Its been nice knowing you all

[Dan Strassberg]

WEAF/WNBC/WRCA/WFAN was directional until the move to High Island. I'm not
sure when that move took place but the date is available if you look for it.
The transmitter was in Port Washignton LI, not far from Huntington on Long
Island sound. It was a two-tower array that might have begun life as the
pair of towers that supported a horizontal long-wire. The pattern was DA-1
and was quite loose. I heard it described as sending the equivalent of 25 kW
to the east over Long Island and Connecticut and 75 kW to the west over New
York City. Of course, such a pattern gave 660 better skywave coverage of the
eastern US than that of New York's two other class IA stations (770 and
880). WOR, which was a IB always claimed to serve more population at night
than any other US station, WOR's loose figure-eight DA-1 pattern came from a
three-element array in Carteret NJ across the Kill Van Kull from Staten
Island. The main lobes went across New York City toward Hartford and across
New Jersey toward Philadelphia. WOR claimed to reach 36 million people in 18
states at night.

I don't remember when WTAM/KYW/WKYC/WWWE gave up its DA. I've heard that it
was a unquie Carl Smith design--a DA with only one tower. One tower yes, but
two elements. The story is that the second "element" was a vertical wire
dropped from one of the guy wires. The DA-1 pattern was very loose but was
designed to reduce the energy wasted over lake Erie. I've heard stories that
KOB Albuquerque (now KKOB) once had a night array of similar construction,
but I don't know if that's really true. According to an old National Radio
Club night pattern book, the efficiency of the 1100 antenna was
extraordinarily high. Indeed, 1100's signal in these parts is not as good as
it was before the change to ND. Smith had a lot of tricks up his sleeve and
he was apparently fascinated by arrays that used elements of unequal height
as this one would have had to do. KKOB's current night array uses two towers
of unequal height, but I believe that they are conventional, base-insulated,
guy-supported towers.

--
Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net
eFax 707-215-6367

----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Bello <RBello@BelloAssoc.com>
To: Dan Strassberg <dan.strassberg@att.net>; Bill O'Neill
<billo@shoreham.net>
Cc: Boston Radio Interest <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: Its been nice knowing you all


>
> OK, WBZ & WWL are directional today.
> When were WTAM & WEAF ?
>
>
> >I assme that all directional
> >stations (except maybe WEAF, WBZ, WTAM, and WWL, which didn't have to
> >protect anyone) had to proof their DAs at the new frequency. That was a
job
> >that could take weeks.
> >
> >--
> >Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net
> >eFax 707-215-6367
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Ron Bello <RBello@BelloAssoc.com>
> >To: Dan Strassberg <dan.strassberg@att.net>; Bill O'Neill
> ><billo@shoreham.net>
> >Cc: Boston Radio Interest <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> >Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 1:29 PM
> >Subject: Re: Its been nice knowing you all
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Did all stations move on the same day ?
> > >
> > > How did they do it ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:56 PM 1/19/04 -0500, Dan Strassberg wrote:
> > > >Pre NARBA, WBZ was on 990, WEEI was on 590, WLAW was on 680, WHDH was
on
> >830
> > > >(I believe), and WLLH was on 1370. That was just prior to March 1941.
> >NARBA
> > > >did not move most of the stations below 730. Dropping in the Mexican
> >Class
> > > >IA channel on 730 resulted in most stations between 730 and 780
moving up
> > > >one notch. The next Mexican IA at 800 caused most stations between
790
> >and
> > > >890 to move up two notches. The third Mexican IA at 900 caused most
> >stations
> > > >from 900 to <something> to move up three notches. There were four
more
> > > >Mexican IAs added--at 940, 1050, 1220, and 1570. Some channels,
including
> > > >990, moved up four notches, but somewhere one channel must have been
> > > >subtracted, because a whole bunch of regional channels in the 1200s,
> >1300s
> > > >and 1400s moved up only 30 kcps (no kHz then). The New York area had
> > > >regionals at 1250, 1300, 1350, 1400, and 1450. Most of the New York
area
> > > >stations on these frequencies were share-timers. Today, the
equivalent
> > > >stations are on 1280 (WADO), 1330 (WWRV), 1380 (WKDM), 1430 (WNSW),
and
> >1480
> > > >(can't remember the current calls). The local channel at 1500 moved
down
> >one
> > > >notch to 1490.
> > > >WMEX moved from 1470 to 1510 and WJSV Washington moved from 1460 to
1500
> >and
> > > >became WTOP. Those moves were four notches. Before NARBA, the
"broadcast"
> > > >band (there was no regularly licensed FM service, so there was no
need to
> > > >identify the standard broadcast band as the AM band) ran from 550 to
> >1500,
> > > >with "experimental high-fidelity" stations on 1530, 1550, and 1570.
NARBA
> > > >did away with the hi-fi channels but extended the band to 1600. NARBA
did
> > > >not extend the band downward to 540. That happened later. Canada (and
> >maybe
> > > >Mexico) went down to 530 still later, but the US never went below
540,
> > > >except for TISs.
> > > >
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: Bill O'Neill <billo@shoreham.net>
> > > >To: 'Dan Strassberg' <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net>;
> > > >'Scott Fybush' <scott@fybush.com>;
> > > ><boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>; 'Kevin Vahey'
> > > ><kvahey@tmail.com>
> > > >Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:02 PM
> > > >Subject: RE: Its been nice knowing you all
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > I had one of those Zenith AM-FM radios when I was in college
> > > > > > and for many
> > > > > > years afterward. Both the AM and FM were excellent, and I
> > > > > > believe that a
> > > > > > side-by-side comparison with my GE Super Radio III (a very
> > > > > > fine receiver by
> > > > > > today's standards) would reveal the Zenith to be superior to
> > > > > > the SR III in
> > > > > > almost all respects on both AM and FM.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's quite an endorsement I'd not expected. I actually own two
of
> >them.
> > > >The
> > > > > other I picked up at a yard sale about 20 years ago.  It works but
> > > >occasionally
> > > > > has an audio drop out and there's a very narrow bandwidth audio.
Tube
> > > >theory
> > > > > ain't my bag, but I think I'll try to tinker with it sometime just
for
> > > >fun.  I
> > > > > also have a GE 1921 floor model radio purchased new by my
grandparents
> >at
> > > >the
> > > > > Bon Marche in Lowell that year.  Broadcast Band, SW1, SW2.  A
speaker
> >the
> > > >size
> > > > > of a satellite dish ;-) and decent sound.  I pre-dates whatever
the
> > > >smartie
> > > > > engineering types invented so as to bring close and far stations
into
> >some
> > > >sort
> > > > > of leveling. So, the locals are very loud and the distants (beyong
.25
> > > >mV/m it
> > > > > seems) need a big of a volume tweak.  Not running a longwire, so
I'm
> >not
> > > >getting
> > > > > SW on it right now.  It still has the station names
(Boston/Lowell)
> >market
> > > >over
> > > > > the five "auto" preselects. WBZ, WEEI (590), WLAW (680), WHDH
(850),
> >WBZ
> > > >(1030),
> > > > > WLLH (1400).  I have to wonder if those were the dial positions in
> >1921.
> > > >I
> > > > > don't think so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bill O'Neill
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>