-
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
Victoria gets another Tejano station -translator
- Thread starter jras20
- Start date
M
MartiUnit
Guest
Just another LP crowding it up with programming from Hispanic Christian Community Network, Inc. A 99 watt power house. ~Yawn~
Isn't this illegal? If in fact their parent station is KNTR, then it is illegal. KTNR is a liscensed commercial station, the rules of translators apply different to Commercial radio stations don't they?MartiUnit said:
While in the topic of translators, let me move to boosters. Has KHMC signed their booster on yet? They have a CP to build a Booster station around the U.S. 59 and U.S. 77 intersection (upper mission valley road). Don't know how it will help the station, but they better know how to synchronise them correctly.
C
CW
Guest
oldjohnny said:
Yes the rules of commercial translators are different than non-comms....but I am not familiar with KTNR....what about it and what would make the translator illegal??
oldjohnny said:
Bottom line, the translator can relay any distant FM signal it wants, so long as it's not a co-owned commercial station. ("Fill-in" translators are the exception, but their coverage area must be entirely within the contour of the parent station.) Here are the facts in this case: the parent station for the Victoria translator is listed as KTNR-FM (or at least that's the last thing shown); the owner of KTNR-FM is Hispanic Christian Community Network, Inc., a for-profit corporation (the license was changed to reflect commercial operation when the sale to HCCN was finalized last year) and the owner of the translator (K290BC) is Gerald Benavides. That's what's on file but what's not stated is the amount of compensation, if any, that Benavides might be getting for relaying the parent station.
C
CW
Guest
jd said:
BUT JD, there is a difference....translators cannot relay non-comms, originating in the reserved band, in the commcercial band via Sat or any other method EXCEPT off air...If the translator is in the reserved band, it can be fed by any means possible. IF KTNR-FM is outside Victoria, then how is the translator relaying it?? I HATE Sat fed translators...I think that is a LPFM and thus is outside the "spirit" of the translator rules (pun not intended but I'll take it). Translators in MY book should always take the signal OFF air and relay it....if its sat or otherwise fed, its a LPFM or Class A and should be licensed as such (like KSBJ's Victoria station).....I dont have a problem with a noncomm translator in the comm band as long as its fed off the air...but then there is hypocricy here. They allow xlators with 250w ERP at 100m on 2nd adj channels...yet not a 100w ERP LPFM at 33m at the same site.....THATS BS!!!!
You're right, the first statement was misleading. It should have read something like "...any commercial station so long as it's not co-owned." But of course, since the translator is in the commercial band and relaying a commercial-band FM there's no issue on that point. But wait, there's more...
By now you know that I agree with most of your thoughts on translators and you bring up a very good point about delivery of the signal in this case. According to their filing they're picking up the parent station off-air, but KTNR-FM Kenedy (on 92.1) is about 56 miles away from the translator tower, which is dangerously close to 1st-adjacent KQVT 92.3 in Victoria. That distance with a 6,000-watt ERP signal just one notch away? Maybe it can be done; I don't know.
But here's a better question. Of several translators belonging to HCCN, one is licensed to Lackland City (on the west side of San Antonio). It's roughly 65 miles from KTNR-FM and supposedly they're also picking up it up off-air. Besides the distance involved, the problem is that both the parent station and the translator are on 92.1. It's right there on the frequency study with the application!
By now you know that I agree with most of your thoughts on translators and you bring up a very good point about delivery of the signal in this case. According to their filing they're picking up the parent station off-air, but KTNR-FM Kenedy (on 92.1) is about 56 miles away from the translator tower, which is dangerously close to 1st-adjacent KQVT 92.3 in Victoria. That distance with a 6,000-watt ERP signal just one notch away? Maybe it can be done; I don't know.
But here's a better question. Of several translators belonging to HCCN, one is licensed to Lackland City (on the west side of San Antonio). It's roughly 65 miles from KTNR-FM and supposedly they're also picking up it up off-air. Besides the distance involved, the problem is that both the parent station and the translator are on 92.1. It's right there on the frequency study with the application!
Perhaps the translators are picking it up off the air within the coverage area of KTNR and then tranmitting the audio by telco or Internet to the translator. Do the rules specify you have to pickup the off air signal at the translator Xmtr site?
C
CW
Guest
Willis1000 said:
rules state you must repeat offair signal..problem with telco or internet is if the parent goes off the air, the xlators DOESNT..it doesnt see loss of carrier as required...there is NO WAY a 92.1 can be legally re transmitted on 92.1 65 miles away under Part 73 rules (well retransmitted by a TRANSLATOR)...JD, thanks for pointing that out...I'll ask some friends at the FCC about it.....I HATE it when anyone plays with the rules...(heck notified the FCC a while back about a LPTV in Lake Charles LA that is licensed....but the tower they are supposively on, was dismantled years ago!!! HMMMMM)
CW said:
Actually if the telco/internet is fed off the right kind of off-air receiver, KTNR could rig a lost carrier alarm if the receiver fails to pick up KTNR. It could shut down the translators and also dial up the appropriate person assuming KTNR is unattended at the time. And again the off-air receiver is within the contour of KTNR.
jd said:
One of the ways that I know is being done, is daisy chaining the signal. From point A to point B then to point C. The regeneration of the signal gets worse and worse. But I've seen it done, though I don't know if it passes FCC requirements. Third parties, as I recall, can use a translator to retransmit a com or a non-com. And in the case of the newly granted AM waivers, translators can be directly fed so long as they are to fill-in the 2mv daytime AM daytime contour.
In Corpus Christi, KXTM of Benavides, Texas, owned by Humberto Lopez, is being rebroadcast on K228XM that is owned by Lisa Lopez (family member?). The mailing address of both stations is the same. The FCC has this information on file. I don't think that there has been any effort to hide the truth. But I don't think that this is allowable under the current FCC rules.
ROFLMAO about this thread 
!!
No matter what the FCC's CDBS says, the odds of GB actually rebroadcasting KTNR are very small.
Someone near Victoria (jras20 ?) listen to KTNR and listen to the translator. See if it is the same programming.
I would guess that the translator is carrying KOPY or KUKA.
!!No matter what the FCC's CDBS says, the odds of GB actually rebroadcasting KTNR are very small.
Someone near Victoria (jras20 ?) listen to KTNR and listen to the translator. See if it is the same programming.
I would guess that the translator is carrying KOPY or KUKA.
Try to get a recording. I may be able to translate.jras20 said:
I've listened to KUKA and they ID themselves as "K-U-K-A San Diego Radio KUKA, La Tejana 105.9 and 94.3" Never heard them ID the translator at CC.
But anywho, from all the information I've read so far, I am now 99.9% shure it is broadcasting illegally.
C
CW
Guest
oldjohnny said:
Translator only have to be IDed certain times of the day if done by voice iirc...(it doesnt have to be done every hour, THAT I know)....also they can ID by MCW AM on the carrier...so you would not hear it on a FM radio....but thats allowed..so even though you dont hear it, that doesnt mean its not (but I know a lot of translators that ARENT IDed at all...especially when it comes to AFA or AFR signals!)
- Status