But if you remove all government regulations what would stop an operator from increasing the power of his FM to 300k or more?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Saving AM Radio
- Thread starter BruceB
- Start date
The industry run committee. Once again, if we let the marketplace determine the future of AM, let's get rid of all the boat anchor 1K daytimers and allow certain stations that qualify to operate at 500K.
Aren't there ITU regulations on that?
WBCT is 320kw and they were grandfathered. WSRW/Star 105.7 in Grand Rapids is 265kw.
This site has some good info about the most powerful FM stations that were authorized but may not have been built, and uses Broadcasting Yearbook as its source:
Congress would have to, being that the FCC is a department / commission of the Executive Branch, and got its empowering legislation from Congress. It's an arm of the Federal Government. Congress could conceivably dismantle it and hand it off to a private organization, but that would be problematic, sort of like privatizing the national parks or national forests.
Then again, Congress could reorganize the FCC and give broadcasters more say in how it, and the FCC regulations are run. Congress could do something like that and still be the 'owner' of the Commission. The original idea behind all the Departments and Commissions and Agencies was that Congress was unable to do all the regulating directly. So they handed it off to the newly created Departments, Agencies, etc., with 'empowering legislation' that defined how the Department, Commission, or Agency is run, placing the actual regulatory activity in the hand of the Department, Commission, or Agency -- which are also part of the Executive Branch, technically. The agencies, departments, etc. can't exist, however, without creation and funding by Congress. Consequently, Congress has final say on things. In practicality, they are hands off unless something is drastically wrong.
Correct. Obviously the Telecommunications Act would need to be revised, as it was in 1996. I'm sure the incoming administration would like to add the internet to the FCC's list of responsibilities. The problem is you have at least two groups within the new administration. One group wants to cut the size of government. The other group wants to refocus government on enforcing ideology. The incoming FCC chairman is in the latter group. He wants to use the government to "rein in big tech," specifically social media.
It's hard to find anyone in any party who is very attached to any of that side of the commission. The biggest part of the telecom act had to do with telephony and cable. As I said, there's a group that wants to add the internet and social media to the law.
Regulating internet -- the actual internet infrastructure -- is one thing, but regulating social media may not work out as planned, because of First Amendment issues. The Federal government can regulate speech -- to a certain extent -- over the airwaves, because technically the airwaves are owned by the government. But social media is private enterprise, running on privately owned internet trunk systems. If a new FCC tries to regulate speech, or content, on social media, there will be lawsuits, undoubtedly, because it would be governmental regulation of speech.
Not in the Western Hemisphere where we still have one "nearly 500 kw" AM
There are places that allow "up to" 500 kw on AM, but in all the western Hemisphere only one even comes close...TWR on Bonaire with 440kw.
And in Mexico City, XEW ran 250 kw but recently downgraded to 60 kw. Two other 100 kw AMs there moved to lower power. 250 kw XERF on the border with the US moved from 250 kw to 100 kw. XEROK-800 AM in Juárez with 150 kw is silent. The million watt AM in Costa Rica is now just a local 10 kw station. Several higher power AMs in Chile either reduced power or turned in the license.
There is no economic benefit to having such high power. While it covers a lot at night, "nobody" listens to radio at night; the daytime coverage is only about 150% better than a 50 kw AM. So a 500 kw in Columbus, Ohio, would have a less-than-the-local-stations signal in Cleveland and Cincinnati. No economic reason to raise power.
But clearing out the stations that are only still on to support a translator might allow remaining stations to simplify directional systems. A tax incentive, such as an income tax credit at a value well above the sale value of an AM might also allow many to sign off.
I believe that's the only reason more owners haven't turned in their licenses. They're hoping to get something (anything) in exchange for what they have. I really don't see the government doing such a thing. They lose nothing by letting these owners continue to lose money by owning these properties, and they don't really gain anything. Instead they'd be stuck with a bunch of licenses no one wants.
The context is about higher power on AM. Unlike FM, AM has to protect skywave signals that might be over 1000 miles away. The first directional station in the US was on 620 in the Tampa Bay area; it had to protect WTMJ in Milwaukee. The year was around 1931.
How far out do those FM signals regularly go?
Typically, a 100kw FM on a 1,000'+ TV signal tower can get out 60-70 miles, and even farther on occasion, depending on topography.
Imagine those GRR signals can go up to 100 miles.
If those AMs could go away, opting to only keep the translator, then the owner of the AM and translator needs assurance the translator is no longer a secondary signal but primary. As it is, it must accept interference and can be forced from the frequency by a primary station making a minor change.
My post was based on the assumption there would be a possibility for a broader AM band restructuring.
If we start with the fact that a huge number of AM stations stay on the air only because they have translators, then any improvement would have to include permanency and a guarantee for those translators. My assumption is that nearly all AM stations with translators would shut down the ancient portion of their operation. This would free up many frequencies for things like power increases and reduction of directional system protections
But it would take both permanence of the FM translator and some incentives for closing the AM to make this happen.
Keep in mind that (I am not totally certain on the extent of the regulations) “overpower” stations are protected to the extent of only their rule-conforming signal. So many of those higher power stations are not fully usable far away from their transmitter site.
Perhaps Fybush or Michi can further clarify this.
So far I don't hear anyone in the FCC championing that cause.
This is something highly needed.
Perhaps the industry could come together and form a "working group" to study and recommend changes/improvements.
Then sell it to the industry associations, then the industry overall, then request FCC/govt changes.
This could be like the industry process in the 2000s where, after tainted spinach sickened and killed a number of people across the U.S., or when Mexican tomatoes were tainted and some consumers died after consuming, the fruit and vegetable industry came together to develop food safety requirements.
The industry worked with scientists, FDA enforcement officials and other food safety officials to develop standards for different fruits and vegetables, to ensure safe movement and sale of such food products.
Because of the risk of contamination, grocery stores and restaurants buying produce/shrimp/etc. from sellers who sell out of the back of a truck would be penalized and perhaps their businesses closed.
This could be a democratic process like the Council of Nicea, in the 300s AD/CE where the leaders of the Christian church assembled to decide which ancient writings would be included in the "official" Bible.
I think the NAB is too focused on AM preservation to take on a challenge of AM restructuring at the same time. The NAB during the sixty-some years I have been watching it has never seemed to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Their legislative initiatives or projects all seem to be one at a time and fairly narrow.
To me, it would seem better to include AM restructuring along with the requirement for that band in car radios as part of “making AM great again”. (Sorry, I could not resist that one)
I still like the idea of making cheap emergency crank radios widely available. Maybe send them to everyone, like Covid-19 checks and test kits.
That would:
1. Provide a universal, reliable way to disseminate emergency information.
2. Introduce everyone to the programming on AM radio in their area. If they find something they like, they can then stream it.
That would satisfy everyone, wouldn't it?
That would:
1. Provide a universal, reliable way to disseminate emergency information.
2. Introduce everyone to the programming on AM radio in their area. If they find something they like, they can then stream it.
That would satisfy everyone, wouldn't it?