Re: 'RKO changes

[dan.strassberg@att.net]

For sure, nothing can be done at night. During the day, 
I don't think there would be any first-adjacent problems 
(the closest first adjacent is WADS 690 in Ansonia CT), 
and it's hard to imagine second-adjacent problems with 
either WFAN or WCAT. So perhaps the day pattern could be 
let out somewhat--albeit not a huge amount--to the west.

First-adjacent protection requirements are tighter now 
than they were in the 40s, but second-adjacent 
groundwave protection requirements are looser, and there 
has been no change that I know of in third-adjacent 
protections.

On the other hand, despite WEEI's 207-degree towers and 
a site that is farther west (and also farther south) 
than WRKO's, WEEI seems to have a noticeably poorer  
signal than WRKO along the Mass Pike west of 495. 
Moreover, if you look at the patterns, WRKO's daytime 
signal in its minor lobes to the west looks as if it is 
actually supposed to be a bit weaker than WEEI's in the 
same direction.

I think the big payoff to Entercom would come from 
diplexing WEEI with WRKO at the WRKO site. WRKO's towers 
are widely spaced and would be even more widely spaced 
(>180 degrees) at 850. But the spacing is within the 
range you often see in arrays that produce modified 
figure-eight patterns, which is what WEEI's pattern 
would be (it would be _quite_ similar to WRKO's).

WEEI would then have a dynamite signal on Cape Cod and 
in New Hampshire (neither of which it has now) and might 
be able to pick up just a tad to the west due to the 
increased distance from WREF.

The payoff to Entercom would be the ability to sell the 
current WEEI site, which has to be worth a bundle. Also, 
there would be no more real-estate taxes to pay on the 
site and no more electric bill for tower lighting.

If Entercom has not been able to see the economic 
advantages in diplexing 850 with 680, I can't imagine 
them seeing any point in tweaking WRKO's day pattern. It 
could be that Entercom is calculating the costs of 
having to satisfy complaints of interference with the 
1V/m contour should they make any changes. Those cost 
could be a killer.
--
dan.strassberg@att.net
617-558-4205
eFax 707-215-6367

> > in the evening, and on weekends, as well as a new signal pattern that
> > would vastly improve WRKO's signal west of Boston
> 
> I won't say that it can't be done, but it is highly unlikely.  Any new
> WRKO facility would likely have more onerous protection requirements
> than WLAW did when it was originally built.  Dan?