Can AM "Revitalization" get any sillier with 10 watt directional translator? - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Can AM "Revitalization" get any sillier with 10 watt directional translator?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,238
    LPFM stations and Translators are equal. Neither can infringe on the other. Both can be displaced by other classes of stations. Even in such an equal situation, the station that came first has the upper hand. Pretty much, if you were on the air first, whoever comes second has the burden of interference causes.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Fresno, CA
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by unclehonkey View Post
    some updates...1st the app was dismissed

    per northpine

    The FCC has dismissed an application to move an FM translator into the Twin Cities over concerns about interference to an existing low-power FM station. During last year's AM revitalization filing window, Hubbard Radio applied to move a translator license from Bemidji to Minneapolis, where it would have transmitted on 94.1 with 10 Watts from the IDS Center. The translator would've relayed Hubbard's "1500 ESPN" (KSTP St. Paul) and would've used a directional antenna to limit the signal towards WFNU-LP/94.1 (St. Paul). WFNU objected, saying the proposed translator would prevent reception by some current listeners. The FCC has now decided that WFNU has provided sufficient evidence of WFNU listenership within the translator's proposed coverage area and dismissed the application.

    so now Hubbard amended it to a TWO WATT translator
    Hubbard Radio is asking the FCC to consider an amended application to move an FM signal into Minneapolis to relay its "1500 ESPN" (KSTP St. Paul). Earlier this month, the FCC rejected an AM Revitalization application to move K235BP (Bemidji) to Minneapolis on 94.1 over concerns about potential interference to WFNU-LP/94.1 (St. Paul). Hubbard has now amended the application to specify a 2-Watt directional signal from the IDS Center, down from 10 Watts in the original application. The lower wattage puts more distance between the coverage areas of the proposed translator and WFNU-LP. Hubbard separately filed a petition for reconsideration asking the FCC to consider the amendment.
    https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_...um=1&exhcnum=3
    https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_...um=1&exhcnum=1
    This should not happen with 10 watts or 2 watts. With another local station on the same frequency it makes less sense than a billboard.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us