What is the FCC ID number on this particular transmitter?
This is a link for the only commercially available type certificated transmitter for use on 76-88 MHz that I know of....
http://www.comtek.com/bst25.html
One needed a Part 74 license to operate it previously.
The FCC ID (for Scosche FMT4R Transmitter):
RLQAT100
If the FCC has
- already authorized
4 watts EIRP TVBDs LICENSE FREE on this band, why would they be concerned about a flea-powered Part 15 FM station in the same band.
If these would go toe-to-toe, it's obvious which would win.
because 4 watts is not allowed to be continuous.
The Grant from the FCC says lower Freq of 88.1. The unit I have in my hand says 87.7.
Interesting, indeed...
For those of you curious about what the NAB's stance on the 50mw rules are:
http://www.nab.org/documents/filings/700MHzComments030110.pdf
Ok, so it drops carrier periodically to check for activity on it's operating frequency. Big deal. It will run 4 watts more than it doesn't.
50mW is already authorized via a Part 74 license. The problem is, not everyone is elegible for that license. This levels the playing field for those that aren't, like Part 15 FM operators.
How fitting that the National Association of Broadcasters is also known as N.A.B.
Mirriams Dictionary defines the word NAB as a noun meaning:
tr.v. Informal, nabbed, nab·bing, nabs.
1. To seize (a fugitive or wrongdoer); arrest.
2. To grab; snatch. <--- Hmmm.
My personal addition to this definition is:
3. To steal the thunder away from Part 15 enthusiast's.
It wouldn't bother me so much if it wasn't for the FCC being so timid that they take everyting the NAB say's as the gospel.
It's the NAB not the government, which is what the FCC is, a branch of our government so to speak.
Oh well , it's too early in the game to throw in the towel just yet.
The Part 74 rules list motion picture and television producers as qualified along with licensed TV stations, and, although retired, the video and radio production company that served as a longtime career still exists in principal. In fact, my Part 15 station is owned by the corporation as a non-commercial project. Is this a shoe in the door?
Could not ANYONE set up a production business as the umbrella for their Part 15 station?
Part 74 only applies to the groups of people you mentioned. How does a church, or live music performer get one?
With the new rules, a Part 74 license is not needed.
As I said, the new rules level the playing field. You could drop $1200 on a Comtek BST-25 and be on the air as soon as it is delivered and plugged in! It is the ONLY certificated TX on the market, that I know of. Beleive me, I've been researching this since last year when I applied for and was granted a Part 74 license (at about 1 watt ERP!)
It is a steep price tag, for what you get, though. A mono TX capable of transmitting anywhere between 76-87.8 mHz at 50mW output, not including the 6dB antenna gain they (the FCC) allow right off the bat.
Isn't it funny that there are only 2 licensed
stations on 87.9 in the U.S.? It is FM band
channel 200.
There is KSFH, 87.9 MHz, in Mountain View,
CA. It is a high school station running 10 watts
at 245 feet BELOW average terrain. I looked
at it's coverage area and the primary contour
is about 2 miles around the transmitter.
Then there is K200AA, on 87.9. Looks like this
is a translator. It's in Sun Valley, NV. I think
it's 28 watts, and it repeats KAWZ, which is a
100,000 watt religious station. It's 112 feet
above ground level.
It sure is funny that KSFH in Mountain View
is 245 feet below average terrain, and K200AA
in Sun Valley is 112 feet above ground level.
(They don't mention HAAT for K200AA.)
I wonder how these 2 transmitters came to
be licensed on 87.9, and why only just these
two? I guess there were no channel 6 stations
around or FM stations on 88.1 or 88.3 nearby.
By the way, that Comtek BST-25 is very interesting
even though it's expensive and only goes up to 87.7 mono.
It can even be used with a 6dB gain antenna.
I hate to sound ignorant on this, but, as we know, the
Comtek was authorized for Part 74. Because of my
vision situation, I haven't been able to read that whole
FCC document yet that we have been talking about.
Does the Comtek BST-25 really fall under the Part 15 rules now,
or am I not understanding what is going on here? To
tbone 903, I believe what you are saying - but is there
a time lag or something?
Actually, I would have to win the lottery to afford one.
Thanks a lot everybody!
Bruce, MICRO1690/1700
Both of the 87.9's were relocated there after being forced off their original Frequencies as Class D was dismantled.
Bruce,
A TX used under the waiver MUST comply with Part 74, Subpart H technical rules. I suspect that is because there is no bonafide Part 15 equipment on the market yet.
Read Paragraph 82 Carefully-
82. Under these waivers, wireless microphones may be operated as Part 15 devices without a
license in the 700 MHz Band under the conditions adopted in this Report and Order, and they can also
operate in the core TV bands. Operation under these waivers is subject to the following conditions. First,
the wireless microphones must comply with specified technical requirements under Part 15, which are the
same technical rules that we are proposing in the Further Notice for wireless microphone operations under
Part 15 (as set forth in Appendix E). Second, the devices must be certificated under the rules
applicable to certification under our Part 74, Subpart H rules. Third, the devices shall not cause harmful
interference and must accept any interference received pursuant to Section 15.5 of our Rules.242 Finally,
users operating in the 700 MHz Band must comply with the conditions for continued operation in that
band during the transition period, including the early clearing procedures discussed above.243 The
waivers will be effective upon the release of the Report and Order.
(The document this paragraph is from- released in January, 2010.)
Elswhere in this waiver, I interpret that a Part 74 authorized user trumps a Part 15 operation on the same frequency, on interference issues though. That's why I have my Part 74 license on hand...it actually authorizes almost a watt ERP through antenna gain using a 50mW transmitter. The antenna is almost impractical in size, however.