Re: WSRO

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

At 07:45 PM 5/1/99 -0000, you wrote:
>   Mike Thomas wrote:
> 
>> since their new single tower setup
>> > barely covers Marlboro/Hudson during the DAY, let alone after sunset.
>> > What a waste.
>   
>    Kevin Vahey wrote:
>
>>   Back in another life when I actually was taking flying lessons....WSRO
>> almost became a one tower station.... which is part of the reason I
>stopped
>> taking lessons....
>
>  I noticed yesterday when coming back from the Worcester area,at the end
>of 290 East making the winding ramp onto 495 North,I saw the 3 tower WSRO
>array still standing.IIRC,someone had posted info they heard stating that
>the City of Marlboro took that TX site by eminent domain.I believe their
>studios are also at this site,or is that also no longer true.Where in
>Hudson is the new single tower? How much power are they putting out from
>this new TX? Weren't they 5KW with the 3 tower? And are there any plans to
>put up 2 more towers at the new TX site? (Ouestion Mode Off)
>
I have no answers, only speculation. WSRO is operating from its new site
under special temporary authorization. The FCC does not provide info about
STAs in its public database, so no parameters are available. Langer probably
has plans to install a DA and increase the night power, but it appears that
no application is on file. Rumor has it that Langer is in financial straits
and probably had barely enough money to install the single tower. He had to
do that to keep the station on the air and retain the license. It's in his
interest not to apply for the new facilities until he has the money to
proceed with the construction because the FCC has really tightened up on
granting extensions of time to complete. It would be really interesting to
know if the new tower is tall enough for WRPT--that is about 240'. There
have been rumors that the new owners of WKOX are thinking of evicting WRPT
and WJLT from 100 Mt Wayte Ave. If that really happens, WRPT and WJLT will
undoubtedly move to WSRO's new site.

WSROs old towers were 150' high, and at the old site, the station was really
shoehorned in. If you believe the official soil conductivity map, there was
big-time overlap with WBET during the day. Supposedly, though, there was no
actual overlap under the rules in existence when WSRO moved from Curtis Ave
to Fitchburg St, because the actual soil conductivity between Marlboro and
Brockton is lower than the 2 mS/m that the map indicates. Since Hudson is
further from Brockton than the Fitchburg St site was, WSRO might be able to
run 5 kW from a taller tower without interfering with WBET any more than it
did from the Fitchburg St site. Now, of course, the alternative is to use
some odd lower power. That option did not exist when the former facilities
were built. Even with the short towers at the Fitchburg St site, WSRO
apparently used a series resistor between the TX and the antenna during the
day. The efficiency listed in the database was substantially lower for the
daytime operation than it was for the night operation.
 

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

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