- Posts
General panic and fear over the Ken Cartwright situation
General panic and fear over the Ken Cartwright situation
Every several years it seems (I have seen it twice before) this sort of thing comes up. The first time was Bill B, the last time was the fellow in Philly. This time it is Ken Cartwright. It seems to be the same situation or similar each time.
First of all there is no concerted effort by the FCC to shut down of otherwise target all Part 15 operators/transmitters, or has there ever been. Please for all those who have been watching the Ken C situation, waiting for an FCC knock at the door,, just relax and forget about it.
I speak with FCC agents on a regular basis, and like I have said before, they are ALWAYS (amazingly) goods guys, professional, will help you out when they can, UNLESS they are SURE you are trying to pull something.
I can assure people that this sort of thing WILL NOT happen on a general basis to them (the agent insisting on Ken complying with 15.209 when he owns a transmitter designed for 15.219 sort of thing)
From speaking to the agent he did have a good reason for “playing hardball”, either he felt Ken was not cooperating, or there was something else illegal going on. For example an agent would do this sort of thing if somebody was using foul language, or was a terrorist, (not saying Ken was doing that)
I am not sure why the agent was “playing hardball” with Ken but I know for sure that the agent did have a reason for what he did.
Again if you use a Part 15 to broadcast to a park, shopping mall, community, church, campground, or like use this really doesn’t apply to you, but if you try to run a “station” with commercials, get into the local network of radio station people so they know who you are, find out who the “go to” radio engineer is and use him for your engineering, the FCC will trust him. Join the local NAB. Don’t let them just “find” you one day and think you are a pirate. When some of them “find” you on the dial some in the crowd need to know who you are. DO NOT use a four letter call sign, there is a FCC law prohibiting that.
Total posts : 45366Makes Sense To Me.
Thankfully I dont Use My Callsign Over The Air
(not for Top Of Hour merely for the website)unless you count having the website being KQRO.tk as a callsign 😉
Good Information Keith
(god I hope I Got Your Name Right)
Total posts : 45366Hello Hamilton:
Your message is reassuring as it’s easily possible to feel crowded off the small real estate provided by Part 15.
In the 50s there was a radio offer from Sargent Preston of the Yukon for an actual Deed to 1-Square Inch in Alaska. That’s about what we have in this hobby.
The sad irony is that a large audience would rather hear the more creative programs from the little stations than the all-alike licensed operators.
I appreciate the great contribution you make to this pastime.
Total posts : 45366Wow, Carl, great memory there! I vaguely remember that, too 🙂
Total posts : 45366According to this article in The Oregonian, all field agent Nguyen did was read a newspaper article about Ken Cartwright marrying his girlfriend on the air. That was enough for him to investigate. Apparently any publicity concerning a part 15 station can lay the broadcaster open to being investigated.
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/11/fcc_shuts_down_folksy_low-powe.html
Also, to quote the article, “The FCC says the station is allowed a signal strength that carries just over 98 feet.” Are they simply quoting agent Nguyen here or is this an official statement from the FCC in D.C.?
I recall back in 2005 when Honda was doing a “talking billboard” campaign using part 15 AM TX’s in Los Angeles. I photographed one of the transmitters and the picture shows the TX ground lead attached to one of the billboard’s metal support bars. Would that be an illegal installation? Because, if it isn’t, I can’t see much difference between that and attaching a ground lead to a 40 or 50 foot tower.
BTW, the Honda ‘billboard transmitters’ were sending out a clean signal for about 3/4 of a mile and noisy at a mile.
Total posts : 45366That’s really taking liberties with our liberties …
Also, to quote the article, "The FCC says the station is allowed a signal strength that carries just over 98 feet." Are they simply quoting agent Nguyen here or is this an official statement from the FCC in D.C.?AFAIK, there is no such rule, no such “federal standard”, no public notices … in short, nothing in FCC policy or regulations for operation under Part 15 that mentions any number like that.
Also, AFAIK, the only Public Notice for unlicensed Part 15 in existence for AM and FM BCBs is #14089 issued July 24, 1991, in which a radius of 200 feet is stated as “approximate coverage” … which is about what would be expected if the short wire (3m) antenna was not loaded and accurately tuned to resonance.
I don’t know what avenues of review and recourse are available to Ken Cartright, but at this point he has nothing to lose if he raises a stink. It might help clarify ambiguity in the regs. If the newspaper is quoting an actual FCC policy statement, then the FCC will have to defend that position before the public with cases and rule of law.
At least if that happens, we’ll know what is and is not legal with more clarity.
Total posts : 45366it’s statements like these that make me nervous…
But Nguyen found the station’s transmission line, antenna and ground lead exceeded the 3-meter height allowed. Plus, KENC can be heard over three transmitters, each of which covers 10 to 12 blocks in Stayton and neighboring Sublimity. That’s too far.
multiple transmitters should not be a concern, and for all purposes putting the damn thing up on a tower should not be a concern.
lets face it. all that metal is not going to efficiently radiate at such a low power level.
riches figures are theoretical. ask a licensed broadcaster who has to turn his signal down to less than couple watt for pre sunrise/post sunset how well that piss weak signal radiates off his heavy aluminum tower.
40 ft of heavy aluminum does not add that much gain to the antenna to be of any concern.
all it does is give a ground to help the Tx tune up easier.
now if you run a 40 ft copper ground wire down the tower and insulated from the tower into a 8ft ground rod then yes, we may see some substantial signal gain.
which is why i believe that one DC agent kieth used to have quoted on his website said to ground the transmitter to the top of a massive metal object and the massive metal object would not be part of the ground.
this is because that massive metal object would absorb most of the RF and effectively neutralize any gains from the extended ground.
any engineer with REAL WORLD am broadcast experience can confirm this.
Total posts : 45366In his opening post on this thread Hamilton’s last paragraph advises against using 4-letter call signs for Part 15 stations, and I will take this to apply also to 3-letter call signs, since some U.S. stations still have 3 call letters. I will also assume we’re talking about signs with the first letter “K” or “W” and I imagine “X” (Mexico) and “C” (Canada) are probably not good. But I have established a selection button of as many Part 15 stations as I find to have websites and notice that the majority have standard FCC-Like call letters http://www.kdxradio.com/am.html
I’ve been using “KDX,” which sounds license-ish, but recently started a second station, so I changed the official call letters to KDX1 and KDX2, which solves the call letter issue for us.
Total posts : 45366TITLE 47–TELECOMMUNICATION
CHAPTER I–FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (CONTINUED)
PART 73_RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES–Table of Contents
Subpart H Rules Applicable to All Broadcast Stations
Sec. 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments.
(l) Users of nonlicensed, low-power devices operating under part 15 of this chapter may use whatever identification is currently desired, so long as propriety is observed and no confusion results with a station for which the FCC issues a license.
——————————————————————————————
From their rules, how would you interpret it as there is no mention of not using call signs…
Total posts : 45366The problem comes if a listener becomes confused and assumes a K or W call sign is either licensed or a station pretending to be licensed. Also their are types of people who deliberately mount absurd arguments and could accuse a K or W station of attempting to appear licensed. This puts the poor Part 15er on the defensive. It’s actually a fairly common type of argument used by many trouble makers.
Being fair, reasonable and honest only goes so far.
Total posts : 45366So regarding a question of confusion, do the rules relate to the FCC or the listening audience?
Certainly the FCC wouldn’t be confused as they know the frequencies of the calls they issue.
When I tune across the band and hear a new station call, I don’t know for certain that they are licensed. I’m not confused and I don’t care.
The rule says I must observe propriety. I can’t pretend to be another station by using their call as this would cause confusion for the listening audience. I would like to think this only applies to the market area of a station I can hear.
I am authorized by the FCC to operate my unlicensed station and their rules clearly state that I can use whatever identification I desire so long as I avoid representing my station as another licensed station.
Since BCB DX listening is enjoyed by a select few, if I inadvertantly picked a call used by a station out of my area would that confuse anyone?
The FCC didn’t shut down KENC because he used a “K” call sign. Rather, they think he should be classified under Part 15.209 because the agent didn’t like his antenna installation. As such KENC’s field strength exceeded the Part 15.209 limit.
I’m sure they would have added that to the list if they could.
Total posts : 45366The 98 foot range mentioned in the article is probably a misunderstanding resulting from the Section 15.209 field strength limit of 14.8 uV/m at 30 meters specified by the FCC agent. 30 meters is 98.4 feet.
Ironically, even in Stayton, Oregon, where the population is only 7300, the background noise is probably high enough so that a field strength of only 14.8 uV/m can’t be heard. The receiver antenna would have to be closer than 98.4 feet from the transmitter antenna for the signal to be heard.
The large document, mentioned in the article, containing the applicable rules, would be the complete text of Part 15. Actually, only a tiny portion of Part 15 is applicable to Ken’s station.
Ken’s other two transmitters were not cited. The NOUO only applied to the one mounted on the 40 foot tower. In an OET opinion linked on the Rangemaster website, multiple transmitters are permitted under Part 15, although it is not clear whether synchronization is allowed or not.
Total posts : 45366What I found most interesting about “The Oregonian” article is that FCC agents don’t only respond to complaints, but may initiate enforcement actions on their own. Ken Cartwright is trying to discover who turned him in; but, if the FCC agent is telling the truth, Ken attracted the attention of the agent because of his high profile–especially because of his much-publicized on-air wedding.
Total posts : 45366much-publicized on-air wedding
that will do it. an on air heterosexual marriage between two Caucasian individuals seems to be highly frowned upon these days.
now if it was an interracial homosexual marriage where one of the parties is an illegal immigrant no one would have batted an eye.
thank you MTv for starting the decline in morals in this country.
this is meant to be commentary on the present state of mind in this country and has nothing to do with a particular race or gender or sexual preference.
But i firmly believe if had been what passes for political correct marriage these days he would still be on the air.
and that is very sad because the constitution says every one is to be treated equal.
MLK Jr. Said it and was shot over it.
Marvin Gaye Talked about in his music and then was shot by his dad.
john lennon advocated for it and was shot.
JFK as well.
Bur Jesse Jackson, and all these people who stir the pot live on forever it seems.
and some guy trying serve his community gets busted for on air heterosexual Caucasian marriage.
anyone see a trend here?
Total posts : 45366“The 98 foot range mentioned in the article is probably a misunderstanding resulting from the Section 15.209 field strength limit of 14.8 uV/m at 30 meters specified by the FCC agent. 30 meters is 98.4 feet.”
And herein lies the problem. We have here an agent who identified the Rangemaster as 15.209 device (because he used the more restrictive field strength measurement) when it is a 15.219 TX–and the FCC did nothing to stop him. Plus the agent only targeted the one Rangemaster on the tower using the more restrictive 15.209 criteria but did not target the other transmitters.
With such an inconsistency something is clearly rotten in the state of Oregon over this issue and it could be the agent (hey, maybe he’s bucking for a promotion along with a transfer out of Oregon to Washington D.C.) not to mention the ambiguous, fluid application of FCC part 15 rules.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
