Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#21

Post by superkuh »

cogman10 wrote: post #13
nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

FM radio is line of sight because of it's high frequency. Because of AM's much longer wavelength it can bounce off the ionosphere and it drops off slower with distance than FM. The range of AM stations is much greater than a comparable FM station for a given height-above-terrain of the antenna.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#22

Post by tcmart14 »

gaudat wrote: post #14

A part of me really wants to push this and see how far it would go. Why stop at AM? Add in shortwave radio and let us listen to stations on the other side of the earth.

Why not we just have a system like the beacons of Gondor?

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#23

Post by superkuh »

brewdad wrote: post #12
superkuh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It should be the FCC enforcing their regulatory duties against specific car models not the house legislating in general. The amount of interference on the low frequency bands that some electrical cars produce prevents reception of AM. And that was already very illegal. You can't do that but car manufacturers were/are too big to care. The public safety aspect of it is entirely secondary.

Didn't the Supreme Court basically say recently that the FCC and similar Executive Branch groups can't enforce such rules? They must come from the Legislature to have any hope of surviving review.

If the FCC can't enforce the prevention of interference with radio broadcasts it is not the FCC. I'm not sure what ruling you're referencing but I doubt it nulls out the core idea of what the FCC does.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#24

Post by 7e »

cogman10 wrote: post #13
nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

AM transmissions have a far greater range than FM transmissions, up to thousands of miles. This matters in a common emergency scenario, a nuclear bomb blast (or all out nuclear war), when EMPs will take out most electronics. Cars are Faraday cages and their electronics will likely survive an EMP. In this case, an AM radio in a car is likely the last surviving broadcast medium people will have access to.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#25

Post by hyrix »

cogman10 wrote: post #13
nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

FM radio bands are in fact used for various emergency services, but they are more specialized in usage https://strykerradios.com/ham-radios/ham-radio-emergency-fre...

AM radio travels farther for the same energy consumption, as a feature of the lower frequencies used. That means they can provide emergency information to a much larger area for a given power supply. AM radio also doesn't rely on huge towers since the waves can bounce off the ionosphere and travel as ground waves.

AM radio receivers are also very simple to make--check out the crystal radio!

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#26

Post by misswaterfairy »

cogman10 wrote: post #13
nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

They might not be listening to AM radio all the time, but it's often used as an emergency broadcast frequency in Australia, and not for apocalyptic reasons though it could be.

AM travels a lot further than FM, all other things being equal, and the local frequency is signposted on road signs around the country.

The big three typical emergency broadcasts down under include wildfire (which have, and do kill motorists caught in them), flood, and cyclone.

The problem with 'narrowcast' mediums like mobile phones (inc. SMS), and landline phones, is that mass emergency alerts can overload those networks which can delay the message getting out, and it takes time to contact each endpoint in the alert area. The message they get is also likely to be short.

AM broadcast is immensely useful for non-overloadable continual updates on an emergency (or several emergencies at once). Though like narrowcast mediums, broadcast mediums also have disadvantages.

AM is used as part of a wider solution. Sometimes the only way to get an alert to people is via AM radio. It's much easier to mandate AM radio in vehicles, and never need it, than to allow manufacturers to drop it because 'reasons' and then discover we suddenly can't warn some members of the community because they relied on AM broadcasting (even if they didn't know it at the time).

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#27

Post by howard941 »

7e wrote: post #24
cogman10 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

AM transmissions have a far greater range than FM transmissions, up to thousands of miles. This matters in a common emergency scenario, a nuclear bomb blast (or all out nuclear war), when EMPs will take out most electronics. Cars are Faraday cages and their electronics will likely survive an EMP. In this case, an AM radio in a car is likely the last surviving broadcast medium people will have access to.

This only works if the AM antenna is protected, inside the Faraday cage, next to the radio. Otherwise you're left with a fried front end.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#28

Post by dghlsakjg »

misswaterfairy wrote: post #26
cogman10 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't convince me. For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio. I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are list…

They might not be listening to AM radio all the time, but it's often used as an emergency broadcast frequency in Australia, and not for apocalyptic reasons though it could be. AM travels a lot further than FM, all other things being equal, and the local frequency is signposted on road signs around the country. The big three typical emergency broadcasts down under include wildfire (which have, and do kill motorists ca…

The same is true in the western US and much of Canada.

It’s pretty easy to find a place where you won’t hear any FM stations reliably, but much harder to find a place where AM service is degraded to unusability.

It’s pretty normal for weather and traffic alerts to go out on AM radio in remote parts of North America.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#30

Post by rurp »

lupusreal wrote: post #19

I understand car manufacturers want to ditch AM radios to reduce their part count, or so they can cheap out and use noisier electronics in the rest of the car, or whatever. What I find a bit odder is the vehemence with which some online commenters also want them gone. I don't use either radio in my car, but their presence doesn't get me hot under my collar either. People say AM radio is useless and obsolete, but the…

Conservative talk shows could be part of it. I think electric vehicle cheerleading is another factor, especially since Tesla is one of the more visible manufacturers to not support AM. There are always folks willing to defend to the death anything that company does. There can also be a fair amount of indifference towards non-techies on HN and other tech communities, even if we're talking about something regularly used by millions of people.
Post reply on HN