[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
I think that any claim that WNNZ's day pattern was
designed to protect second-adjacent WFAN are bogus. Back
when WNNZ was designed, second-adjacent-channel
protections in AM were tighter than they are now.
(Current regs require no overlap of 5 mV/m contours. I
don't know when the regs were relaxed.) The previous
requirement was that the interfering 25 mV/m not overlap
the desired 2.5 mV/m. (In other words, the protection
was -20 dB at 2.5 mV/m.) I think that even if WNNZ
poured everything possible to the south, no such overlap
with WFAN could have occurred.
However, there is another AM 640 that also runs 50 kW
days--this one in southern NJ (it's now Radio Disney for
Philadelphia), and WNNZ probably had to be designed to
protect it (WNNZ must not deliver more than 25
microvolts/meter to the NJ station's 0.5 mV/m contour).
WNNZ also had to be designed to protect WPRO, which was
mentioned in the previous postings on this topic.
And don't forget the never-built and now long-deleted CP
for a station on 650 in Clinton MA. It was that CP, at
least as much as WPRO, that necessitated nulling WNNZ's
signal to the east. And that null made possible Alex
Langer's move of WRPT 1050 Peterborough NH to Ashland MA
and 650. How quickly we forget (or, WBSO--I think those
were the Clinton MA 650 calls--we hardly knew ye--
really, WBSO, _never_ knew ye--except as an entry in the
FCC AM database).
- Re: WNNZ
- From: "Mark Casey" <email@example.com>