Re: Things you can do on AM

[Dan Strassberg <dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net>]

At 02:25 AM 6/6/97 +0000, you wrote:
>
>It occurs to me that if ARS goes through with rumored plans to move 1150
>to the WRKO transmitter site in Burlington, will that provide any
>opportunity for WADN to improve its signal? 
>
The WRKO site is almost perfectly due north of the current WNFT site. I
think the WADN site, on the Concord-Acton line, is about midway in latitude
between WRKO and WNFT, but is, of course, west of both sites. If WNFT were
to increase its power, whether from Burlington or Lexington, it would have
to protect WADN's 25 mV/m contour. WNFT's 25 mV/m contour must not overlap
WADN's. I don't know how close the two 25 mv/m contours come at present.
They must be close but I don't think they touch. Both WADN and WNFT are
directional day and night, with different patterns day and night. During the
day, WADN aims its strongest signal toward Waltham. WNFT's strongest signal
is aimed toward the southeast, although WNFT's day pattern is fairly wide. I
find it unlikely that a TX move by WNFT would enable WADN to increase its
day power. Not only is WADN seriously hemmed in by 1150, it is further
constrained by WNNW and WPMZ on 1110. Hence the rather narrow figure-eight
day pattern, which uses all four towers. On Route 128 in Woburn, I find the
interference from WNNW so bad that WADN is not listenable.

WADN could increase its night power, and, Lord knows, the night signal can
use all the help it gets. Not only is there QRM from KMOX, but now there is
also worse QRM from co-channel WPRX in Bristol CT, which apparently has
increased its night power from 250W to 500W and does not protect WADN. But
by far, though, the worst interference to WADN at night is from WBBR New
York on 1130, which utterly wipes out WADN at least half the time on a
SuperRadio III at my location on the Arlington-Lexington Line.

WADN uses only the three towers that are on a due east-west line at night.
The night pattern is a rather standard three-tower version of a cardioid,
which is to say, not really a cardioid at all. The pattern is narrower than
a true cardioid with a higher effective power dead ahead. I suspect that the
engineers had some difficulty getting the night pattern adjusted, because
they were at it for about two weeks before the station went on the air on
August 28, 1989. It's not uncommon to have difficulty aligning a directional
that protects a clear-channel station. It's pretty obvious, though, that
WADN would need another tower if it wanted to try to increase its night
power. Possibly, the existing fourth tower could be used. It's not in line
with the other three, however, and I suspect that, in this case, that would
make the design of the phasing more difficult. In any event, the project
would be expensive--my guess: $150k. I rather doubt that Crecelius has the
money, and even if he does, he probably would regard the expense as throwing
good money after bad. Nevertheless, an improved night signal might enable
WADN to become viable as "Boston's financial news station." Right now, I
regard their attempt to live up to that slogan as a rather sad joke.

- -------------------------------
Dan Strassberg (Note: Address is CASE SENSITIVE!)
ALL _LOWER_ CASE!!!--> dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net
(617) 558-4205; Fax (617) 928-4205

------------------------------