[BC]a question for the CFR experts

Sat Dec 31 20:57:54 CST 2005

No -  it is up to you to have a plant that is in spec at the time of an 
inspection and have the records to prove it has been kept in spec.

R

JYRussell at academicplanet.com wrote:
> thank you Tom!!  this is one of those replies to store and reread from 
> time to time.
> 
>   I guess I'm just carried away with how much torque the FCC would 
> have... the picture I've had in my mind would be the man with a badge 
> asking me why I didn't do something to stop it from happening again, 
> once I knew we were "interfering" with someone else's contour...  I 
> figured it was up to me to be able to prove out how it was happening due 
> to something external to my stations...
> 
> Jason
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Taggart" <tpt at eurekanet.com>
> To: <broadcast at radiolists.net>
> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [BC]a question for the CFR experts
> 
> 
>> Jason Russell asked:
>>
>> "Isn't it spec'd in the CFR that it is indeed patently illegal to
>> intentionally attempt to communicate by commercial radio communication 
>> with
>> parties beyond your licensed contour..? (Or some fancy language 
>> version of
>> that...)"
>>
>>
>> Nope, nada, nich, nyet,non..
>>
>> Contours are specified in the CFR for several reasons:
>>
>> 1.  For allocation purposes.  Contours, either predicted or measured, 
>> are used to determine if a new station, or a modified system would 
>> cause interference to existing authorizations by overlapping with 
>> certain contours of those exilsting stations.
>>
>> 2.  To determine if a new station, or a modified authorization meets 
>> minimum coverage requirements of the city of license. (e.g. coverage 
>> by a 5 mv/m AM signal or 70 dbu FM signal)
>>
>> 3.  For purposes of ascertainment, usually using the 1 mv contour to 
>> determine the "community" covered by a station and hence the area 
>> within which the station must provide a service to the public and 
>> demonstrate that its programing covers issues of importance or 
>> interest to this community.
>>
>> 4.  For cross-ownership purposes, where the market size is determined 
>> by the number of city grade signals that overlap with the stations 
>> that are to be acquired.  (Superceded by a different test now in the 
>> metro counties of rated markets)
>>
>> If you've followed the "DX Test" thread, its obvious that if you 
>> accidentally left your daytime AM station on overnight, it might not 
>> be very wise to respond to requests for QSL cards.  However, if you 
>> are operating legally, and propogation conditions allow some DX'er to 
>> make a rare catch, there is certainly no law preventing you from 
>> responding. Indeed, especially if the listener is a teenager, why not 
>> respond, explaining why he heard your station, what kind of equipment 
>> you are using, and other distant locations you've been heard in.  With 
>> most kids ignoring radio in favor of computers and I-pods, we need new 
>> people interested in this business.
>>
>> AM: We all know AM will go long distances at night, even with a little 
>> power.  DX'ers have always looked for daytimers on winter evenings 
>> just before sunset.  Here in the midwest, I've heard a number of 
>> east-coast daytimers over the years come booming in around 4 in the 
>> afternoon, just before their sunset. On the other side of the coin, 
>> when I owned a daytimer on 1570, I remembered being 15 miles away from 
>> the tower at 9 in the morning listening to another station in 
>> Alabama.  It's not intereference, just physics.
>>
>> Of course, nowadays, theree are so many stations with some kind of 
>> nighttime authorizations that many channels are nothing but a jumble 
>> at night.  But stranges conditions may make for interesting DX.  I 
>> remember about a year ago or so, with a low in the sunspot cycle, I 
>> picked up some low power stations in Florida that suddenly emerged 
>> from the usual jumble one night; while some of the normal powerhouse 
>> clears vanished from the dial.
>>
>> FM:  The basic tool for predicting coverage on FM is the Commission's 
>> 50/50 chart, which is based on  a series of measurements made long ago 
>> creating a set of curves based on an antenna 30 feet above ground.  It 
>> is called the 50/50 chart because it represents signal strengths for 
>> given powers/ahaat at "50% of the receiver locations 50% of the 
>> time."  So if the 50/50 chart predicts that your Class A station 
>> should have a 60 dbu signal 17 miles out from your transmitter, if you 
>> went out to that point with an FIM, popped your antenna up 30 feet, 
>> you might find 1 mv/m signal. Or 1.5 mv/m. Or .75 m/v. And, like Ohio 
>> weather, if you didn't like what you saw, you could just wait a few 
>> minutes and the reading would change.
>>
>> Hence your FM station's "contours" are nothing more than "best guesses."
>>
>> Ducting and Sporadic E are natural phenomena affecting VHF, just as 
>> the night to day cycle affects medium wave propagation.
>> A friend of mine and former business partner in my FM station has 
>> caught FM stations from all over the country from a short tower in his 
>> backyard. Including a Class D station out in South Dakota, or Iowa 
>> somewhere. Again, if your FM comes crashing down on another station 
>> for an hour or two because of ducting, it is technically not 
>> interference, but something we live with as FM broadcasters.
>> -- 
>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
>> http://www.radiolists.net/
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.9/217 - Release Date: 
>> 12/30/2005
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
> http://www.radiolists.net/
> 