Well, at least we only have 50KW stations.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,...tml?tw=rss.TOP

T. Early wrote:
Well, at least we only have 50KW stations.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,...tml?tw=rss.TOP



If I remember correctly, US television picture signals are broadcast as
AM and can reach 100,000 watts maximum.



mike


--
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /
/ /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ /
/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/

..let the cat out to reply..

©Densa International
'Think tanks cleaned cheap'

"m II" wrote in message
news:WPuUc.34797$fz2.21978@edtnps89...
T. Early wrote:
Well, at least we only have 50KW stations.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,...tml?tw=rss.TOP



If I remember correctly, US television picture signals are broadcast as
AM and can reach 100,000 watts maximum.



1) The study refers to MW AM stations only (and I haven't the foggiest where
they found any 100KW stations here).

2) While it is true that for the time being System M television pictures are
broadcast using vestigial sideband AM (analog television is still slated to
be off the air by 4/2008), there are no high power stations in or near
residential neighborhoods (the study states that the effect is held to
within 2 Km (about 1 1/4 miles) of the tower.)

3) There are US television stations on the UHF band which broadcast with in
excess of 5,000,000 watts ERP, with aural carriers about 10% of that.