Directional station question

[ok walters]

I am GM at WLBE 790 in Leesburg, FL. We are a two tower station - 5KW on one stick day, and 1KW directional E-W on two sticks at night.

My question for the experts is if the second tower was eliminated how much power would be allowed on one stick at night? This is for future planning that I am doing now. The tower in question is in declining condition and is located in a wetland area, with a 400'+ pier extending into the wetland to allow access to the tower and ATU box. We probably have a few more years, but a major hurricane like we had in 2004 may be a problem. Due to the wetlands and the access issues, we may or may not even be able to get permits to make such a replacement, and if we could the estimates are well north of $50K just for the tower, and another $15K for a new pier. That is a pile of money to invest in a night signal for an AM station in 2013.

I am looking at several options, separately or together. Reduced power at night, picking up a FM translator, and/or actually making the repairs if possible. It seems that reduced power and a translator would be a better investment - input?

 

[frankberry]

Your night pattern is quite 'tight.' Very deep nulls. IF the FCC permitted you to operate at night with a single tower, they would probably restrict you to such a low power that you couldn't cover Leesburg. You might be able to operate with 20 watts ... probably less.
I visited WLBE many years ago when I was the Chief Engineer for WGTO, Cypress Gardens.

 

[Bengalsfan]

Your question might be better suited to a consultant. They have the tools to be able to tell you exactly what power you can run at night in ND mode. Looking at how deep your nulls are, I concur with frankberry...you probably won't be getting much and may do better to keep the status quo.

 

[vacuum tube]

Those 150 and 190 degree nulls are killers, Frank is right probably less than 20 watts. I would look into an FM translator and runiing low power NDA at night. You might be able to get a presunrise/postsunset authorization with a little more power(up to 500 watts), that with the translator might be the way to go.

 

[ok walters]

Exactly the info I was looking for. I had a feeling it would be 100 watts or less due to the severe east-west pattern and reduced power we are required to run at night. I am just trying to put a fairly accurate list of our options together so when the inevitable day gets here, we have a clue how to proceed. I can't seem to justify spending upwards of $75K to keep that severely compressed night signal on an AM station in 2013. We had a tough time getting anyone to climb that tower last year when we painted it and changed the light bulbs, and that may become impossible in the not so distant future. A light outage may bring this to a head sooner than later if no one will climb the tower to fix the lights. Like most AM stations, we have very little income at night to justify such a large expense.

Translators have been selling for $30-50K in the area, and with a power upgrade to 250 watts at 285 feet that would be a better option than spending anything on the night time AM signal.

Am I making sense? What do you think?

 

[ok walters]

Your night pattern is quite 'tight.' Very deep nulls. IF the FCC permitted you to operate at night with a single tower, they would probably restrict you to such a low power that you couldn't cover Leesburg. You might be able to operate with 20 watts ... probably less.
I visited WLBE many years ago when I was the Chief Engineer for WGTO, Cypress Gardens.

I have an old WGTO guy doing 4-6 PM on WLBE - Russ Ross - better known as Uncle Russie. Fabulous old school DJ - perfect for my 50s-60s format

 

[frankberry]

Can the tower be repaired? Can they weld sleeves over the rusted-out portions of the tower? I've seen such repairs which have lasted for decades.

 

[Kmagrill]

Can the tower be repaired? Can they weld sleeves over the rusted-out portions of the tower? I've seen such repairs which have lasted for decades.

I concur: Don't replace if not necessary. Repair when possible. There are several tower companies that do excellent repair work. I don't know about the base, but the tower work can probably be done for under $10k, depending upon how extensive the repair are, of course. I once commissioned repairs on an AM tower that had been standing since the 1940s and had sections so rotted that you could see through some holes all the way out the other side. It cost about $5,000, in the early 90's, to fix that one, but it was a lot cheaper than $30k to replace it. I too have seen repairs that lasted for decades. If you must replace, I can recommend a Florida tower manufacturer that will probably be less expensive than most. Contact me off list for the name.

Regarding the translator: Get one if you can, but keep your nighttime signal if possible. Don't think of the translator as a replacement for your AM, but an important suppliment to it. You'll find that the AM goes places that the FM will not. It's very rare to find a translator that approaches the coverage of any AM's main service contour. Once you have turned down your nightime signal, you might not be able to get it back in the future. Since you serve the Villages, many of your listeners are probably happy listening to AM and switch between WLBE and WVLG. You may give up quite a lot by losing the nighttime power. If you want to test that theory, choose your earliest low power time for the year and turn off the transmitter at those times, or operate it at 20W instead of 1,000W. Keep track of the listeners that notice. Each one that you hear from is probably worth 500 more than you don't hear from.

 

[ok walters]

The problem we have is not as much the tower, but the anchors in the wetlands. A repair may be possible, but it would be more related to the tie downs than the actual tower.

I understand that I shouldn't look to a translator as a replacement for the night signal, but if keeping a viable night signal is not fiscally or legally possible, I would think the translator would be the next best thing.

Our night signal is scratchy at best in the Villages. Our directional system is fairly consistant with the contours you see, and the Villages is right on the edge of our range.

As far as getting the night signal back in the future - if it isn't viable to keep it now, I don't see it being viable in the future. A move would not make sense, and the land make up of our facility is half land and half swamp, so there are very limited options if we don't move the entire mess.

 

[bossbill]

The AM stations I am aware of that have added an FM translator have seen most of their listening gravitate to FM. So the AM signal acts as a means to an end. The FM doesn't shut down at sundown, and is not subject to nighttime sky wave issues. I would not hesitate to add an FM translator if available. We did it.

 

[Kmagrill]

The problem we have is not as much the tower, but the anchors in the wetlands. A repair may be possible, but it would be more related to the tie downs than the actual tower.

As far as getting the night signal back in the future - if it isn't viable to keep it now, I don't see it being viable in the future. A move would not make sense, and the land make up of our facility is half land and half swamp, so there are very limited options if we don't move the entire mess.

Swamps and lakes are ideal environments for AM radio. Whenever possible, keep the station in a wet area. Not only are they great for the signal, the land is usually cost effective because not much else can be done with it. When the station was put on the air, all of the vegetation for at least 200' around each tower had to be cut down so that the radials could be plowed in along with the anchors. This should never be allowed to fully grow back. It should be cut back no less than once per year. This does three things:

1. It keeps your signal from being attenuated by the local brush. I've seen trees grow tall enough to affect patterns in just 5 years.
2. It keeps roots from damaging your radials.
3. It keeps anyone from preventing maintenance and repair of the system due to wildlife or native plant species.

I'd suggest a regime of periodic clear cutting, no less than yearly, but as much as quarterly, if possible. After a year or two, then schedule the repair work on the anchors. It should be much easier and cheaper if the area is already cleared. Try to avoid pulling permits, especially ones calling for "new" or "replacement". If you do have to get permits, call whatever you are doing a repair. Replacing an anchor is a repair to the tower system, not a new installation of something. The anchor was already there as part of your existing, (and previously approved) tower installation.

Even if you take town the second tower, you're going to have costs. If subtract the cost of removal from the cost of repair, that difference is what you will be spending to preserve your night signal. It might be a smaller savings than expected.

 

[BobOnTheJob]

The AM stations I am aware of that have added an FM translator have seen most of their listening gravitate to FM. So the AM signal acts as a means to an end. The FM doesn't shut down at sundown, and is not subject to nighttime sky wave issues. I would not hesitate to add an FM translator if available. We did it.

Question about your FM translator success. I know of a station that added an FM translator a couple years ago. Talking with their senior salesperson, I asked "has anyone said--You're on FM now and this is exactly what we've waited for. Here's my order for commercial time" ?" . The answer was no. While they are doing well and even setting records, not one dollar of that revenue has been positively tied to the FM translator. Has your experience been the same or (hopefully) better?

 

[awsherrill]

On the opposite coast from Bill, we just turned up an AM-on-FM translator a few weeks ago, and the response was almost exactly what you are asking about.

While we were working on getting the translator going, the station manager advised that there were a number of clients who were waiting for the FM signal to come on before they would buy airtime. The response from advertisers since then has been rather enthusiastic, or so I'm told. Not a bad start, although it's anyone's guess what happens when the novelty wears off.

 

[ok walters]

Swamps and lakes are ideal environments for AM radio. Whenever possible, keep the station in a wet area. Not only are they great for the signal, the land is usually cost effective because not much else can be done with it. When the station was put on the air, all of the vegetation for at least 200' around each tower had to be cut down so that the radials could be plowed in along with the anchors. This should never be allowed to fully grow back. It should be cut back no less than once per year. This does three things:

1. It keeps your signal from being attenuated by the local brush. I've seen trees grow tall enough to affect patterns in just 5 years.
2. It keeps roots from damaging your radials.
3. It keeps anyone from preventing maintenance and repair of the system due to wildlife or native plant species.

I'd suggest a regime of periodic clear cutting, no less than yearly, but as much as quarterly, if possible. After a year or two, then schedule the repair work on the anchors. It should be much easier and cheaper if the area is already cleared. Try to avoid pulling permits, especially ones calling for "new" or "replacement". If you do have to get permits, call whatever you are doing a repair. Replacing an anchor is a repair to the tower system, not a new installation of something. The anchor was already there as part of your existing, (and previously approved) tower installation.

Even if you take town the second tower, you're going to have costs. If subtract the cost of removal from the cost of repair, that difference is what you will be spending to preserve your night signal. It might be a smaller savings than expected.

Problem is there is water in the swamp area. Any "clear cut" of the 8+ acres would be with hip waders and a weed eater - and you may not come back. The original construction of that tower took place over 60 years ago so who knows what the water situation was then. One thing we do know is there would have been no problem doing whatever you wanted then - today it is a different story altogether.

 

[Kmagrill]

Problem is there is water in the swamp area. Any "clear cut" of the 8+ acres would be with hip waders and a weed eater - and you may not come back. The original construction of that tower took place over 60 years ago so who knows what the water situation was then. One thing we do know is there would have been no problem doing whatever you wanted then - today it is a different story altogether.

It was probably a marshy area back then, too. Still, the land is yours and you do have a Federally licensed broadcast facility with a 60 year history of operating there to care for. I think you will be able to do maintenance without trouble, as long as you do it quietly. Maybe clear an acre a month and start where it is dryest.

I'd imagine that the costs to bring down tower 2 would be fairly high, so repairing a bad anchor may actually be quite a lot cheaper.

Since the Villages was cow pasture 60 years ago, have you ever had a consulting engineer look at the possibility of stearing your pattern more over the populated areas using the existing array?

 

[ok walters]

I have a study done decades ago that actually showed going directional at a full 5KW didn't affect the pattern much at all and would likely be approved. I guess they didn't see the benefit versus the additonal power bill - too bad as the extra heat would help especially with buidling penetration. Reaiming the signal is a possibility, but we are 10 miles from the Villages and 1KW at night is going to be marginal even if it is aimed more precisely.

 

[Kmagrill]

I have a study done decades ago that actually showed going directional at a full 5KW didn't affect the pattern much at all and would likely be approved. I guess they didn't see the benefit versus the additonal power bill - too bad as the extra heat would help especially with buidling penetration. Reaiming the signal is a possibility, but we are 10 miles from the Villages and 1KW at night is going to be marginal even if it is aimed more precisely.

I have a good friend with an AM in Orlando who is upgrading his signal, but he has the same questions in his mind. Is it worth it, in this day and age, to upgrade an AM signal?

 

[okcradioguy!]

I would go with a translator, if you can snatch one up. Do your homework though and try to get one that you can go up as high as you can at a full 250 watts without exceeding your AM contour or bumping into someone else on the FM channel/adjacent channels that makes you reduce your power that direction, etc. Spend good money wisely on consultants to get the max bang for the buck on your new FM translator, and take the tower down. It's a hard pill to swallow loosing some AM coverage at night, but I feel with the right FM translator, it will more than make up for it. We put a translator on here in the OKC metro that's up 1300ft. Some other guys have put two of them up at 1000ft. Ours is limited to 99 watts due to I.F. spacing issues, but theirs is even a full 250 watts. Needless to say all three of them perform pretty darn well. Our AM is absolutely doing much better now than when it only was a daytime 1kw. You will be happy with the results if the FM translator covers the intended target well. Good luck!!!

 

[Grounded Grid]

I'm watching a direction station that has a tower problem. They've been running a 25% STA, but the Commish is starting to put the screws to them to get the problem fixed. The owner thought he might just relicense the lower power, but the consultants say the FCC won't license below 250 watts. I don't know if that applies to night-time reductions, but it might be something to look into. If so, you might be stuck with what you have.

 

[frankberry]

Perhaps the station(s) which you are now protecting are no longer on the air. You should find out exactly who you are protecting.