<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>To me the problem is very simple - the archaic rules that govern potential interference on VHF/FM services need to be revised.<div>CR will not get - and doesn't need - its own Band II sector.</div><div>There are 204 channels available virtually everywhere - there is plenty of room for everyone.</div><div>Italy as one case alone has proved this.<br><br><div><hr id="stopSpelling">Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:43:17 +0100<br>From: ravensound@pilgrimsound.co.uk<br>To: cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk<br>Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM<br><br>
<div class="ecxmoz-cite-prefix">From an AM perspective, the old steam
radio has been there and done most of this - sharing channels,
synchronised oscillators - jamming - offset carriers you name it,
all to try to overcome the limitations of the spectrum. If you
have super expensive receivers it helps, the problem with that is
we increasingly don't have that option. At least with a ferrite
rod antenna you could null out (even jamming) the unwanted
station. There is also the strategic need to limit competition -
once again AM has been there: it was strongly argued for years
that there was no room on the medium wave band for commercial
radio!<br>
<br>
I don't believe you will get anywhere with this until the
community has it's own slice of the cake in band 2 (as do the BBC
and ILR in principle). It has long been accepted that low power
radio should have a separate allocation. As I understand it,
there are now ways to reduce the 2.2 MHz national network slot,
doing this with all five would release two chunks for CR. Surely
there is an argument that if the nationals are not going to move
to DAB yet, they are squatters?<br>
<br>
Regards, Tony Bailey<br>
<br>
On 25/09/14 08:23, Ian Hickling wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:DUB125-W1221A860A80EE066F246D3ADBE0@phx.gbl">
<style><!--
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P {
padding:0px;
}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage {
font-size:12pt;
font-family:Calibri;
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">I don't agree that ".....proper computerised tools
are needed to do it properly" Glyn - sorry.
<div>Computerised tools have got us into the farce that we are
currently in.</div>
<div>Certainly we need proper planning - but after that we need
practical onsite trials as you say with measurement and
analysis.</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div>So Ofcom <b>could</b> do it but won't.<br>
Lots of us <b>can</b> do it - but Ofcom doesn't accept that
concept.<br>
<br>
<div>
<hr id="ecxstopSpelling">From: <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tlr@gairloch.co.uk">tlr@gairloch.co.uk</a><br>
To: <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@a-bc.co.uk">info@a-bc.co.uk</a><br>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:11:01 +0100<br>
CC: <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk">cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk</a><br>
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio on AM<br>
<br>
<style><!--
--></style>
<div><font face="Calibri" size="2">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. </font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Calibri" size="2">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.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Calibri" size="2">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.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Calibri" size="2">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.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri" size="2"><br>
Alex</font></div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>_______________________________________________
Reply - cma-l@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</div></div> </div></body>
</html>