• 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

Would it make sense for WAMS to apply for the expanded band

K

KlassikKountry

Guest
If WAMS applied to go to the expanded AM band, they could opt for more power and have better coverage. I don't understand why more AM stations with poor dial position do not apply for the expanded band. WAMS-1650 et al, or is there an FCC rule that does not allow heritage stations from moving, if they have been on a certain frequency for ages.
 
The truth is there were so many applicants to move to the expanded band, that the FCC narrowed down the candidates to the stations they thought would benefit the most. Using their traditionally bad discernment, here are some of the high and low lights:

1) They gave an expanded band allocation to WHWH 1350 in Princeton; with 5000 watts day and night, WHWH was the #1 rated radio station in Trenton for almost 20 years, beating WBUD, WTTM and WAAT.
2) They gave an expanded band allocation to the former WBOC-AM in Salisbury MD. 5000 watts day and night at 960.
3) They ignored WDAS-AM, one of the worst 5000 watt AM allocations ever. WDAS-AM doesn't get past Cottman Avenue & The Boulevard because of WBCB, they're boxed in all over the place, their nighttime, except for 10 blocks from the transmitter where all their listeners USED TO live, is worthless.
4) They ignored the 1260 in Newark, another terrible allocation, when AM allocations were assigned with a "shoe-horn", when they thought AM Radio was all we were ever going to have. The 1260 in Newark has a co-channel in Trenton, a co-channel in DC, 1270 in Vineland ( about 22 miles as the crow flies), 1250 off the back of the lobe in York PA.

Don't get me started. I'm sorry...what was the question?
 
In answer to one point, WAMS on 1260, is not a "heritage" station. It was on 1380 from 1947/8 until the 90's. At one point the WAMS calls were used on 1600 in Dover. And the 1260 allocation, dating back to 1964, is hardly heritage.

Both 1380 and 1260 applied for the expanded band (1380 was alrady AM stereo, a plus you would think) and both denied.

I really don't think listeners are tuning to the expanded frequencies, anyway. The advertising needed to tell potential audiences to move to a section of the band they have probably never heard of, when less than 18% of listeners tune in AM anyway, would not be a good move.

> The truth is there were so many applicants to move to the
> expanded band, that the FCC narrowed down the candidates to
> the stations they thought would benefit the most. Using
> their traditionally bad discernment, here are some of the
> high and low lights:
>
> 1) They gave an expanded band allocation to WHWH 1350 in
> Princeton; with 5000 watts day and night, WHWH was the #1
> rated radio station in Trenton for almost 20 years, beating
> WBUD, WTTM and WAAT.
> 2) They gave an expanded band allocation to the former
> WBOC-AM in Salisbury MD. 5000 watts day and night at 960.
> 3) They ignored WDAS-AM, one of the worst 5000 watt AM
> allocations ever. WDAS-AM doesn't get past Cottman Avenue &
> The Boulevard because of WBCB, they're boxed in all over the
> place, their nighttime, except for 10 blocks from the
> transmitter where all their listeners USED TO live, is
> worthless.
> 4) They ignored the 1260 in Newark, another terrible
> allocation, when AM allocations were assigned with a
> "shoe-horn", when they thought AM Radio was all we were ever
> going to have. The 1260 in Newark has a co-channel in
> Trenton, a co-channel in DC, 1270 in Vineland ( about 22
> miles as the crow flies), 1250 off the back of the lobe in
> York PA.
>
> Don't get me started. I'm sorry...what was the question?
>
 
When the FCC originally the idea was to reduce interference on the AM band. The FCC looked at all the stations that applied to migrate up to 1610-1700. The other thing that they did was to specify that all stations would be 10kw day, 1kw nights, and co-channel (same channel) was required to be seperated by 800 km. 1st adjacent(above and below) must be 400 km and 2nd adjacent must be 200 km (above and below).
Each station that was granted an expanded band station was required to give up one of the 2 with in 5 years. Once that deadline arrives, and once they channel to drop is chosen, then the FCC will decide whether or not to allow more stations. No word on whether or not the same above standards will be applied.
One of the stations that the chance to move was WTGM 960 in Salisbury, Maryland. The decided not to build the new station, so that construction permit was turned back in. That is what allowed 1680 in Princeton to move closer to Philly.
 
> When the FCC originally the idea was to reduce interference
> on the AM band. The FCC looked at all the stations that
> applied to migrate up to 1610-1700. The other thing that
> they did was to specify that all stations would be 10kw day,
> 1kw nights, and co-channel (same channel) was required to be
> seperated by 800 km. 1st adjacent(above and below) must be
> 400 km and 2nd adjacent must be 200 km (above and below).
> Each station that was granted an expanded band station was
> required to give up one of the 2 with in 5 years. Once that
> deadline arrives, and once they channel to drop is chosen,
> then the FCC will decide whether or not to allow more
> stations. No word on whether or not the same above standards
> will be applied.
> One of the stations that the chance to move was WTGM 960 in
> Salisbury, Maryland. The decided not to build the new
> station, so that construction permit was turned back in.
> That is what allowed 1680 in Princeton to move closer to
> Philly.
>

What's all that mean for WAMS, in a nutshell?

ixnay
 
It means that 1260 and 1380 were not causing enough interfere to be considered, and based on other selections in the region, 1620 Toms River, NJ, 1680 Prinston, 1660 Elizabeth (now Jersey City) 1670 Salisbury, Md. and 1690 in Southern Maryland. 1610 could not be used because of 1590 in Chester and 1600 in Dover. Remember the expanded band is non-directional, so you can't use multiple antennas to pull the signal in from other stations as can be used in the regular band. There is one exception, 1660 in Jersey city is directional at night, 9KW. The FCC gave me a lame excuse about why they approved it.

> > When the FCC originally the idea was to reduce
> interference
> > on the AM band. The FCC looked at all the stations that
> > applied to migrate up to 1610-1700. The other thing that
> > they did was to specify that all stations would be 10kw
> day,
> > 1kw nights, and co-channel (same channel) was required to
> be
> > seperated by 800 km. 1st adjacent(above and below) must be
>
> > 400 km and 2nd adjacent must be 200 km (above and below).
> > Each station that was granted an expanded band station was
>
> > required to give up one of the 2 with in 5 years. Once
> that
> > deadline arrives, and once they channel to drop is chosen,
>
> > then the FCC will decide whether or not to allow more
> > stations. No word on whether or not the same above
> standards
> > will be applied.
> > One of the stations that the chance to move was WTGM 960
> in
> > Salisbury, Maryland. The decided not to build the new
> > station, so that construction permit was turned back in.
> > That is what allowed 1680 in Princeton to move closer to
> > Philly.
> >
>
> What's all that mean for WAMS, in a nutshell?
>
> ixnay
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom