[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IRCA] QSL request
- Subject: Re: [IRCA] QSL request
- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." <walkerbroadcasting@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:33:11 -0500
- Authentication-results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx designates 72.14.176.152 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@xxxxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=eShkBSDq2xF4BYb1NuUdsQJ57BEMT0Bg5jfVtCF7xBw=; b=o8yOBQBkcfHVlA326uIYsGD9lW0sJzZDhGXAwWjfpjvxFB2Nx7blBPCs/5syPOPU+7 5tC8aAVLo+q+LjJAzdJ9Qmtwmei+r0CebFwTbR+HNqHG4E2A1lZUXT45rq9FGjRkU8Ht XSrnpWQS/9WIAJtvn5cV8ITWUA4ycMcSvaHxA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=USSYPVowsCoPqO9fMKIJgs3heDcDRYpFnj6uGgsBAdLHXsbk5UPuuLIlZ2+iNvDBMy EaxqZ7rlrFNgs9hQWd0b6A2F0g52AQ55m4C4f+8MWKYrhE+lQne9Xt0l29q5T2f0Zn9q aIYfHhU2NPyZGDS5Oit+dTWQuqyWjGZTbzzdE=
That station wasn't getting more coverage then it was licensed for, exactly.
WNBH 1340 is right near the water in New Bedford and where Craig heard it in
Maine was near the water.. and obviously AM travels amazingly well over
water.
I heard all of the New York Ams almost clear as day in Dover, NH around 4pm
one day.
Paul Walker
www.onairdj.com
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Steve Ratzlaff <steveratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> Thanks very much; I understand it now. It has all to do with the rules and
> nothing to do with actual RF transmission and antennas. So that example that
> was cited was getting more coverage than it was licensed for, apparently,
> since it used a taller tower without reducing its power. I wonder how much
> improvement it made.
> Steve
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." <
> walkerbroadcasting@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" <
> irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 10:33 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [IRCA] QSL request
>
>
> Steve,
>>
>> I will try an answer your question from a broadcasters point of view. I
>> have
>> a general understanding of RF and FCC stuff.
>>
>> When you see a station's licensed power listed, it is almost always for a
>> 1/4 wave tower. When I was at WQMA 1520, our tower was 150 feet which is
>> 1/4
>> wave for 1520 Khz. If the tower is taller then 1/4 wave, it is therefore
>> more efficent then it needs to be.
>>
>> If a tower is more efficent (taller then required) then you don't need
>> quite
>> as much power to make the same coverage area that a slightly shorter tower
>> would produce.
>>
>> Most stations elect for 1/4 wave towers, much much cheaper to build.
>>
>> Paul Walker
>> www.onairdj.com
>>
>> P.S. I think Powell would even agree I explained this one well.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Steve Ratzlaff <steveratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >wrote:
>>
>> As an AM TX and general domestic AM dummy, what does all this mean, about
>>> not being able to put a 1kW signal into some type of tower? What does the
>>> power and or tower have to do with not being able to feed full power into
>>> the antenna?
>>> Steve
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." <
>>> walkerbroadcasting@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" <
>>> irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 9:44 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [IRCA] QSL request
>>>
>>>
>>> There was an AM not far from me at WABV, that was on a Class C Channel
>>> and
>>>
>>>> supposedly had a 5/8 wave tower.. and put the full 1KW into the tower.
>>>>
>>>> Glad we could try and help!
>>>>
>>>> Paul Walker
>>>> www.onairdj.com
>>>>
>>>>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx