.

To increase the data capacity in LTE networks it is a common practice today to introduce smaller (denser, higher frequency) cell topologies in a managed or coordinated10 geographic arrangement around the larger (lower frequency) LTE macro cells. In a LTE wireless carrier based infrastructure, the cell size must remain geographically small and the RF radiated energy must be contained to smaller areas because a frequency reuse scheme of one (same frequency in adjacent cells) is often used. Constraining the size helps to mitigate inter-cell interference of geographically adjacent cells. This

8 A second step could be to enlarge outdoor nomadic services over larger identified portions of the coverage area. A

broadcaster so interested can then built out broadcast network topology using SFN or other technologies driven by the economics of each broadcaster’s specific business model and on their own time line, this second step isn’t discussed in paper

9 DVB-T2 and EBU-Tech 3348 are used as representative examples the actual Broadcast waveform will be defined by ATSC 3.0

10 In LTE Advanced Heterogeneous Networks (HetNets) use a mix of macro, pico, femto and relay base stations, effectively

bringing the network closer to the user. To deliver high spectral efficiency per unit area, advanced techniques such as enhanced Inter Cell Interference Coordination (eICIC) techniques are needed that centrally manage (schedule) and assign resources across all low power small cells and macro cells using the same channel (frequency) in an area. However, it is very attractive, less expensive and more expedient for an LTE operator to also increase network capacity by deploying LTE Advanced HetNets that also use 802.11 Wi-Fi access points (APs) in unlicensed spectrum under EPC management to offload macro cell user traffic

5

constraint is managed in the design of the LTE network topology and in the LTE network protocols by the scheduling of physical layer resource blocks (OFDMA) in a coordinated manner across all cells in an area.

The cell size must also remain small because of the limited power for uplink available in user devices and by the assumption that fewer user devices on average are in contention for the same resources in smaller cell areas. These constraints become particularly challenging in more densely populated urban areas of the top 30 USA markets. Note: the argument that the 600 MHz spectrum to be obtained at a future FCC incentive auction is ideal to address LTE network capacity (spectrum crunch) as was the mantra of former FCC commissioner Julius Genachowski; this was clearly beltway spin and little more.11 The physics of the 600 MHz UHF band ensures the signal will propagate greater distances, creating more problems via inter-cell interference for building dense cell topologies needed for capacity.

Also, just beginning to emerge in LTE networks for delivery of popular (widely in demand) content is a new flexible LTE waveform that offers a mix of both broadcast and unicast modes (termed eMBMS) which operates in a backwardly compatible (unicast) manner. The LTE EPC (IP Network) under eMBMS scheme identifies the popular content (and or data) being requested in an area of network by users. This high demand data is then segregated in the IP core network and delivered by enabling a broadcast mode (waveform) by trading off unicast capacity. This LTE eMBMS broadcast technology is inherently built on a unicast framework (which is optimized for low latency) that then introduces (time slots) that offer broadcast mode opportunities in a new LTE waveform. There are major constraints12 in introducing a broadcast mode into the LTE waveform which was foundationally architected to deliver very efficient unicast services. The same would be said for any access network that is optimized for broadcast which then introduces opportunistic time slots in the waveform for unicast services. Unicast and broadcast are very diverse service types and the physics require a very different set of tradeoffs and design requirements. It is virtually impossible to economically achieve optimization for both within a single waveform and network topology.

