from the president - ieee broadcast technology...

IEEE

From the PresidentDear BTS Members:

In the SpringNewsletter, I talkedabout membership– and the goodnews that our BTSmembership hadgrown by 2.7 per-

cent over last year, as of January.But, I warned that this was a goodnews/bad news situation, since itwas based on pre-terminator data.(The terminator is the program thatIEEE runs at the end of February todrop members who have notrenewed.) So, this time I'll reportthe rest of the story – the post-ter-minator numbers which, as expect-ed, are not as good. But, there's

more good news ahead, too, so staywith me.

Overall, IEEE terminations werehigher this year than last – 30.1 per-cent of IEEE members who werebilled for the 2006 renewal year, ver-sus 26.5 percent of members whohad been billed for 2005. Society ter-minations were also higher this year– 21.1 percent versus 17.5 percent.These are people who kept theirIEEE membership but dropped asociety membership. Of these, BTSlost 19 percent of our members tothe terminator, so we fared betterthan the average society. In total,though, counting those who droppedboth IEEE and BTS as well as thosewho dropped only BTS, we lost 29percent of our 2005 membership.

The status of BTSmembership con-tinues to be fea-tured with somegood news andsome bad news asyou will see fromreading our presi-dent’s column. I

have discussed my take on this issuein the past and will not dwell on ithere. I do ask, as Tom has, that you,our current members, voice youropinion as to what you believe wouldhelp us to grow the membership. We

would especially like to hear fromyou if you are thinking about notcontinuing to be a part of the BTS.

On a more positive note, the firstBTS sponsored IEEE InternationalSymposium on Broadband Multi-media Systems and Broadcasting2006 was held April 6th and 7th,2006 in Las Vegas, NV appears tohave been a big success. I hear wemay have even made a few dollarson the event. That is really great for asymposium that was put togetherrather quickly. It also lends credibility

The technologies to deliver information and entertainment to audiences worldwide, at home and on the go.

From the Editor

continued on page 2

ISSN 1067-490X

Volume 14, Number 2, Summer 2006

This equals the average for all soci-eties. In raw numbers, 542 of the1,881 members we counted lastAugust, before the bills were sent

continued on page 2

InsideAnswers to 10 Questions by the

Two Candidates for 2007

President-Elect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

IEEE Broadcast Technology Society

Representation and Tutorial

Activities at IBC2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

1st Annual IEEE International

Symposium on Broadband

Multimedia Systems and

Broadcasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Chapter Activity Reports:

Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Beijing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Ottawa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

ACAP Demonstration Project Gets

Underway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

The Use of Grid Technology Within

the Broadcast Arena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Hello . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

The Videotape Recorder Turns 50 . . . .18

56th Annual Broadcast Symposium .22

IBC 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Portable 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Welcome to the New BTS Members .25

IEEE BTS Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

btsNL_summer06.qxd 7/13/06 1:14 PM

to the idea that this is an area wherethe BTS can expand its base andbroaden our scope of interest. As ourindustry is changing, many, includingmyself, believe that the BTS needs toexpand its activities in areas such asthis, so I am encouraged by the suc-cess of the new symposium. Buoyedby that success, plans are alreadyunderway for next year’s symposiumthat will be held March 28-29, 2007 inOrlando, FL. We will give you moredetails in future issues as those plansdevelop. One final note, congratula-tions and thanks to all who helpedmake the symposium a success.

Not to be out done, chairman GuyBouchard and his committee are alsohard at work on putting together our56th Annual Broadcast Symposiumthat will be held once a again at theHotel Washington in Washington, DC.There is a lot going on in our industryand this is where you will hear aboutit from those in the know and on thefront lines. Make your plans to attendnow as it promises to be a veryinformative three days. As usual it isalso a great place to see old friends,network and make some new friendswhile getting the latest on what’s hap-pening in broadcasting technology.Please take note that our fall Sympo-sium this year will be a bit earlier than

in recent years. It is scheduled forSeptember 27–29, 2006.

In addition to our usual content ofchapter reports and other BTS news,this issue also contains some interest-ing and informative articles. The IEEETechnical Activities Board (TAB)Newsletters Committee asked IEEE

Societies to publish an article aboutthe 2007 IEEE President-Elect candi-dates. This lead article, in the form often questions and answers, is intendedto help you know the candidates andtheir platforms. Jerry Whitaker has pro-vided an article on the ATSC AdvancedCommon Application Platform (ACAP)standard for interactive television. Wehave an interesting piece on thepotential application of grid computingin broadcasting from the BBC. Thereare also articles on the 50th anniver-sary of the invention of the video taperecorder and one on the ARRL Hellocampaign celebrating the first voicebroadcast on radio that occurred 100years ago on December 24, 1906.

And finally I must apologize thatthis issue is getting to you later than itshould have. I hope to get back ontrack with the next issue and asalways I would like to hear from you.

Bill [email protected]

IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Newsletter 2 Summer 2006

Newsletter Deadlines

The BTS Newsletter welcomes con-tributions from every member.Please forward materials you wouldlike included to the editor [email protected]. Here areour deadlines for upcoming issues:

Issue Due Date

Fall, 2006 July 20, 2006Winter, 2006 October 20, 2006Spring, 2007 January 20, 2007Summer, 2007 April 20, 2007

IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Newsletter (ISSN 1067-490X) is published quar-terly by the Broadcast Technology Society of the Institute of Electrical and Electron-ics Engineers, Inc. Headquarters address: 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY10017-2394. Sent at a cost of $1.00 per year to each member of the Broadcast Tech-nology Society. Printed in USA. Periodicals postage paid at New York, NY and atadditional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to: IEEE BroadcastTechnology Society Newsletter, IEEE, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08855.

© 2006 IEEE. Information contained in this newsletter may be copied without per-mission provided that copies are not made or distributed for direct commercialadvantage, and the title of the publication and its date appear.

out, did not renew. We added 130new members by the end of January,for a total of 2,011, which was the2.7-percent gain from January 2005that we reported last time.

Some of you procrastinated, anddid not renew until after February.In March, the IEEE Member ServicesDepartment conducted an e-mailand telemarketing outreach, result-ing in the recovery of nearly tenpercent of the lost IEEE and societymembers. By the end of March, ourBTS membership had exceeded itslevel at the same time last year.We've added 203 new members inthe first five months of this year. Asof the end of May, we're just 26members short of our benchmarkAugust 2005 level. So, we're wellon our way to our second straightyear of net membership growth.But, obviously, a major membershipconcern, for IEEE and for BTS, is"churn" – the replacement of lostmembers with new members neededeach year just to stay even.

We're delighted to welcome ournew members this year – you'll seea list of your names in this Newslet-ter. But, we'd be even moredelighted to have retained more oflast year 's members. Havingreviewed the past six years of termi-nation data, of which this year isalso typical, we can expect thatabout 29 percent of you who arenow receiving this Newsletter asBTS members will not be with usnext year. But, we hope it won't

From the Editor continued

come to that again – we'd like to dosomething about it. Some of youwill be hearing from us directly aswe survey your concerns. But, don'twait for our e-mail or call – pleaselet us know what you like and don'tlike about BTS and IEEE, and whatwe can do to add value to your

membership. We want to save youfrom the cruel clutches of the termi-nator, and ensure that you'll be back!

Tom GurleyPresident

IEEE Broadcast Technology [email protected]

From the President continued


Summer 2006 3 IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Newsletter

IEEE Board of Directors selected LewTerman and John Vig to be the twocandidates for 2007 IEEE Pres-Elect.In an effort to better present their plat-forms and in connection with theupcoming elections, Lew and John,assisted by the TAB Newsletters Com-mittee have prepared for the readersthe following "Answers to 10 Ques-tions by the two Candidates for 2007IEEE President-Elect".

Lew Terman (www.terman.org) canbe contacted at [email protected],and John Vig (www.JohnVig.org) canbe contacted at [email protected].

QUESTION: What are IEEE'sstrengths?Lew Terman: The volunteers are per-haps the most important strength; it istheir enthusiasm, expertise, and timewhich is key to the success of theInstitute.

Another major strength is theIEEE’s generation and dispersion ofhigh quality Intellectual Property,including archival publications, con-ferences/meetings, and standards. Itis this IP which produces the revenuestreams that financially enables theIEEE and create the information flowwhich is so valuable to the technicalcommunity. The IEEE publishes over30% of the published material inIEEE’s fields of interest, and its confer-ences/meetings around the worldenable rapid dispersal of new results,as well as networking and face-to-facediscussions.

A third major IEEE strength is glob-alization: RAB’s structure of geo-graphical based entities extendsaround the world in over 150 coun-tries, allowing networking and theinterchange of technical information atthe local level.

Fourth, the IEEE has recoveredfrom the recent downturn to a strongoverall financial position. Reservesare at an all-time high, though someproblems remain for specific O/Us.

The financial performance of the Soci-eties and Councils has been veryimportant.

Finally, the IEEE has an excellentstaff supporting the volunteers andworking with them for the Instituteand its goals.

John Vig: The IEEE’s main strengthsinclude:1) That we are a non-profit member-

ship organization; we have~50,000 volunteers who contributeto the IEEE’s >350 conferences,>100 journals, >300 sections, >900standards, >40 societies and coun-cils, etc.

2) The breadth and quality of prod-ucts & services: publications, con-ferences, workshops, standards,educational products and services,sections, chapters…

3) Our diversity – i.e., that we have~360K members, in 150 countries.The membership includes not onlyengineers but also computer/ITprofessionals, scientists…; menand women; members of all cul-tures..., and that our activities tran-scend national borders.

QUESTION: What are themajor challenges facingthe IEEE? Lew Terman: Membership has beenessentially flat in recent years, and thenumber of higher grader members hasbeen decreasing. A major problem hasbeen the retention of new graduates,now below 25% three years after grad-uation. Society membership continuesto decline, and the fraction of IEEEmembers without society membershipis now over 43%. Much of this can beattributed to a perceived lack of valueof IEEE membership relative to its cost.Increased support of member careerdevelopment is important. IEEE mem-bership will be 50% in Regions 7-10within 10 years with current trends; the

implications (and opportunities) needto be thoroughly examined. The long-term impact of IEL on membershipcould become significant.

