KKVI is illegal

[93-3TheSurge]

Dan did you watch any of the videos I posted? You'd find all those answers there. No. There IS no KKVI. No tower, No antenna, No carrier on that frequency - no ID. Nothing. It doesn't exist. It's just a front. Period.

That's good info, Avenger. This seems like it would be the best time to purchase K240DS from the religious zealots broadcasters and make the superstation a reality!

K240DS Garland
KFWR---Mineral Wells
KSCH---Sulphur Springs
KCKL---Malakoff

All within 75 miles of Downtown Dallas!!

 

[radi0avenger]

That's interesting Mike. According to the FCC database, KKVI went "on the air" 07/18/2008. One can only assume k240ds has been carrying the HCCN folks for quite some time (like, since 07/18/2008???)

I find it interesting that I keep getting hits on the wordpress blog from a Garland TX IP. Granted I know there are LOTS of people in Garland... but one appears overly interested.

 

[dfwrunner]

Dan did you watch any of the videos I posted? You'd find all those answers there. No. There IS no KKVI. No tower, No antenna, No carrier on that frequency - no ID. Nothing. It doesn't exist. It's just a front. Period.

That's good info, Avenger. This seems like it would be the best time to purchase K240DS from the religious zealots broadcasters and make the superstation a reality!

K240DS Garland
KFWR---Mineral Wells
KSCH---Sulphur Springs
KCKL---Malakoff

All within 75 miles of Downtown Dallas!!

radio-locator shows kkvi is near sulphur springs and licensed to Overland with repeater at k240DS in gGarland. KKVI is on 89.9.

 

[radi0avenger]

radio-locator shows kkvi is near sulphur springs and licensed to Overland with repeater at k240DS in gGarland. KKVI is on 89.9.

Correct. except that there IS NO transmitter. No signal. Nothing on 89.9. Plus the previous poster was referring to the Garland translator, not the KKVI station/frequency itself

 

[arnoldevns]

radio-locator shows kkvi is near sulphur springs and licensed to Overland with repeater at k240DS in gGarland. KKVI is on 89.9.

That's the point. It appears these people hold a license for a station in a small town that was never built and does not exist - for the sole purpose of running a translator in a major market. If that's the case, that's illegal. It's not really a translator at all, it's originating programming. It seems to me the word fraud would probably apply here, but I'm no legal expert.

What should really bother people about this is the fact that someone can go through the application process for a station and tell the FCC they've built the station and get the license for it without ever having anyone from the FCC check to see if they did what they said they were doing.

 

[radi0avenger]

http://kkviillegal.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/k240ds-antenna-pictures

Translator antenna pictures posted.

And yes Tested, the FCC translator rules say a translator (unless it gets a special waiver) must receive the originating station OFF AIR. With an ANTENNA. Obviously if Garland was doing that, they'd be playing static.

 

[dfwrunner]

http://kkviillegal.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/k240ds-antenna-pictures

Translator antenna pictures posted.

And yes Tested, the FCC translator rules say a translator (unless it gets a special waiver) must receive the originating station OFF AIR. With an ANTENNA. Obviously if Garland was doing that, they'd be playing static.

Wouldn't it be better to just report it to the FCC and let them investigate? Why tip off the bad guys by posting here?

 

[radi0avenger]

The only reason I've posted the info here is because there have been quite a few comments/complaints from the folks here, and I thought I'd solve the puzzle of whether kkvi was a real station or not. If it hadn't been for the guys on here, I probably wouldn't have gotten up off my rear end and gone looking

 

[317C50KW]

A/B ing KDFT-540 and K240DS this afternoon on the way home from work, I found different programming on both from 5:40 PM to 6:30 PM. They probably have no relationship.

 

[93-3TheSurge]

Wouldn't it be better to just report it to the FCC and let them investigate? Why tip off the bad guys by posting here?

You should change your name from dfwrunner to Debbie Downer. It seems like the only posts you contribute are of the "negative criticism" variety.

Just a thought...

 

[LibertyNT]

Anyone could've told ya 95.9 was bad.

 

[jd]

I'd still like to know what sort of an arrangement the people in Garland have with Edgewater Broadcasting out of Twin Falls, Idaho. Not that I care about Edgewater, one of the religious band-hogs who applied for 1700 translators and were granted well over 400, but the license for K240DS is still in their name. Wouldn't they be interested in knowing that license is apparently being jeopardized, or do they care?

 

[dfwrunner]

Wouldn't it be better to just report it to the FCC and let them investigate? Why tip off the bad guys by posting here?

You should change your name from dfwrunner to Debbie Downer. It seems like the only posts you contribute are of the "negative criticism" variety.

Just a thought...

:

 

[davideduardo]

People don't realize that WE all pay for the massive tax cuts and benefits they get.

The fact that non-profit organizations do not pay taxes on their income and on much of their property is a long standing principle of our republic. The art museum and the symphony, the center for autistic children, the non-profit hospitals and health clinics as well as churches are not taxed because the broad spectrum of non-profit organizations delivers services much more efficiently than the government can and should be encouraged.

