Thank you Rich for hinting out my misplaced decimal-point: "(.999 mW) would be OK now, as long as FCC §15.239 is met. Ditto even for 999 mW."
Of course I meant to say 999 mW, or perhaps 999.999 mW, just less than 1 Watt.
_____________
I was not hinting at a misplaced decimal point, Mr Blare.
Rather I was pointing out that NEITHER 0.999 mW, NOR 999 mW (or by inference, any power input/output of any FCC-certified transmitter using the FM broadcast band) is prohibited -- if that system actually complies with FCC §15.239.
That part of the message was obvious and didn't require any further comment, but it's o.k. to have repeated it.
Perhaps I took something from your overall message that you didn't consciously intend to say, in any case it worked out well.
My comments are more to the point.
... My comments are more to the point.
And exactly what point are you trying to make, Mr Blare?
Start at #1 and read every post until you get to here, then draw a conclusion from what you read.
Actually, any transmitter power level can be used as Part 15.239 does not specify transmitter power. Rather, Part 15.239 specifies the field strength permitted at a specific distance.
Of course, higher power would require less system efficiency usually controlled by the antenna system or lack of.
And of course the idea here is to lobby the FCC for a hobby class FM service where it is felt that 1 watt would do.
But then again rather than specify power perhaps simply permitting a higher field strength is in order. Then one could take into consideration system efficiency, TPO and HAAT like the big boys do.
MRAM 1500 understands what is being discussed in this and other threads.
Let it serve as a guide post for members who express uncertainty.
MRAM's approach as just expressed is a definite way of going at a change as is being sought.
It's a simple idea. Easy for almost everyone to understand.
Our friends outside the USA have reported that the Ramsey turned all the way up to 25 mW and connected to the ultimate FM antenna that Radio Brandy talks about will travel 3 miles. I assume to a Car Radio. I'd think to a boombox you'll be hard pressed to go 2 miles max. But this is about the range I'm asking for. Its about the same range as an FRS Walkie Talkie. I was actually asking for the same range with an inside antenna or one with the transmitter. What one would have to do is figure out the ERP of 25 mW into the ultimate FM antenna as the brand name is called. We'd need to know the db gain of it. Then we could figure out how much ERP it put out. Asking for that amount of ERP would get us the Range we really want. Its why I say a little less than a watt. Maybe someone could find out the gain of that antenna and do a calculation. Plus I'd like to know how high the antenna was to achieve that range with only 25 mW.
The key to that 3 mile range isn't the antenna - it's the 25mw output. With any kind of resonant antenna and the right conditions (i.e., antenna mounted at a high elevation, sensitive receiver at the other end, line of sight) you can easily get 2-3 miles range. Of course, if you don't have the right conditions, you'd be hard pressed to get 1/2 mile.
And that's the problem that the FCC will have with changing the rules to ERP in the milliwatt range. While some might be happy with, say, 1/2 mile range, other enterprising individuals may push those milliwatts to the limit and get far greater range - in the process, greatly increasing the possibility of interference to licensed stations. Don't forget that right now, you can generate Part 15 field strength with about 15 nanowatts (a nanowatt is a BILLIONTH of a watt). Talking about milliwatts is talking about 6 orders of magnitude difference.
So if the FCC created a hobby class FM service based on a service contour which takes into consideration HAAT and ERP, the interference issue could be mitigated while providing a predictable coverage area.
But just like speed limits, some will comply-some will not, pushing the envelope will still be a problem.