Re: FCC grants WJLT application for 2 kW-D

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

 >dan.strassberg@att.net wrote:
>
><< A
> better plan might be to buy WNEB and take it dark so
> that they could move WARE to Worcester.  >>

>>>jibguy wrote:
>Too close to the "Big K"  (Manchester)

        Probably. But I love these speculations. Is there an absolute
distance factor that would prohibit it?  Maybe if you reduced power for
WARE if you moved it, you still might come up a winner vs. WNEB's signal if
you could ever figure out how to do it. Plus, it'd be cool to have a
12-tower array nearby to go look at <g>. In addition to Manchester, there's
also 1260 in Boston to deal with, but that's probably easy.
        The right transmitter site with the right pattern, and maybe Dan's
on to something. I know that WARE has a nighttime null that's almost total
to the west (for Pittsburgh, very old station). So you'd probably want to
be roughly north/northwest of Worcester and throw it all roughly south,
although that would be a lot closer to Manchester. Or maybe be west of
Worcester, although a lot closer than now, and throw it east.
        I have no idea what Manchester's night pattern is (TLTLIU),
although I bet they protect Pittsburgh, too, which probably is why WARE can
exist at all as a full-time station. WARE started in 1949, and I assume
Manchester is older, no? I do know that until the mid-70s, when one of the
spasms of allowing more interference on the AM band must have happened,
WARE, from the site it still uses in Warren, ran 1 kW day, non-DA, and 1 kW
night out of two towers. (It's now 5 kW D, 2.5 kW N, DA-2). I think it's
three towers all the time; at least it's three at night. I don't know if
that gives any clues to the technically minded.