[BC] Re: IBOC in Trouble?

[Phil Alexander]

On 28 Jul 2005 at 14:43, Bill Harms wrote:

> Phil:
> 
> I disagree with you that it would kill AM.  It would actually help AM 
> because AM would end up being a better product. Going forth with the 
> current plan would surely weaken, if not kill AM. The choice is 
> there.

AM is a victim of about 40 years of mis-regulation and urban 
sprawl.

To help AM, power line radiation would need to be aggressively
enforced, the number of stations cut more or less in half, and
powers/patterns of the remaining stations modified to reduce
NIF contour levels to 5 mv/m or less. Additionally, Congress
would have to pass a law requiring AM stereo wideband receivers 
in all sets.

The total cost would be greater than IBOC, and the possibility
is zero. It's not practically or politically feasible.

Recall that the idea of IBOC AM was undoing the mess that has 
been made by unintended consequences of Commission actions and 
the broadcasters unceasing demand for more stations.


Phil Alexander, CSRE, AMD
Broadcast Engineering Services and Technology 
(a Div. of Advanced Parts Corporation) 
Ph. (317) 335-2065   FAX (317) 335-9037





-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.6/59 - Release Date: 7/27/05