Open Access is the major long-termquestion for publications - if all publi-cations are available for free on theweb, the IEEE publication businesscould collapse. Publication timelinesshas been a problem, new publicationsare launched too slowly, and there is astrong need for practical publicationsto engage the practitioners/”bench-topengineers”. Finally, there is the impactof going to full electronic publishingand on what schedule it might occur.

While the overall IEEE financialposition is good, there are specificunits with problems; further reductionof the infamous Infrastructure Chargeis needed through continual evalua-tion of the efficiency of our opera-tions. With the continuing growth ofreserves, long term financialplans/goals for the reserves and theiruse must be developed.

Finally, the IEEE needs to react tonew technologies faster to claim leader-ship positions in these technologies asthey emerge. We must continue oursearch for effective and fair governance.

John Vig: How to provide sufficientvalue to justify the membership duesis a major challenge. A growing num-ber of members who work for institu-tions which provide “free” access toIEEE’s publications and conferencesare asking, "I get everything I wantfrom IEEE for free, so, why should Ibe a member?"

About 80% of IEEE members don’tread IEEE journals on a regular basis.“The articles are by academics, foracademics.” Half of IEEE memberswork in industry. Providing morepractical content without diluting thequality of our publications is a majorchallenge.

Half of IEEE’s revenues result fromthe sale of publications. “Open

Answers to 10 Questions by the two Candidates for2007 IEEE President-Elect19 March 2006From Your IEEE TAB Newsletters Committee Chair: Jacek Zurada


access,” the worldwide movement todisseminate scholarly research litera-ture online, free of charge, threatensthese revenues.

QUESTION: What are themajor changes IEEE needsto be making?Lew Terman: Membership: increase(and actively market) membershipbenefits around the world, broaden thebase of membership such as aggres-sively moving into software, services,applications and solutions. Follow upthe China initiative with similar effortsfor India and Eastern Europe.

Publications: establish a faster trackfor new publications, pilot new publi-cations that are more practically-orient-ed, and establish a reward system forreducing the submission-to-publicationtime. Develop the best search capabili-ty for technical material, and make it amembership benefit.

Education: the Expert Now pro-gram for continuing education is off toan excellent start; aggressively push itand make it available to members.

Financial: drive good financial behav-ior for Operating Units with reserves bygiving them more access to thosereserves – as the ratio of the O/U’sreserves to expenses increases, allowaccess to an increased percentage of thereserves. Continue to work on decreas-ing the Infrastructure Charge and increas-ing revenues, though not at the cost ofmaking IEEE’s prime goal increased sur-pluses/reserves. Develop a long-termfinancial plan/goals for the IEEE reserves.

Governance: the current gover-nance structure is not egregiously bro-ken; continue to work towardsstreamlining operations and govern-mental efficiency.

Finally, work across the IEEE majorBoards to establish a spirit of workingtogether, understanding each othersproblems, and working with staff onidentifying and solving tactical andstrategic problems.

John Vig: To improve the IEEE’sagility, e.g., with respect to entering

new technologies, I have proposedthat we establish an IEEE Venture Cap-ital Fund. Any person could proposean idea, and, if the idea is judged tobe worthy, receive up to $100,000 toimplement, or show the feasibility of,the idea.

To provide practical content, I haveproposed that we create a new cate-gory of peer-reviewed publications,“application notes” - which wouldinclude “how-to’s,” and case studies;and that we digitize many of the ~600IEEE Press books and make themavailable to members, and membersonly, for free.

The IEEE should be more willing totake prudent risks, and it should bemore willing to terminate unsuccessfulactivities.

To explore new ideas, the IEEEshould experiment more – with newmembership models, dues structures,publication models (e.g., new forms ofpeer review), etc.

The IEEE needs to improve its com-munications with members. The Insti-tute should become a real newspaper,i.e., it should report both the goodand the bad, and it should publishcontroversial views, even when suchviews may displease the leadership.

The IEEE should join with otherengineering and scientific organiza-tions to establish a public relationscampaign to improve the image ofengineering and science.

QUESTION: What are someof the important challengesfacing IEEE as a publisher inservice to its membership?Lew Terman: Issues raised by OpenAccess will need to be anticipated andmanaged. A major implication is to atleast maintain the revenue streamwhich our publications generate. IEEEneeds to help members navigate themass of data available from IEEE,other technical publications, and onthe web. Practical publications needto be developed with the collabora-tion of RAB and TAB. Goals for articlepublication timeliness must be set, and

rewards established for publications tomeet or exceed the goals. Establish afast approval track for new publica-tions. Maintain the importance ofpeer review. Keep monitoring thepossibility of going to all electronicpublishing, and establish when or if itshould occur well before any criticalpoint occurs.

John Vig: Open access, the world-wide movement to disseminate scien-tific and scholarly research literatureonline, free of charge is a serious chal-lenge because half of IEEE’s revenuesresult from the sale of publications.Google, at www.scholar.google.comand similar services, now make it easi-er to find the free copies of publica-tions. Papers can be read withouthaving to pay the publishers.

Delayed open access, e.g., makingpublications open access two yearsafter publication, would not be asdamaging. It would allow the IEEE tomaintain most of its publication rev-enues while fulfilling its mission ofbeing “for the benefit of humanity andthe profession.”

A frequently heard criticism of IEEEpublications is that they are primarily“by academics, for academics;” theyare not useful for practitioners. Abouthalf of our membership is from indus-try. If our publications are not usefulfor the majority of our members, thenwe have a serious problem.

I have proposed three solutions tothis problem. One is to ask authors toprovide, voluntarily, a “practicalimpact statement” with their papers.The second is to create a new class ofpeer reviewed publications, “applica-tion notes,” and the third is to digitizeIEEE Press books and make themavailable to the membership.

The mean time between an author’ssubmission and the date of publicationof an article is too long for some ofour journals; the delay for five of ourjournals has been >120 weeks. Thismust not be allowed to continue, andit need not continue, as evidenced bythe fact that the mean is <50 weeksfor 31 of our journals.



QUESTION: Do you see IEEEin future years as anorganization based on itsstrong membership base,or do you foresee othermodels?Lew Terman: IEEE should remain amembership-based organization. Mem-bership is critical – it is the membersthrough whom we serve our technicalcommunities, and who provide the vol-unteers that are critical to the successof IEEE. Members also provide ameans of measuring how relevant weare to the technical world, and providethe mechanism for engaging emergingtechnical and geographic areas.

John Vig: I see the IEEE continuing tobe a membership-based organization -with its tens of thousands of volun-teers and its membership diversity asits pillars of strength.

I do, however, see a need to experi-ment with membership and dues mod-els. Some members, for example, maybe willing to receive Spectrum and TheInstitute electronically if the dues werelowered by the costs of producing thepaper copy of those publications. Wehave >$160M in reserves. Therefore,we can afford to experiment.

The success of our IEEE ElectronicLibrary (IEL) is hurting membershiprecruitment and retention. (IEL sub-scribing institutions, which includemany of the largest universities and cor-porations, provide “free” access to IEEEpublications.) I hear more and more "Iget everything I want from IEEE forfree, so, why should I be a member?"Therefore, another experiment I wouldpropose is to offer reduced dues tothose working or studying at a few IELorganizations and measure the effectson membership numbers.

QUESTION: What changesin IEEE would youadvocate in response toquick industrialization andpotential IEEE presence inlarge Asian countries?Lew Terman: The two major Asiancountries of interest are quite different

in technical environment and socialstructure. I believe the current Chinainitiative is appropriate; we need tounderstand the environment and thecurrent approach seems a good firststep. We need a deeper understand-ing of the specific needs and opportu-nities and how to involve thatcommunity to effectively stimulateIEEE membership and volunteerism.

India is also a key growth area inthe 21st century, and currently hasmore IEEE members than any countryoutside the US. We need to under-stand why they join, and focus on theappropriate member and technicalservices to support their interest.India has a strong university structurewith which we should be working.

John Vig: IEEE’s presence in largeAsian countries is actual, not just“potential.” For example, in 2005, weheld 59 conferences in China, and atotal of 129 in China, India, Japan andKorea. Our publication sales, inChina alone, amounted to ~$5M in2005. Total sales to the four countrieswas ~$20M. In 2005, our combinedmembership in these four countrieswas ~45K.

Although the IEEE has madeinroads in China and India, it is a longway from realizing the potential pres-ence in these and other countries.Membership is too expensive formany in Asia, Latin America, EasternEurope... We need a membershipstrategy for potential members whocan’t afford our dues, not just in Asia,but, throughout the world.

QUESTION: What do yousee as the power of theIEEE President and howwould you exercise thispower? Lew Terman: The IEEE President hasthree major responsibilities/opportunities: a) Running the Board and ExCom

meetings effectively, including set-ting up the meetings. This isimportant as the members of thegoverning bodies of the IEEE meetfor only a short time, and it is

important the meetings be efficientfor the most effective interaction.

b) Providing leadership to the Insti-tute: setting directions, establishingcommittees and study groups toget information and sift throughalternatives, work with the staff,work with the IEEE Boards andgovernance levels. It is in thisarea that the President can havethe most effect. I would focuson bringing the various groupsin IEEE together, and on listen-ing to their input, getting anopen airing of issues and sug-gested solutions, and generatingand following through on newideas.

c) “Showing the flag” around the world,to both IEEE geographies/groupsand non-IEEE entities - geograph-ical, technical and political. Theinteractions with IEEE groups arevery important to generate mutualunderstanding, and the interactionwith non-IEEE entities is impor-tant to present the IEEE and thetechnical community it represents,and to understand their needs,views, and to understand possibleopportunities.

John Vig: The president’s duties areto: chair the meetings of the IEEEBoard of Directors, Executive Commit-tee and Assembly; perform ceremonialfunctions such as meeting with digni-taries, presentation of awards, openingremarks at conferences, etc.; promotethe objectives of the IEEE; and be “theChief Executive Officer of the IEEE.”

I would make maximum use ofthe presidency to advocate theIEEE’s agenda, both within and out-side the IEEE.

I would set at least one lofty (man-on-the-moon-like) goal for the IEEE,aimed at inspiring and mobilizing thevolunteers and staff.

The Board of Directors has beentoo inward-focused. I would proposethe establishment of a council of advi-sors – consisting of prominent, mostlyoutside experts and leaders – toadvise the IEEE leadership.



