• 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

WNBP's Magical 90 Watt Translator

M

MickeyD

Guest
Last week I spent driving along the seacoast of MA, NH, and Maine. I was enjoying local AM and FM radio on my trip and came across WSCA in Portsmouth on 106.1. I have listened to them in the past and were one of the few east coast LPFM's granted a CP back in the 2003 window.

What I found was the station was un-listenable in Portsmouth because of a WNBP's 90 watt translator. While up in Maine, outside of WSCA's coverage area, I could still hear WNBP's magical 90 watt translator.

I looked up W291CC (WNBP's-translator) and the coverage map shows that their 60 Dbu signal ends slightly beyond the Hampton Toll booths. According to their authorization they are only using a single element antenna to accomplish this great feat. Why use the one element that you are authorized for when 4 work so much better?

Not only can they wipe out the signal of an existing LPFM, but they can reach beyond the range of the LPFM, and get into Maine. The reason is simple the translator is running much more power than its licensed 90 watts ERP with an array that is not authorized.

From what I can gather the translator has been on the air for only a couple of years and has been allowed to destroy a community station.

Where is the FCC on this matter? Is this what LPFM stations can look forward to with AM stations being granted translators?
 
And as I pointed out at RI, where Mickey started a similar thread, LPFMs are not interference-protected from translators.

This is a whole lot of whining about something that is FCC-legal.
 
MickeyD said:
They are indeed protected. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title47-vol4/pdf/CFR-2012-title47-vol4-sec74-1204.pdf
Click to expand...

You tried that argument already, Mickey, over at RI.

And was told -- by several people, including me -- that §74-1204 only applies to applications. It does not extend to actual operation, which is covered by §74.1203 ... the rule preceding the one you keep citing. Nowhere in the applicable rule does it say LPFMs are protected. NOWHERE.

MickeyD said:
Radio programmers are a dime a dozen.
Click to expand...

And people who post on message boards claiming they are right, even when proven wrong by the facts, are priced so low as to not scan at the register.

You, sir, fit Einstein's famous definition. Google it if you don't already know what it is.
 
K.M. Richards said:
You tried that argument already, Mickey, over at RI.

And was told -- by several people, including me -- that §74-1204 only applies to applications. It does not extend to actual operation, which is covered by §74.1203 ... the rule preceding the one you keep citing. Nowhere in the applicable rule does it say LPFMs are protected. NOWHERE.



And people who post on message boards claiming they are right, even when proven wrong by the facts, are priced so low as to not scan at the register.

You, sir, fit Einstein's famous definition. Google it if you don't already know what it is.
Click to expand...

No you don't understand it. The pattern has to comply with the authorization and it does not. That translator is not putting out 90 watts ERP. The FCC doesn't do surprise inspections anymore they give you a courtesy call before they arrive. I wouldn't expect an oldies programmer to know this. I know two stations that you will never program for.
 
MickeyD said:
No you don't understand it. The pattern has to comply with the authorization and it does not. That translator is not putting out 90 watts ERP. The FCC doesn't do surprise inspections anymore they give you a courtesy call before they arrive. I wouldn't expect an oldies programmer to know this. I know two stations that you will never program for.
Click to expand...

The FCC definitely does show up at stations unannounced, and I have been through quite a few of those inspections, including some in more recent years.

If they want to visit the transmitter site, they will request an engineer or other station staff member to accompany them to gain access.

However, if a station is suspected of using higher than authorized power or an antenna system at variance, they will do their own measurements with a FIM or, in the case of FM, do measurements with an Audemat. They will not necessarily notify the station of such a process, and action is only taken if an irregularity is noted.

And unless you have an FM field intensity meter which you can have for the low 5 figures, you don't know for a fact what the ERP of that translator is.

Some of us programmers know that Ohm's Law is not something an attorney has to be consulted about.
 
MickeyD said:
No you don't understand it. The pattern has to comply with the authorization and it does not. That translator is not putting out 90 watts ERP. The FCC doesn't do surprise inspections anymore they give you a courtesy call before they arrive. I wouldn't expect an oldies programmer to know this. I know two stations that you will never program for.
Click to expand...

1. If the station is operating outside of its licensed parameters, then I suggest you follow the advice of others and file a complaint with the FCC. Contrary to your belief, they do not give courtesy calls when following up on complaints, only for routine station inspections.

