extending FM band down to 76 MHz

Garrett Wollman wollman@bimajority.org
Sun Aug 2 12:35:29 EDT 2009

<<On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 09:19:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter Q. George" <radiojunkie3@yahoo.com> said:

> I think that the FCC made a big mistake in cleaning out UHF Channels
> 52-69 for land-mobile, in the first place.  Those channels would
> have had ample space so that ALL full-powered TV stations could go
> DTV with plenty of room to spare for NEW stations and all LPTV's and
> translators.  VHF-hi would be fine for other uses other than TV.

Wrong on both counts, unfortunately.

A minimally-efficient VHF-high antenna is still 16 inches long, which
is far too long for any mobile device today.  A quarter-wave at 750
MHz less than four inches, making antenna-size constraints -- and
multipath -- far less of an issue for device manufacturers.  That's
why Qualcomm MediaFLO operates on channel 55: it could be reasonably
received on devices and antennas designed for the cellular (850-900
MHz) band.

The government simply would not have received any revenue from
auctioning off any other part of the TV spectrum -- it's useless to
anyone other than broadcasters.

> VHF-lo (5 and 6 would be perfect for the expanded FM).

I have an FM tuner that goes down that low (Sony ICF-1000T) but most
people don't.  The installed base of FM radios is in the billions.  I
think the ship has already sailed for this proposal, unfortunately.


More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list