QUESTION: In the 2005 IEEEelections, only 14% of themembership voted. What, ifanything, would you do toincrease members'participation in IEEEelections?Lew Terman: I think what we aredoing this year is pretty good – talkingto the Regions and other entitieswhich invite us (with Q&A sessionswhere time permits), sending these 10questions to the Newsletters, partici-pating in the Philadelphia debate andmaking available recordings of thedebate and presentations of the candi-date platforms on the IEEE web site,and making additional informationavailable on our personal web sites.

John Vig: In 1975-77, when a contro-versial candidate, Irwin Feerst, ran forIEEE president, 36% voted. In thosedays, the membership was moreinvolved in IEEE issues than they aretoday.

Today, the membership is rarelyinformed of controversial issues. Forexample, last year, I received reportsof meetings where readings from theKoran and Christian prayers wereparts of the program. Why not reportsuch events and ask the membershipwhether or not such religious expres-sions should be allowed as parts ofIEEE events?

“THE INSTITUTE is the newspaperof the IEEE” claims The Institute’swebsite but, The Institute is more a“house organ” than a newspaper. Aspresident, I would propose to theBoard of Directors, and The Institute’s

Editorial Board, that The Institutebecome a real newspaper of the IEEE.

The office holders in IEEE, espe-cially the President and the othermembers of the Board of Directors,make decisions about matters that areimportant to the membership and thefuture of IEEE. Voting in the annualIEEE election is the chance membershave to choose the decision makers.With only 14% voting, 7+% of themembers can decide the fate of IEEE.

QUESTION: What have beenyour three most importantcontributions to IEEE?Lew Terman: In the late 1990’s, I wasinstrumental in the conversion of theSolid-State Circuits Council to theSolid-State Circuits Society. This wasvery successful; the SSCS is now the5th largest Society in the IEEE, and theJournal of Solid-State Circuits recordsthe highest number of hits in IEL. Iserved as the first SSCS presidentelected by the Society.

In the mid 90’s, IEEE and TAB weregoing through financial difficulties. Iwas appointed TAB treasure, stabilizedthe situation and improved the com-munication with TAB, and served asecond term as Treasurer.

In 2001, I was on the Board as thebottom fell out of the IEEE financialsituation. As part of a team effort, wewere able to put in place a number ofchanges which arrested the slide.

John Vig: My three most importantcontributions are:

The IEEE Sensors Council, i.e., Iproposed it, shepherded it through the

approval processes, and was electedits founding president, in 1999. In2005, the Council’s journal published1500 pages, and its conference had>500 registered participants.

Between 1999 and 2002, the IEEE’sreserves declined >$50M (>40%), due,in large part, to the decline in thevalue of IEEE’s investments. Up tothis point, the IEEE had no formalinvestment policy. I wrote the firstdraft of the Investment OperationsManual (IOM), then worked withinvestment professionals, volunteersand staff to finalize it and get it passedby the Board. Contained in the IOMis an investment policy which hasreduced the risks and increased thetransparency of IEEE’s investments.

I brought what is now the IEEEInt’l Frequency Control Symposiuminto the IEEE. I negotiated thetakeover of this conference by anIEEE society (UFFC). This conferenceis now the premier international con-ference in its field.

QUESTION: What would beyour single and mostrecognized contributionthat will distinguish yourIEEE Presidency from thoseof others? Lew Terman: I would like my presi-dency to result in the elimination ofany silos between IEEE operatingunits, and attacking IEEE problemswith coordinated efforts across IEEE.

John Vig: The president under whoseleadership innovation flourished inIEEE.


Lewis Terman received a Ph.D. inEE from Stanford in 1961. Herecently retired from IBM followinga 45 year career in semiconductordevices and technology, digital andanalog circuits, and processor andmemory design. He received 9major IBM technical awards includ-ing three Corporate Awards, and was

involved with a number of productprograms. He did two tours of dutyon the Research Division TechnicalPlanning Staff. He was elected tothe IBM Academy of Technology in1991 and served as its president2001-2003. He is an IEEE Fellow,received the IEEE Solid-State CircuitsTechnical Field Award, and is a

member of the US National Academyof Engineering.

He was a member of the IEEEBoard of Directors for three years asTAB VP (2001) and Division 1 Director(2004-2005). He has been on TABalmost continuously 1990-2005 as TabVP, Division 1 Director, president ofthe IEEE Electron Devices Society and

Biographies


the IEEE Solid-State Circuits Society,Chair of the Technical Meetings Com-mittee, and two terms as TAB Treasur-er; he was off TAB in 2003 serving asPSPB Treasurer. He was editor-in-chief of the IEEE Journal of Solid-StateCircuits, and has been chair of numer-ous conferences, including the ISSCC.

John Vig was born in Hungary. Heimmigrated to the USA in 1957, andreceived the B.S. degree from the CityCollege of New York and the Ph.D.from Rutgers - The State University, in1964 and 1969, respectively. He has

spent his professional career perform-ing and leading R&D in governmentresearch laboratories - developinghigh stability quartz crystal resonators,oscillators, and sensors.

He has been awarded 55 patentsand is the author of more than 100publications, including nine bookchapters.

Since 1997, he has been a techni-cal advisor to program mangers atthe US Defense Advanced ResearchProjects Agency for programs rang-ing from micro- and nanoresonatorsto chip-scale atomic clocks. He is an

IEEE Fellow, and is the recipient ofthe IEEE Cady Award and the IEEESawyer Award. He has been the Dis-t inguished Lecturer of the IEEEUltrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Fre-quency Control (UFFC) Society, andhe has served as the president ofthis Society.

He founded the IEEE SensorsCouncil - which now has a successfuljournal, the IEEE Sensors Journal, anda successful conference. He hasserved on the IEEE Board of Directorsfor three years. In 2005, he was IEEEVice President for Technical Activities.


IEEE BTS Information BoothThe IEEE BTS will be staffing aninformation booth at the 2006 Interna-tional Broadcasting Convention (IBC)from 8 through 12 September 2006 atthe RAI Exhibition and Congress Cen-tre in Amsterdam, Netherlands. TheIEEE BTS booth will be located at IBCExhibitor Stand Number 8.750b. Wewill be in the same familiar locationin the lobby of exhibit hall 8 howeverattendees will see the partnership vil-lage has a new look this year. You areinvited to stop by and meet with theBTS representatives Tom Gurley,President of the BTS, Mike Bennett,BTS AdCom, Yiyan Wu, Editor-in-Chief of the BTS Transactions onBroadcasting and Kathy Colabaugh,BTS Publications Administrator. Theywill be glad to talk with you and helpyou with any questions you may haveabout the IEEE and the BTS.

IEEE BTS TutorialIn addition, the IEEE BTS will be host-ing a tutorial session during the IBCconference. The details are:

Session Title: Tutorial on Video Display Technology

Session Chairman: David Bancroft Thomson Digital Media Solutions

Date: 7 September 2006

Time: 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM

Location: Room L, Amsterdam RAI Exhibition and Congress Centre

Synopsis: Video display technology has under-gone a sea change over the lastdecade, as LCD, plasma, and DLPdevices have all but supplanted thevenerable CRT in consumer applica-tions. Recent developments haveimproved such parameters asdynamic resolution, viewing angle,contrast, and color gamut – long-held advantages of the CRT – chal-lenging its continued dominance

even for critical professional view-ing. However, challenges remain inachieving standardization of colorgamut, contrast range and otherparameters across these newreplacement technologies for contentcreators to continue to achieve con-sistent quality control.

This tutorial will be presented by theIEEE Broadcast Technology Society, aco-sponsor of the new IEEE/OSA Jour-nal of Display Technology. It will drawupon the technical expertise of leadingresearchers and developers worldwideto explain these recent developments inthe context of both consumer and pro-fessional applications. It will also offera peek at emerging technology still inthe laboratory.

IBC2006The IBC Conference Sessions run from7 through 11 September 2006. TheIBC Exhibition Halls will be openfrom 8 through 12 September 2006.For detailed information aboutIBC2006, please visit its website atwww.ibc.org.

IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Representationand Tutorial Activities at IBC2006



Successful Launch for IEEE International Symposiumon Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting Some 60 presentations and 100 Attendees at April Event in Las Vegas

Kamil Grajski of Qualcomm/FLOForum presenting“MediaFLO Technology Overview”

Yoram Solomon of Texas Instruments/Mobile DTVAlliance “Complementary Unicast/Broadcast/Podcast

Topologies and Open Standards in Mobile TV”

Thursday Keynote Speaker: Roger QuayleChief Technology Officer: IPO Wireless

”TDtv: Enabling Mobile Operators to Maintain Controland Increase Revenues”

Keynote Speaker: Charles L. DagesExecutive Vice President

Warner Bros. Emerging Technology"Technology and Entertainment; The Saga Continues..."

Opening Plenary Keynote Lunch Speakers



Speakers Christine Di Lapi (Motorola Inc.) and RolandSchaller (UDcast) smile for a picture.

Speaker Sung-Hoon Kim (ETRI), and Technical ProgramChairs Yiyan Wu and Demin Wang (Communications

Research Center Canada) after a morning paper session.

Borrowing from the fall Broadcast Symposium, an evening “Welcome” reception took place on Thursday evening whichallowed attendees to mingle and relax in a comfortable setting.

Session Chairs Pablo Angueira and David Guerra (Universityof the Basque Country, Spain) enjoy a cup of coffee.

Society President and Symposium Steering Committee ChairTom Gurley with Charles Sestock (Texas Instruments), John

Cosmas and Amar Aggoun (Brunel University). Session Chair and Plenary Speaker John Cosmas (BrunelUniversity) & Speaker Medhi Rezaei (Tampere University)

Symposium Planners Yiyan Wu, April Monroe, Tom Gurley,Kathy Colabaugh and Demin Wang gather to celebrate a

successful symposium.

Welcome Reception


During the evenings of 30 and 31 May2006, the IEEE BTS Argentina Chapterconducted a two-day Seminar on Broad-cast Transmitting Antennas. The Semi-nar was very well received by 21attendees including attendees from dif-ferent parts of the country includingPosadas in the province of Misiones inthe northern part of the country, fromRio Cuarto in the province of Cordoba inthe western part of the country and fromBahia Blanca in the province of BuenosAires in the southern part of Argentina.

Prof. Valentin Trainotti and Dr. Wal-ter Gustavo Fano presented the Semi-nar in Spanish during a three-hoursession each evening of 30 and 31May 2006.

