• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

fm frequencies

Here's a controversial idea: with better adjacent channel rejection of modern radios, repack the band so the metro market stations are separated by 3 channels instead of 4.

I'm guessing the reason it's a non-starter is the second adjacent relationship between markets that are 65 or 75 miles apart. Denver vs. Colorado Springs/Pueblo that co-exist and interleave nicely now would be on opposite ends of the band. Without IBM's Watson to run a new Table, I'm guessing 3rd adjacent spacing would mean fewer stations instead of more.
 
MarioMania said:
With the FCC approving 93.3 in Sac, Is the FCC really care what they do with the FM Band?
Click to expand...
I don't think the current FCC cares anything about broadcasting, past collecting their annual "Spectrum Management Fee." I just sent them over $6000 for my stations. So far, all I've got from them is a filing window for a new station that will interfere with one of my translators. I'll have to move it, assuming a clear frequency is available. Thanks for nothing.
 
The FCC doesn't care at all, They just giving out Frequ. If someone has the Money to throw at them

What Station do you have, That the FCC said there's a Translator going to Interfere with your Station
 
MarioMania said:
The FCC doesn't care at all, They just giving out Frequ. If someone has the Money to throw at them

What Station do you have, That the FCC said there's a Translator going to Interfere with your Station
Click to expand...

The translator is K300CX. It took several years and one frequency move to get it on the air. The day after we filed for our Licence to Cover, the FCC announced Auction 98 which included an availability for a Class C2 station on the same frequency about 35 miles away. There are at least 20 entities who are qualified to bid on this frequency. It is pretty certain that someone will get a CP. When I first found this out, I asked the FCC if we could move now so we wouldn't go through the exercise of promoting this station just to move it later. I was told that I can't apply to move it more than three channels (none of which would work) from it's existing channel. I have to wait until a CP is issued for the new C-2. That seems silly to me.

In any case, It will probably cost me several thousand dollars, since it uses a custom directional antenna that will not work right at another frequency.
 
Chuck said:
The translator is K300CX. It took several years and one frequency move to get it on the air. The day after we filed for our Licence to Cover, the FCC announced Auction 98 which included an availability for a Class C2 station on the same frequency about 35 miles away. There are at least 20 entities who are qualified to bid on this frequency. It is pretty certain that someone will get a CP. When I first found this out, I asked the FCC if we could move now so we wouldn't go through the exercise of promoting this station just to move it later. I was told that I can't apply to move it more than three channels (none of which would work) from it's existing channel. I have to wait until a CP is issued for the new C-2. That seems silly to me.

In any case, It will probably cost me several thousand dollars, since it uses a custom directional antenna that will not work right at another frequency.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but basically, you've bet on the wrong horse. A translator is secondary service and you're told that going in. It's always a risk. Where I live, there's an old Class D that's moved four times and if the FCC hadn't recently opened up the second adjacencies, they'd be dead in the water. They began operations in 1958!
 
semoochie said:
I'm sorry but basically, you've bet on the wrong horse. A translator is secondary service and you're told that going in. It's always a risk. Where I live, there's an old Class D that's moved four times and if the FCC hadn't recently opened up the second adjacencies, they'd be dead in the water. They began operations in 1958!
Click to expand...

That is not news to me. I'm well aware of the risk. It is the timing that grinds my gears. It took nearly ten years to get it on the air. That and the fact that I can't move it now, but have to wait for a CP to be issued for the C-2 seems silly. This translator is used by one of my AM stations. which has been on the air in one form or other since the late 1930's. It's hardly a newcomer. About the only thing I can think of that has more convoluted rules than translators is liquor laws in the South. :)
 
DavidEduardo said:


Larger cities got more B's or C's, with some being put at the larger cities in more rural areas. Suburbs and smaller cities got A's.

Amendments to the Table of Allocations modified this considerably from the 40's to the 80's. Docket 80-90 destroyed it beyond recognition around 1990.

Go to http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-BC-YB/Broadcasting-1948-Yearbook-Page-Range-Guide.htm and click on "FM Stations and Allocation Table" to see how it was set up originally. There is an element of geographical/population based logic there.

Click to expand...

It's saying the fm alcations file is read-protected, could you fix that?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom