"Telamon" wrote in message
...
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?

The FCC. Just the same reason why we never considered Eureka... the band is
in military service in the US. The same reason Long Wave is not used in the
US. And so on.

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.

Actually, if you peruse Broadcasting Magazine going back to the late 30's,
you find a couple of decades of indecision on the part of the FCC. When
there were few stations, when the bands were reallocated in around 1932, the
FCC established the clears because there were so few local stations yet.
Then, after the war, they doubled the AMs in 4 years, and kept postpoing the
upgrading of clears to 500 to 750 kw. Eventually, this became a written (via
administrative law) position of favoring localism over broad coverage. This
changed even FM, where power limits of 50 kw or 100 kw (by zone) were
imposed where up to 500 kw had been earlier authorized.

So, through the 70's, many, many local stations were authorized, FMs were
dropped in power caps, and only the 24 1 A clears survived, but at the low
power of 50 kw. By the end of the 70's, even the clears were broken down to
give new local servi ce, mostly in the west.

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?

And what frequencies would you use? And that would obsolete existing radios,
which HD does not do.

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.

But, in the way the AM band is used today, it does not make as big a mess as
everyone complains. I have seen several recent RW articles in which skywave
is still defended as the reason why HD is not a good idea. These experts do
not understand that, starting with the FCC in the 40's, skywave is no longer
relevant.

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.

The TV band is going to be auctioned off for new technologies and the FCC
plans to bring in billions. Giving licenses for new "AM swaps" in Bemidji
will not come anywhere close to that, so it will not happen.