"Low Power" means different things in different places

I know that 500 mW EIRP is allowed for unlicensed FM broadcastin in New Zealand, but I was surprised to learn from RADIOBRANDY that 10 W is allowed in Norway. I was not able to find out anyting about the LPFM rules in Norway on the Internet. I would really like to know more about this. I wonder if RADIOBRANDY can cite some reference.

Regarding interference: One simple test for spurious emissions is to tune across the FM dial and see if your signal pops up else ware. For harmonics tune your transmitter to 98.3 then turn a nearby TV to channel 10 (your channel 10 needs to be active), some minor hare boning may appear in the picture (wiggly lines). That would indicate your transmitter has pretty good harmonic suppression, if the picture is the wiped out; you will have a problem with your neighbors and the transmitter should not be used.

Regarding your power levels; if you are in a condo community (private property) and using the supplied antenna, you should not worry about the Feds knocking your door down. Ramsey and others sells micro power transmitters like yours by the thousands, those transmitters are not going to cause harmful interference anywhere near the level IBOC broadcasting causes. The FCC seems to turn a blind eye towards IBOC & CFL interference that wreck havoc on radios across America, they also seem to give a pass to the countless pirates running 100's of watts and using every four letter in the book in New York & Florida.

If the FCC started targeting micro-powered broadcasters, while ignoring the others; there would be a public outcry you could hear from coast to coast, and it would be a public relations nightmare the FCC and NAB may not be willing to deal with. The NAB, the driving force behind the FCC has concerns about its members being forced to back their local communities (very costly). Micro-broadcasters fill a void left in communities where the mega corporate broadcasters have left, having thousands of micro powered transmitters in the field has proven that they can coexist with full power broadcasters; causing less harmful interference than a CFL (compact florescent light) generates. Once the NAB understands it's to their advantage to have micro-broadcasters come in and fill a void in communities vacated by full power broadcasters, they will relax their concerns and so will the FCC.
The last thing NAB member’s want is to be forced back to their local communities, besides right now Wi-Fi broadcasting is a far greater threat to them than a 250 milliwatt neighborhood broadcaster will ever be.

With proof in hand that micro broadcasters will not cause the harmful interference anticipated, we might be able to justify higher powers legally like the 300 milliwatts allowed in New Zealand and 10 watts in Norway.

Be responsible with your transmitters and programming, and we might be able to get the rules changed sooner than later.

Steve
www.radiobrandy.com

Steve wrote:

...If the FCC started targeting micro-powered broadcasters, while ignoring the others; there would be a public outcry you could hear from coast to coast, and it would be a public relations nightmare the FCC and NAB may not be willing to deal with....

By micro-powered broadcasters I have to assume that this refers to part 15 AM and FM operators and if not then my remarks should be disregarded and with a reasoned reply I will stand corrected. Steve, I know from your many previous posts and by visiting your web site that you have accomplished remarkable things but I have to question why you state there will be a public outcry if microbroadcasting (assuming you mean part 15 stuff) is targeted by the FCC. I would like to believe this but experience has taught me otherwise. I have been a broadcast radio DXer and part 15 operator for over 50 years and I have never heard another micro station on the air except for a Talking House which went away within a week. I know of only one other part 15 station near me in Marysville, Ohio which is about 15 miles distant and I cannot hear his signal. Given your experience what makes you think there will be a "public outcry" if the FCC clamps down on part 15? Pardon me if I take this out of context or make statements from ignorance but could you please elaborate. I don't believe the public knows about nor cares about microbroadcasting. unless your definition differs from mine.

I also do not see any chance that the rules will be changed in the foreseeable future pertaining to part 15 operation. As I recall you recently obtained a license for a low power operation and, if so, congratulations, and if licensed low power operation such as this is what you mean by microbroadcasting where the effective range is more than a few houses down the street then I am all for it, but please clarify if this is what you were referencing.

Neil

RADIOBRANDY's claim of 10 watts allowed in Norway might be easy to confirm if one reads and understands Norwegian. I, for one, don't. The website for the Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority, www.npt.no is entirely in Norwegian. About all I was able to find out searching the Internet in English is that Norway does allow LPFM, but I was not able to find out anything about the regulations.

For years, I have read rumors claiming higher powers allowed for unlicensed broadcasting in other countries; but the only country I know of where that is actually true is New Zealand.

"Given your experience what makes you think there will be a "public outcry" if the FCC clamps down on part 15"

When the FCC raided a community radio station in Santa Cruz, the community came unglued with protest and few flat tires on agent cars. Even local city and law enforcement got involved, with their open disgust for the FCC's actions. People are becoming more aware of the loss of local radio here in California, especially in communities like Tehachapi where both stations are programmed from out of town broadcasters and have directed the signals away from the COL, There are places in Tehachapi where you can look at the transmitter site and still not be able to get a signal. I had a long talk with the mayor on the issue; they don't like the fact they have no way of communicating with the public in the event of a train derailment or prison break. They especially don't like the fact the stations refuse to do anything for the community. Clear Channel owned 103.1FM, which is licensed to the city of Tehachapi, told a mayor they don’t want anything to do with Tehachapi and that, was before they turned it into a repeater for a Los Angeles station.

