[BC] Alternative reality

[Mike McCarthy]

There are ITU treaties in Region 2 which makes that effort extremely 
difficult if not functionally impossible.

I prefer a reallocation of the TV 6 band with protected contours to greater 
distances for those how choose a pioneering band.  TV 6 is already 
allocated for FM in many areas outside the USA and receivers have the 
channels already programmed into the firmware.  The D/U ratios will be very 
different than what we know today in that digital will offer much tighter 
spacing options.

Anyone who enters into a pioneering band should be given added and 
irrevocable contour protections.  At least then stations can have a chance 
at covering their existing areas TO their current protected contours 
without impairment.  Thus even my Class C station has a chance at covering 
most of the metro Chicago area from it's existing less than stellar 
location.  And the investment isn't THAT great.

MM

At 12:14 PM 10/6/2007 -0700, Dana  Puopolo wrote
>Why not refarm 30-50 mHz as well? It's literally unused these days...or at
>lease refarm 40-50 mHz and kick the few users there down 10 mHz. There's
>plenty of space for those still left there in 30-40 mHz. Now you have either
>32 or 22 mHz of spectrum. Granted, the 6 meter ham band sits between it, but
>with digital radios, who cares? They can be programmed to simply skip over 6
>meters. Require DRM  with software upgradeable codecs. If they use OGG, not
>only will it sound good, it'd have no licensing fees-keeping the cost of both
>the transmitters and raecivers down to a reasonable cost.
>
>Also, there's no reason why channel 4 can't be refarmed as well...unless you
>want to keep it clean for all the ATSC/NTSC converters that will be out
>there.
>
>If radio is to survive, we need REAL solutions that use forward thinking-NOT
>the same one same ond we always seem to find...
>
>The NAB is one of the big luddites here-all they want is the status quo-it's
>time to blow them out of the equation and begin thinking "out of the box".
>
>Unfortunately, so is the FCC...
>
>-D
>
>
>    As a listener only, I think it would be better if all AM stations 
> would migrate to the TV channels 2 and 3, with FM and digital signals, 
> like FM IBOC.
>With large guard bands and many channels across the 12 MHz no two stations 
>would need to use the same channel within 250 miles, it's not a waste of 
>spectrum it's clean long distance listening.  (What will it be used for 
>after 2-2009?)
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
>Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Test Gear-Tools-Lots More + Now Barix too!
>www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>
>