You may disagree with one religion or another, or be agnostic or atheist in your beliefs, but when you look at the overall non-profit sector you should be able to recognize the good done by it as a whole and the fact that they put in more than they take out.

I may disagree with one non-profit's stance on abortion or immigration or such, but I don't deny each organization's existence. Since the principal funding of may is personal donations, given by individuals and families who have already paid taxes on their income, why worry about what these organizations do with money others have given freely?

 

[azumanga]

the FCC translator rules say a translator (unless it gets a special waiver) must receive the originating station OFF AIR. With an ANTENNA. Obviously if Garland was doing that, they'd be playing static.

Of course, there are many translators that popped up the last several years that get its programming from a satellite source, with the station its sourcing it from being a thousand miles away or so.

In a license for a translator, if they state a station it is sourcing, must it source that station?

Nevertheless, the owners of K240DS are still on the hook for fraud, as the station it is sourcing only exists in FCC records, with no physical plant of any kind.

 

[johndavis]

Of course, there are many translators that popped up the last several years that get its programming from a satellite source, with the station its sourcing it from being a thousand miles away or so.

In a license for a translator, if they state a station it is sourcing, must it source that station?

In the non-comm section of the band, a non-comm station can feed a translator over satellite. It's the rule put in there for state public radio networks that Moody Bible turned into a huge loophole for religious radio. However, this translator isn't in the non-comm section of the band. Therefore, it can only be fed over the air. As in use a receive antenna and tuner and not a sat dish, internet stream, or STL.

As for what's on the license, yes you can change what station you're carrying; you just put a letter in your public file from the station that you're retransmitting stating that you have permission to carry them. I don't think you have to file anything with the commission to make that change.

 

[LibertyNT]

HD would be a waste on 95.9

but here's an interesting snippet from their site.

KKVI IS BROADCASTING PROGRAMMING FROM HCCN SPANISH CHRISTIAN NETWORK TEMPORARILY, OUR REGULAR PROGRAMMING WILL RESUME SOON,YOU CAN LISTEN FROM THIS SITE TO OUR REGULAR COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING.JUST CLICK ON COMMUNITY RADIO.

Also Here is the Format they will be when the Spanish ends. MOR. When was the last time you heard an MOR station.

Our format consists of community-based information with MOR (middle-of-the-road, non-offensive) music. Weekends from Saturday 12:00 Noon - Sunday Evening, we provide a Christian broadcast with various Gospel music and Christian ministry.

Also Here is their Coverage map. I would love to know how they figure their HD will go that far.
http://www.kkviradio.com/coveragemap.php

 

[radi0avenger]

but here's an interesting snippet from their site.

KKVI IS BROADCASTING PROGRAMMING FROM HCCN SPANISH CHRISTIAN NETWORK TEMPORARILY, OUR REGULAR PROGRAMMING WILL RESUME SOON,YOU CAN LISTEN FROM THIS SITE TO OUR REGULAR COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING.JUST CLICK ON COMMUNITY RADIO.

They've had that on their site for at least 9 months.

 

[jd]

Also Here is their Coverage map. I would love to know how they figure their HD will go that far.
http://www.kkviradio.com/coveragemap.php

They made it up, literally. As talked about on the 95.9 thread, what's displayed is a Longley-Rice model using a V-Soft Communications program, based on a 1,000 watt station on 88.1 with an antenna height of roughly 550 feet. Interestingly, whoever did this "proposed" coverage plugged in coordinates that are pretty close to the school on State Street in Garland. They also used a power level that's four times the highest power allowed for translators (as radi0avanger mentioned); the maximum of 250 watts is for a relatively short height above average terrain (about 350 feet or less) and as the height goes up the ERP has to come down. If a translator were to use a 550 foot antenna it would be limited to just 92 watts, so using a "model" map with those parameters as a representation of the Garland translator's [HD] coverage is ridiculous.

The map below it is from Radio-Locator, of course, but it's old information depicting their coverage (60dBu "service area") from a site near downtown Garland. A prior application had specified that location, nowhere close to what became their "officially" licensed site off I-30 and Bobtown.

 

[fybush]

They also used a power level that's four times the highest power allowed for translators (as radi0avanger mentioned); the maximum of 250 watts is for a relatively short height above average terrain (about 350 feet or less) and as the height goes up the ERP has to come down. If a translator were to use a 550 foot antenna it would be limited to just 92 watts, so using a "model" map with those parameters as a representation of the Garland translator's [HD] coverage is ridiculous.

While I agree that the made-up coverage map is ridiculous, I'm compelled to point out that the FCC does not, in fact, height-derate translators in the same way that it derates full-power stations. (Translators don't have to specify a height above average terrain on their applications.) Look, for instance, at W250BC "Riverdale, Georgia," which is actually on one of the big Atlanta FM towers. 250 watts at 324 meters above ground, which gives it facilities almost equal to a 6 kW class A derated for that height.

The only requirement that has to be met is that the translator's 60 dBu contour can't exceed the primary station's 60, and that's only if it's a co-owned fill-in translator.

One other minor correction to the original poster's otherwise well-researched investigation: there is not, in fact, any current requirement in the FCC rules that the legal ID be in English.