RE: 'RKO changes

["Paul Hopfgarten" <hopfgapr@sprynet.com>]

And with WVEI in Worcester, they'd at least still have Metro Worcester
covered. (As a So NH resident, I'd love to see 'EEI tx at Burlington)

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> [mailto:owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org]On Behalf Of
> dan.strassberg@att.net
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:58 PM
> To: Garrett Wollman
> Cc: Norm Rosen; boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> Subject: Re: 'RKO changes
>
>
> 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?
>