Talk:AM expanded band

Frequencies
Aren't there a few stations on 1720 kHz, as well? I thought the AM band went from 520 kHz (i can't think if any stations below 530 right now) to 1720 kHz...  RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk''' 20:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No broadcast stations have been licensed on 1710 in the US. 70.36.212.48 (talk) 00:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * 1720 = limit of Upper Sideband no carrier (nominal frequency) allowed there


 * 1710 AM =	protected frequency for WQFG689 --2003:CC:93C1:7801:C967:5E82:916A:3E22 (talk) 12:57, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The AM broadcast band, based on the Rio Convention ends at 1705 kHz (as to allow for the bandwidth of the centre frequency 1700 kHz). WOFG689 was granted a waiver to move from 1690 to 1710 kHz as the FCC had determined that the ability to operate on 1710 kHz was necessary due to the spectrum crowding in New York City to the south. .  While TIS stations can be received on a AM broadcast receiver, they are not considered broadcast stations.  They are licensed more like utility stations under FCC Part 90, which mainly applies to private land mobile services.  Recnet (talk) recnet  —Preceding undated comment added 17:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Type H3E emissions in Australia?
The article claimed that Expanded Band stations in Australia were limited to "Type H3E emissions" (eg Single-Sideband, Full Carrier). This is incorrect. A quick check of the ACMA Licensing Register shows all Extended Band stations use 6K00A3E (Double Sideband, Full Carrier). I have removed the entry. Gutta Percha (talk) 23:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The applicability of the All-Channel Receiver Act to the expanded AM broadcast band (1605~1705 kHz)
Unless a specific citation can be made to the FCC Record, I do feel that the mention that the application of the All-Channel Receiver Act was not used to mandate the FCC in the 1980s to mandate that new AM radios manufactured mandating tuning in the 1605~1705 kHz band.

I have already reviewed the original Expanded Band R&O (6 FCC Rcd 6273, 6337) and at para. 202, the FCC acknowledges comments were received suggesting mandatory standards pointing to "earlier Commission actions in regard to the UHF television band" however, there is no cite to the Act in this section. It can be concluded that no requirement was in the original R&O.

There was no mention of it in the NPRM (5 FCC Rcd 4381-4481). Receiver standards discussed in paras. 96~99 discussing the NRSC-2 emission model.

No mention of it in the MO&O (8 FCC Rcd 3250) or in any subsequent orders on reconsideration (most of those were related to issues involving the assignment of migrating stations and frequencies).

Keep in mind though that I do not have a subscription legal database (i.e. Lexis) so I can't find anything within docket 87-267 related to receiver standards that mandate expanded band tuning citing the All-Channel Receiver Act. Unless this was addressed in a different proceeding, we could conclude that the All-Channel Act was NOT invoked but only suggested by commenters and that the Wikipedia article is inaccurate. Again, this may have been addressed on a different docket but based on my limited abilities to search past proceedings that do not require expensive subscriptions, I could not find any documents that cite the original R&O (6 FCC Rcd 6273).

Again, unless someone can cite a specific Order from the FCC Record, I move to have this information removed as inaccurate. Recnet (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC) recnet