[BC] Re: A different tack ....

[Rich Wood]

------ At 06:53 AM 1/19/2006, Kent Winrich, K9EZ wrote: -------

>Again, we can Nay Say, or we can offer CONCRETE ideas of improvement.
>I must say that that I certainly dont feel connected to iBiqity.  I 
>think that their  lack of communications to the engineering 
>community is certainly a pitfall.  If I were them I would be all 
>over the place.

Why? Engineers aren't paying their fees. Engineers will be involved 
in about 5-10 years when enough AM stations are on the air causing 
sales problems because of the interference. When a bunch of 
advertisers pull their accounts because they can't hear their spots, 
things will happen. Angry owners and managers (forgetting they 
approved the system) will want immediate fixes. It'll be too late.

My ham call is KF2JO. That puts me on the East Coast. In Winter, we 
have almost 2 hours where the interference is very obvious, even at 
the less than 100 station level. If this system is so awesome, we 
should be howling to get it approved for 24/7 operation. You can't 
solve a problem when the system is shut down. Fire it up and start 
making whatever facilities changes will be necessary, one at a time, 
instead of rushing to keep an audience from abandoning AM en masse. 
Let the pioneers take the arrows as they always do, the make the 
world safe for IBUZ.

Of course, you understand it'll take much longer to fix the problem 
than lose the audience. It might take half a year or more when you 
need overworked consultants to change patterns, maybe even longer to 
get the changes through the brilliant engineering staff at the FCC. 
It'll take about a week to lose the audience. They won't come back. 
That I guarantee.

Rich