overpowered stations that are not recognized as such

[bobdavcav]

What's up with this? Many stations in Salt Lake City run 25 kw at 1140 meters, but the maximum power for that haat is supposed to be only 24 kw. WRQX in DC runs 19.5 kw at 246 meters, but the maximum for a class B is only 19 kw at that haat. KWPZ in Lyndon, WA runs 68 kw at 711 meters, but the maximum erp for a class C at that haat is 67 kw. Back to Salt Lake for a moment, it looks like KUUU should be running 490 watts, not 500 watts. Last but not least, how is WBIG able to get away with 50 kw at 152 meters when maximum haat for a class B is 150 meters? http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/fmpower.html

 

[ftballfan]

What's up with this? Many stations in Salt Lake City run 25 kw at 1140 meters, but the maximum power for that haat is supposed to be only 24 kw. WRQX in DC runs 19.5 kw at 246 meters, but the maximum for a class B is only 19 kw at that haat. KWPZ in Lyndon, WA runs 68 kw at 711 meters, but the maximum erp for a class C at that haat is 67 kw. Back to Salt Lake for a moment, it looks like KUUU should be running 490 watts, not 500 watts. Last but not least, how is WBIG able to get away with 50 kw at 152 meters when maximum haat for a class B is 150 meters? http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/fmpower.html

There are quite a few B's that are 50kW/152m (WTNR in Holland, MI is another example)

 

[fybush]

B was originally defined as 50 kW/500' (152m) instead of the present 50 kW/150 m (~492'). Anything that was authorized prior to that slight change in the rules is effectively grandfathered as very slightly overpower.

In practice, the difference between 19 kW and 19.5 kW is going to be nearly zero.

 

[w9wi]

How did you calculate the 24kw figure for SLC? FCC online calculator?

I've noticed the same thing -- a very large number of stations that are just *slightly* overpower like that. I suspect most of them used the propagation curves in a *printed* copy of the FCC regulations to arrive at those figures. Best I can tell there is no formula for deriving the printed curves -- the code driving the FCC website was engineered to match the printed curves as closely as possible. And it's probably not quite right at many figures of HAAT. It would be interesting to see what the printed charts show as the ERP for a HAAT of 1140m.

Note also that the rules call for ERPs to be rounded to specific figures. If the curves show you should get 24,718 watts, something else will be printed on your license. (I don't have the rule in question handy, but I'm betting your license would say either 24,500 or 25,000)

Of course, Scott has it with regard to the large number of Class B stations authorized for 50kw/152m.

 

[bobdavcav]

Yep, it was with the program I listed above. The unrounded ERP was something like 23998 or something like that. The same thing happened with KWPZ being at 711, the rounded ERP was something like 66930 watts. Although 10 watts may not make that much of a difference, I am a little surprised that KUUU isn't 490 watts, as that's what the calculator said a C2 should be running at 1198 meters.

 

[ftballfan]

The Humpy rimshots run 89kW/647m, when the maximum ERP according to FMpower for a Class C at 647m HAAT is only 84kW

 

[bobdavcav]

Hmm that's the biggest overpowered stick I've found yet. An example I forgot in my original post was the Boizee stations, many of which run 54 kw at 786 meters, when the maximum ERP for that haat should be 52 kw.

 

[ftballfan]

Found one in Knoxville, TN: WCYQ (100.3) is 100kW at a HAAT of 610 meters.

On the other hand, there are several Cs and C0s in New Orleans, LA that run 95kW at 300 meters. Those stations can be downgraded to C1 without any other changes.

 

[w9wi]

WCYQ is, like the 50kw/152m stations, a beneficiary of the old non-metric limits. 610m=2,000', the old antenna height limit for a Class C station.

 

[bobdavcav]

Yes those could be downgraded. One I don't understand is WXOS, which runs 100 kw at 300.4 meters but is a C1. Shouldn't it be a C0?

 

[ftballfan]

WCYQ is, like the 50kw/152m stations, a beneficiary of the old non-metric limits. 610m=2,000', the old antenna height limit for a Class C station.

Basically the A's were helped by metricization (reference HAAT was 300ft=91m) while B's and C's were not helped.

Yes those could be downgraded. One I don't understand is WXOS, which runs 100 kw at 300.4 meters but is a C1. Shouldn't it be a C0?

Another question: Why isn't C1 100kW/300m? Every other class has a reference HAAT ending in either 50 or 100.

 

[bobdavcav]

Here's one that's a little offtopic since it isn't an overpowered station, but how can WSPA-FM change the oerating haat from 580 meters to 581.4 meters with no other changes to its facilities? I was kind of curious about permits for this station because I thought they had to move east a bit to avoid being shortspaced to a 98.7 that was being upgraded?

 

[w9wi]

Here's one that's a little offtopic since it isn't an overpowered station, but how can WSPA-FM change the oerating haat from 580 meters to 581.4 meters with no other changes to its facilities? I was kind of curious about permits for this station because I thought they had to move east a bit to avoid being shortspaced to a 98.7 that was being upgraded?

Reading the application, there are no actual technical changes to WSPA-FM. They recalculated the HAAT using updated terrain data.

The application also says the changes required to accommodate WLCZ-98.7 were to WSPA's *reference* coordinates, not the *actual* coordinates. (they moved east-northeast by roughly seven miles) Scott Fybush will need to explain precisely what that means but it would seem to be strictly a paper change.

 

[bobdavcav]

Ok, that's good, it would be a shame to lose that big signal. From what I understand, WSPA is a blowtorch.