Is There Room For LPFM's In New York?

[Barry]

The F.C.C. has been expending considerable effort into opening up frequencies nationwide to community oriented low power FM stations. They have issued guidelines they will follow to balance the amount of new translators licensed with applications for LPFM's that will be granted.
Can space for a few LPFM signals be found within New York City's highly crowded FM spectrum?
Which groups/communities in the area are significantly underserved by the current radio stations, and could benefit most from a LPFM?

F.C.C. On Translator vs. LPFM Applicationshttp: www.radiosurvivor.com/2012/03/19/fc...-for-new-low-power-community-radio-stations/:

 

[satech]

Is that a rhetorical question? Because obviously the pirates have used up available FM frequency in and around NYC. So unless you can kick them off a channel for good, there will be no room for LPFMs -- unless the FCC suddenly declares amnesty and starts giving LPFM licenses to the pirates!

 

[Ai4i]

What pirates do is totally irrelevant for licensing purposes.
Frequencies will likely be divied in some convoluted basis, of course LPFM's still need to protect 3'rd adjacencies, so nothing is available anywhere in the country's largest markets.
Also, remember that a translator on the ESB could be ¼kw but an LPFM at that height would be reduced from 100w @ 30m to one watt @ 300m. The power vs height reduction ratio is aproximately a square rooting.
LPFM city grade contours extend about 3½ miles and primary grade contours go to 5½ miles. An LPFM could maybe half decently serve any single burrough.

 

[w9wi]

...of course LPFM's still need to protect 3'rd adjacencies, so nothing is available anywhere in the country's largest markets.

Not anymore. The FCC released a document yesterday finally implementing the Congressional repeal of the blanket ban on 3rd-adjacent LPFMs. There are however still stricter protection limits on 3rd-adjacents than on 4th-adjacents. (which are completely unrestricted)

Now, with stations every 800KHz in NYC, de-regulating 3rd-adjacents will not in itself make LPFMs possible there. (the only unused frequencies are all 1st or 2nd-adjacent to *something*) But they're asking for comments on the criteria for issuing waivers to the 2nd-adjacent restrictions. It is possible some of these splits may become available.

 

[badjef]

Let's look at this as a translator frequency. If 106.3 in Manhattan (hypothetically) wanted to turn it into an LPFM, could that be done?

Personally, I don't believe that would be allowed.

The IF from WPLJ would lend to interference 106.3 would have to put up with. If the 106.3 were located near Empire, the chances are the interference from the IF of 95.5 would almost make the signal of 106.3 disappear on most radios.

The 800khz spacing is an absolute in NYC. Count, starting at 88.3 and add .8 until you get to 107.5. those are the "25"(5 non-comm, plus 20 commercial) If you find a freq, add or subtract 10.7 to find out about the IF interference. Remember about aircraft freqs. above 107.9, since the flight paths are over The City for approach to La Guardia.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

 

[secondchoice]

Jeff might have have something. I wonder if the FCC could "rework" the allocations nationally? I know that sometime in the past 1930's or early 1940's there was a major realigning of the AM band.* The old allocations were based originally on old tube technology. What really needs to happen is the FCC to require FM receivers to be able to handle 2 adjacent city grade signals. I has been my personal experience that most of the digital tuners can handle adjacent stations at a distance of more than 30 miles and IIRC the digital TV stations can be very close to each other with their OTA signals

* I know there were few stations back then but some one with an advance degree and a computer might be able to do this now.

 

[WNTIRadio]

You think all the broadcasters are going to go for new antennas or new combiners in a master system? Then add the cost of tower rigging to get that all done. And then the stations that don't have broadbanded transmitters having to buy a new one??

Your idea, while noble, is dead on arrival.

As far as LPFM in NYC... no. Could it work in the real world? Yes. Using FCC rules, no.

 

[secondchoice]

You think all the broadcasters are going to go for new antennas or new combiners in a master system? Then add the cost of tower rigging to get that all done. And then the stations that don't have broadbanded transmitters having to buy a new one??

