Pirate AM in Marysville, OH

[PaulBWalkerJr]

I agree with WCW, ICU and Grrr.....it seems like the priorities of the FCC are misplaced.

 

[Grrrradio]

Just to clarify, I wasn't targeting my rant at R. Fry. His technical analysis seems very intricate, and most likely right on. My annoyance was directed at a government agency for spending its time, and our dollars, on noncompliance so minor in degree that it TAKES someone of Fry's knowledge and dedication even to notice it.

 

[Neil E.]

Mr. Walker,

In a previous post you said:

I also have to question their motives in pointing an accusing finger before having all the facts on the subject. It's shameful... I might also add it is not up to the station owner in Marysville to have to prove anything to Neil or anyone else on this board. Gossip is the product of immature people that need to find something constructive to do in their spare time.

Your statement about not having the facts amazes me since that is what I requested.

If you will please read my post again you will see that I was not pointing any accusatory fingers at anyone, nor was I questioning the "legality" of the Marysville station. I made the point which I will restate as clearly as I can that gossip results from lack of true information. I requested that the station owner share information which could be useful to others who want to pursue part 15 AM operation and which, I believe, would quell gossip.

I assure you that I am not immature chronologically nor in technology and would suggest that your making such an unfounded accusation directed at people about whom you know nothing is not a good way to engage in a productive exchange of information.

There are many posts here and on other boards which are nothing more than hearsay. Few even present real experiences. In an effort to rise above gossip and hearsay I was simply asking for some descriptions of real experiences from someone who may be qualified to comment.

Neil

 

[WCWalker]

Neil. I was not directing the comments about being immature at you. That was for the person or persons that originated the string. I apologize if you took the comment that way. I should have directly stated who that was intended for.

My point to you is simple. Immature people do gossip and this board has had more than its fair share. I too have been victimized by it over the years and it angers me to see disturbed minds attempt to tear down others or besmirch their reputation when they don't have all the facts. And, I was always taught, that if you cannot obtain all the facts to make an accurate assessment of a situation before saying something then it is best to bite your tongue and keep your opinion to yourself. Their warped minds manufacture falsehoods that can damage a person's reputation to the point that they cannot effectively function in society. The blame for that should not fall on the victim (in this case WRPO) but instead on the people that have nothing better to do with their time than to spread the disinformation. In other words, they presume guilt and judge as such despite not having all the facts. But since this is not a court case and we're talking about a privately owned radio station it is entirely up to the owner to decide whether or not to provide any additional information concerning the operation of his station.

Since the station has passed an FCC inspection I just don't see why people need to continue to badger the owner for more details about the installation. There are ample resources on the internet that show you how to obtain such range or even greater range with a FCC Type Accepted AM transmitter.

 

[phatdaddy]

Mr Walker

Let me set the record straight on something right here and now. I AM NOT in the habit of spreading what you call "gossip". I have openly apologized to WRPO here on this board for assuming that he had a pirate operation. The laws of physics dictate how far a signal will propagate on any radio frequency band with 100 milliwatts or less of power applied to the antenna. The simple fact is that a 100 mW signal DOES NOT normally propagate nearly 10 miles on the AM broadcast band. Since you apparently wish to nitpick my previous posts, kindly take note of my use of the phrase "does not NORMALLY propagate". The fact that WRPO is able to install a station which accomplishes this feat is to his credit and I am man enough to admit that here in front of everyone. I have built and/or helped build a number of part 15 stations, both FM and AM, none of which has as of yet accomplished such a feat. I have also helped engineer several commercial AMs and FMs over the years. One of the AMs has a night power of 29 Watts into a 1/4 wave vertical and it doesn't do a whole lot better than WRPO's part-15 station. He is very fortunate to have his transmitter environmentally situated so that his small signal is launched so effectively.

As for Neil's post...there is no harm in simply asking WRPO to share his experience with the group. Whether or not RPO chooses to respond is up to him and he certainly does not need you trying to run interference for him. If you wish to make more snide references about me, take your best shot! The last time I checked America was still a semi-free country and since you don't pay my mortgage or monthly bills, rest assured that I could care less what you think!

 

[Neil E.]

William Walker, (I just realized there are two Walkers here)

Thank you for your comments. That puts your previous post into perspective for me.

Your mention of being victimized by gossip rings true. I, too, have been damaged by the spread of a rumor involving an allegation of misconduct. Briefly, I shared breakfast with two ham friends just before I took the FCC administered amateur extra code test. Two of us were to take the test, the third was just visiting with us at the restaurant. He produced a mini tape recorder asked us to tape record the code test and we refused. It was then claimed that the conversation was overheard by another ham at a nearby table and the rumor that we had taped the test was the topic of discussion on the repeater as soon as we left the test. If he had reported the event truthfully, only the one making the request would have been hurt, but the incomplete truth damaged all three of us. A few days later, the one who spread the rumor was caught causing malicious interference to the repeater and it was revealed by one of his friends that he was being treated for psychological problems. His credibility tanked and we regained our honor, but before this it was his word against ours. Damage like this can last a long time.

It was with this type of experience in mind, as well as to build a knowledge base based on truth and not gossip, that I sought to avoid a problem by asking WRPO for some information about his station. It is unfortunate if my request was seen as badgering him and I accept his choice of whether to comment or not. If he does not then I suggest we all drop the speculation and gossip from which nothing useful will follow.

Neil

 

[WCWalker]

Phatdaddy. After rereading your original post on this subject my comments are justified. You made a claim that someone is an alleged pirate and broadcasting way over power despite the fact the opposite is the case. I've seen this far too often on this board and others and I get really steamed when people start throwing the word "pirate" around about stations using a Hamilton Rangemaster transmitter. In fact, another individual that posted in this very string used to go out and hunt down stations he "thought" were pirates when in reality, they too were likely part 15 operations. What was so amusing about that was that he was running a pirate FM station (he even admitted it on another Radio-Info.commessage board) at the time and claiming that it was legal. The pot calling the kettle black.

In my eyes it is also an issue of privacy since he does not hold a public license for the station. Over the years I've learned that people that are quick to point an accusing finger are usually the very first people that should be scrutinized (note above story). Yes, it still is a semi free country and WRPO is free to broadcast as he chooses because his station passed an FCC inspection. And he should be allowed to freely broadcast without receiving outside interference or innuendo from people or local government entities that have no business insinuating themselves into his station's operation.

What you think about me is not the issue. The issue is simple, yes you apologized to WRPO and that was the right thing to do. But next time think twice about labeling a station a pirate and then coming onto a message board and posting that information unless you have CONCRETE evidence to suggest it is fact. Obviously stations that R. Fry and some others deem as pirates ain't what the FCC considers as illegal operations.

 

[rfry]

There are ample resources on the internet that show you how to obtain such range or even greater range with a FCC Type Accepted AM transmitter.

Using a transmitter certified for Part 15 AM does not automatically produce full compliance with Part 15, no matter how it is used.

Full compliance when using a Part 15 certified AM transmitter requires its use with an antenna system that also meets Part 15, ie, its radiating length cannot exceed three meters.

Installing a Part 15 AM tx+whip at some elevation above the earth and using it with a long, radiating conductor to "ground" does not, as a fact of physics, constitute an antenna system meeting 15.219, whether or not that reality is recognized by the operator or even an FCC field inspector. And such a system will have greater range than one where the radiating length is 3 meters or less, other things equal.

Of course everyone is free at their risk to do as they wish in these installations.
//

 

[WCWalker]

R. Fry. Yes we are aware of this and you've made this point far more than once. The point is simple, the station passed an FCC inspection and continues to operate.

 

[Timewarp]

Guys! Please! We are talking about someone with 100 mw. Come on!

 

[phatdaddy]

I started this thread merely to inform everybody about the new radio station in Marysville. Little did I realize what a firestorm my poor choice of words in describing the station was going to create. I think that by now everybody has voiced their opinion on this subject and as far as I am concerned this thead is closed and I will not be posting any further comments on it. For whatever it may be worth, WRPO's apparent success with his station has encouraged me to jump back into AM part 15 myself. My first choice was the Rangemaster, however due to financial considerations it was necessary to choose a less expensive but still highly respected product. Now comes the fun part, rooting through my music collection and ripping all my big band era stuff to mp3s to get my automation set up ;D

 

[Hamilton]

Unfortunately there are many situations in life that are unclear and can’t easily be put into a formula, some have a hard time dealing with that. There are many vague and unclear laws, not only concerning the FCC but on all of our law books. Part 15 law vagueness isn’t limited to just the “what is ground lead” issue. I have talked to the FCC about Part 15 law, (including the author of Part 15). My personal opinion is that the FCC leaves the law vague because it gives them flexibility in the field. We get (harassed!) often by this issue and others. I totally agree with the previous posters that pointed out that complying with Part 15.219 regulations shouldn’t be like firing up a nuclear reactor.
If a reasonable person thinks about it just isn’t reasonable to expect all Part 15.219 transmitters to be mounted onto a rod in the dirt, that is what would have to happen if some peoples interpretation were correct, that all ground had to be the “dirt”. This just is not possible and practical, many products certified under 15.219 aren’t even designed to be used outdoors but use some sort of other ground, or are designed to be mounted on the roof and are supplied with connecting coax cable. In these cases something else besides the “dirt” has to be ground. Some people in large cities have never seen the dirt in their entire lives! In most cases because of aesthetics and/ or vandalism risks, the best spot for a transmitter is on the roof. Seems like some unwise interpretation of the rules to me. Our RangeMaster unit was certified in the configuration we recommend, the pole mount with a wire (the massive wire we call ground! Not ground lead) in our certification the ground wire to the dirt was not included in the 3 meter limit.
It is only reasonable in engineering practices that other things besides the dirt can be called ground, a water pipe that is connected to dirt is a great ground. Anything massive that is not obviously designed to radiate could be called ground. A #8 20 foot length of wire will measure only .0125 ohm! That adds very little to the ground.
Our unit has to be grounded for lightning protection, if a customer doesn’t ground our unit because he reads somewhere that he may violate someone’s interpretation of Part 15, he may get struck by lightning and be damaged. Who will pay for his damage? I doubt if whoever advised the customer to not ground the transmitter will be willing to accept the consequences! This is a reason why we repeatedly try to address this particular issue, we are trying to prevent that from happening. We recommend in the documentation that comes with the transmitter how to properly ground the transmitter.
So why not allow a water pipe or other massive metal that from a reasonable engineering prospective can be called ground be “ground” Again the term “ground” is used commonly in all engineering areas. Massive metal and the dirt can be synonymous, it is up to the engineer on the site to determine what is ground and what is ground lead, and the final judge is the FCC inspector. I have found though that the agent will rarely go against a decision by an engineer unless the decision seems outlandish.
I think the moral of the story here is everyone should try to look at the overall picture instead of jumping to one small view.

 

[Hamilton]

Hey, we lost a sale there,

Keep in mind we give discounts!

 

[rfry]

Guys! Please! We are talking about someone with 100 mw. Come on!

True, keeping an accurate perspective on this issue is important. But that accurate perspective has to include the fact that many of these "100 mw" transmitters are installed with radiating conductors that do not, in reality, meet the 3-meter radiating length limit permitted under 15.219.

And why? Because those longer radiating lengths improve the coverage range possible from that 100 mW of tx input power.
//

 

[rfry]

A #8 20 foot length of wire will measure only .0125 ohm! That adds very little to the ground.

Presumably you are the "Hamilton" connected with the Rangemaster AM1000. If so, you may be interested in the following text on this and related issues.
_________

Now following with comments to some of the statements in your post, reportedly from the Rangemaster site:

Rangemaster "We don't feel that in most cases, a properly designed ground system will add significantly to the overall radiation of the system, ..."

There is abundant evidence in antenna engineering textbooks and elsewhere to show that radiation from a long conducting path to ground is a significant, and often the largest source of radiation from a Part 15 AM antenna system. If the meaning of "a properly designed ground system" as used in the paragraph above is one where the total radiating length of the conducting path to the buried r-f ground plus the length of the whip is 3 meters or less, that should be stated. But I don't think that configuration is described elsewhere on the Rangemaster site (correction invited). The installation drawing on the Rangemaster site shows the tx/antenna installed on a rooftop, with a long ground conductor.

