FM Translators

[notalkallstatic]

I don’t know if this is the place to post this question, but inquiring minds would like to know:

You purchase an FM Translator, and you don’t have a “main channel,” can the translator become the main channel, or does it (the translator) have to become an LP station? What does it take for an FM Translator to become an FM-LP? Do you need to wait for an application window to open from the FCC, or can you file paperwork (and if approve) it becomes an –LP?

Just curious...

 

[PTBoardOp94]

A translator will remain a translator unless a separate application allows it to change status. A simple sale is not sufficient for a translator to begin originating programming.

I don't know of any form to directly request a conversion from an FX (translator) to LP, but that's not something I'd expect to know.

 

[w9wi]

I don’t know if this is the place to post this question, but inquiring minds would like to know:

You purchase an FM Translator, and you don’t have a “main channel,” can the translator become the main channel, or does it (the translator) have to become an LP station? What does it take for an FM Translator to become an FM-LP? Do you need to wait for an application window to open from the FCC, or can you file paperwork (and if approve) it becomes an –LP?

Just curious...

No, an FM translator may not originate its own programming. It must relay some other station. It may not need to be a station you own -- you may use your translator to relay a station that belongs to someone else, if you have their permission. It can also be the HD2/HD3/HD4 subchannel of some other station. In certain circumstances you may relay AM stations.

There is no route to convert a translator into a LPFM. I suppose you could surrender the translator license for cancellation, and then take out a LPFM license for the same frequency. You'd probably have a pretty lengthy wait for a filing window to open. You should also note that a frequency that's legal for use by a translator may not be legal for use by a LPFM.

 

[nd2023]

I don’t know if this is the place to post this question, but inquiring minds would like to know:

You purchase an FM Translator, and you don’t have a “main channel,” can the translator become the main channel, or does it (the translator) have to become an LP station? What does it take for an FM Translator to become an FM-LP? Do you need to wait for an application window to open from the FCC, or can you file paperwork (and if approve) it becomes an –LP?

Just curious...

No, an FM translator may not originate its own programming. It must relay some other station. It may not need to be a station you own -- you may use your translator to relay a station that belongs to someone else, if you have their permission. It can also be the HD2/HD3/HD4 subchannel of some other station. In certain circumstances you may relay AM stations.

There is no route to convert a translator into a LPFM. I suppose you could surrender the translator license for cancellation, and then take out a LPFM license for the same frequency. You'd probably have a pretty lengthy wait for a filing window to open. You should also note that a frequency that's legal for use by a translator may not be legal for use by a LPFM.

It's easier to program an HD2 of a full power station and translate that on your analog station than to convert a translator into an LPFM.

 

[Nostalgia]

Sounds like you may have just purchased the hardware, not a license. If you can dial the power down to about 250mw you can put it on the air as a part 15 station and broadcast to your neighbors :

I know for a fact that you cannot make a LPFM a translator, and by the explanation my attorney gave me (they are completely different classes of stations) I am sure you cannot go the other way either. Good news for LPFM'ers, congress passed something today for you, but I imagine this is bad for the translator crowd. Didnt read the story, just the headlines.

 

[notalkallstatic]

Thanks for the response everyone. Wasn't planning on buying anything, was just curious. Mind is happily full now. ;D

 

[rfry]

Sounds like you may have just purchased the hardware, not a license. If you can dial the power down to about 250mw you can put it on the air as a part 15 station and broadcast to your neighbors :

Just to note: under § 15.239 the unlicensed use of the FM broadcast band is limited to a field intensity of 250 µV/m in any direction from the transmit antenna -- not to a 250 milliwatt transmitter.

The applied power that a matched 1/2-wave dipole needs at its feedpoint to radiate that maximum legal field is about 11.43 nanowatts (0.000 011 43 milliwatts).

 

[w9wi]

Good news for LPFM'ers, congress passed something today for you, but I imagine this is bad for the translator crowd. Didnt read the story, just the headlines.

I suppose it's *minor* bad news for translators. Under the old rules, there were certain frequencies (3rd adjacent) that could be used by translators but not by LPFMs. Under the new rules, these frequencies will be available to LPFM. So someone wishing to launch a new translator or find a new frequency for an existing one is more likely to find a LPFM was there first.