1a. If you're not going to take the appropriate action, I don't know what your harping on it here is going to solve.

2. You have no idea how many stations in my career that I doubled as Chief Operator at. I don't publicize that because I am not an engineering consultant. That does not mean I don't know how to read the Rules & Regulations, and I maintain that you are citing the wrong Rule ... because this station is licensed, not in the application process. I politely suggest that you find the appropriate Rule to file a complaint under (one that deals with operation outside of licensed parameters). I'm not going to look it up for you because you seem to believe you know everything about that anyway.

3. I know several hundred stations I will never program for, for a variety of reasons (mostly because their desired programming is outside of my areas of specialization). But I will never be a consulting engineer for any station, so your point is moot.
 
K.M. Richards said:
I politely suggest that you find the appropriate Rule to file a complaint under (one that deals with operation outside of licensed parameters).
Click to expand...

And for a complaint regarding the radiation pattern of a directionalized translator, something other than "I think it sounds too strong" is required. Like field strength readings with an accepted, calibrated device with the ability to read the signal in accordance with FCC standards.
 
DavidEduardo said:


And for a complaint regarding the radiation pattern of a directionalized translator, something other than "I think it sounds too strong" is required. Like field strength readings with an accepted, calibrated device with the ability to read the signal in accordance with FCC standards.
Click to expand...

It has already been done by the station and is an open investigation. You can take all of the measurements that you like but when it comes down to enforcement the FCC might say thank you, or not, but they have to measure it themselves. The station is being run hot.
 
MickeyD said:
It has already been done by the station and is an open investigation.
Click to expand...

I believe that what David meant was that if you, yourself, have the necessary equipment and took the appropriate field strength measurements, inclusion of same in a complaint to the FCC greatly increases the chances of them actually doing something about it.

To repeat myself: Posting on a message board doesn't change anything, and I fail to understand why you still are.
 
MickeyD said:
It has already been done by the station and is an open investigation. You can take all of the measurements that you like but when it comes down to enforcement the FCC might say thank you, or not, but they have to measure it themselves. The station is being run hot.
Click to expand...

However, to start an investigation by the FCC, you have a much greater chance if an engineer "whose credentials are known to the FCC" swears a statement which is attached to the complaint. Otherwise, the complaint is processed at about the speed as one that says "aliens are interfering with my reception of Fox news because we all know aliens are liberals".
 
DavidEduardo said:


However, to start an investigation by the FCC, you have a much greater chance if an engineer "whose credentials are known to the FCC" swears a statement which is attached to the complaint. Otherwise, the complaint is processed at about the speed as one that says "aliens are interfering with my reception of Fox news because we all know aliens are liberals".
Click to expand...

An investigation has to be started by the station itself, AND IT HAS, and it is on-going. My credentials are known by the FCC and my experience spans over 40 years in radio and TV. The FCC TODAY calls before they show up, things aren't they way you either think that they should be, or the way they were 20 years ago when you worked in the business. Get yourself a radio station to play with mine will be on the air this summer.
 
MickeyD said:
An investigation has to be started by the station itself, AND IT HAS, and it is on-going. My credentials are known by the FCC and my experience spans over 40 years in radio and TV. The FCC TODAY calls before they show up, things aren't they way you either think that they should be, or the way they were 20 years ago when you worked in the business. Get yourself a radio station to play with mine will be on the air this summer.
Click to expand...

I have 67 station to "play" with, and I work in the business and have for 56 years. I've been qualified as an expert witness before FCC Acting Law Judges. Let's just say that if I don't know the answer, I can call a colleague or expert who does know.

The FCC is very understaffed today, so they make fewer inspections. They will call if they want a visit to a separately located transmitter site, but inspections of the office / studio location are spontaneous so as to not give time to make it see that the office is staffed when it is not, or to "fix" a deficient or missing Public File or to allow the EAS gear to be serviced if now working.
 
Reminds me of an engineer I knew who was working for a local 1 kW AM back when Ronald Reagan got elected.

The guy was ecstatic. We asked him why, and his response was "Reagan is going to cut the FCC budget so low that in a few years, you'll be able to get this station on Jupiter!"
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom