• 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

Translator Applications near NYC

W

WNTIRadio

Was looking at some for a client and wondered how the heck these are still in the system:

http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?state=&call=&city=tarrytown&arn=&serv=&vac=&freq=0.0&fre2=107.9&facid=&class=&dkt=&list=1&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&NS=N&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&EW=W&size=9

There are 2 class B stations on those frequencies coming from the Empire State Building.

First of all, who applied for them back in 2003. Second, why are they still there gumming up the system? Shouldn't they have been thrown out immediately?
 
The 2003 applications didn't demand as much detail as a 'long form' application will involve.

Any translator applications that made it through the great culling this winter will now have to file the dreaded 'long form.' That means they have to actually show how the proposed facility doesn't cause prohibited interference to other licensed or previously proposed facilities.

Those who can't show that their RF levels are below various specified strengths vs. other co, first, second and third adjacent channel stations will be tossed into the dumper.

Not all of the surviving translator applications are going to make it past this part of the herd thinning.
 
What really prompted the explosion of translator applications in 2003 is the destruction of the translator interference rules by the FCC.

Section 74.1204 describes the protection requirements that translators must meet to existing stations. Except, at subpart (d) of the rule, when they don't.

For 2nd and 3rd adjacent channels, the 100 dbu contour of the translator can't invade the protected contour of the 2nd or 3rd adjacent station. So one would expect a translator need be, oh, 40~45 miles away from that 2nd adjacent Class B station? Wrong-o!

In 2002 the Commission decided that (d) meant--1) You could interfere over 'uninhabited' areas and 2) interference would be decided by a ratio of interfering and protected contours.

So...protected station has a 95 dbu contour at the translator tower site. The interfering contour is then 40 dbu higher, or 135 dbu. This contour extends 100 feet, and the translator antenna is 200 feet above ground. Voila--no interference.

Of course, in the immediate area of the translator the field strength stays the same day to day. The protected station's contour is theoretical, based on 50% of the locations, 50% of the time, for an antenna 30 feet above ground. So if the translator's tower is on the other side of a hill from the protected station...
 
TomT said:
In 2002 the Commission decided that (d) meant--1) You could interfere over 'uninhabited' areas and 2) interference would be decided by a ratio of interfering and protected contours.

So...protected station has a 95 dbu contour at the translator tower site. The interfering contour is then 40 dbu higher, or 135 dbu. This contour extends 100 feet, and the translator antenna is 200 feet above ground. Voila--no interference.

Of course, in the immediate area of the translator the field strength stays the same day to day. The protected station's contour is theoretical, based on 50% of the locations, 50% of the time, for an antenna 30 feet above ground. So if the translator's tower is on the other side of a hill from the protected station...
Click to expand...

Of course, there are indeed cases where interference occurs despite predictions to the contrary, even for translators located 40 or 50 miles out. BUT.... There is a remedy for that as well. If the translator interferes with a licensed FM station, the translator must cease operation and remove the interference. If it cannot do so, it has to remain silent. If even one bona-fide listener is affected, the translator cannot continue to operate. Several translators go dark each year as a result of that requirement. This applies to all translators, even those that are fully spaced, however the FCC takes a much harder view when the translator exists near the edge of the protected station's service contour using a D/U showing.

Soon, there will be a great test of this as thousands of new LPFM stations come online using the same D/U rules.
 
I haven't done the math but translators can readily move +/- 3 channels and subtracting 10.7 from the frequency in question, they can also move +/- 3 channels from there. So that's 14 channels per translator that have to be ruled out before a translator can be shown to be non-viable. At least that is how I understand it.
 
I'm not talking interference here. I'm talking about applications that were filed that are well within the 54dBu of the class B stations from Empire. And even well within the 60dBu contour.

Why would they even be filed in the first place? That's really what I'm asking. Of course, why they didn't get immediately dismissed too. But who thought that was a good use of WFUV's money??
 
I've never applied for a translator but do you just apply for one without having to do an interference study? The 102.7 app doesn't appear to have any Exhibits with it.
 
Let's take an example. A translator is proposed with 100 watts with the antenna 100 feet above average terrain. The translator is on the second adjacent of a Class B station, at the translator's antenna site this Class B station has a 90 dbu contour.

The translator can't cause interference to this class B station as set forth at Sec. 74.1204. Normally, the interference zone would be where the 94 dbu contour of the translator overlaps the 54 dbu contour of the Class B station, a difference of 40 db. Under the Commission's interpretation of its interference rule (Sec. 74.1204(d)), overlap is allowed where the interference zone falls in an uninhabited area. However, then the interference zone is determined by the RATIO of the two signals. So the interfering contour of a translator at the 90 dbu contour of this Class B is 40 dbu higher, or 130 dbu.

100 watts at 100 feet AHAAT (30 meters) places this interfering 130 dbu contour at 72 feet. Or 28 feet above ground in a circle around the tower. Which, apart from the occasional pigeon and tower climber, is clearly uninhabited.
 
Tom, this is CO-CHANNEL. Not second adjacent or first adjacent.

I know the D/U ratios quite well, I deal with them all time.

I just don't get why anyone with half a brain would file a co-channel inside the 60dBu of a class B!! 102.7 and 101.9 are both class B's in NYC, with 6kW ERP from the top of the Empire State Building.
 
WNTIRadio said:
Tom, this is CO-CHANNEL. Not second adjacent or first adjacent.

I know the D/U ratios quite well, I deal with them all time.

I just don't get why anyone with half a brain would file a co-channel inside the 60dBu of a class B!! 102.7 and 101.9 are both class B's in NYC, with 6kW ERP from the top of the Empire State Building.
Click to expand...

If they're co-channel and within the service contour of the primary, they cannot survive, but they might be able to move to an adjacency or IF channel and stay alive that way. On the other hand, much depends on what the FCC allows during the next round.

I know of another auction 83 translator app that was co-channel to a class C0, but well outside their 60dbu. In the intervening 10 years, the class C0 downgraded to a C1 and is now in the same city as the translator app with a transmitter site only about 10 miles away. The translator applicant is hoping to stay alive long enough to get to another channel.
 
The short form translator applications of 2003 were never vetted for viability. They are all merely theoretical.

In this first week of long form filings for the 700+ singletons, FCC staff have already dismissed a few that just aren't possible in the real world.

During the soon to be announced MX round, where apps are generally in more densely populated areas, an even greater percentage will bite the dust because there's simply nowhere left for them to go to avoid one another.

Many will be bought out by their MX competitor and dismissed for 'costs'. I have seen filed agreements where a couple of the Christian translator chains claim their costs to be $20,000 per app. I only wish I had gotten that kind of money to do their translator apps.

So to you many lucky people who got an application done for $1200-$2000, I say, "What a BARGAIN!"
 
I just don't get why anyone with half a brain would file a co-channel inside the 60dBu of a class B!! 102.7 and 101.9 are both class B's in NYC, with 6kW ERP from the top of the Empire State Building.
Click to expand...

You've put your finger on it. A lot of these were, indeed, filed by people with half a brain. But I guess they were hoping for some kind of a miracle at the FCC.

And let's face it, every so often, usually with the help of a senator, somebody with half a brain gets a free pony from the FCC.
 
And on the other side of the coin, what good would a 10 watter be in the midst of a class B signal anyway.

The applicant was Fordham University, which owns and runs WFUV in NYC. That makes these applications even more of a mystery, as they are no stranger to radio.

Why would someone file an impossible app only to move to a better (and viable) frequency? Why not just apply for the more open frequency in the first place and not one that is impossible.

To those of you not familiar with NYC geography, these two apps are about a mile east-northeast of the Tappan Zee bridge. About 22 miles north of the Empire State building and all of those class B signals. Again, they operate a 48kW stick in the Bronx, have synchronous boosters in the city and know how to do radio.

See for yourself:

http://www.fccinfo.com/CMDProFacLookup.php?tabSearchType=Lice&sLicensee=FORDHAM+UNIVERSITY
 
Okay, I pulled up the applications and I think I figured out this mystery. They were submitted by the "Vice President for Administration", who I'm sure has not a clue about how these things were supposed to work. Probably thought that if he applied that 101.9 and 102.7 would be kicked off their frequencies.

And there is no consulting engineer involved in this either.

Still, they should have been dismissed instantly.

https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=100647178&formid=349&fac_num=153960
 
Sorry, I misunderstood your original post by assuming you wanted an answer.

Please feel free to bitch about the FCC. They deserve it.
 
Well, I just looked at the 20030317FDX application in rfInvestigator and (as reported) the interfering contour from the translator is completely contained within the 54dBu protected contour from WFAN. I have no idea what they were thinking. If the FCC does not allow them to move or change channels, they're dead ducks. Either it was a brilliant strategy that will surprise us all, or it was really dumb. Time will tell, and pretty soon, I'd imagine.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom