WNSH

[Dan Strassberg]

Don: WNSH is nondirectional (day and night). What looks like a directional
pattern at radio-locator.com is simply the result of the wldly different
ground conductivities that exist side by side here in southeastern New
England. Within feet of each other, we have rock, which is about as poor a
conductor as can be found in nature (I guess outer space is worse) and salt
water, which is very good--not as good as solid copper, but you don't find
solid copper in nature; you find ore, which is nowhere near as good a
conductor.

WNSH originally applied to increase to 50 kW-D DA with a pattern aimed north
over Essex County, but Keating had had such rotten luck with directional
arrays that he wasn't anxious to go through the experience again and didn't
want to spend the money, so he applied to reduce the proposed power to 30
kW-D ND and that's what he built. He says it's on the air now at the full 30
kW. The signal where I live (Arlington Heights near the Lexington line just
north of Route 2) is wretched--at least for that kind of power at that
distance with a bit of the path either over or nearby salt water. Based on
loudness and background noise, I estimate the signal strength to be in the
neighborhood of 1.5 mV/m, which is listenable on a good radio but not very
strong. For comparison, WCRN's signal here is about 2.1 mV/m by day and a
little stronger at night. It's not a good signal either.

There is no real chance that a knowledgeable buyer would buy either station
for its coverage of Boston.
--
Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net
eFax 707-215-6367

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don A" <donald_astelle@yahoo.com>
To: "BRI" <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>; "Dan Strassberg"
<dan.strassberg@att.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:20 PM
Subject: WNSH


> I had the opportunity earlier this week to drive from northern Vermont
into
> Boston and used it as a chance to check out the new daytime signal for
WNSH.
> (It's always interesting to see how a 'proposed' facility upgrade actually
> turns out!)
>
> I started to pick up the signal just south on Manchester at Rts 93/293.
>
> The signal strength increased as I got closer to the Mass/NH border...but
> when I entered Massachusetts, I was surprised at how bad the signal was.
>
> Judging from this map:
>
> http://radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/pat?call=WNSH&service=AM&status=C&hours=D
>
>    ...WNSH should have been a reliable signal once I crossed the border.
> ANd while the signal was "there"....I could hear some station in the
> background fighting it out with them.  (Whats the next nearest station I
> would pick up on 1570AM during the day? I don't have my database with me.)
>
> Once I crossed over 128/95 the signal was very usable and very reliable
(as
> the map indicates it should be), and stayed that way until I got into
> downtown Boston traffic.
>
> While it appears the intended directional pattern is going where it out to
> be, I am surprised the signal wasn't as reliable and useful in the areas
> just outside it's primary contours.
>
> Someone on the list said there is an issue with ground/soil conuctivity?
>
> I hope there are more conversations with the consulting engineers before
> this is considered a "done deal".
>
> While this no doubt gives WNSH a stronger signal in their
> hometown/COL....and a stronger signal coverage to the north (Gloucester,
> etc.)...it doesn't appear to have given them the added area that I
imagined
> from reading the documentation.
>
> I think some field test readings should be on the to-do list.
>
>
>
>