AM sledgehammer: 10X Power Increase Nationwide

[amfmsw]

A petition has been filed before the FCC for all AM Stations to increase power Tenfold for daytime operation. Thoughts?

Story here: http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...cross-the-board-am-power-increa?ref=mail_news

 

[satech]

In order for mega-power 500 kW AM to fly (again), first we'd have to change the ITU "Rio 1981" agreement, which states:

– class A stations, covering large areas, are protected for their ground-wave and sky-wave service; their power shall not exceed 100 kW daytime and 50 kW night-time;

– class B stations, for medium coverage, are protected for their ground-wave service; their power shall not exceed 50 kW;

– class C stations, for local coverage, are protected for their ground-wave service; their power shall not exceed 1 to 5 kW daytime, depending on the noise zone, and 1 kW night-time.

So the FCC could allow Class A stations to apply for increases up to 100 kW daytime without needing international re-negotiation of "Rio", but due to the "ratchet clause" and existing protection ratios, many stations would be restricted to less than the maximum unless they install tightly-nulled directional arrays. So for a lot of current 50kW'ers, the costs associated with the upgrade simply wouldn't be worth it, for the meager expansion in coverage area it would provide (doubling the power doesn't even come close to doubling the coverage).

p.s. Expanded Band stations are restricted to a maximum to 10 kW due to "Rio 1988", so they wouldn't be able to upgrade at all, except maybe for their nighttime power (a few EB'ers are already running 10 kW full-time with a directional array, but most are 1 kW or less at night, non-directional).

 

[davideduardo]

A petition has been filed before the FCC for all AM Stations to increase power Tenfold for daytime operation. Thoughts?

What good will it do? AM listening is decreasing each year, and pretty much anyone under 50 has little use for AM. Increasing power will not do anything to make AM more attractive and will just increase interference.

You can not legislate a change in the laws of physics.

 

[Tom Wells]

I read the proposal earlier and have corresponded with Mr Arnault by e-mail.
A portion follows:

-------------------------------
I read the proposal and while I beleive it would help, I think it will bring in actual NEW problems, too. Many new intermodulation products will occur at higher levels, both inside AND outside of radios. Pickup of AM signals with unintended operation will increase for so many modern products with poor design and unwitting detectors.
AGC circuits in radios will be overloaded, and tuned circuits will tune extra broad and mushy.
Many stations will not be able to afford to make enough difference to bother.
Images will begin to appear in markets where several large stations are set in approx repeating 100 khz such as Chicago and NYC.
I am afraid we're past the point at which shouting louder is an answer.

I totally agree with every single sentence and breath you have written regarding the background and premise for the petition. I have been more or less incensed with the FCC since the cheap lamp dimmer with TRIACs was introduced 40 years ago, and always wondered how any of this all gets approved, as it most certainly does not comply with pt 15 levels, never written to adress devices with discontinuous, "switched" current and the wideband RF products created by such switching.

Have you considered any proposals to the effect that some sort of meaningful compliance be required in all new products, or that the FCC immediately ban importation and manufacture of about 80% of the consumer electronics sold in the US?
Seems to me they dropped the ball many years ago, but are still in a position to require and enforce a standard that would put the emission of a "brick" power supply at the level that was intended by part 15 rules, not specifically written to address the local oscillator radiation within every radio, but largely in recognition that radios DID have to have such oscillators, and these necessary signals were pollution if not kept within very small areas. Even then, such signals were continuous sine wave in nature, not square waves with wideband RF splatter.

I'd like to discuss this more with you and hear your thoughts on the considerations I've raised.
--------------------------

He responded that he is trying to bring attention to the problem, even if the issues I mention are realistic.
Any effort to clean up the mess is overdue and would be welcomed by many.

I urge others with an interest in this problem to support this proposal, even if it is only useful for bring the problem to recognition and
possible FCC action to require proper engineering of the RF aspects of digital electronics.

Some people actually seem glad (or proud) that junk engineering and the pollution it creates is destroying particular neighborhoods
in RF spectrum-land. I can understand such a view from a profit motive, but then I have a very hard time respecting
those who hold such views. My view as an engineer is that signal and spectrum purity are foremost, and any design
or mode which intrudes and diminishes the usefulness of RF is negligent to the point of being criminal.

 

[kenglish]

Before we get in to the long, drawn-out process of changing the laws...not to mention the fights that would come from neighbors of stations that want to increase their "radiation".....
How about a concerted effort to inform the public about interference issues? Some practical information on how to receive radio and TV signals? Some PSAs about interference control?