The first session of the Seminarpresented the following topics:• Medium frequencies transmitting

short Monopoles, Monopoles• Dipoles, and Monopole Arrays for

AM and Digital transmissions• Antenna characteristics• Artificial and natural ground plane• Input impedance• Bandwidth• Power capacity• Near and Far Field Strength• Diurnal and Nocturnal service area.• Surface and ionospheric wave

propagationThe second session of the Seminar

continued with the following topics:• Very and Ultra High frequencies

transmitting antennas for FM and TV• Antenna elements• Reflector Antenna elements• Antenna Arrays• Input impedance.• Bandwidth• Power capacity• Near and Far Field Strength• Service area• Spatial Wave Propagation

Each attendee at the Seminarreceived two textbooks on Electromag-netic Engineering and several IEEE BTSpapers authored by the lecturers. Infor-

mation about the two textbooks can befound at the following web sites:http://www.cuspide.com/detalle_libro.php/9871104103

http://www.cuspide.com/detalle_libro.php/9871104324

Prof. Valentin Trainotti and Dr. Wal-ter Gustavo Fano are available to pres-ent this Seminar to other IEEE Sectionsor Chapters in IEEE Region 9. Theycan present the Seminar in a singleday by scheduling a three-hour ses-sion in the morning and a three-hoursession in the afternoon. If interest-ed, please contact Prof. Valentin Train-otti by email at [email protected].


Report from the IEEE BTS Argentina Chapterby Valentin Trainotti

Prof. Trainotti and Dr. Fano

Report from IEEE BTS Chapter of Beijing SectionTHE 2nd INTERNATIONAL FORUM of DIGITAL TV and WIRELESS MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS (2nd IFTC) in SHANGHAI

by Zhixiang Xu, Chair

The 2nd International Forum of DigitalTV & Wireless Multimedia Communica-tion (IFTC) was held during November,2005 in Shanghai, China. The IEEE BTSChapter of the Beijing Section was theone of the sponsors of the 2nd IFTCForum. The IEEE member Prof. WenjunZhang, who is the Vice President ofShanghai Jiao Tong University, was theChairman of the Forum. Prof. ZhixiangXu, who is the Chairman of the IEEEBTS Chapter of Beijing Section, servedas the Executive Chairman of the

Photograph 1: Chairman and the main speakers. On the far left side of thephotograph is Wenjun Zhang, Forum Chairman


Forum. On behalf of the IEEE BTS Dr.Yiyan Wu, who is the principal scientistat CRC Canada, presented the welcomespeech to 280 persons attending theForum. The thematic topics of the 2ndIFTC were Digital TV, IPTV, MobilePhone TV, Content & Security Manage-

ment, and New Advances of Broad-band Multimedia. Keynote speecheswere provided by fourteen scientistsand specialists from both domestic andforeign locations. Thirty-two paperswere presented at the Forum.

The 3rd IFTC will be held on Novem-

ber 3-4, 2006 in Shanghai. For informa-tion about this event please visit its website at www.siga.com.cn/iftc2006. Wewelcome IEEE members to come toShanghai and attend the 3rd IFTCForum during the golden autumn ofthis year.


Photograph 2: IEEE BTS representative Dr. Yiyan Wu (right),Principal Scientist at CRC and Prof. Zhixiang Xu, Executive

Chairman of the Forum

Photograph 3: Some of the IEEE members attending theForum.

Report from the IEEE BTS/ComSoc Ottawa JointChapter Seminar by Bahram Zahir, Chair

OTTAWA, Canada – April 18, 2006;David Falconer, Professor Emeritus,Carleton University conducted a semi-nar on Air Interfaces for Future-Gener-ation Wireless Systems. The seminarwas held in SITE, University of Ottawa.About 75 people attended this seminar.

The seminar focused on therequirements of “4th Generation” ofwireless systems, including anoverview of the organizationsinvolved in the process of research forthe 4th generation; flexible spectrumuse; user requirements and applica-tion scenarios; moderate terminal andbase station hardware costs; highspectral efficiency; and scalability ofthe cost of terminals with respect totheir maximum bit rate capabilities.Also, it discussed the benefits ofOFDM/single carrier and frequencydivision/time division. The next gener-ation of wireless systems is intendedto intuitively adapt to the needs of the

user as they evolve from PersonalArea Network to Cellular Network.

We thank EION Wireless(www.eionwireless.com) as the spon-sor of this event. As well, we would

like to thank the School of InformationTechnology and Engineering (SITE) -University of Ottawa, (www.site.uot-tawa.ca/index.shtml), for providing thevenue for this event.

Dr. David Falconer gives a talk to members of the IEEE in Ottawa on ‘futuregeneration wireless systems.


The ATSC Advanced Common Appli-cation Platform (ACAP) is a compre-hensive standard for interactivetelevision. Developed as the result ofa landmark harmonization effortbetween the ATSC DTV ApplicationSoftware Environment (DASE) andCableLabs’ Open Cable ApplicationPlatform (OCAP) specifications, ACAPprovides consumers with advancedinteractive services while providingcontent providers, broadcasters, cableand satellite operators, and consumerelectronics manufacturers with thetechnical details necessary to developinteroperable services and products.

The ATSC Planning Committee (PC)has undertaken a major demonstrationproject of the capabilities of ACAP, thegoal being to illustrate how ACAP can beused to enhance the viewing experience.

About ACAPIn essence, ACAP makes it appear tointeractive programming content that itis running on a so-called commonreceiver. This common receiver con-tains a well-defined architecture, exe-cution model, syntax, and semantics.As a “middleware” specification forinteractive applications, ACAP givescontent and application authors assur-ance that their programs and data willbe received and run uniformly on allbrands and models of receivers.

An ACAP Application is a collec-tion of information that is processedby an Application Environment inorder to interact with an end-user orotherwise alter the state of the Appli-cation Environment.

ACAP Applications are classifiedinto two categories depending uponwhether the initial application con-tent processed is of a Procedural or aDeclarative nature. These categoriesof applications are referred to as pro-cedural (ACAP-J) and declarative(ACAP-X) applications, respectively.An example of an ACAP-J applicationis a Java TV™ Xlet composed of

compiled Java byte code in conjunc-tion with other multimedia contentsuch as graphics, video, and audio.An example of an ACAP-X applica-tion is a multimedia document com-

posed of XHTML markup, style rules,scripts, and embedded graphics,video, and audio.

An ACAP application need not bepurely procedural or declarative. In


ACAP Demonstration Project Gets Underway by Jerry Whitaker, VP of Standards Development, ATSC, Washington, D.C.

Figure 1 ACAP-J system architecture.

Figure 2 ACAP-J system architecture and system software.


particular, an ACAP-J application mayreference declarative content, such asgraphics, or may construct and causethe presentation of markup content.Similarly, ACAP-X applications mayuse script content, which is proceduralin nature. Furthermore, an ACAP-Xapplication may reference an embed-ded Java TV Xlet.

The architecture and facilities ofACAP are intended to apply to broad-cast systems and receivers for terrestri-al broadcast and cable TV systems. Inaddition, the same architecture andfacilities may be applied to othertransport systems, such as satellite.

ACAP is primarily based on theGEM (Globally Executable Multime-dia Home Platform) specificationdeveloped by the DVB consortiumand DASE developed by the ATSC.ACAP includes additional functionali-ty from Cable Labs’ OCAP specifica-tion. ACAP builds upon GEM byadding specification elements inorder to offer a high degree of inter-operability among different environ-ments based on digital TVspecifications from ATSC and SCTE.

Where only ACAP-J applications aresupported, the application and systemsoftware are as shown in Figure 1.Where ACAP-X applications are sup-ported, the application and systemsoftware are as illustrated in Figure 2.

In recognition of the launch ofACAP services, the ATSC has developeda Certification Mark specifically forACAP-compliant products. See Figure 3.The Certification Mark Policy is speci-fied in ATSC document B/35, whichcan be found on the ATSC Web site.See: http://www.atsc.org/policy_docu-ments/B35_Certification%20Mark%20Policy.DOC.

TTA Certifies First ACAPReceiverTTA has issued Samsung Electronicsits first certificate of compliance forthe ACAP Standard (A/101). Telecom-

munications Technology Association(TTA) is a standardizing, testing, andcertifying body in the field of infor-mation, communication and broadcasttechnology. The certification testingon Samsung’s ACAP Set-Top Box andTV covered Profile 1 as defined bydocument TTAS.OT-07.0001, whichcorresponds to ACAP-J profile inATSC A/101.

Last year TTA organized a com-mittee called CATS for developmentof an ACAP test suite. The commit-tee members—which include Sam-sung Electronics, LG Electronics,Daewoo Electronics, Aircode, andTTA—analyzed differences betweenthe MHP Specifications and ACAPStandard to make use of existingMHP Test Consortium (MTC) TestSuite and to create the required newtest cases. There are approximately8400 tests in the current ACAP Con-formance Test Suite. The test casesare classified into four categories;MHP tests, HAVi tests, Sun tests, andACAP tests. The first three tests arefrom MTC’s MHP Test Suite, some ofwhich are modif ied to faci l i tateACAP testing. The Tests were writtenby CATS and are used to test ACAPspecific and Korean specific func-tionalities in ATSC A/101 and TTAS-OT.07.0001.

PMCP Support for ACAPAddit ional developments withinATSC are aimed at facilitating ACAPimplementation at broadcast facili-ties. CS/76A, “Candidate Standard:Programming Metadata Communi-cation Protocol Standard, Rev. A”incorporates various changes andincludes a new informative Annexthat discusses the use of PMCP withACAP and the ATSC Data Broad-casting Standard (document A/90).The Candidate Standard stage rec-ognizes that a specif icat ion hasreached a level of technical maturi-ty that would benefit from imple-mentation experience and technicalfeedback. After the Candidate Stan-dard period ends, the documenttypica l ly moves on to the nextapproval s tage on i t s way tobecoming an ATSC Standard.

The PMCP standard makes it possi-ble to integrate the various informa-tion sources that are needed tocompile the key PSIP tables. PMCP isdesigned to permit broadcasters, pro-fessional equipment manufacturers,and program service providers tointerconnect and transfer data amongsystems that eventually must be com-municated to the PSIP generator.These systems include:• Traffic• Program management• Listing services• Automation• MPEG encoder

PSIP—the Program and SystemInformation Protocol, specified inATSC document A/65—is a critical ele-ment of digital television that providesthe methodology for transporting DTVsystem information and electronic pro-gram guide data. Because PSIP andother DTV metadata is typically devel-oped and/or processed by severalseparate systems, communicating theappropriate metadata to the PSIP gen-erator can be problematic.

