WNNZ

[dan.strassberg@att.net]

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).

--
dan.strassberg@att.net
617-558-4205
eFax 707-215-6367