Maybe even some "Investigative Reports" about how "Inferior products are jeopardizing the potential use of valuable spectrum, in your home or business".

When DTV stations have to change their channels from VHF because people don't know that rabbit ears won't work while tucked behind their metal refrigerator, maybe the public needs a bit of education.

 

[Bengalsfan]

This won't do much more than raise the noise floor for everyone.

 

[bossbill]

I'll have to buy a new transmitter and ATU. My power bill will go up ten-fold. And I'll still wake up with an AM station in a world that has not only moved to FM, but moved from broadcast to broadband.

While the proposal does make some good points, how many broadcasters would see a Return on Investment?

 

[davideduardo]

Maybe even some "Investigative Reports" about how "Inferior products are jeopardizing the potential use of valuable spectrum, in your home or business".

That would only work if people thought that AM was of any value. Two generations of Americans have grown up without any habit of AM usage. The youngest barely knows that AM exists, and uses even FM less than prior generations.

All the PSAs in the world will fall on deaf ears in this case.

 

[everydayguy]

Hey David Eduardo -- enough already with your bashing of AM radio -- we get it -- of course, FM took over in the late 70s blah blah blah -- but I'd give my left arm for the revenue that KLBJ-AM in Austin Texas rakes in every month..and it's just one of many money making AMs in the U-S.

 

[satech]

Hey David Eduardo -- enough already with your bashing of AM radio -- we get it -- of course, FM took over in the late 70s blah blah blah -- but I'd give my left arm for the revenue that KLBJ-AM in Austin Texas rakes in every month..and it's just one of many money making AMs in the U-S.

The truth lies somewhere in the middle. No, AM is not dead, and plenty of AM stations are still doing just fine, in both big and small markets. But if you ask those successful AMs if they felt it was worth it to invest in a large power increase in order to gain some extra coverage area, don't be surprised if many say no. If their power level and antenna pattern is sufficient to cover their market, then they will likely have no interest in an expensive power boost with marginal improvement in coverage area. And even those who aren't happy with their AM coverage would probably have more interest in getting an FM signal on the air instead.

 

[davideduardo]

Hey David Eduardo -- enough already with your bashing of AM radio

Name one more AM in Austin that makes a significant profit. In general, there are zero to two viable AM signals in each of the top 100 markets. In total, there are less than 200 which put a decent signal (10 mV/m is the minimum to get in home and at work listening today) over their MSA day and night. Quite a few are concentrated in a couple of markets like NY, Chicago, etc. Others, like Washington, DC, have no viable AM signals at all.

The fact that the further you go under 55 years of age, the less AM listening there is confirms that over time, there will be less and less total listening in age groups that advertisers seek.

And that is why WIBC, WTOP and KTAR moved to FM. Or why WWL, KCBS and KSL added FM simulcasts which upped the under-55 listening enourmously (there are dozens and dozens of additional examples).

Austin only has 11 12+ AM shares, and under 55 it is around half that. There is no other local AM in the top 15 stations after 590 AM.

And looking at AM objectively is hardly bashing AM. Reality bites, I guess.

-- we get it -- of course, FM took over in the late 70s blah blah blah -- but I'd give my left arm for the revenue that KLBJ-AM in Austin Texas rakes in every month..and it's just one of many money making AMs in the U-S.

KLBJ is almost unique in still having a decent 25-54. Biggies like WGN are barely in the top 20 stations in sales demos. And as many as can are moving to FM, or being beaten by ones that have like KDKA which is pretty bare in 25-54 while the FM talker is doing great there.

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

"You can not legislate a change in the laws of physics."

Didn't they do that with -10 HD fm! (rimshot sounder)

In all seriousness, isn't it about time for ch5 and 6 to be the new am band?

 

[stormy01]

In all seriousness, isn't it about time for ch5 and 6 to be the new am band?

I would be all for 76-88 MHz to be an expanded FM band, and move all the 'graveyarders' and all the AM stations that operate with 'peanut power' at night to go on FM, but that is a dream...not gonna happen! The broadband hogs have their eyes on 76-88 MHz as well as taking more of the UHF band away from OTA broadcasters.

 

[Lazy J]

The broadband hogs have their eyes on 76-88 MHz as well as taking more of the UHF band away from OTA broadcasters.

We have to embrace new technology. Broadband is a far superior product than music or talk. With broadband, I can listen to any song I want, look up weather reports, stream almost any station I want, check my email, make phone calls, etc, etc, etc...

