"PEAK-FM"

["Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@03038.com>]

I noticed on the WOKQ website that the call 103.7 "Peak-FM". I thought that
was the monikor for the old Top-40 WZPK?

Paul Hopfgarten
East Derry NH 03041
paul@03038.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> [mailto:owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org]On Behalf Of Paul
> Hopfgarten
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 9:16 PM
> To: Dan Billings; Sean Smyth; bri@bostonradio.org
> Subject: RE: MOUNT WASHINGTON BURNS
>
>
> What are the rules on backups? Do they ALSO have to meet certain COL power
> levels? Since WHOM is actually licesnced to Mt. Washington, would
> their AUX
> TX have to have a certain signal on top of the Mountain?
>
> If so, I can't see how they could have an AUX TX anywhere else BUT on the
> Mountain.
>
> (I would guess WPKQ would at least be able to AUX in No.Conway/Conway...)
>
> Paul Hopfgarten
> East Derry NH 03041
> paul@03038.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> > [mailto:owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org]On Behalf Of Dan
> > Billings
> > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 8:57 PM
> > To: Sean Smyth; bri@bostonradio.org
> > Subject: Re: MOUNT WASHINGTON BURNS
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sean Smyth" <ssmyth@suscom.net>
> > To: "Dan Billings" <billings@suscom-maine.net>; <bri@bostonradio.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 9:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: MOUNT WASHINGTON BURNS
> >
> >
> > > I wonder why stations in these situations where calamities would make
> > > antenna/transmitter replacement a hardship wouldn't have
> primaries that
> > > aren't on the same tower/building as the primary. The World
> Trade Center
> > > towers are another parallel to this. Most stations also had
> > their backups
> > on
> > > the top of the WTCs. Obviously, everything was wiped out with the
> > disaster.
> > > Out of the TV stations, only WCBS had a backup elsewhere.
> >
> > Two thoughts:
> >
> > 1.  Your point is a good one in this situation because a long
> > outage on the
> > top of the mountain was more likely to happen than what happened
> > to the WTC.
> >
> > 2.  But a secondary site off the Mountain would only provide a small
> > fraction of the coverage area of the primary antenna.  There
> > would be value
> > to this but how much?
> >
> > -- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine
> >
> >
>