There are hundreds of communities like Tehachapi, up and down the west coast that do to the mountainous terrain have little to no FM radio reception, and very noisy AM signals and are glad to have someone come in and fill the void by starting a local radio station. Even local law enforcement appreciates having the use of these stations during emergencies. A 100-milliwatt FM radio station is a godsend for some communities that have nothing else to listen too. Some operate as mini repeaters to bring stations on the other side of the mountains into the valleys, with the ability to go live in an emergency.

To help with our cause, we have done an extensive public awareness program; demonstrating and educating the public as to what micro power broadcasting is all about and how their communities can benefit from such stations without causing interference to other radio stations. The people that see our demonstration get it! They understand because of IBOC they can no longer listen to KDWN in the High Desert, or because of a move in or out they can no longer listen to a station they liked when they drive to the city because the move in or out interferes with it or the signal is gone from the move out. The folks also get the wild claims of interference by micro powered broadcasters are nothing more than scare tactics the NAB uses and are without merit.

The public of all ages out west are very aware of the loss of local radio, and how micro radio stations can help fill the void. At the same time they like the fact it gives the younger folks something positive to do with their time. I feel and hear the anger growing over the state of radio as it has become. It's not just the younger folks; it's the elderly too. Retirement centers are tickled pink when we help set up a radio station that plays the music they like along with the old radio shows, they would notice if someone tried to take it away from them and would become rather hostile.

Broadcasters we have talked too, have no objections to these little stations coming into the communities they cannot serve. Most educated broadcasters understand the need for these communities to be served with something and know they are not going to affect their revenue stream.

If it's not Part 15, then a new class of broadcasting needs to be created like there is in New Zealand. In the past, the FCC has tried to raise the power for unlicensed broadcasting to 1 watt, including adding a second FM band that was considered for the 200Mhz band with an emphasis on public radio. I don't need to tell you who shot both ideals down! The NAB of coarse!

The more responsible micro broadcasters we have on the air, the more it helps boaster our case that these stations cause less interference and danger to the listening public than a CFL or dimmer switch; while providing a valuable community service at the same time.

The fact that there are thousands of low power transmitters AM & FM on the air already is a good start to help prove our case. For me a micro-powered broadcaster operates with less than 400 milliwatts TPO AM or FM; but 1 watt would help in rural areas

I do think if a user of a micro transmitter intentionally interferes with a licensed radio station, public safety or programs or uses foul language where children might hear it; then let them be fined and suffer the consequences. But to deny thousands of local communities from having a local radio station is also totally unreasonable; especially where it can affect public safety. The NAB. can't have their cake and eat it too; take a station, leave a station!

The current Part 15 rules are completely outdated when it comes to unlicensed broadcasting. If New Zealand is able to come up with a practical solution, then certainly we should be able too. It was public pressure that brought about change in New Zealand, and that is what it will take here. If it were not for intense public pressure in a form of a mass revolt, we would all still be stuck driving 55 MPH across the desert. Congress did not all of a sudden decide to lift the 55; they were forced into just like they are being forced into taking a second look at the outrageous fees CARP wanted from small Ma & Pa streaming broadcasters.

Sometimes a revolt is necessary for the poor folks to get the Governments attention; I remember an old tea party in Boston that that worked out pretty good for us. Since high priced lobbyists are out of the budget for most of us, a revolt is the next best thing to get ridiculous laws changed. The part 15 FM rules are the most outdated and need to be loosened up a bit or create a new broadcast class. Just think of how good it would be for the economy with the mass business & job creation around the nation that would result from it; from new transmitters, antenna and solar manufactures to radio host to fill the airwaves and everything in between.

Sometimes it's good for the rebels to revolt and stand up to an out of control or misguided government. I know a recent revolt even got the attention of the Icelandic government, when the heads of state gave it up and walked out.

Lets not forget it was rebel broadcasters that proved a need for and got LPFM, Micro broadcasters can help fill in another much needed void. The government never hears from a silent and complacent public, and laws are never changed without a good protest.

Public awareness is critical to our success in changing the rules:
First thing we do during our demonstration; is prove that Micro broadcasting is safe and will not cause harmful interference when used properly. Once people have those concerned resolved, in most cases they express concern (outage) that the government and the NAB would lie to them, using scare and fear tactics to make their phony case. Image if we could perform our demonstration nationwide the influence we would have not only with the general public but also with local community leaders. One thing I have learned in our travels; is the fact the public does not like it when the government lies to them, especially solely to benefit an origination like the NAB.

Regarding 10 watts in Norway: I got my information from a former member who would spend his summers in Norway visiting family and checked it out with the government there. The only loophole is you are not allowed to say anything bad about the government, violating that rule brings swift action. Apparently Norwegians are a little sensitive about their King!

In the USA sometimes you have to remind the government who the boss is!

Thanks to a 5 & 6 year old, this has only taken five hours to write.

Steve

Steve,

Thanks for the detailed and informative reply to my question regarding public outcry. Since my previous post, I was able to find several stories in videos on youtube regarding "pirate radio". Anyone interested in this should watch some of them. A couple of them showed local public officials protesting the raids.

It seems to me that from the Communications Act of 1934 to the present the main driving force in restricting unlicensed radio transmission by the common folks is to prevent an undercutting of the revenue stream of the licensed operators. Witness that amateur radio operators are not allowed to handle messages for money or of pecuniary interest. This was done to prevent hams from handling traffic which would otherwise be done by commercial companies such as Western Union. Technically, hams cannot legally call a cab using autopatch.

The other aspect, often cited, is the potential for interference to other operations. This is valid, but given modern technology low power transmitters are capable of producing clean signals and as long as they do not "step on" another station's signal there should be no problem. For example, we are allowed to use 4 watts on AM in the CB as long as the transceiver is certified and not modified. The same approach could be used for unlicensed broadcast equipment.

Part 15 operation in the broadcast bands was never intended to permit "broadcasting". It was for "phono oscillator" uses similar to the XM and IPOD FM units we can purchase...short range intended only for linking to a quality audio system for playback.

Perhaps rather than modifying the part 15 rules it would be better to write new rules specifically providing for low power "neighborcasting" yet the threat to commercial interests, real or not, would still have to be overcome.

Neil

Under my proposal a new set of Part 15 Rules allowing various power ranges from 100mW up to 15 watts might possibly work according to economic logic.

Mainly, the choice of power level would be an economic matter. It's been very obvious from reading postings on this website that perhaps the majority of hobbyists find $100 for a 100mW transmitter a major expense and more serious wealthier users spend $1k for Procasters and Rangemasters. Normally, persons working to serve a community begin dealing with larger budgets and the field of 1-watt on upward would narrow down quickly because of the steeply rising equipment and operating cost.

I chose 15-watts as a top because of published data that names 20-watts as the level necessary to generate a meaningful skywave signal which could lead to interference problems off in the distance.

The only reason my plan will probably be ignored is because the government is not working with either logic or community interest and the NAB and NPR could care less about the audience actually being served. Most licensed stations are running cheap to maximize their bottom line and the idea of serving the audience has been off the table for years. For all of them it's all about control.

Claire Said: "I chose 15-watts as a top because of published data that names 20-watts as the level necessary to generate a meaningful skywave signal which could lead to interference problems off in the distance."

I said: If that data were correct, amateur radio operators with modest antennas, and power less than 5 watts, would not be able to communicate on a regular basis. LOL!

73, John

John,

We are jumping into the realm of wishful thinking with this and I know you know the estimate of "needed" power is subject to more than pulling numbers out of the ether.

First, are we talking about AM or FM? The context of this thread seems to be FM so maybe we should just look at this for a moment.

Yes, hams can communicate reliably with fractions of watts. I did so with 250 mW on 2 meters with a handheld at a distance of 100 miles. My contact was a pilot ham and he was at 10,000 feet altitude. I can work repeaters 20 miles distant with 2 watts but the repeater antennae are on 1000 foot towers. So we know that the conditions are key to performance.

I am going to pull a number out of the ether also and guess that we are talking about 5 to 10 watts ERP to cover a radius of about four miles on the FM broadcast band to allow mobile and table top receivers to function. Sure is fun to speculate isn't it?

I recall serving on a committee once where we were trying to decide on the size of the letters for a sign. We went back and forth about 2", 4", etc. until someone said "Why don't we start with how far away we want people to be able to read it and work back from that?". If we are going to pursue LPFM neighborcasting then I suggest we start with range rather than power.

I offer this just for fun and for thought and comment.

Neil

My proposed "ethereal" numbers had strictly the AM medium wave band in mind and have no relevance to SW or FM. And it was fun. Who is Claire?

Thanks Carl for the prompt to comment on AM. We have a completely different situation than what I was citing for FM. We also have something to gauge the requirements, namely the TIS stations.

I am no expert on this but if I recall the TIS are allowed up to 10 watts and have an antenna height restriction but they also have a field strength restriction. Nonetheless, it is a guide to what to expect.

Here, the city TIS is located 2 miles from my house and I can receive them Q3 in my basement with a portable AM radio (lots of light dimmers here). On my 'big ear" antenna and comm. grade receiver they are Q5. (for those wondering, Q1 is barely readable, Q5 is full quieting and perfectly readable). I can receive them mobile at distances up to 20 miles (Q2 or Q3). Any one else checked local TIS ranges?

More to think about.

Neil

I manage/program our city advisory AM station on 1650 kHz.

Currently the output power is at 4 watts into a 10 foot antenna mounted on the 2nd story flat roof of a fire station. The signal can be heard Q5 at 2 miles, Q3 at 5 miles. And of course with such a short antenna you will find areas where the signal will drop out within these distances.

I have been able to hear the signal 8 miles out.

The station was installed by a subcontractor of I S S. They did not use a field strength meter, rather they went by typical installation guidelines.

Point well taken. 🙂

73, me