Should,Could,Would RTE Radio 1 move from 252 LW?

Greenman

I listen everyday in my truck in Belgium to RTE Radio 1 on longwave 252 but as well as hearing Pat Kenny I hear Algerian Radio in the background. Even in Ireland it possible to hear Algeria bubbling underneath.
I'm sure there is a space say on 242khz ie a free channel so Algeria and RTE would be free of each.
I know RTE are thinking of DRM on LW but lets get real how DRM radios are there out in use in the European English speaking world ?

Any views welcome.

RoundyMooney

Tell you what I know.

I thought they'd shut down 252 with the MW switchoff tbh.

Fuzzy Clam

Greenman wrote: »

....I'm sure there is a space say on 242khz ie a free channel so Algeria and RTE would be free of each.
I know RTE are thinking of DRM on LW but lets get real how DRM radios are there out in use in the European English speaking world ?

Any views welcome.

I think you mean 243 but prehaps I'm just being pedantic:cool:

I presume 252 is allocated to Ireland so thats the reason for that.

Maybe 279 should seriously be considered by RTE since there's a snowballs chance of the IOM thing ever getting to air now. I'm sure it would only be a formality to have it re-allocated.

As for how many DRM radios? Notalot.

_blank_

RoundyMooney wrote: »

Tell you what I know.

I thought they'd shut down 252 with the MW switchoff tbh.

Bah, they use it for their Friday Night Sports show (eircom League), the batards. Hardly any walkman-type radios have LW on them. :mad:

DMC

This one does.

I have the older version, and its as robust a pocket radio you can get.

As for OP's thoughts, I dunno of they can, since all the European frequencies were agreed 30+ years ago in Geneva.

Fuzzy Clam

DMC wrote: »

As for OP's thoughts, I dunno of they can, since all the European frequencies were agreed 30+ years ago in Geneva.

Well thats a useful comment!!!

An agreement 30 years ago does not mean that a channel cannot be re-allocated.
The ITU (i think its the ITU) are asked to and do re-allocate with agreements from countries involved. A look at their website shows that.

Greenman

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

I think you mean 243 but prehaps I'm just being pedantic:cool:

243 is good for me, is it a free channel?

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

An agreement 30 years ago does not mean that a channel cannot be re-allocated.
The ITU (i think its the ITU) are asked to and do re-allocate with agreements from countries involved. A look at their website shows that.

Yes I think it could be changed since lots of things have changed in broadcasting in the last 30 years.

As for a small pocket radio walkman type with LW I've had the
Sony SRF M37L for years, works well.

DMC

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Well thats a useful comment!!!

Wunderbar. I'll carry on posting if that's alright with you. :rolleyes:

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

An agreement 30 years ago does not mean that a channel cannot be re-allocated.
The ITU (i think its the ITU) are asked to and do re-allocate with agreements from countries involved. A look at their website shows that.

Certainly for FM and MW, wouldn't it be more tricky for LW?

Zaphod

See 3/4 way down this post.

Fuzzy Clam

That is interesting, Zaphod. I don't know who Mr.Mick Kehoe is but it would appear from that, that the process of getting a new frequency has not been started, "We will be obliged to commence the process of undergoing international co-ordination. It could take five or six years for that process to be completed."
Now,if they'd started the process 6 years ago..........


In an educated guess, I'd say it would be easier to get an arrangement regarding LW than MW. There are hundreds of MW LPBs in neighbouring countries that need to be protected.

Incidently, I believe that ICB managed to get Russia to let Ireland use high power on 549 kHz. I wonder how long that took?

DMC

Zaphod wrote: »

See 3/4 way down this post.

Thanks Zaph, I knew I remembered reading about this not so long ago, thanks for the refresh