PMCP is intended to solve thisproblem by defining a method forcommunicating metadata that thePSIP generator requires. The overallgoal is to ensure proper PSIP imple-mentation while requiring minimummanual intervention by the broad-caster. Equipment manufacturers,system designers, and broadcasterscan use the tools provided in PMCPto help achieve that goal. While tar-geted primarily at PSIP, the schema isextensible for other types of metada-ta, and can be used for the carriageof private information within the cur-rent structure. Providing for ACAPdata integration was a high priorityfor ATSC after the basic PMCP stan-dard was finalized.

For More InformationThe ACAP specification can be down-loaded at no charge from the ATSC Website. See: http://www.atsc.org/stan-dards/a101.html. Persons interested inparticipating in the field trial effort, ledby Jon Dakss of NBC Universal, shouldcontact the author, Jerry Whitaker [email protected].


Figure 3 ATSC ACAP CertificationMark.


IntroductionOver the past decade, grid computinghas emerged from being primarily anacademic research project to a usefultool for business use. This paperdescribes some of the work undertak-en by the British Broadcasting Corpo-ration (BBC) in this field and asksquestions about the future uses of thetechnology. Its sole intention is tostart a lively discussion on the subjectwithin (and without) the broadcastengineering community. The authorcomments on pan-United Kingdomand pan-European Union projects andpresents a grid technology scenario forcomment.

This article presents an overview ofthe BBC’s work on Grid computing. Itis not intended to be a fully quantita-tive report of the work completed, infact only two quantitative results arepresented, it is more aimed at being adiscussion point. The author wouldlike to hear the views of the broadcastengineering community.

A fictional future scenario is pre-sented using a range of technologiesavailable at present, in an attempt toprovide readers with an understandingof how diverse the uses of Grid couldbe within broadcasting. In order toseparate fact from fiction, the fictionalscenario is italicised. Any furtherideas would be most welcome.

The range of projects presentedcome from across the BBC, from oper-ational divisions as well as Researchand Development (R&D) and fromcollaborations with academia andindustry.

In discussing geographical loca-tions, distances are referred to forreaders not cognisant with UnitedKingdom (UK) geography.

Grid ComputingGrid computing is an Internet-basedservice evolved from the World WideWeb. Whilst the Web allows the shar-ing of, and interaction with, geograph-ically diverse documents, Grid allows

the sharing of, and interaction with,diverse resources. Resources caninclude processing power, computer-based storage, networking infrastruc-ture, and specialist hardware etc.,turning an institution’s computationalresource into a single entity. Grid alsoprovides: • certificate-based security, ensuring

trust between users and providers • more efficient resource utilisation

via active load balancing andupdated software techniques

• service brokerage (services boughtautomatically from 3rd party com-panies if unavailable in-house)

• service search (find where thatpiece of content, or specialist serv-ice is located)

• dynamic management of diverseresources and repositories

• a platform agnostic implementation• an end-user experience similar to

that of using Web-browser software(the end-user requires little or noknowledge of what is happeningbehind the scenes)Grid is implemented via open stan-

dards [1] and is used to implementworkflows, an example of which inthe broadcast arena could be an end-user with a 4:3 television receiverrequesting content, which is automati-cally repurposed from a high-defini-tion (HD) source and securelydelivered. One example of such animplementation is the Globus Toolkit[2]; an architecture and protocol setbuilt in a method similar to theGNU/Linux kernel.

GridCastVarious departments of the BBC incollaboration with the Belfast eScienceCentre (BeSC) at the Queen’s Universi-ty, Belfast (QUB) have just completeda UK Department of Trade and Indus-try (UK-DTI) funded project calledGridCast. This project was taskedwith investigating the possible uses ofGrid technology within the broadcast-ing industry. The main investigation

looked at the uses of Grid within theplayout chain.

BackgroundBBC Television currently broadcastsregional variations of its flagship serv-ice, BBC One. Seventeen variationsexist within England plus three nation-al variations (Scotland, Wales andNorthern Ireland). Red Bee Media(formerly BBC Broadcast) transportthe main London feed to the regionalplayout centres, via high bandwidthasynchronous transfer mode (ATM)lines, these centres then decide toeither transmit London’s version, or toinsert their own local feed instead(e.g. local news bulletins). Regionalcentres can time-shift forwards in timeusing video tape recording, but cannotplayout a show before London. Allregional feeds are then broadcastlocally (via analogue Phase AlternatingLine (PAL) and Digital Video Broad-casting – Terrestrial (DVB-T)) and sentback to London via a second ATM lineto uplink to satellite for direct-to-home(DTH) broadcast. Cable broadcastersutilise the satellite DTH feed.

Grid-enabled PlayoutThe GridCast grid-enabled playoutprototype gives a greater amount ofautonomy to the regions. Londonpublishes a schedule that is deliveredto the regions. The regions can thenmake any changes they like to thisschedule, from accepting to deletingall content, and the Grid services thenlocate the necessary programme fileson storage, organise transferral in asecure and timely fashion, brokeringany required 3rd party network infra-structure, and ensuring the deliveredformat matches the playout centre’scriteria e.g. HD only.

The test network consists of sites inSurrey, England and Belfast, N. Ireland(A distance of 500 km apart) linked tothe UK joint academic network(JANET) by 1 Gbps optical fibre links.Using grid-ftp protocols, link speeds


The Use of Grid Technology Within the Broadcast Arenaby Simon Thompson, M.Eng., M.I.E.E., M.I.E.E.E.


(no storage access) of 800 Mbps andfile transfers (hard-disc to hard-disc)of 500 Mbps have been achieved.GridCast has been demonstrated atthe International Broadcasters Con-vention New Technology Campus inboth 2004 and 2005.

ManifestThe BBC is currently mandated toinclude 25% of non-BBC producedprogramming within its schedules.(Under current plans outlined by theBBC Director-General, Mark Thomp-son, independent production housescould bid for a further 25% in compe-tition with internal producers). Thisrequires interaction with independentproduction houses to generate con-tracts, negotiate content changes andtransport content to and from theBBC's Media Centre in West London.Traditionally programmes have beendelivered on tape, via motorcyclecourier or public transport.

Manifest is an exchange protocolthat efficiently transports content, andcan reduce the necessity for paper-based interactions, between the BBCand independent production houses.Grid is one method of implementingsuch a protocol, and a manifest serv-ice was built into the GridCast projectdeliverable.

A trial is currently underway assess-ing the viability of using such a sys-tem to ingest content from productionhouses in the Soho district of Londonto the BBC Media Centre in LondonW12 (5 km).

PrismPrism is the follow-on project fromGridCast, with more commercial part-ners. It builds upon the work under-taken in GridCast but alters theend-goal. Instead of delivering contentto a regional playout centre, content isdelivered to the end-user in the home,probably via a set-top box. Projectwork is due to commence in late 2005.

PrestoSpacePreservation towards storage andaccess - Standardised Practices for

Audiovisual Contents in Europe(PrestoSpace) is a project funded bythe European Union (EU) InformationSociety Technologies sixth frameworkprogramme. The aims of the projectare to “deliver technical solutions andintegrated systems for digital preserva-tion of all types of audiovisual collec-tion”, providing “tangible results in thedomain of preservation, restoration,storage and archive management, con-tent description, delivery and access.”[3] An aim of the project is to allowthe creation of pan-European preser-vation factories. The BBC is a mem-ber of the project steering board.

In investigating technologies tohelp create such an integrated system,the work of the GridCast team andtheir grid technology prototype wasstudied.

A Grid-based Future?In the realm of broadcasting, thequestion still remains, what can Gridoffer? In this technology-rich environ-ment, what need is there for yetanother technology, especially onewhich is so “unseen” by end-users.Take this passage as an example :

Outside the Central CriminalCourts, a BBC news team gathers torecord events surrounding the case ofRegina vs. Fawlty (Criminal Damage),presided over by Mr. Justice Deed. Thecamera is equipped with global posi-tioning system (GPS) equipment, giv-ing accurate location data, and thecameraman is recognised by his radio-frequency identification (RFID) tagproviding metadata related to whoand where the footage was shot.

The footage is uploaded to the cen-tralised BBC content bin via a secureGrid connection by wide area IP net-working (WiMAX or DVB-IP) viaaccess points located around London.The cameraman ID, location andsecurity certification provides authen-tication, alleviating the editorialprocess. The content is transferred toa 3rd party for metadata enhance-ment, using biometric recognition ofthe subjects, and the biographies arepurchased.

News offices across the BBC arenotified of the footage’s presence with-in the content bin, and BBC NorthernIreland request a copy. The datatransfer is brokered with a third partyagent, and converted to 4:3 standarddefinition en route. A documentaryteam uses an external firm to mathe-matically model the trajectory, toascertain if Mr. Fawlty’s denial ofthrowing the brick can be refuted, andaccesses the BBC archive for back-ground material.

Automatically a web-version of thecontent is created and delivered to thewebsite, allowing news to be represent-ed geographically rather than tempo-rally, and those end-users representinga keyword match are delivered a per-sonally tailored version of the contentto their domestic set-top boxes. Educa-tional institutes are provided with aversion for study use via the BBC Cre-ative Archive.

Meanwhile, within corporate HQ,payroll is utilising the camera crew IDmetadata to authorise secure paymentof wages, and engineering is using thecollated data to create a map of accesspoint coverage.

The majority of these technologiesare not fictitious:

GPS prices are falling to the pointwhere addition to a broadcast-stan-dard camera would produce a mini-mal cost rise. For example, serialbased GPS were available at time ofwriting for less than £30.

Biometric data is being used forrecognition in many areas, and inter-esting new techniques are beingresearched. For example, researchersat the University of Southampton canidentify people by their gait whilstwalking or running [4].

Geographic representations of thenews, whilst non-mainstream, doexist. BBC Backstage, a project toallow viewers access to computerdata feeds for software-writing pur-poses, has numerous examples ofsuch systems [5].

Trajectory modelling is already anestablished technique in UK broad-casting following the introduction of



Hawkeye by Channel 4 (a UnitedKingdom terrestrial broadcaster).Hawkeye is used to model the flightof a cricket ball from release at thepopping crease to see if a leg has pre-vented impact with the stumps (a leg-before-wicket decision), measurespeed and provide virtual replays [6].

