[BC] I knew it

[Barry McLarnon]

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 17:27:13 Edwin Bukont wrote:
> When I saw Barry McL's post in the index of the digest version, I figured
>  it would contain a dig at HD. 
> Sure enough, that's what it was.  An answer to a question that nobody
>  asked.  What exactly was the purpose of your post?  Your agenda continues
>  to show.

I responded to a post stating that the FCC curves give answers that rarely 
correspond to reality.  I agree.  They attempt to predict field strength at a 
given location based on only three parameters: ERP, HAAT, and distance.  
Anybody who's done measurements in the field knows that the real world is far 
more complex than that - the FCC curves are a crude approximation at best, 
and they are particularly poor in rough terrain.  Moreover, far better 
prediction tools that use terrain and land cover databases have been 
developed in the past couple of decades.  I simply pointed out a particularly 
egregious misuse of the FCC curves - why base such an important decision as a 
digital power increase on them, when far better and more accurate tools are 
readily available?

You can call it an agenda to point out certain facts about the shoddy 
engineering underlying IBOC and its rollout, but, unlike you, I have no 
financial interest whatsoever in its success or failure.  I do hate to see, 
however, a viable analog service being undermined by the pursuit of a 
technological silver bullet that the general public has little interest in.

Barry

-- 
Barry McLarnon VE3JF  Ottawa, ON