Rangemaster "We have no problem calling the tiptop of your ground wire at the transmitter binding post "ground" as long as you use a massive wire, (#12 or #10) intended for grounded purposes."

Rangemaster may not have a problem with thinking of the top of a "massive wire" as ground, but that concept is not supported by physics. Even though the top of such a wire may be near "ground" potential for direct current, it has considerable resistance to the flow of the r-f energy in it, that results from the coupling of the wire with space, ie, because it is acting as a radiator. So the top of that wire is NOT an r-f ground. The whole length of that "massive wire" radiates until it enters the physical earth.

Rangemaster "..however if your system requires it, we stock an RFI filter that you can place in series with the ground terminal of the transmitter (needs to be placed physically right at the transmitter ground terminal to be effective) that will suppress RF radiation from the ground system. Just let us know when ordering and we will include the filter."

The r-f filter is good, but how are users to know whether or not it is needed? That takes an understanding of antenna systems that few Part 15 operators would be prepared for. And how about r-f filters for the power and audio leads -- they also will radiate unless filters are installed in them.

These quotes reportedly from Keith Hamilton/Rangemaster use phrases like "we at Rangemaster feel," "we do not feel," "we have no problem with", "it is reasonable to allow," "will add significantly," "and "I have been told." Such statements shift responsibility for using the information they apply to back to the reader, and wouldn't give anyone implementing such advice any reliable relief from possible FCC action.

Please note that I am neither anti-Rangemaster nor anti-Part 15. I am neutral. The purpose of my posts is to supply technically valid information to be used as its readers see fit -- which should offer a positive and encouraging benefit to those wanting to better understand Part 15 systems.
//

 

[phatdaddy]

I knew I said that I wouldn't post on this thread again but had to respond to Keith. If the product I purchased doesn't get the job done, I'll be in touch with you about a Rangemaster 8)

 

[Black_Shire]

R. Fry wrote:

<The r-f filter is good, but how are users to know whether or not it is needed? That takes an understanding of antenna systems that few Part 15 operators would be prepared for. And how about r-f filters for the power and audio leads -- they also will radiate unless filters are installed in them.>

The power leads and audio leads are not counted as part of the radiating conductor length in the FCC Certification process, as Gerry Herlinger (the designer of the TalkingSign Part 15 AM transmitter) told me.

What does and doesn't radiate well in the antenna + ground system can be easily checked with an inexpensive Field Strength Meter (I use a Micronta FSM/SWR meter) that indicates relative field intensity levels.

With my Talking House and TalkingSign Part 15 AM transmitters, the RF from the 3 meter wire antenna nearly bends the FSM needle with the meter held 30 cm (12") away from the antenna (and with its sensing antenna parallel to the transmitter's antenna). The transmitters' six-foot AC power cords and six-foot audio leads radiate very feebly compared to the antennas because the power cords and audio leads are not inductively loaded to be resonant and are physically shorter than the antennas. As the power and audio leads are made longer, they will radiate more RF.

What is allowed and what isn't in Part 15 AM installations is up to the individual FCC Field Agents, and their latitude of discretion does vary. As "Crash" Knorr reported on his Medium Wave Alliance web site www.geocities.com/raiu_harrison/mwa/skyhooks/chapter7.html :

"Some whip and mast installations have been allowed to continue operating by some FCC field agents. However, Mr. John A. Reed of the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology wrote the following comment in response to a query: "If the installer/user places the transmitter atop a metal pole or other conducting structure and grounds the transmitter to that structure, the height of that structure also is counted toward the three meters maximum length." (Radio World, August 2, 2000) In view of this published opinion from the OET it's a little unclear why the manufacturers of FCC-approved transmitters are advising their customers to put the rigs in whip and mast installations."

"Because they often achieve a very good coverage radius, whip and mast stations are often inspected by FCC field agents. Anyone using the whip and mast technique should do it with an FCC-certified transmitter. The field agents have been more liberal when it comes to interpreting the rules if the transmitter is factory-made and has an FCC ID number stamped on the back. Even so, don't be surprised if they tell you to switch to a more "down to earth" antenna system."

I would also add that where a Part 15 AM radio station is located makes a difference in an FCC Field Office's attitude toward it. A few years ago I called the Anchorage, Alaska FCC Office and asked them what they would think if I set up a Part 15 AM radio station in a remote Arctic village (I'm part Native American myself), using a full-size 1/4 wavelength antenna and ground radial system. Their answer? "We don't care. You're so far away from any other community that no one outside the village would ever hear it, even with that antenna system."


-- Black Shire

 

[rfry]

So why not allow a water pipe or other massive metal that from a reasonable engineering prospective can be called ground be “ground”

But a reasonable engineering perspective cannot ignore the principles of physics, which show that anything that radiates cannot be considered as an r-f ground (no matter how massive). AM broadcast towers are massive, yet they radiate very well indeed. Calling something a ground doesn't make it one.

Here is a good definition of ground as applied to antennas (paraphrased from a website):
<em>An electrical connection to earth as a reference potential for radio frequency antenna signals. As high frequency signals can flow to earth through capacitance, capacitance to ground is an important factor in effectiveness of signal grounds. Because of this a complex system of buried rods and wires can be effective. An ideal signal ground maintains zero voltage regardless of how much electrical current flows into ground or out of ground.</em>

The last sentence in the paragraph above is very important, especially as concerns the use of "massive wires" considered by some (even Part 15 tx OEMs) as providing a "ground" to an elevated transmitter installation (on a roof top, flag pole, mast etc). The ONLY part of such a ground wire approximating the true electrical characteristics of the earth at radio frequencies is the part that is IN the earth. Once that conductor exits the earth, it behaves as an antenna for radio frequencies. The top of such a "massive wire" has greatly different r-f properties than the part that is in the earth, and in fact, that ground wire often contributes the largest part of the total radiation from such an elevated Part 15 AM system.

To illustrate the point, there is a type of monopole radiator used in commercial AM broadcast consisting of an uninsulated tower directly connected to the earth at its base via ~120 buried radials. It is driven by applying tx power to it at some physical height above the earth. This is possible, because the impedance of the tower at radio frequencies is a function of height along the tower face. This tower has essentially zero impedance when measured on the structure where it enters the earth, but when properly driven still functions as a very efficient radiator. This application and the elevated Part 15 tx+whip used with a long conducting path to something buried in the earth are electrically identical.

In some applications it is impractical to use the earth as the reference potential for a vertical monopole antenna. In such cases a properly designed network of horizontal, non-radiating, elevated conductors can be used as that reference, but the better term for such would be a counterpoise, rather than "ground." And their use for Part 15 AM systems might take some convincing for FCC inspectors.

Lastly on this subject of radiating ground wires, the Rangemaster website allegedly states that running such a ground wire up to the elevated tx via a metal conduit that is connected to the earth only at the bottom will inhibit radiation from the ground wire. But just as with the bare ground wire itself, that conduit would have the electrical properties of the earth only for the part of it that is physically buried in the earth. And like the ground wire, that conduit will behave as an antenna once it exits the earth -- so there is no real benefit in using it. This was confirmed rather easily using NEC.
//

 

[Timewarp]

Remember those old cordless phones made about 25 years ago, that used what is today the expanded
AM band? With a receiver hooked to a good ground and long wire antenna, I could hear good audio
3 miles plus. Yet the field strength was not amazing next door. Again we are talking about part 15.

 

[Hamilton]

I hesitated to post at all here because I didn't want to stir up anything, I do feel it is important to point out that people need to follow our instructions for our product. And we do feel singled out, most all Part 15 manufacturers have some sort of extended ground thing going on (not ground lead). Everyone can feel free to interpret Part 15.219 any way they want. But the only interpretation that counts is the FCC agent that comes calling.

Phatdaddy let me know, I'll make you a good deal on a RangeMaster!