I forgot one part of my idea. Move in's have made the diversity in the "City of License" requirement a joke. License stations to the top 200 or 300 MSAs. WHTZ's COL is Newark. Except for the station ID and the required public affairs program usually aired during super low listener ship time is WHTZ really a Newark station? WHTZ to the best of my knowledge is perfectly legal and they are following the following the rules. I am just using them to show the ridiculousness of the idea of having every incorporated city having a licensed station.

I know the economics of Radio are not as good as TV but TV mostly* went digital and I have not heard of a bunch of TV station owners "turning in their license" because they could not afford new transmission systems. Most modern transmitters are frequency agile. Modern solid state transmitters "pay for themselves" in electric costs over 40 or more year old tube rigs. BTW there are a couple of threads about the lack of quality and cost of tubes over on the engineering threads, so the difficulty and expense of getting parts for some of the old rigs could "doom" a lot of the old transmitters anyway. If a station is that weak financially it is just a matter of another economic downturn and they are gone anyway. Most community antenna systems are frequency agile by design so the only the combiners would need modified. If you are using a narrow band antenna then you might have to change it out, but if you are licensed to the MSA (NY NY) for example there most likely is a community antenna system in your "city" / MSA of license.


*The rural stations will still play the COL game.

**IIRC there are some analog LPTV's

 

[WDAE-FM101]

If your idea could be implemented, a possible outcome could be the elimination of the 100.3 and 101.1 short spacing between NY and Philly

 

[XCountry285]

Philly's 100.3 and 101.1 should move to at least 100.9 or 100.5. Why did they allow them to sign on after NYC's 100.3 & 101.1 signed on? With DC having 100.3 and 101.1 they are extremely crappy signals for Philly Listeners. It doesn't matter to me because I'm in the NYC market. But that is something I never understood? If anything move 100.7 in the LV to 100.5 while 101.1 goes to 100.9 FM.

 

[XCountry285]

for LPFM's put them in areas around NYC & same with Translators. Put some in areas like West Milford, Paterson, Newark, Jefferson, Sussex, Morristown, Garden City, Mahwah, Union City. If you put translators away from the city rather than in them you'll have less worrying about interference. Up in Passaic County you could easily put a station on 94.3 or 95.9 or 92.7 (protecting WRRV) or 106.3 & 107.9.

 

[WNTIRadio]

I know the economics of Radio are not as good as TV but TV mostly* went digital and I have not heard of a bunch of TV station owners "turning in their license" because they could not afford new transmission systems. Most modern transmitters are frequency agile. Modern solid state transmitters "pay for themselves" in electric costs over 40 or more year old tube rigs. BTW there are a couple of threads about the lack of quality and cost of tubes over on the engineering threads, so the difficulty and expense of getting parts for some of the old rigs could "doom" a lot of the old transmitters anyway. If a station is that weak financially it is just a matter of another economic downturn and they are gone anyway. Most community antenna systems are frequency agile by design so the only the combiners would need modified. If you are using a narrow band antenna then you might have to change it out, but if you are licensed to the MSA (NY NY) for example there most likely is a community antenna system in your "city" / MSA of license.

There are plenty of stations that "aren't that weak" but can't afford $100k outlay for a new transmission facility. Otherwise, they are holding their own and employ people, thus feeding them and putting a roof over their heads. Lots of mom and pop owners and small groups are still out there. There is one in my town. It does well, stays afloat, but a cash outlay like that would probably result in a couple staffers being laid off.

My point is, before you make a statement like that, think about the actual real people that still do work at a lot of these stations. Do you really want them to go away? Sure the big boys in NYC can afford it, but if you're going to re allocate the entire country, that's a lot of stations that can't afford it, but are still financially afloat.

Sometimes people on this board think of radio stations as chess pieces, and not actual business that employ people and keep them off the unemployment lines.