Broadcast Centric HetNet Architecture Proposed by ONE Media for ATSC 3.0 An example of a broadcast centric Heterogeneous Network (HetNet) system architecture13 can be found as part of the ATSC 3.0 system proposal submitted by Coherent Logix, Inc. and the Sinclair Broadcast Group to the ATSC in response to their call for ATSC 3.0 proposals. Figure 1 shows the high level block of one instantiation of a broadcast centric heterogeneous network that will be discussed briefly. On the transmitter side an ATSC 3.0 Modulator capable of producing a flexible OFDM parameterized waveform is installed in the existing transmitter and the existing tower. On the receive side a new node termed a Software Defined Radio Head “SDRH” mounted outside the home and is powered and controlled via an “Anchor Point” 14 in the home. The SDRH and Anchor Point (Home gateway) are under broadcaster control and are connected by an Ethernet cable which also supplies power to the SDRH from the Anchor Point. If the (ISP) is available the broadcaster/s IP core

11

The physics of propagation for 600 MHz make these frequencies more ideal for coverage, and in rural areas. Also the longer

wavelengths at 600 MHz (antenna size) become problematic for achieving capacity from MIMO another capacity tool in LTE 12

The fundamental LTE requirement of low latency for unicast services precludes the use of deep time interleaving at the

physical layer which is used in all systems optimized for broadcast and fading channels. This leads to inefficiency by requiring AL-FEC be used to mitigate the absence of adequate time interleaving in a design that is optimized for unicast (low latency). 13

Sinclair Broadcast Group and Coherent Logix, Inc. submitted an ATSC 3.0 proposal S32-1062r0 to the ATSC on Sept. 27, 2013

and this can be found on the ATSC member’s website and can be referenced for more conceptual details. The basic Framework from this proposal forms the basic starting point for the foundation and evolution of ONE Media going forward 14

One instantiation of the anchor point could be a Home Gateway with Storage under control of broadcaster. In this document the term Anchor Point and Home Gateway are used interchangeably

6

network entity can provision or manage OTT content on the anchor point which may be cached and then synced or side loaded onto nomadic devices that are registered and authenticated, etc. The content may also be cached for later consumption by consumer or for enabling of targeted services and advertising driven by consumer analytics (IP Core network) that is available both inside and outside the home. Also, content and or data may also be pushed by broadcaster OTA and stored in the anchor point in addition to the ISP (Unicast) if available.

Ethernet

Home Gateway

Tablet

Tablet

U/HDTV

Tablet

(SDRH)

Ethernet/ HDMI /WiFi Storage

(SDRH Powered by RJ-45)Transmitter w/

ATSC 3.0 Software Defined Modulator

Software Defined Radio Head

ISP

Modem

Broadcaster/s IP Core Network

Figure 1 Conceptual High Level Block Broadcast Centric Heterogeneous Network

The anchor point in the home is a software defined node (device) that also provides an air interface via DSP (Wi-Fi) to clients in the home and uses the latest and most efficient W3C web protocols such as Web Sockets for communicating with clients.15 The anchor point would also authenticate wireless clients and use encryption on the wireless links. The clients (Tablets, Handheld, etc.) use unlicensed spectrum for example Wi-Fi and licensed OTA broadcast (that are complimentary like peanut butter and jelly to quote FCC commissioner Wheeler, see footnote 2) and open web protocols to request multimedia and or data content that is broadcast OTA and received by the SDRH and forwarded as IP packets to the anchor point for storage or live consumption. The clients may also request content that has been cached in advance (Home Gateway) to augment the broadcast experience under the control of broadcasters in the ONE Media HetNet environment.

15

WebSocket Protocol is an independent TCP-based protocol. Its only relationship to HTTP is that its handshake is interpreted by HTTP servers as an Upgrade request. The WebSocket protocol makes possible more interaction between a browser and a server, facilitating live content and the creation of real-time games. This is made possible by providing a standardized way for the server to send content to the browser without being solicited by the client, and allowing for messages to be passed back and forth while keeping the connection open. In this way a two-way (bi-directional) ongoing conversation can take place between a browser and the server once a session is established