Given the glacial rate at which the FCC handles applications for either class of station, I suspect the practical effect of this legislation will be nil, other than to improve the chances of existing LPFMs to find a useful alternate frequency when bumped by full-power stations.

(has this bill in fact passed both Houses of Congress? Last I heard it passed the House but hasn't been considered by the Senate.)

 

[TomT]

Yes, it's passed.

LPFM stations, while now allowed on 3rd adjacents, will still have to meet minimum separation rules. Therefore, LPFM's can't be used in many areas where translators can be placed, using the looser rules for translators.

Translators merely have to demonstrate they meet contour protections to existing stations. And there is a loophole in the rule that swallows the intent of the rule--if the overlap area is "uninhabited" then the contour protection rule can be skirted. So we have third and even second adjacent translators proposed based on the argument that the overlap (for the most part--the translator's 100 dbu to the existing station's 60 dbu) occurs only "in the air" or only around the base of the tower.

 

[nd2023]

Speaking of short spacing interference, WMJC and WIGX are both class A's on 94.3 and are less than 40 miles apart. The 60 dBu contours overlap significantly. However, the overlap occurs in the Long Island Sound. On land, there isn't much noticeable interference between the two stations except during tropo.

 

[ChiefEngineer]

LP apparently is secondary service like translators. Some had beenh ramping up to retain something better than secondary service with relocated LP signals being required to be moved by the party dislocating the, Wonder how the NAB got that done? $$$ Chaching

 

[knowbetter]

A translator will remain a translator unless a separate application allows it to change status. A simple sale is not sufficient for a translator to begin originating programming.

I don't know of any form to directly request a conversion from an FX (translator) to LP, but that's not something I'd expect to know.

I asked the commission the same question about 5 months ago...they were pretty clear then by saying NO! I don't think the new "law" will change that.

 

[ChiefEngineer]

AM's cannot use translators for rebroadcast. Hard and fast right? That changed.

While this may be cut and dried to some there have been past applications to change full power FM stations to translators. I found one in Texas that Staff accepted in the 90's without looking hard. It was accepted for filing.

The Licensee later changed his mind. The application was withdrawn.

In this day the expected 20 year holdup on new LP applications is something that has changed. Part of the holdup was the translator glut from 03 (2003) that Staff couldn't finish. Translators then trumped new LP applications. Now they are the same? Is this a way to somehow make them equal and use this belief to end the translator glut?

I still know of thousands of translator applications that were filed expecting regulatory action in a timely manner that are close to 10 years stale. Many can be granted. I think first come first served is still a good Rule.

This messy condition was surely considered when Staff held up the grants of nearly 10 year stale translator applications.

LP broadcasters are dubious in many cases. The "local" New Castle Indiana translator that rebroadcasts with no local programming a satellite service. The "local" Mount Carmel Illinois translator that was co owned with a full power AM and LPTV. When you check the Licensee it never existed. Fake company never filed with the State. Off air now for 3 years. Many others. A few success stories, like WHUM Columbus Indiana.

Are we looking at another way to allow local broadcasters to get on the air by buying transwlators that can then be LP? Like the AM translator deal? Possibly? Staff never lets you know what they are thinking.

The fact that they are secondary like translators makes this curious. Who knows?

I'd like to see the translator mess that was created by staff allowing applications then deciding to put them on hold because they had their heads up M Street: a poorly planned, poorly executed, American value robbing, fiasco. If anyone is interested in my true feelings PM me.

 

[w9wi]

I still know of thousands of translator applications that were filed expecting regulatory action in a timely manner that are close to 10 years stale. Many can be granted. I think first come first served is still a good Rule.

IMHO "first come first served" can be taken two different ways, and I can't really tell which way you're referring to...

- If you're suggesting the translator applications that were filed first should be acted on before the FCC proceeds with LPFM applications (existing or new) that might be mutually-exclusive..

I would suggest the problem is, that there were LPFM applicants who were prepared to file before many of these translator apps were filed, and were prepared to build stations if granted. They were denied the opportunity to file by the FCC's window process. If those LPFM applicants had been allowed to file as soon as they were ready, many would have filed *before* many of the translator applicants - and first come first served would have worked for both services.

- If you're suggesting the FCC should never have adopted the windowing system...

I would agree. It's turned into a huge impediment for all broadcast services, not just LPFM. I've seen some bizarre applications filed as "minor changes" in an attempt to avoid being put on hold for 5-10 years.

LP broadcasters are dubious in many cases. The "local" New Castle Indiana translator that rebroadcasts with no local programming a satellite service. The "local" Mount Carmel Illinois translator that was co owned with a full power AM and LPTV. When you check the Licensee it never existed. Fake company never filed with the State. Off air now for 3 years. Many others. A few success stories, like WHUM Columbus Indiana.

I wish I could remember how the localism requirements got gutted for LPFM. I have two LPFMs within range of my antennas; one is an excellent example of what LPFM should be, and the other one is an excellent example of how the service got, to a large degree, hijacked by the same forces that fueled the "Translator Invasion". (i.e., on the latter station I've never heard even a legal ID, let alone any kind of programming originated from within the station's community.)

 

[notalkallstatic]

I wish I could remember how the localism requirements got gutted for LPFM. I have two LPFMs within range of my antennas; one is an excellent example of what LPFM should be, and the other one is an excellent example of how the service got, to a large degree, hijacked by the same forces that fueled the "Translator Invasion". (i.e., on the latter station I've never heard even a legal ID, let alone any kind of programming originated from within the station's community.)

Just curious, what station is the "excellent example of what LPFM should be"? What makes it special to you?

 

[ChiefEngineer]

I still know of thousands of translator applications that were filed expecting regulatory action in a timely manner that are close to 10 years stale. Many can be granted. I think first come first served is still a good Rule.

IMHO "first come first served" can be taken two different ways, and I can't really tell which way you're referring to...

- If you're suggesting the translator applications that were filed first should be acted on before the FCC proceeds with LPFM applications (existing or new) that might be mutually-exclusive..

I would suggest the problem is, that there were LPFM applicants who were prepared to file before many of these translator apps were filed, and were prepared to build stations if granted. They were denied the opportunity to file by the FCC's window process. If those LPFM applicants had been allowed to file as soon as they were ready, many would have filed *before* many of the translator applicants - and first come first served would have worked for both services.

- If you're suggesting the FCC should never have adopted the windowing system...

I would agree. It's turned into a huge impediment for all broadcast services, not just LPFM. I've seen some bizarre applications filed as "minor changes" in an attempt to avoid being put on hold for 5-10 years.

LP broadcasters are dubious in many cases. The "local" New Castle Indiana translator that rebroadcasts with no local programming a satellite service. The "local" Mount Carmel Illinois translator that was co owned with a full power AM and LPTV. When you check the Licensee it never existed. Fake company never filed with the State. Off air now for 3 years. Many others. A few success stories, like WHUM Columbus Indiana.

I wish I could remember how the localism requirements got gutted for LPFM. I have two LPFMs within range of my antennas; one is an excellent example of what LPFM should be, and the other one is an excellent example of how the service got, to a large degree, hijacked by the same forces that fueled the "Translator Invasion". (i.e., on the latter station I've never heard even a legal ID, let alone any kind of programming originated from within the station's community.)

My comments were in re the translator "window" that allowed application to be filed the Staff has not acted on in nearly a decade.

I won't guess the thinking of LPFM versus translator because I fully expected LPFM with local service to become protected. Hasn't happened.

If the FCC issues "Rules' and places a window for new applications wouldn't that mean they would be processed and not put on hold for almost 10 years? Several applications can be granted or are available to be granted that haven't been. Why?

The applications were accepted for filing then placed "on hold". The LPFM status hasn't changed. Many LPFM people would file but this hasn't been allowed. If a window opens will they (now in an equal status to translators) be allowed to be granted or just hosed like they were in the last window?

Open an LPFM window with a set of Rules then change AFTER the window closes. This process seems to be Monty Python in application. The hundreds of LP aps should be MPFM. Applications that applicants spent thousands on filing then being told: We held the lottery and yes you should have palced but we changed the numbers. Spam Spam Spam and Spam.

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

If you want to see the holy Grail of staff boo-boos go take a look at KTTL in Alva, OK. Some staffer goofed that one up big-time years ago and it's still just sitting there in limbo.