 

[w9wi]

Let's look at this as a translator frequency. If 106.3 in Manhattan (hypothetically) wanted to turn it into an LPFM, could that be done?

Personally, I don't believe that would be allowed.

Taken literally, you're right -- there's no legal path to convert a translator into a LPFM.

Whether a LPFM could be licensed with the same facilities as the translator... again, you're probably right...

Don't have the time to run the numbers but I'd be surprised if there's adequate spacing to suburban Class A's. That, and since they'd need a 2nd-adjacent waiver, they're going to have the same actual interference issues the translator had.

 

[secondchoice]

I know the economics of Radio are not as good as TV but TV mostly* went digital and I have not heard of a bunch of TV station owners "turning in their license" because they could not afford new transmission systems. Most modern transmitters are frequency agile. Modern solid state transmitters "pay for themselves" in electric costs over 40 or more year old tube rigs. BTW there are a couple of threads about the lack of quality and cost of tubes over on the engineering threads, so the difficulty and expense of getting parts for some of the old rigs could "doom" a lot of the old transmitters anyway. If a station is that weak financially it is just a matter of another economic downturn and they are gone anyway. Most community antenna systems are frequency agile by design so the only the combiners would need modified. If you are using a narrow band antenna then you might have to change it out, but if you are licensed to the MSA (NY NY) for example there most likely is a community antenna system in your "city" / MSA of license.

There are plenty of stations that "aren't that weak" but can't afford $100k outlay for a new transmission facility. Otherwise, they are holding their own and employ people, thus feeding them and putting a roof over their heads. Lots of mom and pop owners and small groups are still out there. There is one in my town. It does well, stays afloat, but a cash outlay like that would probably result in a couple staffers being laid off.

My point is, before you make a statement like that, think about the actual real people that still do work at a lot of these stations. Do you really want them to go away? Sure the big boys in NYC can afford it, but if you're going to re allocate the entire country, that's a lot of stations that can't afford it, but are still financially afloat.

Sometimes people on this board think of radio stations as chess pieces, and not actual business that employ people and keep them off the unemployment lines.

I agree a lot of companies would choke on $100,000 at one time. I do not want to see anybody canned, but this would be considered a capitol expense and could be financed as such. $100K @ 8% for 10 years =1213.28. per month.* Do not worry there are too many big operations (with good lobbyist) what would fight this tooth and nail because it would allow a few more competitors with good signals to challenge their over leveraged clusters.

*Electric rated vary but a 30 or 40 year old 15 KW tube transmitter verses a solid state (or one final tube) transmitter will make this a smaller cash expense.

 

[Ai4i]

...think about the actual real people that still do work at a lot of these stations. Do you really want them to go away?Sometimes people on this board think of radio stations as chess pieces, and not actual business that employ people and keep them off the unemployment lines.

Tell me I am being heartless and don't care for real live humans, but what you are saying is not a consideration.
People lose their jobs, their homes, and their life savings all the time, but they rarely starve to death.
These are not considerations in a market economy.
The only decisions that have any merit are those of what serves the consumers best.

 

[ka2xuk]

Philly's 100.3 and 101.1 should move to at least 100.9 or 100.5. Why did they allow them to sign on after NYC's 100.3 & 101.1 signed on?

That dates back to the early days of the current FM band. An engineer by the name of Kesten, who worked for CBS, came up with the "Single Market Plan", which aimed to limit FM coverage to a single market. This was done to protect the networks' investment in the 50 kW flamethrower AM stations, as ABC and NBC concurred with Kesten's idea. This maximized the power of what are now Class B stations at 20 kW ERP and allowed a lot of short spacings in the Boston-Washington urban corridor. When the maximum Class B power was raised to 50 kW ERP, the short spacings were grandfathered.

Philly's 100.3 and 101.1 should be 100.5 and 101.3, if the same bandplan used in San Francisco is followed...but then there would be problems with first-adjacents in Wildwood and Allentown on 100.7 and with a co-channel station in Lancaster on 101.3. The allocations in both Philly and New York are pretty much boxed in and the FCC would have to do a wholesale change to Paragraph 73.202 of the Rules (the FM Table of Allocations) in order to implement different channel spacings in the urbanized areas. LPFMs may be able to be shoehorned in, much as second-adjacent stations abound in the noncommercial part of the band in the NYC metro. But don't look for any of the big Class B stations to be moved.

 

[1069_KIFR]

No.

 

[WNTIRadio]

Tell me I am being heartless and don't care for real live humans, but what you are saying is not a consideration.
People lose their jobs, their homes, and their life savings all the time, but they rarely starve to death.
These are not considerations in a market economy.
The only decisions that have any merit are those of what serves the consumers best

I sure hope I never wind up working for you anywhere.

No, small stations still do care about their staff and will help them, and the community out in a time of need. You should try it sometime, your heart may grow 3 times today...

 

[badjef]

Philly's 100.3 and 101.1 should move to at least 100.9 or 100.5. Why did they allow them to sign on after NYC's 100.3 & 101.1 signed on?

That dates back to the early days of the current FM band. An engineer by the name of Kesten, who worked for CBS, came up with the "Single Market Plan", which aimed to limit FM coverage to a single market. This was done to protect the networks' investment in the 50 kW flamethrower AM stations, as ABC and NBC concurred with Kesten's idea. This maximized the power of what are now Class B stations at 20 kW ERP and allowed a lot of short spacings in the Boston-Washington urban corridor. When the maximum Class B power was raised to 50 kW ERP, the short spacings were grandfathered.

Philly's 100.3 and 101.1 should be 100.5 and 101.3, if the same bandplan used in San Francisco is followed...but then there would be problems with first-adjacents in Wildwood and Allentown on 100.7 and with a co-channel station in Lancaster on 101.3. The allocations in both Philly and New York are pretty much boxed in and the FCC would have to do a wholesale change to Paragraph 73.202 of the Rules (the FM Table of Allocations) in order to implement different channel spacings in the urbanized areas. LPFMs may be able to be shoehorned in, much as second-adjacent stations abound in the noncommercial part of the band in the NYC metro. But don't look for any of the big Class B stations to be moved.

Z100, in the former life of 100.3 was 100.5, licensed to Red Bank. The allocation for WKMK in Eatontown, was at 105.5 and was a filling of the Red Bank allocation after the 100.5 moved in to New York City as one of the "25". WKSZ, returned 100.3 to the airwaves in '82, in Philly, but that was in litigation for years dating back to the days to be grandfathered. It is this grandfathering that I believe 105.9 and 94.7 can use to become full "B"'s if, and when, someone wants to use a precedent for their argument. The folks at WNYC may not be looking into it because of funding. Remember the many challenges to the 105.9 license over the years can be looked at as reason for not taking advantage to the upgrade. Family didn't care with 94.7, but may now.

If Emmis can still be close enough to Empire to use West Orange as a backup, then, why can't it be used in the reverse?
(step 3?, maybe)

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

 

[DJBigOne]

Tell me I am being heartless and don't care for real live humans, but what you are saying is not a consideration.
People lose their jobs, their homes, and their life savings all the time, but they rarely starve to death.
These are not considerations in a market economy.
The only decisions that have any merit are those of what serves the consumers best

I sure hope I never wind up working for you anywhere.

No, small stations still do care about their staff and will help them, and the community out in a time of need. You should try it sometime, your heart may grow 3 times today...

Maybe that's a good question for bean counters that arbitrarily lay off good talent, managers, etc. Do they care? Unfortunately, in today's job market, the only thing that seems to matter is the bottom line.

Yes, there are small market owners/managers that wish to take care of their staff. I worked in 3 small markets. The bad news is few can afford to live on small market wages. I chose to go back to better paying engineering work.