7

The use of web tools (W3C) HTML5 and the extensive API’s now available to web developers can make it much easier, faster, and more cost-effective to target a wide variety of nomadic devices.16 HTML5 is also being used today to expand the market for apps beyond mobile devices and into platforms such as in-vehicle infotainment systems and Internet-connected Smart TVs,17 etc. Moreover, in the TV Everywhere model any device with a HTML5 web browser (W3C extensions, API’s) or an App in near future becomes a potential device under the HTML5 paradigm. Also, 3GPP has a Study item in Release 12 to enable HTML518 as the presentation environment in LTE in the future. The truth of the matter is the real winner has already been declared and it is the “Web” and broadcasting needs to evolve and use as many of the same W3C tools to remain relevant and to evolve in a new system architecture that is presented by the ATSC 3.0 green field opportunity.19 Part of the vision in the ONE Media proposal20 (including physical layer) is to fully support HTML5 and MPEG-H protocols in a broadcast centric heterogeneous network architecture whose time is now. The emerging MPEG-H (Heterogeneous) environment standards ISO/IEC 23008 listed below are prime component pieces leveraged and a profile defined:

MPEG-H Part 1 Media Transport (MMT)21 MPEG-H Part 2 (HEVC) MPEG-H Part 10 (AL-FEC) MPEG-H Part 11 (Composition Information) HTML5, XML

There was a serious constraint in MPEG-H Part 1 (MMT) spec in that there is no full support of a broadcast only mode. The presentation timeline in MPEG-H is based on the availability of UTC time (wall clock) at all nodes in the network. This had driven a serious constraint to always have a unicast channel available to establish the UTC clock in the client. The (ONE Media) proposal to ATSC 3.0 has mitigated this constraint and in doing brings tremendous broadcaster flexibility. The ONE Media physical layer design enables accurate UTC time to be broadcast (in-band) in the same waveform and robustly recovered in the receiver ensuring the establishment of an accurate UTC time base at client (OTA) to be referenced for presentation timing at the application layer.22 This ONE Media contribution and system

16

Eventually many believe Apple will be forced to also embrace current open standards, or risk losing content which has made their platform so appealing. The irony of course is that Apple has done so much marketing touting themselves as leaders of the “open web” movement, and they are the long holdout stalling the success of open standards 17

ONE Media feels strongly that a local broadcaster’s business model must evolve to delivering broadcast bits beyond the

walled garden of a Smart TV, which is also being position as an anchor point in the home by CE industry. The local broadcaster/s needs the control to imagine, develop and evolve the consumer (viewer) relationship in their coverage area. Most importantly to serve their local communities in the internet age broadcasters must harmonize their use of HTML5 on the web and their OTA broadcast service as broadcasting becomes an APP in the future 18

3GPP; Technical Specification Group SA4; HTML5 for a new Presentation Layer in 3GPP Services (Release 12) 19

The good news is 8-VSB is finally on the cusp of providing something useful to broadcasters, it is so limited and non-

extensible to be anything other than the monolithic fixed service originally envisioned when A/53 was adopted by FCC in 1997, that broadcasters in ATSC 3.0 are now openly embracing without hesitation a non-backwardly compatible standard or “green field opportunity”. ONE Media was founded to fully explore this once in a life time opportunity for broadcasters to reinvent themselves for mobility in the internet age. 20

Most other ATSC 3.0 proposals are built on extensions of legacy systems such as DVB-T2 and or ISDBT were the incentive is to

build onto existing legacy standards and the installed base of equipment in other countries and not try to invent some new architecture for broadcasting. This isn’t an option in the USA with the current FCC. But, let it be said “necessity is truly the mother of invention” 21

MPEG-DASH will also be transported by MMT 22

The ONE Media broadcast UTC clock is very robust negative - C/N with an accuracy of 100µs at 20 miles, and is more accurate than NTP time for the client side available over the web. NTP via the web can also be used for unicast when no broadcast

8

capability should not be glossed over by the reader, it is very important to have a true “network clock” if a vision of a next gen broadcast platform is to be realized.

Link budgets and Propagation study under Heterogeneous Network Figure 2 shows the seven RF Paths and reception scenarios that a link budget was calculated and will be presented. All the calculated minimum field strengths (dBµv/m) indicated on the vectors are normalized to 10M above ground and the link budget calculations are shown in Table 1.

Note: the goal in this paper is to first calculate the link budgets and required minimum field strengths for different broadcast service environments and then normalize all field strengths to 10 M as is commonly done for fixed roof top service. The normalized required minimum field strengths are shown in table 1. These normalized field strengths are then used in a propagation study using the Longley-Rice (OET-69) methodology mandated by FCC to make relative comparisons between (A/53) HDTV and (ATSC 3.0) U-HDTV fixed services and ATSC 3.0 nomadic services areas in various environments. The Sinclair Broadcast Group station licensed parameters for WNUV-DT in Baltimore, MD is then used for the comparative study to the show potential benefits of a broadcast centric HetNet.

(UTC

Time

)

Anchor Point(HTML5)

Tablet

Tablet

U/HDTV

ISP

Software Defined Radio Head (SDRH) -> IPGain 3 dB

LNA (NF) 2dB

HDMI/W

iFi

1.5

M

10

MStorage

(SDRH) Powered by Ethernet)

Tablet

(NF) 6dB

1.5

M

Tablet

(NF) 6dB

(30.9 µV/m) 16 QAM-3/5

(73.4 µV/m) 16 Q

AM-3/5

(55.

9 µV

/m) 1

6 Q

AM

-3/5

OutdoorSuburb

Broadcaster

(45.3 µV/m) 256 QAM-3/4

1.5

M

Tablet OutdoorUrban

(62.

4 µ

V/m

) 16

QA

M-3

/5

ATSCHDTV

(40.8 µV/m) 8-VSB

NF(7dB)

Gain 10 dB

4dB Loss

HH

(82.8 µV/m) 16 QAM-3/5

(NF) 6dB

Broadcaster Managed IP (OTT)

Nomadic

Modem

Indoor

Existing Tall Tower High ERP

Note: Planning factors for link budgets and derived signal strengths is from EBU-Tech 3348 and assumes DVB-T2 as a proxy, except ATSC A/53 FCC is used

(NF) 6dB

HH

(Normalized)

Figure 2 Block Broadcast Centric (HetNet) All Field Strengths (dBµv/m) Normalized 10 Meters

The seven (7) columns in table 1 from left to right indicate the link budgets, the columns are.

channel is present see S32-1062r0 there is also surely to be many other valuable uses for serving UTC time via broadcast over wide areas with good robustness

9

1. ATSC A/53 (FCC predicted > 40.8 dBµv/m) 2. Indoor w/ SDRH (10M) UHDTV 33.7 Mbps (> 45.3 dBµv/m) 3. Indoor w/ SDRH (10M) to wireless devices (Wi-Fi) 12.3 Mbps (> 30.9 dBµv/m) 4. Outdoor Tablet Suburb (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 55.9 dBµv/m) 5. Outdoor Tablet Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 62.4 dBµv/m) 6. Indoor Tablet Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 73.4 dBµv/m) 7. Indoor Handheld Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 82.8 dBµv/m)

Note: Planning factors for link budgets in (columns 2-7) are from EBU-Tech 3348 and assume DVB-T2 as a proxy, except Column 1 ATSC A/53 FCC planning factors are used. All calculated minimum field strengths (dB µv/m) indicated are normalized to 10M above ground for comparison.

Table 1 Seven (7) Link Budget Calculations for Study

The reader is directed to the appendix of this paper for the results of all seven propagation studies conducted using WNUV-D channel 40 in Baltimore as a use case. The 8-VSB modulator is replaced by the ATSC 3.0 Modulator described in this paper and the SDRH is located outdoors at 10M above ground at the home. Figure 4 shows the current predicted 8-VSB (19.3 Mbps) coverage area with the signal field strength (>41 dBµv/m) as defined by the FCC. 23 Figure 5 shows the maximum data rate 33.7 Mbps used for instance by U/HDTV services. By, using the SDRH the high data rate (33.7 Mbps) only required a 4.5 dB increase of signal strength for an increase of 57% in data rate compared to the 8-VSB baseline. There is a small decrease in coverage shown for the 33.7 Mbps service compared to the ATSC A/53 (19.3 Mbps) shown in Figure 5 as one would expect.24

23

Coverage to the west of WNUV-DT in Baltimore is constrained by increasingly mountainous terrain, to the east the land elevation is decreasing towards the ocean and this in part explains the better coverage to the east of WNUV 24

The C/N for 33.7 Mbps is 22 dB as compare to 15.2 dB ATSC A/53 (6.8 dB delta) but by using SDRH a 33.7 Mbps high data rate service with an increase of (57%) only needs 4.5 dB increase signal strength as compared to ATSC A/53 baseline

10

Figure 6 shows the predicted service area for the SDRH for Nomadic service at 12.3 Mbps (Tablet/ Handheld) and this requires only 30.9dBµv/m at the SDRH. For comparison Figure 10 shows the very small service area predicted for the reception of the exact same 12.3 Mbps received directly indoors on an ATSC 3.0 handheld (82.8 dBµv/m) an increase of 51.9 dB in signal strength is required. Figure 3 below conveniently presents both plots (Fig. 6 & 10) together to easily show the large service area (on left) with the SDRH and (on right) for the equivalent handheld indoor service without benefit of the SDRH. This is a 51.9 dB increase in required signal strength without the benefit of SDRH, which equates to very small relative service area for the exact same 12.3 Mbps service.

The FCC on 3/31/2014 at its open meeting announced an additional 100 MHz for unlicensed service will now be made available for entrepreneurs and businesses such as LTE wireless carriers. This is also very complimentary for a next gen broadcast system with ATSC 3.0 given the right technology and topology.

Figure 3 Handheld Indoor (Left) with SDRH (Right) Indoor NO SDRH increase of 51.9 dB needed 25

Conclusions This paper was written to help Broadcasters develop an understanding that there exist many new opportunities to serve our markets and viewers in imaginative, powerful ways. If new fundamental capabilities are encompassed in a future ATSC 3.0 service, it is possible to unlock service potentials which Broadcasters are currently precluded from implementing.

What is most importance to understand is that the future of Broadcasting is dependent on much more than simply a future ATSC 3.0 Broadcast Standard. It is a start and, if properly designed to provide services and capabilities that meet our needs, is essential. ONE Media was founded to help broadcasters understand this once in a lifetime opportunity to embrace innovation and develop a standard and system topology that will evolve and remain competitive in the future, thanks to the flexibility of SDR and to network function virtualization and software defined networks (SDN) that are emerging.

We (Broadcasters) must take the time and the effort to more fully define the network layer of our future enterprises so that the intraoperative opportunities unlocked by intelligent networks controlled by Broadcasters become part and parcel of our thinking. 25

Note: FCC OET-69 and Longley-Rice are known to actually over predict the coverage area. Therefore, the service areas

predicted herein should be considered best case scenarios. However, since modeled relative to OET-69 (Longley-Rice) a relative comparison to ATSC A/53 is possible. The propagation Studies were conducted using V-Soft Probe 4 software

11

Appendix: HetNet Propagation Studies Plots WNUV Channel 40 Baltimore

Figure 4 ATSC A/53 (FCC predicted > 40.8 dBµv/m)

12

Figure 5 Indoor w/ Radio Head U/HDTV (10M) 33.7 Mbps (> 45.3 dBµv/m)

13

Figure 6 Indoor w/ Radio Head (10M) Handheld 12.3 Mbps (> 30.9 dBµv/m)

14

Figure 7 Outdoor Tablet Suburb (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 55.9 dBµv/m)

15

Figure 8 Outdoor Tablet Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 62.4 dBµv/m)

16

Figure 9 Indoor Tablet Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 73.4 dBµv/m)

17

Figure 10 Indoor Handheld Urban (1.5M) 12.3 Mbps (> 82.8 dBµv/m)