Re: MESSAGE ID: 1EC610858

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

At 04:56 PM 7/31/97 +0000, you wrote:
>
>The power increase WMEX received was for 50,000 watts during the day, but
> still 5,000 watts at night. I would think the FCC's decision to move WNLC
> New London from 1490 to 1510 was what precluded WMEX from increasing power
> at night.
>
No, no, no! As I've already explained in two very detailed replies that you
either have not seen or have ignored. The problem was NOT WNLC. It was the
AM 1510 in Sherbrooke PQ. As long as WMEX's TX was sited in Quincy (south of
Boston), no increase in nighttime signal over Boston was possible without
interfering with the Sherbrooke station 200 miles due north. WITS ultimately
got the increase by moving its TX northwest, to Waltham, where the main lobe
could go east over Boston (actually east-northeast) and the signal to the
north could actually be reduced somewhat. That's why the nighttime signal
disappears into the co-channel and adjacenet channel inteference as you
drive up Middlesex Turnpike in Burlington past the Mall but before you reach
Route 62.

The fact that WNLC had nothing to do with WMEX's inability to get a
nighttime power increase is demonstrated by the fact that WITS GOT the
increase by moving the TX.

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

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