WAAF and the Red Sox

[Dan Strassberg]

I've discovered that V-Soft Web site has entries for WAAF at both the Paxton
and W Boylston sites, and finding the correct entry in each ZIP code is a
bit counter-intuitive. To find the signal strength from W Boylston, it
appears that you must look for WAAF WORCESTER. To find the signal strength
from Paxton, you apparently search for WAAF WESTBOROUGH. I tried the
following ZIP codes: 01701 (Framingham), 01760 (Natick), 02451 (Waltham),
02476 (Arlington), 01612 (Paxton), 01583 (W Boylston), and 02139
(Cambridge). In all cases except Paxton, WAAF WORCESTER (that is, W
Boyleston) showed greater signal strength. In Paxton, WAAF WESTBOROUGH (that
is, Paxton) showed 36 dB greater signal strength than WAAF WORCESTER (115.2
dBu vs 79.0 dBu, that is 572.77 mV/m vs 8.93 mV/m). In all of the other
ZIPs, however, WORCESTER was stronger than WESTBOROUGH by 1.3 dBu (18.4%) to
5.1 dBu (80.3%). Surprisingly, the largest advantage for WORCESTER was not
in W Boyleston (4.7 dBu); it was in Arlington (5.1 dBu).

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@csail.mit.edu>
To: "Dan Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: WAAF and the Red Sox


> <<On Sun, 14 May 2006 08:55:12 -0400, "Dan Strassberg"
<dan.strassberg@att.net> said:
>
> > BTW, unless I am misremembering what I learned at the V-Soft site (and I
> > might be), ONLY WAAF of all "Boston" market FMs puts 60 dBu into
Framingham
> > and it misses 60 dBu by a whisker in Natick. I believe these figures are
for
> > the Paxton signal; the W Boyleston signal probably does better in Natick
> > than does the Paxton signal.
>
> You are very much misremembering.
>
> All of the FM-128 signals put at least 77.8 dBu at me.  The Pru FMs
> deliver about 72.  93.7 and 99.5 are nearly tied at about 63, WERS is
> 61, WXRV is 57, WILD-FM is 53, and Plymouth is 52.
>
> -GAWollman
>