WTMP translator

austingrace said:

Something I have noticed.
WBT is like a local here at night.

Click to expand...

WBT would have really sounded local back when they were the only station receivable on 1110 in this area.

BTW...now that this thread has been brought back to life, I will just comment that
of the two Bay area music stations that put decent day signals into Sara-Mana, WTMP sounds MUCH louder and brighter that WTIS.
I have not compared their translators, but WTIS's has a much bigger signal even now,
plus WTMP's has a CP to downgrade both their height and their power even more.
Perhaps someone could pop in who knows why they are doing that.

ai4i said:

WBT would have really sounded local back when they were the only station receivable on 1110 in this area.

BTW...now that this thread has been brought back to life, I will just comment that
of the two Bay area music stations that put decent day signals into Sara-Mana, WTMP sounds MUCH louder and brighter that WTIS.
I have not compared their translators, but WTIS's has a much bigger signal even now,
plus WTMP's has a CP to downgrade both their height and their power even more.
Perhaps someone could pop in who knows why they are doing that.

Click to expand...

This is not official info, but Hall Communications (owners of 100kW C0 WPCV 97.5 in Lakeland) might have complained on grounds of interference, because of how much signal W248CA puts into Tampa; given the latter is going to remain on same tower once it changes from present configuration. But who knows?

Byron

One would think that they could go North-south directional like WWBA's W252DF.
Perhaps that is also in the works.

Either in January or February the FCC query website had a PDF for people to complete in reference to WTMP’s translator interfering with WPCV 97.5; it asked at what times and dates the interference was received and for how long a period; it also asked how long the person completing the form had listened to WPCV and what date the interference was first noticed; I believe the forms had to be completed and filed by either the end of January or February.

So I’m guessing that the FCC was convinced that the WTMP translator was in fact infringing on WPCV’s listening area.

Just looked on the FCC query, and under links, there is a correspondence file indicating that the FCC was convinced that there was interference; won’t let me cut and paste the pdf file; will just manually “cut and paste” the first part of the letter in a separate post.

Herei’s the FCC Ltd dated 2018 Mar 28 1:45

Ref: NIA Broadcasting INC, License of FM Translator Station W248CA, St. Petersburg,fl

Update to interference complain and request for immediate suspension of authority to broadcast

Hall Comminuications Inc (Hall), licensee of WPCV, Winter Haven, FL by its counsel, herbtgy update its previous complaint regarding the operation of FM translator station licensed to NIA.

Hall’s Complinat, it submitted the declarations of five different listener was well as information from a sixth and showed that W248CA was causing interference to the reception of WPCV at 14 specific locations.

In a nutshell Hall requested that W248CA’s authority to broadcast be immediately suspending pending its construction of modified facilities and a determination that such modications have rectified the outstanding problems.

In response, NA stated itat is was reducing the power level at which W248CA was broadcasting. Additionally after discussions between Hall and Nia, the parties reached an agreement in principle would NIA would modify its translator facilities so that W248CA would no longer interfere with the reception of WPCV in Hillsborough county Florida and that Hall would not object tointerference located in Pinellas County, FL.

There are a lot more details for people that can pull this 8 page letter to view.

drt said:

...and that Hall would not object to interference located in Pinellas County, FL...

Click to expand...

I don't know why the reduction in height and maximum ERP?
A broad null to the east would be very simple and very effective.
I would also suggest relocating their facility toward the east.

As I leave TPA airport, WWRZ (MAX 98.3) is very clear.
Even if W252DF were to send much more signal eastward, all the interference area would be in the bay.
Same principle; the bay is wide enough for different stations to cover either county but not the other clearly.

Ai4i; don’t know if you were able to read the 8 page document in rerefence to this; but Hall Communications was wondering around if even the reduction to 130 watts and new antenna position was going to avoid interference in Hillsborough county.

Even with the old antenna height and 250 watts and a slight null to the east, reception in most of n.e. St. Pete south to downtown and further south to the Coast Guard station and old S.E. St Pete the reception was sketchy at best, now it is not really listenable, it’s there but a poor signal.

As far as the translator moving further west, I’m not sure where there is any viable land, if any for a free standing tower; as it is the current tower location on Starkey Road is extreme western Pinellas County about 5 -6 miles to Indian Shores, which is the most western part of Pinellas County and in between are many condos and business and the intracoastal waterway; unless they get reach an agreement with a business to put a tower on top or along side the business, they’re aren’t many option other than sticking the tower in the Gulf of Mexico. Pinellas County is pretty well paved over; 20 - 25 years ago moving west might have been more of a viable option.

I actually suggested moving the translator to the EAST and with a broad and deep null in that direction.
A broad north-west-south pattern should cover all of Pinellas county but not interfere in Hillsborough county.
BTW...does interference on a bridge over water count?

ai4i said:

I actually suggested moving the translator to the EAST and with a broad and deep null in that direction.
A broad north-west-south pattern should cover all of Pinellas county but not interfere in Hillsborough county.
BTW...does interference on a bridge over water count?

Click to expand...

It seems to me, that the bridges would count and approximately half of the Gandy Bridge, I-275 and SR 60 (Courtney Campbell bridge) are in Pinellas County.

Sorry I misread your post; going east, the only options I know of, would be the iHeart tower complex near Derby Lane (dog track) that has the 95.7 antenna (don’t know enough about engineering to know if that would present a harmonics problem) or the 1380 tower (not sure of their call letters this week!) both are as about as Far East as you could go and still not interfere with WPCV in Hillsborough county. There are the WDAE towers even further east, but that is almost on the Pinellas/Hillsborough county line.