Grid represents the “glue” whichholds diverse technologies together.In the example GPS, RFID, WiMax,biometric recognition, broadcast andweb infrastructure, production com-puters, set-top boxes and payroll soft-ware are all interfaced by Gridtechnology.

ConclusionGrid is an emergent technology thatcould, if utilized correctly, providenumerous solutions for broadcasters.As with all emergent technologies,questions are raised which requirecareful thought, and work, amongstthe broadcasting community.

Amongst questions that requireanswers (and, hence, future work), themost important include:• Just how secure is secure? If a

broadcaster is relying on the inbuiltsecurity of Grid technologies tosupport transfer of importantmedia, how sure can the broadcast-er be that the media will arrive, andwill not have been tampered with?How can the broadcaster beassured of the validity of a piece ofcontent and of the identity of itsauthor?

• What are the technological limits?Are there a certain number of peo-ple who can be served with datadirect to home? Is there a maxi-mum number of incoming links?

• What can be done in real-time overa Grid network? Can data alwaysbe re-purposed en route? Is there aminimum reliable network specifi-cation?

• Is the Grid network extensibleenough to cover the introduction ofnew technologies? Will HDTV data-rates be handled without problem?

• What new and exciting technolo-gies could feasibly be interfacedusing Grid? Does this offer newopportunities to the broadcaster?

• What will the end-user experiencebe? How as engineers can wemanage expectations and frustra-tions? If a GUI is used, what will itlook like? Will it be standardized?

• If a diverse group could connect tothe Grid in a way similar to today’sWeb; could the concept of pro-gramming by the audience, for theaudience, using audience-generatedcontent become the norm? Theconcept of “Community Collabora-tive Radio” was recently (Sept.2005) investigated by a rapid proto-typing session at BBC R&D, andwas proven to be feasible [7].

• Grid, due to its use of security certi-fication, has an in-built auditingservice. In a broadcasting role,could Grid alleviate the pain ofmanual metadata and meta-metada-ta [8] insertion?If Grid is to be used, open stan-

dards for use within the industry, suchas those developed in conjunctionwith the BBC, are required. Work alsoneeds to be done on finding the limi-tations of the technology.

The author is certain that numerousexciting applications could be createdwith this technology and looks for-ward to a lively discussion of suchideas.

AcknowledgementThe author wishes to acknowledgethe efforts of Chris Chambers, LukeSluman and Paul Brown of BBCR&D, Stephen Craig of BBC NorthernIreland, Brendan Malloy of BBC Scot-land, Kevin Price and Rhys Lewis ofBBC Technology Direction, AntMiller of BBC Information andArchives and Dr. Terry Harmer, MarkMcColgan, Julie McCabe and Christi-na Cunningham of the BelfasteScience Centre (QUB) for all theireffort and support in GridCast relatedwork. The author wishes them every

success with the follow on project,PRISM.

References[1] F. Grey, M. Heikkurinen, R. Mondar-

dini, R. Prabhu et.al. CERN GridCafé, European Organization forNuclear Research. [Online] available:http://gridcafe.web.cern.ch/grid-cafe/

[2] Globus Toolkit, [Online] available:http://www.globus.org/toolkit/about.html

[3] D. Teruggi et. al.. PrestoSpace,European Commission 6th Frame-work Programme for Research –Information Society Technologies.[Online] Available:http://www.prestospace.org/index.en.html

[4] J. Carter, M. Nixon, Automatic GaitRecognition for Human ID at a Dis-tance, University of Southampton,UK [Online] Available:http://www.gait.ecs.soton.ac.uk/

[5] BBC Backstage, British BroadcastingCorporation [Online] Available:http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/proto-types/

[6] P. Hawkins, Hawkeye Innovations,Television corporation, [Online]Available: http://www.hawkeyein-novations.co.uk

[7] A. Sheikh et. al., Rapid Prototyping,British Broadcasting Corporation,Research and Development Depart-ment, [Online] Available: http://www.rd.bbc.co.uk/rapid-prototyp-ing/index.shtml

[8] EBU P/MDP Project Group, Supple-ment to the Middleware Report,European Broadcasters Union,Geneva, February 2005. pp 80 – 83.

ContactSimon Thompson, MEng, MIEE, MIEEEResearch and Development EngineerBritish Broadcasting CorporationResearch and DevelopmentKingswood WarrenTadworth KT20 6NPUKEmail: [email protected]



Hello – (a) an expression or gestureor greeting; (b) a thematic campaignin 2006 based on the word “hello” tar-geted to give a positive, friendly facefor Amateur Radio and celebrate 100years of voice over the airwaves

Broadcast Engineers have a long his-tory with ham radio. It has beenthrough their ham experiences whiletinkering, experimenting- and at timeseven failing and blowing things up –that many of today’s best engineers gottheir start in practical electronics engi-neering. Unlike most of today's con-sumer electronic gadgets, ham radioremains the one place where most peo-ple can literally make their own radio,try it and see what happens, open andmodify it, and try again. This hands-on, practical experience is still the bestteacher known! It is something that ismissing with cell phones and iPods.The book-learned theory of Ohm’s lawtakes on a whole new meaning whenapplied across your pliers.

“Hello!” is a coordinated public rela-tions campaign for 2006 involving allareas of the ARRL, the national associa-tion for Amateur Radio in the USA.Since its beginning, several internation-al associations have also joined in thiscampaign based on the simple word“Hello” and having a positive, upbeattone which highlights the one-to-oneand international communicationopportunities of Amateur Radio.

Excellent, professionally doneaudio and video 30 second publicservice announcements are availableand being broadcast to promote thecelebration and ham radio.

_______________________________“Hello”

That’s possibly the most pleasantword in any language.

_______________________________

As a ten year old in 1876, ReginaldFessenden heard his uncle describeAlexander Graham Bell’s miraculousaccomplishment of sending thehuman voice over wires. With child-like wonder, Fessenden thought, ‘Whydo they need wires?”…

Early attempts at sending voicesover the air were unintelligible, but onDecember 24, 1906 Fessenden madethe first voice broadcast on radio.That Christmas Eve, instead of usingthe usual dit-dah Morse code for hisweather report, he was going to TALKto people on the radio! At theappointed hour, radio operators allacross the North Atlantic wereshocked to hear a voice coming outfrom their radios.

While Commercial broadcastingdidn’t begin for another 14 years afterFessenden’s historic feat, thousandsof inquisitive hobbyists began toexperiment with this new fangledelectromagnetic technology. Theywere, and are still, called “amateur”radio operators. They labored inattics, barns, garages and cellars toperfect what we now call Radio.Amateur radio operators have contin-ued to be at the forefront, experi-menting with and developingtechnologies years in advance ofwhen they are rolled out to the pub-lic. FM, television, mobile tele-phones, VoIP technologies -Thesewere all used by amateur radio oper-ators years ahead of the public. Andyou should see what the hams aredoing today!

Ham operators say Hello to theworld in many languages and manyways. But whether they preferMorse code on an old brass tele-graph key, voice communication ona hand-held radio or computerizedmessages transmitted through satel-

lites, they all have an interest inwhat's happening in the world, andthey use radio technologies to reachout. AM, FM. SSB, TV and digitalmodes- we use them all to open thedoor to new world-wide relation-ships over the airwaves with peoplewe may never meet, but come tocall friends.

WWW.Hello-Radio.org was creat-ed as one central, simple websiteto which people cur ious aboutAmateur Radio can go to quicklylearn more and, most importantly,ga in contac t in format ion abouthams and groups in their homeareas. The ARRL has learned thatthe best way to create new hams isto have contact WITH a ham. Thecuriosity and excitement are conta-gious, and the role of an "Elmer"(ham nickname for an AmateurRadio mentor) is crucial in teachingthe practical ski l ls needed. Nomatter if the end result is a simpleTechnician Class ham operator, oran advanced Broadcast Engineer ata major facility, the basic, practicalskills learned in the Amateur RadioService last a lifetime and lead to amuch larger appreciation for thescience of electronics.

The Hello campaign will climaxduring the week between Christmasand New Year's Eve with special oper-ating activities planned to allow par-ticipation by both broadcasters andhams in a joint celebration. "Staytuned for more!"

To learn more about ham radio, goto www.Hello-Radio.org.

To learn more about the Hellocampaign itself, go to www.arrl.org/pio/contact/

To receive one of the public serv-ice announcements, write [email protected]


by Allen G. Pitts (W1AGP)


In an age when video cameras andrecording devices are virtually every-where, it’s difficult for some of us tobelieve that it wasn’t always possibleto walk into a Wal-Mart or Best Buystore with $50 and leave with a newvideo recorder.

The science of magnetically record-ing video images is so mature todaythat it’s taken completely for granted,but that was not always the case. Tele-vision broadcasting as we know itappeared in the mid-1930s. Videorecording technology lagged by anoth-er 20 years.

Imagine a large meeting room fiftyyears ago filled with 200 peopleassembled for a more or less routinebriefing. The only thing slightly out ofthe ordinary is a video camera trainedon the speaker and some monitorssprinkled around the room. However,television is no longer a stranger andthe presence of even large tube-typecameras of that era had become fairlyroutine.

The event was a Saturday pre-NAB(then the National Association ofRadio and Television Broadcasters)meeting of CBS affiliate owners andmanagers. The setting was the Nor-mandie Lounge in Chicago’s ConradHilton, the speaker was WilliamLodge, CBS engineering vice presidentand the date was April 14, 1956.

During his remarks, Lodge men-tioned a new technological break-through, but was not specific. At theconclusion of his address, he continuedto remain at the podium. As the crowdbegan to murmur and break up, thevideo monitors went from black backto an image of Lodge. Only this time,Lodge was still making his presenta-tion, not standing silently. This was aseeming impossibility, as the onlymeans for preserving video images waskinescope recording, a process inwhich a special motion picture cameraphotographed a television monitor.

When the recording was finished, thefilm had to be unloaded and sent awayfor developing. Under normal circum-stances, this could take hours.

The crowd, realizing that they wereexperiencing something very unusual,became hushed and locked onto themonitors, viewing an image of Lodgethat was indistinguishable from thevideo seen just moments before.Again, this was quite uncanny, as eventhe best “kine” had a distinctive lookthat set it apart from the live video ithad captured.

