What's the point of low power AM stations at night?

[SomeRadioGuy]

Still why do it when the cost of leaving it on is minimal?

i dont know anyone who does, but im saying you could, and its legal....

 

[TheBigA]

i dont know anyone who does, but im saying you could, and its legal....

But, in answer to the question, "what's the point of...."

Perhaps there IS no point. They're just being lazy.

 

[Steve Green NEPA]

I'd read somewhere quite recently -- maybe even here ? -- that an AM station with an FM translator need not 'cover' the COL at night with the AM signal.

If that's so .... and if it's within FCC output power + or - power tolerance .... then why can't these 24-hour operations, between the parent AM and the shiny new FM translator, operate using the lowest possible AM power?

Perhaps the only hassle would be if some of the flea-power AM's dropped their 25 or so nighttime watts to 2 watts, or .015 watts, to legitimize the link and save money. But who would complain? Only competitors.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

I'd read somewhere quite recently -- maybe even here ? -- that an AM station with an FM translator need not 'cover' the COL at night with the AM signal.

If that's so .... and if it's within FCC output power + or - power tolerance .... then why can't these 24-hour operations, between the parent AM and the shiny new FM translator, operate using the lowest possible AM power?

Perhaps the only hassle would be if some of the flea-power AM's dropped their 25 or so nighttime watts to 2 watts, or .015 watts, to legitimize the link and save money. But who would complain? Only competitors.

Not truew.

Class D AM stations, those with less then 250 watts at night don't have a night time COL Coverage requirement.

 

[Steve Green NEPA]

@ SomeRadioGuy: ..... Yes, that's what I meant. Perhaps I wasn't clear. Since there is no COL mandate at night, why not drop the AM power down *past* what the measly pittance the license reads, and feed the translator with the minimum power that'd work?

The electric bill savings would probably amount to lose change in many cases, certainly.

So could an AM station licensed for 25 watts after sundown could feed the FM translator using even fewer watts? That's what I was curious about. Since the AM station has no legal edict to follow at night vis-a-vis the COL ....
And since a few of those low-wattage nighttime AM signals have trouble reaching the ground, never mind the ionosphere .....
And since a previous poster suggested that no one listens at night to the AM anyway ....
Where's the problem leaving the corridor open at very minimum effort between the wee AM and the shiny new FM?

Perhaps FCC filing during the Shutdown plays a factor. But that obstacle has just surfaced in recent weeks. The venture of destitute AM nighttime signals feeding the 'high tech' translators goes back considerably farther.

There might've already been an FCC freeze on forms of AM re-filings or applications for some time. Others here will know. Yet, it seems to me that anyone who complains to the FCC about some station across town detected using LESS power to feed its translator cannot be a listener. It would be a competitor.

Y'know ... you play the odds if you think you're immune. Many cheating stations leave the xmtr switch on 'high' for certain nighttime broadcasts. So why not have the switch on 'low' ?

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

@ SomeRadioGuy: ..... Yes, that's what I meant. Perhaps I wasn't clear. Since there is no COL mandate at night, why not drop the AM power down *past* what the measly pittance the license reads, and feed the translator with the minimum power that'd work?

The electric bill savings would probably amount to lose change in many cases, certainly.

So could an AM station licensed for 25 watts after sundown could feed the FM translator using even fewer watts? That's what I was curious about. Since the AM station has no legal edict to follow at night vis-a-vis the COL ....
And since a few of those low-wattage nighttime AM signals have trouble reaching the ground, never mind the ionosphere .....
And since a previous poster suggested that no one listens at night to the AM anyway ....
Where's the problem leaving the corridor open at very minimum effort between the wee AM and the shiny new FM?

Perhaps FCC filing during the Shutdown plays a factor. But that obstacle has just surfaced in recent weeks. The venture of destitute AM nighttime signals feeding the 'high tech' translators goes back considerably farther.

There might've already been an FCC freeze on forms of AM re-filings or applications for some time. Others here will know. Yet, it seems to me that anyone who complains to the FCC about some station across town detected using LESS power to feed its translator cannot be a listener. It would be a competitor.

Y'know ... you play the odds if you think you're immune. Many cheating stations leave the xmtr switch on 'high' for certain nighttime broadcasts. So why not have the switch on 'low' ?

I know of no am station that feeds a translator with it's AM signal, I've heard it being done but i dont recall who. translators are fed with STL's.

BUT. i dont see why a station couldnt apply for a reduction in night power, being a minor change, it can be filed at anytime....... file to go from 100 watts to 10 watts, i guess.. or justr shut the am off at 8pm, continue on with the translator till sunrise when the am comes back on, its legal.. the translator can continue on as long as the am hasnt been off more then 24 hours.

 

[b-turner]

As an AM under 250 watts nighttime authority needn't run the transmitter at night, should they have a translator which is utilized 24/7, why would they run at night on the AM? A daytimer with a translator runs 24/7 but gone at sunset on the AM. It would seem to be perfectly legal. As pointed out, the 24 hour rule would apply. If a translator must be fed with the AM signal it would seem a daytimer with a 24/7 translator would be in violation and with the distances allowed by the FCC for translators many AMs might not find it possible to feed off air after sunset anyway.

I can see reducing power to almost nothing if you have separate patterns day and night requiring more land for towers or a dedicated nighttime site. The savings on maintenance and other costs could be substantial. Whatever power you can get from the daytime site/pattern would be fine. If I had an AM with a solid versus sketchy FM translator, I'd rather have 5 watts ND rather than 251 watts with 3 more sticks or separate site to mow, maintain and pay taxes on. I'm sure it would save me many times the revenue I could get from nighttime billing.

 

[kf4rca]

Nightime billing is almost nothing.

Lucky if you make the electric bill.
An ABC engineer I once knew suggested giving all daytimers 100W Nightime with the assumption that they must tolerate any interference they receive.
The AM bands are already polluted with Flatscreen power supplies interference not to mention the Cubans.
And it looks like its only going to get worse.

 

[gr8oldies]

The translators for AMs do not have to be fed from the AM signal (which is usually a bad idea. I have a recording of one where La Mega out of Atlanta was obliterating the 34 watt signal of the originating station). They can be on 24/7 even if the originating station is not.

As an AM under 250 watts nighttime authority needn't run the transmitter at night, should they have a translator which is utilized 24/7, why would they run at night on the AM? A daytimer with a translator runs 24/7 but gone at sunset on the AM. It would seem to be perfectly legal. As pointed out, the 24 hour rule would apply. If a translator must be fed with the AM signal it would seem a daytimer with a 24/7 translator would be in violation and with the distances allowed by the FCC for translators many AMs might not find it possible to feed off air after sunset anyway.

I can see reducing power to almost nothing if you have separate patterns day and night requiring more land for towers or a dedicated nighttime site. The savings on maintenance and other costs could be substantial. Whatever power you can get from the daytime site/pattern would be fine. If I had an AM with a solid versus sketchy FM translator, I'd rather have 5 watts ND rather than 251 watts with 3 more sticks or separate site to mow, maintain and pay taxes on. I'm sure it would save me many times the revenue I could get from nighttime billing.

 

[b-turner]

The whole idea of the translator was to allow AM stations that are daytime only or have a service area smaller than their daytime signal to at least have something. The distance between the AM tower site and translator has been expanded in part because the tight directional station off in the boonies with a translator would never have translator reach their primary audience without loosening the distance rules.

I can tell you nighttime is essential to many potential clients no matter how minimal that coverage is. I have literally been told you can reach more cows than people at night as long as I have a 24 hour signal. Even more crucial is a translator. It doesn't matter to the buyer of time on the station what nighttime and the translator reach of the daytime signal as long as you have the ability to be 24/7. I don't understand that logic but I can tell you it exists in virtually every prospective client I talk to. So, the 8 watts at night or that translator reaching 2% of the market might not bring you any income by specifically selling those hours, it certainly increases the number of potential clients and elevates the value of the daytime hours...say about $5,000 to $10,000 a month more in income. Quite frankly it is the weirdest 'thinking' I've seen doing sales and these potential clients are not unaware. They know what they are getting. All I can assume, the value they give it is directly related to the value they encounter when they resell the time to their clients. Perhaps they use night hours to bonus to get a better daytime rate.

 

[kenglish]

Does anyone really switch to low power at night, anyway?
Lots of daytime-only stations never switch the transmitter off at night, leaving it on full daytime power, with no modulation for twelve hours or more.
Others conveniently leave it on day power when they should be protecting others a hundred miles away.

 

[TheBigA]

Does anyone really switch to low power at night, anyway?

The computer does it automatically. Not as though a human has to make a switch.

And the red tape if you get caught isn't worth it. Not like a bunch of advertisers are clamoring to buy time at night.

 

[b-turner]

Absolutely. In fact most AM stations I know view nighttime as a money pit. I agree AM stations know the risk is not worth getting caught. For quite a few AMs the fine would be about what an AM brings in 24/7 in a month. Sometimes the lower night power ND or on the same directional pattern is fairly equal to the daytime power. And I can tell you from experience whoever your station protects will certainly let you know if you interfere even if it was a skip. In fact, after Harvey dumped more rain than had ever fallen on earth since radio has been around, at the licensed power we were blasting out hundreds of miles and interfering with the station I had to protect right in their primary service area. They were about as happy about it as I would have been in their shoes. Once the water evaporated enough so did the unbelievable coverage.

 

[kenglish]

It really doesn't take a radar gun to see if someone is speeding down your street...especially if they are driving ten times the limit.
With a good radio, an S-meter will do.

Several people on local forums have noted three stations in our market that run day power 24/7. A couple of others stopped when they tore down their towers.