Hi Allen,

Yes, I agree that LPFM operators need to present a better service to
the public, but this alone will not secure higher EIRP levels.

The idea of LPFM (GURLs) is a good one, if various conditions are met.
In small towns and isolated areas where there are one or two
operators, the system works well. Unfortunately, in areas like
Auckland and other large cities and towns, there are more operators
for a given area than RSM could have possibly predicted - meaning the
band is overcrowded.

This has resulted in a sea of intermod, distortion and co-channel
interference. The use of more than 500 mW EIRP that is adopted by some
operators further exacerbates the issue.

It appears that some people are attempting to operate (or are
operating) what could easily be described as "semi-commercial"
stations, using the GURL system. I don't believe this was the intended
application of the GURL.

Commercial FM works reasonably well in NZ because RSM allocates
frequencies and power levels based on various factors including but
not limited to geographic location and atmospheric variables. A lot of
engineering work goes into the allocation of such frequencies to
ensure that overlap is minimal and that stations don't stomp on
others. Unfortunately, due to the self-governing nature of LPFM, this
happens rarely, if at all, causing the problems I referred to above.

I have no doubt that in an emergency situation, few people would want
to tune to a station that is constantly disappearing into a black hole
of noise and static, or worse, is off the air due to lack of power.
How many LPFM operators have full emergency power backup?

I've been involved in community and commercial broadcasting as a
technician since 1984 and have seen a lot of changes over the years.
It used to be that a condition of your licence was that you were
required to have emergency backup power at both your studios and your
transmitter site. This is no longer the case, and I know of many
commercial stations that don't have backup services - meaning they are
off the air if the town loses power. This was a reality for quite a
few places in the July storms of last year, and no doubt during the
recent foul weather.

Even if stations manage to stay on the air, few if any have practical
advice to offer the general public. One station (which I won't name)
that is responsible for broadcasting to a fairly large area of the
north island simply continued with its normal programming during the
recent floods. There have been subsequent letters to the editor asking
why no practical or survival information was offered at the height of
the emergency.

Providing localised information requires people on the spot to assess
and report back. Stations used to have "radio cars" that would do just
this. They would drive around, gather info and relay it back to the
studio using land mobile links. To some degree, this has been replaced
by people with cellphones calling up and describing what is happening
in their own area.

What we have learnt however is that in some areas, when an emergency
strikes, cellphone towers can be knocked out (as happened in the
recent weather bomb) and this form of communication is lost.
Therefore, unless some other method of local news gathering is at
hand, you are reduced to relaying what is coming from national news
services and reporters - which effectively means you become another
"network station fed from a remote point".

When people are switching off to commercial network stations during
ordinary times, simply because they don't want to hear what a jock in
Auckland is talking to them in Invercargill about, they sure won't be
listening to them during an emergency.
I agree that LPFM can provide true "local public service radio" - but
I think there are a number of issues that need to be addressed before
this really happens.

The points I raise here are not criticism of the LPFM service or of
operators - there are some really good stations out there and some
dedicated people running them.
I feel however that simply raising the EIRP for a GURL isn't going to
solve these issues.

As always, dialogue is invited and encouraged.


--- In LPFM_Radio@yahoogroups.com.au, "Allen Little" <vision@...> wrote:
>
> Greetings "wireless.radio"
> I have had some dialogue on this subject over many long months. The
> situation is just as David suggests. What happens will happen when it
> is Safe to happen. What we need to do is ensure we are ready and able
> to provide an efficient LPFM service when required. I suggest each of
> us should capitalise on the fact of being the only true local radio
> station in our communities when disasters strike. Taking into account
> our common experiance of the past week it is clear the so called "BIG"
> stations let local audiances down. Networks fed from a remote point
> failed to connect with and communicate local information to the public.
> In the name of "Entertainment" the networks let the local pblic down.
> Where was "Public Service Radio"? Many LPFM stations were the true
> voice in their community. This is why we need loud, efficent sound and
> an urgent power increase.
> Cheers
> Allen
>