WNFT / WRKO / WEEI tower sites

[mwaters@wesleyan.edu (Martin J. Waters)]

>On 6/7/97, Matt Sobolewski wrote:
>
>> ARS seems to be doing some renovations on the WRKO transmitter
>> building. Maybe geting ready to move an 1150 transmitter in to diplex?
>>
>>
>Paul Hopfgarten wrote:
>
>I hope so. Could 850 AND 1150 use Burlington w/680 ?
>
>Will the Burlington site help the Southern NH nighttime signals
>of 850 (poor) and 1150 (non-existant, I get a French-Canadian station
>{CHGM?} on 1150 at night)?
>
>
>Dan Strassberg wrote:
>
>All three stations could triplex from Burlington, but putting 1150 there
>would involve adding towers and putting 850 there might or might not involve
>adding towers. If 850 were to transmit from Burlington, its signal in
>southern NH (and on the Cape) would definitely improve. It would not be as
>good as 680's but would be better than it is from Needham. The questionable
>area about 850 using 680's towers is whether the 680 towers are too far
>apart for 850. They are already pretty far apart for a station on 680 and,
>in terms of wavelength, they would be 1.25 times as far apart for a station
>on 850. 1150 would definitely need some new towers. And though a move to
>Burlington, coupled with a power increase, could improve the 1150 signal in
>southern NH during the day, I doubt whether they could do much to improve
>the signal north of the TX at night.
<snip>
> Hence 1150
>could not put a signal to the west that was anywhere near as good as WRKO's
>day signal or even as good as WEEI's day signal in the area west of Needham.


        The FCC database seems to show that the WEEI towers in Needham are
extremely tall -- 57.5 percent of a wavelength. Taller than nearly any
Class A station, even. Most don't go more than about a half wave. On the
other hand, WRKO's towers are extremely short -- two of them are
three-tenths of a wave and the other is 26.9 percent of a wave. On that
basis, they'd be better off in Needham, although I know there are many
other factors. And the Needham towers must be too tall for 1150.
        Also, WEEI's signal is so bad in so many directions, especially at
night, that moving it to Burlington could be a real problem. On the
near-South Shore at night (Scituate-Marshfield, for example), WEEI has weak
spots and there's at least one faint interfering signal in the background.
And this is only a few miles, really, from Needham. IMO, it's more
important for it to cover the basic metro area than to put more signal into
New Hampshire.
        This also brings to mind questions about these two antenna systems:
Why are WRKO's towers so short? They'd surely have an even better signal if
they had proper towers. Too bad they never were upgraded back when it could
have been done without the many complications that would be involved
now--if they could even get it done at all now. I imagine the one really
short tower is left from the original little non-directional station
licensed to Lawrence. Funny that RKO General never upgraded the antenna
when it bought the station back in 1953 and put WNAC on it.
        As for WEEI, it's at the other extreme. Does someone (maybe Donna)
know whether perhaps when they got their 50 kW upgrade and built that site
in the late 1940s they thought they might later get designated as the
second I-B clear-channel station along with KOA on 850. No second I-B ever
was put on that channel. But WHDH / Herald-Traveler put up the towers to do
it. Or perhaps it was just the way things were done then, when you were
owned by a newspaper with plenty of money  -- things were done the right
way. Interesting that their signal, except if you're a fish, s**ks so bad
despite the Class A towers.

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