Then a curtain opened, revealing astrange machine and four individualshovering around it. The crowd could-n’t restrain itself and amid cheers,whistles, back slappings andapplause, began pushing and pressingin around the world’s first videorecorder and part of the team that hadmade it possible. Some even stood inchairs to get a better look at thedevice that was making this miraclepossible.

That was the scene 50 years agothis year.

Practical video recording had beenborn. The machine was the AmpexMark IV VTR prototype, which was tobecome the VRX-1000, the greatgranddad of all video recorders. It wasthe star of the convention and eventhough Ampex had set a selling priceof $45,000 for production models(more than $320,000 in 2006 dollars),orders were written that week formore than 70 machines. (Marketingresearch conducted prior to the showindicated that there would be ademand for no more than a dozenmachines globally.)

CBS got the first delivery and put iton the air in late November that yearto air the west coast feed of “DouglasEdwards and the News.” This eliminat-ed the requirement for Edwards tohave to repeat his broadcast for thePacific time zone. However, as thevideo recording technology was sonew, CBS made kinescope recordings


The Videotape Recorder Turns 50Routine NAB preview event showcased revolutionary technology

by James E. O’Neal, Technology Editor, TV Technology and BTS Member

The Ampex video recorder is unveiled at the NARTB show in Chicago April 14, 1956


as backup and had them at the ready“just in case” during the first month ofthe new machine’s use.

WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?Recording of video goes back to the

late 1920s when television pioneer JohnLogie Baird made recordings of his 30line images on ordinary 78 rpm phono-graph records. What was so specialabout the Ampex recorder and why didit take so long to come to market?

Those of us who can’t remember aworld without VTRs perhaps have lit-tle comprehension of the tremendoustechnical challenges involved in elec-tronically recording television images.To put the problem in perspective,magnetic audio recording evolvedover several decades and by the late1940s was fairly mature when Ampexintroduced its first audio machine. Tocapture and reproduce high qualityaudio, a recording device needs tohave a passband of some 20 Hz. to18,000 Hz., or about 10 octaves. Torecord acceptable video, this had tobe stretched to 18 octaves.

Other groups had been working onvideo recording schemes for at leastfive years prior to Ampex’s success.All relied on pulling tape past fixedheads at high speeds. The BBC’sefforts resulted in a machine knownas VERA (Vision Electronic RecordingApparatus). It moved 1/2-inch tape at16 feet per second, with a 21-inch reelof tape providing a mere 15-minutesof recording time. Video response wascapped off at 3 MHz. and heavyleather gloves to provide assistancewith reel braking were part of theoperator’s tool set. Another U.S. groupestablished by Jack Mullin, the engi-neer who introduced audio taperecording to America, and funded bysinger Bing Crosby, also devised alongitudinal video recorder. Thismachine spread the video across mul-tiple tracks on a 1-inch tape runningat a mere 120 inches per second. Itmade pictures, but as the responsetopped off at a bit over 1.5 MHz, itreally wasn’t up to broadcast applica-tions. Not one to be left out or out-

done, RCA’s David Sarnoff mandatedthat his R&D people build a videorecorder. In a rather questionablemove, the top audio engineer there,Harry Olson, was given the job. Eventhough RCA held a patent on rotaryhead recording, Olson simply tried toscale up a conventional audio trans-port to do the job. His first machineused 1/2-inch tape pulled at 30 feetper second. It took 7,200 feet of tapeto provide four minutes of recordingtime and the pictures were not muchbetter than those of the other groups.As relatively crude as the kinescoperecording process was, none of thesevideo recording technologies couldequal its quality, storage time andease in handling.

Ampex engineers early on saw thefutility of longitudinal recording forvideo and based their efforts on arotating head design first patented foraudio in 1938 by an Italian inventor.The Ampex work was kept underwraps, and due to changing econom-ics, was actually terminated at onepoint. This group consisted of CharlesGinsburg, the team leader; CharlesAnderson, FM expert; Ray Dolby, then

an engineering student and later ahousehold name in the audio field;Shelby Henderson, master machinistand model maker; Alex Maxey, themechanical genius behind the rotaryhead design, and Fred Pfost, whosolved the problem of making practi-cal high speed recording heads.

In addition to discarding high-speed longitudinal tape movement forachieving the necessary writing speed,the Ampex team also realized that FMoffered some advantages not availablewith conventional recording technolo-gy, and could possibly help in squeez-ing those additional octaves onto tape.Research was started on an FM systemthat smacked of heresy—the carrierfrequency was very near the highestmodulating frequency and conven-tional wisdom dictated that the carrierfrequency must be at least 10 timesthat frequency. The carrier frequencywas set by available tape head tech-nology and this rather revolutionaryFM system resulted in some mathe-matically interesting consequences(sidebands which could fold over intothe desired signals). Nevertheless, thething worked, and worked better than


The VTR design team (L to R) Fred Pfost, Shelby Henderson, Ray Dolby, AlexMassey, Charles Ginsberg and Charles Anderson


any AM signal system could have, pro-ducing a greatly improved S/N ratioand compressing the necessary 18octaves into the space of three.

The video recorder shown to thecrowds in Chicago, and destined to setthe standard for all video recording,used a special 3M 2-inch tape, a four-head quadraplex or “quad” rotatinghead assembly and pulled tape alongat a sane 15 inches per second. Itcould provide up to 90 minutes ofrecording time and recorded the full4.2 MHz bandwidth needed for 525-line television.

FAR FROM PERFECTThese early machines were bulky (theycould not fit through an ordinary door-way), weighed more than 1,000pounds and the scores of vacuumtubes used consumed a very substantialamount of electricity. An external sup-ply of compressed air and a vacuumsystem were necessary for operation.Operational costs were extremely highby today’s standards. An hour’s worthof 2-inch tape cost hundreds of dollarsand the life of the machine’s videorecording head assembly was meas-ured at best in just a few hundreds ofhours. This figure was sometimes muchlower and head refurbishment costs

amounted to $1,000 or more. Therecorders were finicky and requiredboth a highly skilled operator and afairly intensive setup and adjustmentperiod before each use. A great deal ofheavy maintenance and specializedtools were needed to keep them opera-tional. Video was not instantly avail-able, as the machines took severalseconds to get up to speed and stabi-lize. This required care on the part ofoperators and TDs in making sure thatthe requisite back timing and pre-rollwere done. Due to mechanical differ-ences in the rotating head assemblies,none of the early machines producedrecordings that were really fully inter-changeable. The networks got aroundthis by making sure that the headassembly used for recording also didthe playback. This had to be carriedout in the extreme if a show wererecorded in Los Angeles and thenplayed back in New York. In suchcases, the video head was removedfrom the recorder and shipped alongwith the tape. Still, the convenienceand video quality made the machine aninstant success.

RCA saw the handwriting andscrubbed their longitudinal recorderR&D work, licensed Ampex technolo-gy and shortly rolled out their own

quad machine, the TRT-1. RCA wasthe only other serious competitor toAmpex and in the years that followed,a tech war of sorts evolved betweenthe companies. Improvements werefast and numerous: air bearing heads,rotary transformers to replace sliprings, time base correction technolo-gies, color recording, genlockableservo systems, high band recording,velocity compensation, electronic edit-ing, better head alloys, low noise tapecoatings, vacuum column tape han-dling…the list of these “one-up-man-ships” continued right on up until theend of 2-inch recording developmentsin the 1970s. Ampex’s quad designendured for well over 20 years, until itwas gradually displaced by 1-inchtype “C” helical scan technology.

An incredible 50 years later, thereare some quad machines out there stillat work. According to Pat Johnston,director of project management forAheadTek, his company is rebuildingabout 200 quad heads per year.

RCA is now just a dimming memoryin the broadcasting landscape. Ampexcontinued to build new VTR modelsinto the dawning of the digital age, butwas essentially out of broadcast videorecording by the end of the millennium.The company name still exists in con-nection with data recording and archivalstorage technology, but isn’t seen muchin television stations anymore.

With the advent of digital televisionand the DVD and hard drive videorecording that it spawned, videotapeuse is on the wane. Some of the biggestproducers of magnetic tape pulled outof the market years ago. The phrases“tapeless television station” and “the endof tape” entered the vernacular at least10 years ago. With the exception of datacartridges for archival recording, theseprognostications may well may come topass. Even that application appearsshaky, as data packing advances in opti-cal disc recording methodologies seemdestined to surpass what can be donewith magnetic storage.

For decades, video recording qualityhas been such that it is indistinguish-able from live video. Recording deviceshave become so reliable and common-place that no one is excited in the least


An early Ampex VTR installation at CBS



What Was It Like?There is a special kind of captivation or fascination thatgoes along with being witness to an event destined to havehistoric significance.

John T. Moore, the youngest witness to the Wright broth-ers accomplishment in December, 1903 was reported to haverun down the beach at Kitty Hawk yelling at the top of hislungs to anyone listening, "They done it! They done it!Damned if they ain't flew."

This atmosphere was certainly present that Saturday inApril, 1956 when Ampex showed to the world that it hadperfected a video recorder.

If anyone should know what the situation was like in theHilton’s Normandie Lounge, it would have to be CharlesAnderson, one of the Ampex VTR design team memberswho was there with the Mark IV machine. As Andersondescribed it:

“The (CBS) affiliates meeting was in the NormandieLounge, the foyer of a ballroom. We were in an alcove therewith the machine, behind a curtain. No one knew we werethere. CBS had cameras and monitors scattered around thelounge, but that was nothing unusual.

There were a lot of people in the room and on cue we startedto record. Bill Lodge was explaining to the group that there wassomething new they wanted to show. On another cue, werewound the tape and started playing it back.

All of a sudden, there was a deafening silence.Did we screw up somehow?Then came a roar. The curtain was opened and people

started to swarm back around machine. Before we knew it,we were knee deep in people.”

Anderson recalled that Charles Ginsburg, Fred Pfost andPhil Gumby were with him that day.

“That machine was demoed a lot. It was a very success-ful show for the network. That night, Ginsburg and I wentout with Blair Benson from CBS to the Blue Angel to cele-brate. Ginsburg was dancing on the tabletop.”

Pfost also recalled the silence that initially ensued once theplayback started.

“There was total silence for about 15 seconds. Then peo-ple began to realize what they were looking at. It madesuch an impression on me that I get tears in my eyes tellingthe story. People screamed and clapped for probably 10minutes.”

