41. It is also considered possible to contemplate a slightly higher power for the "low power" broadcasting used at this band edge. The power limit is designed to protect against interference to the sensitive Land Mobile base receivers which are typically located on hilltop locations some kilometres away from the urban areas where low power FM services are generally located. There has been little evidence of incompatibility between LPFM and land mobile at present power levels and a modest power increase is not expected to change this, especially if such use was constrained to say 0.5 MHz away from the band edge.
42. Land mobile base receivers should be able to tolerate off frequency signal levels comparable to those created by mobile transmitters operating within their frequency band. This suggests that an e.i.r.p. of around 5 watts could be used on specific frequencies in the low power band edges.4 However this is not considered practical at the upper band edge because of the high protection requirement for the aeronautical services.
43. If the allowable power is to be increased, there might also be benefits in changing the method of specification of the power of LPFM services. The power is presently specified as a radiated power (e.i.r.p.), which requires knowledge of the antenna gain and feeder loss to set the transmitter power. An alternative could be to specify a transmitter power, and recognise that a typical dipole antenna gain and feeder losses will probably only increase this by only 1 to 2 dB. A sophisticated installation might add perhaps 6 to 10 dB in one direction, with a corresponding decrease in other directions. The alternative approach is likely to be easier for operators to ensure compliance, but is perhaps more difficult for enforcement purposes as access to premises is required for measurement. In any event a LPFM operator would still be required to avoid creating interference and may need to use a power level lower than the maximum as at present.
It mentions only the lower band, unfortunately, but there could be an argument put forward that 5 watts would be fine up to say 107.5Mhz and would not affect aeronautical services. Perhaps you could discuss this with your engineering friends Jochen.
If we can get some engineering details of this fact, we could use this in our submissions. I'm sure Auckland LPFMers would need to push this more than the rest of the country due to the smaller lower band.
I believe RSM are under a little pressure to provide some sort of higher power LPFM, so the more submissions on this subject, the more likely it will go through.
Note that commercial operators will also be submitting professional submissions strongly against these proposals, with the help of their engineers and lawyers. They will want to stop LPFM becoming more of a threat to their listening audience figures.
So we need as many for this proposal as possible. But the more professional the submission, the better. They will take more notice of these.
Nothing seems to have come from the Auckland LPFM club for helping with submissions. I still feel that providing a draft submissions to individual operators to modify and send, is in the best interests of your members and the rest of the country.
Cheers,
Ross.
----- Original Message -----From: Jochen SiegenthalerTo: LPFM_Radio@...Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 9:46 AMSubject: [LPFM] MED Discussion Paper on VHF-FM Broadcasting: FrequencyAvailability and Allocation4. The purpose of this paper is to seek public feedback on proposals relating to VHF-FM broadcasting that:
- adopt new technical standards with narrower frequency separations for future use in the FM band; and
- progressively move to a slightly lower frequency limit at the edge of the band; and
- enhance low power FM broadcasting through changes to the General Licence; and
- facilitate the wider use of synchronous technology for coverage extension and infill purposes; and
- create new FM licences throughout the country, largely in the band above 100 MHz after the removal of the present moratorium, for use by:
- a future non-commercial "not for profit" network (or an equivalent use in each local area); and
- local broadcasting (two licences in each area), with restrictions on acquisition to facilitate new entrants; and
- commercial broadcasting (two licences in each area), allocated with no special acquisition restrictions.
See the full papaer here:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CAUTION : This email message and attachments are confidential and may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately by return email and then delete both messages and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any use, distribution, amendment, copying or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance of this message or attachments is prohibited. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. Views expressed in this email may not be those of originating organisation. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Offline 
Send Email