It seems as though Hall communications is playing hard ball to protect their signal and I would not be surprised if they haven’t already done over those three bridges to check the signals; also as strange as it seems, the WTMP’s translator could not project too much of a signal southward, since the main part of the Sunshine Skyway bridge is in Hillsbourgh county. (That bridge is mostly Manatee and Pinellas counties, but the main span is technically Hillsborough county.

Edmont Key, believe it or not is also in Hillsborough county; most people assume it’s either in Pinellas or Manatee county, so if the bridges and land along the bridge count, there would have to be some type of null to the south as well.

There is now an update on the FCC FM query site; The attorneys for WTPM have sent a letter to the attorneys for WPCV basically accusing the WPCV engineers of making some false claims (in more diplomatic language) about the modifications so far and obviously a copy of that letter went to the FCC....... so the battle goes on; sounds to me that the final resolution isn’t going to bode well for WTMP listeners in St. Petersburg east of 49th ST, the High Point Area and Feather sound will need to tune in to the 1150AM or listen online.

drt said:

so the battle goes on; sounds to me that the final resolution isn’t going to bode well for WTMP listeners in St. Petersburg east of 49th ST, the High Point Area and Feather sound will need to tune in to the 1150AM or listen online.

Click to expand...

Those of you that listen to WTMP, or other FM translator signals, should be made aware that the FCC has proposed some rules changes that would stop a lot of this harassment from out-of-market stations. The proposal is technical, but stations like WTMP and many others would really benefit from loyal listeners of stations like WTMP (FM) telling the FCC that you prefer local content over that of a distant station serving another city.

You can read the FCC proposal at:
https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0419/DOC-350332A1.pdf

The electronic comments site where you can read current comments or post your own is at:

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=18-119&sort=date_disseminated,DESC

The FCC docket number is 18-119. The initial comment window is open until 5-18.

Changing their status from secondary to primary?
Maybe the same for LPFM's?

ai4i said:

Changing their status from secondary to primary?
Maybe the same for LPFM's?

Click to expand...

No, not really. The FCC proposal has several threads, but carefully maintains all translators as secondary services. What it does propose is a limit to how far out a listener can be in order to complain. Also, they have suggested that some minimal threshold of listeners be achieved before they will take action.

As an example of why this might be necessary, we have a translator client in a major NE market. A class A (6kw) FM station 60+ miles away was able to find alleged listeners to complain about supposed interference at distances in excess of 60 miles. The FCC proposal would limit complaints to those occurring within the 54dBu contour of the affected station. That would have limited the complaints to about 30 miles away. We have another situation where a single listener on a mountain top 80+ miles from a station complained about interference and caused the translator to have to replace their antenna with a narrower beam. That kind of stuff is crazy, imho.

In the case of the W248CA vs WPCV argument, the proposed rule would have protected legitimate complaints in east Tampa, but some of the complaints filed by WPCV's alleged listeners were in St. Pete Beach, Largo and Clearwater. Those complaints would have been disqualified.

One of the biggest problems with LPFM stations is illegal power. Many are running much more power than they are licensed for. Also, many of the TPO calculations are bogus allowing more transmitter power and thus boosting the stations power.

rfrus said:

One of the biggest problems with LPFM stations is illegal power. Many are running much more power than they are licensed for. Also, many of the TPO calculations are bogus allowing more transmitter power and thus boosting the stations power.

Click to expand...

Well, that's clearly true, but translators are quite different than LPFM stations, especially the fill-in translators that we are mostly seeing today.

Actually, there are all kinds of problems with many LPFM stations, but that could fill up a whole thread by itself. I also know quite a few legitimate LPFM broadcasters that do an excellent, and honest, job.

The time has come to resurrect this thread after nearly two and a half years because it seems that W248CA has recently relocated southward.
This latest CP was granted on the seventh of this month and I believe they move south fast(ly).
As I drive around Manatee county, I am hearing "all of my favorite disco and country oldies on 97.5"
(either the disco or the country oldies depending on which direction my car faces).

ai4i said:

The time has come to resurrect this thread after nearly two and a half years because it seems that W248CA has recently relocated southward.
This latest CP was granted on the seventh of this month and I believe they move south fast(ly).
As I drive around Manatee county, I am hearing "all of my favorite disco and country oldies on 97.5"
(either the disco or the country oldies depending on which direction my car faces).

Click to expand...

It's actually a "License to Cover" that was granted on 10/7/20 from the previous CP that was granted on 9/9/20. What appears to have happened is a power increase from 130 to 180 watts and a height increase from 360' to roughly 550' so the extra 50 watts essentially magnifies but still has quite the obstacle to compete with a 100kw co-channel. Their previous app to implement a directional antenna towards WPCV was denied and so they took this path subsequently which makes more sense in terms of cost and without the hassle of a DA pattern. You are right though, it did happen very quickly from CP grant to L2C.

The 1½db power increase is insignificant but the extra 58 meters is verry important, plus I ¿think? they moved a few kilometers south. A nice, north-south pattern would do them well.

ai4i said:

The 1½db power increase is insignificant but the extra 58 meters is verry important, plus I ¿think? they moved a few kilometers south. A nice, north-south pattern would do them well.

Click to expand...

Remember that PPM meter placement changes about 6% to 8% monthly and, while ther is an optimization process within each county called Geozones, it is not a requirement but just a goal not fully met ever.

So any figure about meter placement is an extreme variable. And unless your station is in the top dozen or so, ratings are of little value. Stations outside the top tier are not going to get transactional business so worrying about meters is not useful.

DavidEduardo said:

Remember...

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about ☹️