[BC] FM TX spacing question (cross-post)

[Steve Michaels N4AY]

Thanks Mark.  What if the overlap is insignificant, and the stations
overlapped agree to mutual interference?  Is that kind of thing still done?

Thanks again,

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
[mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Mark Humphrey
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 7:02 PM
To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [BC] FM TX spacing question (cross-post)

On 2/7/06, Steve Michaels N4AY <steve at stevemichaels.net> wrote:
>
> Perplexing question-what is the difference between part 73.207 and 73.215?


207 is based on distance only.  If the site under consideration exceeds
minimum distance requirements with respect to all pertinent stations, it is
considered acceptable.  (70 dBu coverage over the principal community must
also be shown)

215 provides a few kilometers of "wiggle room" on the distances, but you
also need to show contour protection to any facility that doesn't meet the
207 minimum.  This can be accomplished with a directional antenna, although
sometimes terrain works in your favor.


> If a station licensed under 73.207 can upgrade using the 73.215 spacing,
> what has to be done and how long does it take?


A CP application must be filed, including a contour protection exhibit.
Depending on the FCC processing backlog, it could be granted in a few months
to a year or more...  and if you request a waiver, be prepared to wait much
longer!

Anybody on the list ever
> done it?


Yes.  It's quite common to see 215 applications filed in all but the
least-congested parts of the country.

Mark

_______________________________________________
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/