Expect a tidal wave of LP's to come rushing in

[JHBrandt]

Finally!

After a year and a half, on 12/3 the FCC granted K31GL's application to move from RF 31 to RF 33. Their situation is now similar to KJJM.

In their applications both stations claimed adjacent-channel interference (from KDAF and KDFW, respectively), but the proposed displacements also involve antenna changes that would reduce their coverage more than the ACI I expect either is receiving, so I suspect that ACI was mostly a lame excuse. (To be fair, K31GL's application also includes a power increase to 15 kW, the maximum for UHF LPTV.)

I doubt either station will actually move at this point, since both seem to be doing fine at their current frequencies. But we'll see.

 

[Bob E. Nelson]

Re: Finally!

After a year and a half, on 12/3 the FCC granted K31GL's application to move from RF 31 to RF 33. Their situation is now similar to KJJM.

In their applications both stations claimed adjacent-channel interference (from KDAF and KDFW, respectively), but the proposed displacements also involve antenna changes that would reduce their coverage more than the ACI I expect either is receiving, so I suspect that ACI was mostly a lame excuse. (To be fair, K31GL's application also includes a power increase to 15 kW, the maximum for UHF LPTV.)

I doubt either station will actually move at this point, since both seem to be doing fine at their current frequencies. But we'll see.

I'm inclined to agree with your evaluation of the K31GL and KJJM situation. Both of these applications were submitted by an engineer who is no longer listed as being with MAKO. Like you, I don't think it would be prudent to move either station.

On the subject of MAKO, when KHPK/28 lights up, it ought to have solid signal. The CP calls for an HAAT of 1289', sharing K31GL's antenna. Given the unpredictable weather at this time of the year, it'll probably be a few months before any of the pending CPs actually get built out at Cedar Hill or atop the Bank of America Tower.

 

[JHBrandt]

KSEX <--> KBOP

KSEX has filed another application for 20 digital with the FCC. This latest attempt keeps the directional antenna (to avoid interference with KWBU in Waco) but boosts the ERP to 15 kW, the maximum allowed for a digital LPTV station.

It took a while, but on May 11, the FCC granted KSEX's construction permit, so they may return to the airwaves soon. Oh joy, more infomercials : You'd think with those call letters, they could come up with something more interesting

And now KSEX has swapped call signs with San Diego station KBOP. So now, DFW has KBOP (or will have it if/when they get back on the air), and San Diego has KSEX.

I wonder if this means anything regarding what their programming will be. Nah, probably not....

 

[JHBrandt]

And now the FCC has told KQFW "no" to channel 24. Since they want to broadcast from Garland rather than Cedar Hill, they're expected to cause too much interference to HSN/25 near the Garland transmitter. (They're too low power to cause significant interference to KUVN/23.) Oh well, so much for DFW having consecutive virtual channels from 20 to 29 :

To look at it from another angle, it seems like the FCC told KQFW something more like: "not so fast, my friend."

They've given KQFW the chance to file a minor amendment within 30 days to clear up the interference concerns. What makes this interesting is that KQFW's initial filing doesn't indicate any interference (as I read it) to the actual K25FW facility now on the air (DTV). There is interference shown to K25FW's recently shutdown analog plant.

Here's the QRM report for the channel 24 application:

https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS...?appn=101377388&qnum=5100&copynum=1&exhcnum=1

Although the figures are in a red attribute, it shows 0.0%/0.0% for what I surmise are the interference columns for the currently-operational K25FW facility (which is now a Dallas station, no longer licensed to Corsicana).

Apparently the FCC's analysis disagreed with KQFW's: their letter (here) claims interference to both the old (analog) and new (digital) transmitters, but it didn't include any details.

I don't know which analysis is correct. I would've expected KQFW's digital signal to be more likely to interfere with an adjacent digital signal than an adjacent analog one, but KQFW's analysis shows the opposite, so maybe it's a bit suspect. (OTOH, even the 0.4% QRM shown for the old analog facility would've been well within the FCC's 2% threshold for other LP stations. It'd surprise me if their analysis was that far off.)

Another option for KQFW I didn't cover above would be reduced power. The lower the power, the smaller the "QRM zone" around KQFW's transmitter will be, and they probably don't need a full 15 kW to reach their target audience.

And now it's all moot. KQFW sat on their hands and let the FCC dismiss their application for RF 24. They still have the out-of-core CP for RF 56 :-\

 

[eskipper411]

And in less than 2 years after I made this thread, that tidal wave of low powers is growing at a fast rate.