After that presentation finally ended, Ampex executivesrealized from the reaction of the crowd that the companyhad a hit on its hands. The CBS demonstration had beenjust that—a closed-door session for invited guests. It washastily decided to rent hotel space to exhibit the VTR forthe balance of the show. Anderson remembers that part ofthe experience as not being so euphoric:

“I believe the room was 512. Very early the next morning(Sunday), the VP was on the phone with orders to movethe videotape machine. We weren’t at our best from thenight before, but we went ahead and moved it there. Fromthen on there was a steady stream of people throughout therest of the show.”

Pfost also recalled relocating the recorder.“After the (CBS) demo we took machine up to fourth or

fifth floor in the hotel. For the rest of the show that roomwas totally full. At the end of the week, the orders formachines amounted to more money than Ampex had beendoing in a whole year. We went back (to Redwood City)and had to figure out how to build all these machines.”

Ray Dolby stayed behind in Redwood City to demon-strate video recording for members of the press and Ampexexecutives. The reaction was similar to that in Chicago,according to Dolby.

“Everyone was enthusiastic, there was a lot of applauseand laughing and clapping…but on the other hand, youhave to remember that this was an engineering lab, not aplush hotel room as they has in Chicago,” he said.

Even so, sales orders were being written on an almostnon-stop basis. According to one source, Ampex ran out ofsales forms and was writing orders on any scrap of paperthey had at hand.

The Author offers special thanks to following persons fortheir assistance in connection in preparing this article: -Elliot Sivowitch and Hal Wallace, Smithsonian Institution,Peter Hammar, former curator, Ampex Museum of MagneticRecording, Chuck Howell and Michael Henry, Library ofAmerican Broadcasting, Tom Mittelstaedt, Pavek Museumof Broadcasting, Henry Lowood and Colyn Wohlmut, Stan-ford University, Charles Anderson, Ray Dolby, Eve MullinCollier, Fred Pfost, and Tim Stoffel.

James O’Neal, [email protected] © 2006 IMAS Publishing Group. Reprinted

with permission. This article originally printed April 12,2006 in TV Technology magazine, www.tvtechology.com

by the words “video recording.”Still there are a few remaining from

that crowd, who, 50 years ago, wit-nessed the first demonstration of realvideo recording and who rememberthe electricity and shivers of excitementthat went with it. There are many moreof us that recall our initial encounterwith video tape and the fascination thatcame with it—the solid snap as the

guide shoe engaged; the pleasing,almost musical “buzz” produced by thatmassive, yet very delicate, rotary headassembly spinning at its 14,400 rpmrate; and the smell of the tape coatingas the heads literally tore into it.

An early video recording textbookdescribed the rotary head recordingprocess as one in which the head’spole pieces “created a localized dimple,

moving across the tape.” Actually,something far more profound hap-pened as the heads moved. They frozetime and left behind moving images forfuture generations to witness and enjoy.They also launched a business that hasbecome the single largest element inbroadcasting and a technology that hasbecome an integral part of hundreds, ifnot thousands of other businesses.


The IEEE Broadcast Technology Society

56th

ANNUAL BROADCAST SYMPOSIUM

Guy Bouchard, Canadian Broadcasting Corp, Chair

27-29 September 2006 Hotel Washington

Washington, DC USA

Preliminary SchedulePreliminary Schedule

WednesWednesday, 27 September IPTV Tutorial

IPTV, Mobile TV, and Multimedia Technologies

Thursday, 28 September y, 28 September Digital TV Systems & Standards

Unlicensed Devices in the TV Broadcast Bands

Friday, 29 September Distributed Transmission Systems

Radio Broadcast Engineering

Full Registration includes: Wednesday Box Lunch

Wednesday Evening Welcome Reception Thursday BTS/AFCCE Luncheon

Friday BTS Awards Luncheon

PLAN TO ATTEND!

For the latest program information and registration, please visit:

www.ieee.org/btsymposium




See website for Dealine update


Region 1HONG SHI GERHARD A FRANZ TIMOTHY B BAMBRIDGE JAMES C ROSELIUS SERGEY N MAKAROV PETER SABOL JULIUS R CHUMA ROBERT BLAZEWICZ

Region 2CHRISTINE M DILAPI THOMAS W HOLMES THOMAS JAWOROWSKI GERALD F NUGENT MARTIN R DOCZKAT ROBERT GLASS KARL HEIMER BRIAN SATTIZAHN STEVEN STRAVITZ TROY E SMITH RICHARD C TODD

Region 3KENNIE Y KWONG CHARLES J LORD JOHN N MARTIN BRIAN K NIEMAN CHULGYUN PARKDOUGLAS J GLAZAR CURTIS L PHIBBS MILTON CANDELARIO GLENN HOWELL RUBIN I GARCIA CHRISTIAN E NAVARRO PHILLIP J FRALEY RYAN P FELL CHRISTOPHER D HUTCHINSON

Region 4RONALD J MOERY DR JOSHUA P SEEGER ERIC M TERVOL MS ELSA MADRIGAL CHRISTOPHER D TARR ROBERT P PETERS WILLIAM SCOTT MONDSCHEIN

Region 5CARL M STANCHAK RICHARD S SNELL JRDR MARVIN R YOUNG MARK A BAUR ZUBIN INGAH SAMEER R HERLEKAR

KENNETH S HALEY ROBERT E PHILLIPS MICHAEL S BATSON MS TIAOTIAO XIE FARRUKH INAM

Region 6SUZANNE C MARTIN RUSSEL H BEHM DAVID P LESTER PING DONG MEREDITH W CALDWELL AMIT S SHALIGRAM BERTIN KOALA DR HONG K YANG DR WENSHENG ZHOU RICHARD L HOLLANDSWORTH TOM GRIESHABER KENNETH FULLER ANTHONY M SCALPI CRAIG W OCONNELL DR KEEYOUNG SUH ENG OVE BJELKE-HOLTERMANN MICHAEL YIP JOSEPH N COCO PETER C GABRIELE CHOMPROT P TEETER

Region 7DARREN WARD CHRIS J JOSLIN ALESSANDRO VILLACCI BORIS SPOKOINYI PROF DONALD M MILNE ENG PASCAL MARCOUX ROBERT D HAMILTON GARRY SHEPHERD EDWIN L BIRKS

Region 8ROGER A VOUNCKX HANS D SCHOTTEN M M BANAT PATRICK P VANDENAMEELE LIAM MURPHY MS ROSA LANCINI HUSEYIN BURKAN DR VASSILI R SNOURNITSIN MARTIN SCHAFER DR TAKEBUMI ITAGAKI ALEXANDER G TOSHEV JOERG ROESCH BORISLAV P MARINOV MOHAMMED A EL-NEEL ENG TORBEN DALGAARD


Welcome to the 203 new BTS Members who joinedthe Society since 1 January 2006.


OLEG DYBAJLO ENG STELIOS A MITILINEOS KREMEN ZHELYAZKOV HRISTOVENG STEPHEN N DOMINIAK ENG MEHDI REZAEI ADRIAN KLIKS EFEFIONG A UMO KRASIMIR O SLAVYANOV LYUBOMIR B GEORGIEV BRANISLAV SKRBIC DR ALBERTO MALDINO JOHNATHON MEICHTRY SERGEY V ZHUKOV PRAVIN GOSWAMI DR GANGOLF HIRTZ AWADH M AL QUFAILI DESISLAVA P MIHAILOVA ENG NOURI E AL-DAWOOD GIANCLAUDIO MEYER ENG OLIVIER CAILLAU MATT TAYLOR ANDREAS POULLAIDES CHRISTIAN WAHSWEILER NNAEMEKA C ILOEJE OLIVIER ROUSSET MRS IRMA SOKOLOVIC VINAYE ARMOOGUM BABAFUNMI O OGUN BABAFEMI O OGUNMADE GARETH W YOUNG BENJAMIN BASSON RASMUS M JENSEN THOMAS A BATIANCELA SAMI BOUSTANY MISS SWEEKRITI MOHUN JAMES P WHITEBREAD EMILIO TEJEDOR ESCOBAR PANAYIOTIS GEORGALLIS CHUKWUEBUKA E MBANUGO LATEEF MUFUTAU DR GIUSEPPE GIANOLIO ISAIAH G PETER VICTOR V KUSNEZH SERGEY N ELISEEV WAHID OMAR MOHAMED MOHAMMED T AL SHARQAWI

Region 9MIGUEL SANCHEZ MERAZ JOSE G RAMIREZ DE ARELLANO MARIO A ROBAYO LUIS A DORADO EDGAR E GUZMAN JAIME VASQUEZ PATRICIA LUDENA MISS GLORIA I VANEGAS

MISS SANDRA E CASTILLO ALEXANDER O CHIGUANO ONTANEDA JULIO BARZOLA MISS MILYBERT C CASTILLO ALEXIS J ROA PAULO HENRIQUE RAMALHO P GAMA RAFAEL H CRISTANCHO ENG FLAVIO F LIMA

Region 10DR SUHAD SHEMBIL ALBERT H MAUNG JOK TIN TAN P JANARDHANAN BYUNG-GOOK CHUNG TZU-SHIN WU JING-JUNG HONG BYUNG-SUK MIN ALVIN M RAZON YASUHIRO ITO KAZUMASA ENAMI HSIAO PING TSAI ENG GATOT SANTOSO GANG WU CHALASANI H KRISHNA PROF CHUNG C FENG SHAKEEL ZAHID LEE KI JONG MISS KAVITHA B CHAND ENG JOSE ELMER S LORENZO MISS DOLORES R SCHOLASTICA CUI LI DR TAKAHIRO MAKINO DR R. K GUPTA MARK J FOSTER MISS YUN-CHIN TENG TERENCE J SMITH RAHUL P BADAVE DR JIAN SONG MICHAEL T OLANREWAJU SUNGMIN KO CHAO-CHIH HUANG YI CHAN KAO YEN-WEN HUANG SEUNGKEON CHUNG JEFFREY T TSAI DR SANG WOON LEE DAVID W SULLIVAN MS JEONG HOON LEE Y GHOUSIA ANIL GARG HIROSHI SHIMAMOTO M S MITTAL CHAYA N R NADIMPALLI SONALI P KADAM DEEPAK CHATURVEDI



IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Newsletter 28 Spring 2006

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.445 Hoes LaneP.O. Box 1331Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331


from the president - ieee broadcast technology...

Documents