WSMN Sold And Expected Back On The Air Soon

[Dan Strassberg]

I suspected that Cordville's proposed 1 kW ND day operation could kill the
Cordaville app as long as WSMN remained licensed, but maybe not. The
distance from Cordaville to WSMN's old site is 31.6 miles. I bet
Cordaville's 0.25 mV/m would be no more than 20 miles from its site, leaving
more than 10 miles for WSMN's old signal to the southwest to drop down to
0.25 mV/m. I don't think Cordaville had any problem with the old WSMN. A
site five miles to the north of the old WSMN site would probably be three
miles further from Cordaville, so a 250W ND signal might fit there, although
it would be a tighter squeeze than it would have been if the old WSMN had
remained. A stronger signal from a two-tower array beamed north from S
Nashua might also fit.

But realistically, I doubt whether Cordaville will ever be built because of
the minimal chance that there a site with the correct shape and size that is
large enough for six towers and is so situated as to allow proper coverage
of the COL. Can such a site a) be found at all, b) get the neighbors' and
the town's approval, and, c) given real-estate prices in MetroWest, fit the
applicant's budget--or any reasonable budget? I guess that the chances of
affirmative answers to all of these questions are just a skosh higher than
the possibility of affirmative answers to the same questions about Langer's
proposed move of 650 to Lex,,, err, Foxboro. In a posting elsewhere, I put
the chances of the 650 move at 0.01%. However, at least there is a need for
the Cordaville station if it could be built: Portuguese 24/7. As for the
WSRO move, Alex is not stupid; what could he have been thinking? Besides
requiring land that could easily cost well over $10 million, what purpose
would the station serve--a replacement for WDIS, maybe? Oh, if WVBF does
attempt to focus on Taunton as a replacement for WPEP, maybe WSRO could take
over the talking books ;>)

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: "Dan Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "Laurence Glavin"
<lglavin@lycos.com>
Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: WSMN Sold And Expected Back On The Air Soon


>
> >So although the FCC might allow WSMN to operate temporarily
> >from the 900 tower with more than 25W-D, I doubt whether a license would
be
> >granted for 250W-D or anything close. Since finding a site for a DA
sounds
> >like a completely forlorn hope, WSMN's best hope would appear to be to
find
> >an existing tower (cell tower) in or near the north end of Nashua, get
> >permission from the tower owner to add a skirt-fed Folded Uniple antenna
to
> >the tower and hope that 250W-D or thereabouts would work put the
requisite
> >signal over Nashua while reducing interference to WARV and WUNR.
> >Alternatively, two 100' towers somewhere in South Nashua might be
> >satisfactory if a site could be found where the neighbors didn't hold up
the
> >project for years. Such an operation would have a reasonable chance of
being
> >allowed enough daytime power to actually cover Nashua with the requisite
5
> >mV/m daytime signal.
>
> One wonders whether Mr. Monaghan has anyone experienced enough in the ways
> of AM radio to counsel him as well as Dan is doing right here, or whether
> he's spending the $300K on the theory that losing the three-tower array is
> no big deal.
>
> Dan, isn't the 1580 Cordaville app also a concern here, since (as long as
> it's alive) it limits WSMN's 0.25 mV contour in that direction as well?
>
> And changing COL to, say, Hudson might have been a possibility once - but
> it requires the sort of major-change window that came and went a year ago
> and isn't likely to come around again for a while...
>
> s
>