Why should we waste that spectrum by giving it to some broadcaster who will just throw an automation system on there and play a bunch of songs or TV shows that I may or may not like. I'm sorry, but broadcasting in general is becoming out-dated. And AM radio is the - Skywave Interference, Multiple Tower Array, Poor Audio Bandwidth, big dead cow - stinkin' up the room. This is an "Entertainment On Demand" world now and the spectrum would be better used to embrace that.

(I'll go HIDE now... )

 

[davideduardo]

Why should we waste that spectrum by giving it to some broadcaster who will just throw an automation system on there and play a bunch of songs or TV shows that I may or may not like. I'm sorry, but broadcasting in general is becoming out-dated. And AM radio is the - Skywave Interference, Multiple Tower Array, Poor Audio Bandwidth, big dead cow - stinkin' up the room. This is an "Entertainment On Demand" world now and the spectrum would be better used to embrace that.

OK, let's start with cars in the US. The average age of the registered American car is over 8 years, approaching 9. That means, save for a small percentage of aftermarket conversions, that it will take about a decade just to get broadband in half the cars in the country, assuming every car sold starting tomorrow is so equipped and every buyer pays the cost for the services to feed them.

Then we can go on to the other 500 million or so radios in the US... and discuss the added cost of services. Heck, there are millions of homes that still use off-air TV reception because they don't want to pay the average of $600 or $700 a year that cable costs.

Most radio stations will have to move to WiMax or other distribution methods, but it will be a lengthy transition.

 

[Lazy J]

The broadband hogs have their eyes on 76-88 MHz as well as taking more of the UHF band away from OTA broadcasters.

Most radio stations will have to move to WiMax or other distribution methods, but it will be a lengthy transition.

I'm not saying radio needs to do a big digital conversion like they did with DTV. My point is simply that when spectrum does open up (ch5 ch6) we should use it to embrace new technologies like WiMax, and not expand fading technologies like talk and music radio.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm not saying radio needs to do a big digital conversion like they did with DTV. My point is simply that when spectrum does open up (ch5 ch6) we should use it to embrace new technologies like WiMax, and not expand fading technologies like talk and music radio.

I agree with you, then. Radio can not sell 700,000,000 new radios; most radios today are part of a multifunction device... like a car or a clock or iPod dock. It's just not going to work when radio should be realizing we are not in the transmitter business, but in the content business. If AM is perceived as sucking big-time, then any viable programming on AM now should be put on better distribution channels.

 

[Old PD]

I remember back in the early 70's when the decision was made to let the Class IV (now Class C) stations go from 1 Kw Day, 250 watts Night to 1 Kw Fulltime. I remember everyone saying that we would get out so much better at night and have a big increase in listeners.

Unfortunately, the only increase was the power bill. The extra power at night just raised the noise floor and hash at night on the frequencies. No one had any better reception...in fact I think it went down hill.

This idea would just do the same thing, with the added benefit of killing off a lot of small AM stations that are "hanging on by their fingernails".

Not only are you talking about new transmitters, anyone with a directional array will probably have to have everything out to the towers rebuilt or replaced, and oh yes, the power company will have to rebuild the power feed to the station. You can run a 1K transmitter on single phase 220v, but a 10K will need to be fed 3 phase 480. Redi-Kilowatt will be drooling when he brings you that bill.

So you are looking at expenditures way into the six figure mark or more. How many Mom & Pop operations could absorb that much expense? Any station that did not increase their power would be buried under the I-buzz hash. Even people that want to listen will not be able.

This is either a poorly thought out well intentioned proposal, or a Wolf-In-Sheep’s-Clothing proposal to clean out the AM band. It is clear to me that the Gummint believes AM is dead and all of the traditional radio spectrum is just lunch meat for the broadbanders and their VERY big wallets.

 

[Lazy J]

What if the FCC just stopped renewing the licenses of AM stations under say... 10kW?

I know it sounds nuts, but they created all of those little Mom & Pop stations to serve the little communities that didn't have a local station. But I can't think of ANY communities now that aren't served by at least one FM station. Most of the Mom & Pops I know make all their money off the FM and the AM is treated like the step child. Most of them get less than 100 watts at night, if they even bother to stay on at night.

So, I propose that we stop renewing the licenses for anybody under 10kW, and then start increasing the power and patterns for the larger stations and get back to the old clear channel days.

Any Thoughts?

 

[davideduardo]

So, I propose that we stop renewing the licenses for anybody under 10kW, and then start increasing the power and patterns for the larger stations and get back to the old clear channel days.

Any Thoughts?

Hugo Chavez is doing that... not renewing licences. Different reason, same effect: confiscation of private property and displacing many from their jobs.

So, we would keep the 10 kw station on 1570 but not the vastly superior 5 kw station on 550?