[cma-l] Community Radio on AM

Sat Sep 27 12:59:41 BST 2014

Alan et al

All good points and very interesting from the technical side. 

By the way (not wishing to get in trouble with Ofcom, because they haven’t
been to bad with us) when I said ‘jobsworths’ I was meaning that in loose
terms, meaning in general. Jobsworths are these folk who get rolled out by
the DCMS sometimes at our meetings, you know the ones we mean ‘’’the full of
hot air brigade’’’   the junior Ministers for example. They spend two hours
telling us what we already know, have hardly any intention of changing
anything, but run a survey anyway so that the boxes are ticked and then we
all just soldier on in the same old way. If anyone has any doubt about this,
look back over the past ten years. We ought now to be called not Community
Radio but ‘same old same old Radio  LOL

The point I am trying to make is that if a Community Station can prove that
by sticking their power up by 10 watts or moving a transmitter 30 ft higher
or moving it half a mile down the road and it DOESN’T interfere with anyone
and/or cause anyone any problems but alas ‘improves their service’ someone
please please please tell me <> Where is the problem ?    the system invents
problems, it invents and creates issues that don’t exist. If little
irritations can be sorted easily then why not take that option. Also, why
does everything take so long ?    it’s like turning an Oil Tanker around.

In our case, let us do the homework, if we get our homework wrong and it
costs us £5000 grand, then that’s our problem and our fault. But, we ain’t
going to do that and neither is any person with half a brain. Let us ‘get on
with it’ do the job and then Ofcom come and test it. If it works and no one
is harmed and we cause no problems then fine. If we do, Ofcom simply say
‘’sorry’’ ‘’shift it back to where it came from’’

I’m not condoning a ‘free-for-all’ as that would be chaos, I just think an
element of common sense needs to be applied.

In our case, the only Station who we tend to have a tickle at within our
Fraternity is Chorley FM 
 moving our transmitter to where we need it would
lessen the problems in general, not increase them. Chorley also peck at us
in Pott Shrigley, that’s to do with line of sight and the fact that we sit
behind a Hill. The spectrum is full and it can’t be helped, but where it can
be helped, it should be dealt with as opposed to making up lame excuses.

The same of course ought to apply to the commercial outfits. If Real / Heart
get licensed and start broadcasting and they peck at us, they should be told
to reduce their power slightly until their presence ‘goes away’
as I have said, we are running two rule books at the same time here and it
is completely unacceptable. I repeat once again, what is good for the goose
is good for the gander and that should be the rule.

One very important point that I forget to mention [and this is crucial] is
that Real / Heart interfere with us WITHIN our MCA, that even takes away the
Macclesfield argument and leaves virtually no argument and no case 

 but
????

We all do our best, and no doubt so do Ofcom. It still doesn’t alter the
fact that some of the rules are nothing much short of a debacle, with one
rule for one and different rules for others.

Nick

  _____  

From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Alan Coote
Sent: 26 September 2014 14:06
To: 'The Community Media Association Discussion List'; 'Associated Broadcast
Consultants'
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM

The FM protection ratios were set up using a specs’ based on the selectivity
and sensitivity of radios in the 60s. The IBA, Radio Authority and Ofcom
planned licences based on their analysis of available frequencies using this
spec’. It became an ITU standard so is very unlikely to change.     

Fitting new stations on an ad-hoc basis has the danger of commercial
operators being disadvantaged through interference, however occasional. 

Picking up Nick’s point about Silk FM getting more power, this has happened
numerous times around the UK. It’s because commercial stations are licenced
to use a preallocated and cleared frequency by Ofcom. Should a licenced
station make a case that either Ofcom’s analysis was wrong, or over time the
area has changed, then Ofcom will need to reflect that by permitting changes
to the coverage.

This is of course a totally different scenario from the way community
stations start life.   

At the end of the day Ofcom is full of people whose job it is to run things
by the rules. There is absolutely no advantage to them doing otherwise. 

In my view a better baton to wave is for access to DAB via standalone
stations – here the rules aren’t even set.                

Kind Regards

Alan

 <http://www.letstalkbusinessonline.com/> Hear Alan Every Week on Let’s Talk
Business The UK’s Premier Radio Programme For Current and Future
Entrepreneurs - Now Broadcast To 4.3 Million People  

Email -  <mailto:alan.coote at 5digital.co.uk> alan.coote at 5digital.co.uk

Phone - 0800 949 6655

Mobile - 07801 518858

Twitter -  <http://www.twitter.com/TheAlanCoote> @TheAlanCoote

Web -  <http://www.5digital.co.uk/> http://www.5digital.co.uk

cid:image001.gif at 01CE03CD.223AC920

The Media Production, Broadcasting and Training Company

From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ian Hickling
Sent: 25 September 2014 08:23
To: The Community Media Association Discussion List; Associated Broadcast
Consultants
Subject: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM

I don't agree that ".....proper computerised tools are needed to do it
properly" Glyn - sorry.

Computerised tools have got us into the farce that we are currently in.

Certainly we need proper planning - but after that we need practical onsite
trials as you say with measurement and analysis.

This however is costly in terms of the equipment and manpower which Ofcom
does not have available and is not going to get funded by HMG.

So Ofcom could do it but won't.
Lots of us can do it - but Ofcom doesn't accept that concept.

  _____  

From: tlr at gairloch.co.uk
To: info at a-bc.co.uk
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:11:01 +0100
CC: cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM

I understand the 'complex scientific' side of it, but I still don't honestly
see how the map helps give any insight other than in the crudest measure of
overall density of stations. 

It shows the general density of stations and is a nice tool for browsing
stations and frequencies, but it gives no visual representation whatever of
frequencies or powers, so I don't honestly see how it gives even the vaguest
insight into the interference landscape for a station.

It could maybe take useful steps in that direction with some development.
For example if one could select a frequency or transmitter of interest and
set a filter to show only stations of that frequency, or of that frequency
plus adjacent and/or image channels it would start to give an idea of
potential for interference. Combined with perhaps a crude free space range
indication using semi-transparent overlays based on on powers and direction
templayes it might beging to give a rough feel for the interference
landscape for a given station. But as it stands I don't see how it does that
in the slightest.

Not meaning to be picky, honest - I like it for what it is, and it does give
a feel for the geographic distribution of CR stations, but it doesn't seem
to me to offer any useful insight or even vague feel for the interference
landscape.

Alex

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Associated Broadcast <mailto:info at a-bc.co.uk>  Consultants 

To: Two Lochs Radio <mailto:tlr at gairloch.co.uk>  

Cc: The Community Media Association <mailto:cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk>
Discussion List 

Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 5:37 PM

Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM

Absolutely right Alex - the frequency selective map would only be for
getting an "insight" or feel for the interference landscape - proper
computerised tools are needed to do it properly. 

It's complex and scientific, but this post below gives a pictorial,
non-technical insight into the "Protection Ratios" that Ofcom use, and are
one of the reasons they often say there are no frequencies available:-

http://a-bc.co.uk/ofcom-fmvhf-protection-ratios-illustrated/

Glyn

-- 
Glyn Roylance - Principal Consultant 

Associated <http://www.a-bc.co.uk/>  Broadcast Consultants

On 24 September 2014 16:58, Two Lochs Radio <tlr at gairloch.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Glynn

That's a nice map for browsing, but as far as mapping all transmitters to
allow assessment of potential interference, it surely isn't the way to go.
As you'll be well aware you need much more than a simple mapping of
potential co-channels - you have to take into account image channels and the
directional power templates of antennas at the very least, even before
thinking about the intervening terrain.  You also have to take into account
transmissions in neighbouring countries of course.

I think all that can be done far more effectively in tabular form than on a
map.

Of course, the elephant in this particular room is not in any case what
frequencies are or aren't occupied, but what parameters Ofcom applies in
assessing their potential for mutual interference - eg should a 99%
confidence level or a 90% confidence level be used, should second adjacent
channel be regarded as safe or not? Those are what make all the difference
to the assumed potential for interference between transmitters. Similarly,
is potential interference acceptable for 0.1% or 1% of the time or location?
All these parameters are really what set the technical bar as to whether or
not there are channels available.  Then of course there are strategic and
political issues, agrements for the BBC to have priority use of certain
sub-bands etc.

One thing that could be considered for releasing more community radio
frequencies is for Ofcom to reuse channels more closely on the basis of a
mutual agreement between stations that they will not complain about the
remote possibility of mutual interference less than say 1% of the time in
10% of their fringe. We have transmitters on the same frequencies just a few
miles apart, but terrain-limited with no significant mutual interference in
locations of interest, because we were able to agree not to complain about
our transmitters interfering with each other! A similar thing happens on
96.6 between Nevis Radio (Fort William) and MFR (Aviemore) in the Laggan
area half way between them. I suspect many groups would be willing to accept
a service that might be subject to a little marginal interference in some
limited locations rather thna no licence at all.

As for suggestions on the map, which is nonetheless nice to have, could I
suggest you add in the Scottish not-for-profit stations that operate as
non-profit community stations, but for historical reasons have commercial
licences (Cuillin FM, Two Lochs Radio, Lochbroom FM, Argyll FM, Oban FM,
Isles FM). That would give a more representative picture of community radio
cover in the northwest of the UK, which otherwise looks a bit empty on the
map! There are also community op-outs from MFR in the north-east.

Also for adding the Northern Ireland stations there is a batch convertor for
Irish grid references here
http://www.osi.ie/calculators/batch.asp?alias=/services/gps-services/co-ordi
nate-converter

Alex

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Associated <mailto:info at a-bc.co.uk>  Broadcast Consultants 

To: The Community Media Association <mailto:cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk>
Discussion List 

Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 2:54 PM

Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM

Further to Ian's update below - we recently mapped the Ofcom data for FM
CR's onto an interactive Google Map that you can browse, zoom etc.  If you
click on any site if gives the essential information. 

http://a-bc.co.uk/community-radio-station-map/

If there is interest we might do a similar map for all UK transmitters
(nearly 2000 of them) that you can filter by frequency - thus to get an
insight into co-channel interference for any station/location/frequency you
wish.  Or other variations if people have suggestions.

Regards, Glyn

_______________________________________________ Reply -
cma-l at commedia.org.uk The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided
by the Community Media Association - http://www.commedia.org.uk Twitter:
http://twitter.com/community_media
http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation Canstream Internet Radio &
Video: http://www.canstream.co.uk/
_______________________________________________ Mailing list guidelines:
http://www.commedia.org.uk/about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe or manage
your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:
http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20140927/ccb4c0e4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 5394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20140927/ccb4c0e4/attachment.gif>