In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

IBOC blows. If you are going to make the change to digital split the
band and make half of it digital or better use a different band. If the
bean counting think goes with the "only good station is a local one"
based on an advertising model then pick a band that does not propagate
long distance while you are at it.

We were handed AM. We don't like the fact that it has skywave, which has not
been particularly helpful since TV took over evening entertainment.

The reason AM became outmoded is that the FCC itself could not decide
whether to allow regional or national coverage or to promote localism... so
they never allowed US AMs the amount of power needed to really be anything
but a local medium.... and licensed thousands of lower power stations that
only find that skywave creates interference that reduces coverage.

Ok then who is responsible for perpetuating the continued use of a band
that has long range propagation?

When things started out decades ago the night time long distance
propagation was desired, then at some point the FCC wanted the use of
the band to be local and changed rules to favor that. Now that it is
proposed to continue the local over distant usage AND going to a new
mode requires that everyone buy new receivers why not change the band to
a frequency range that does not favor distant propagation?

What is the point of making a mess of the current AM band? The status
quo could be maintained by giving the current AMBCB holders of licenses
first dibs on the new band.

There are all kinds of solutions out there. Former TV analog band space
could be used for radio or as a sub channel on digital over the air TV.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California