• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

WRDZ AM 1300 files for STA extension

WRDZ AM 1300 (Rebel Radio) has filed with FCC for STA extension to operate from their temporary site at 4949 W. Belmont Avenue with 800 Watts daytime/10 Watts nighttime. They have been using the tower under STA since November 2025.

If granted, the STA will expire on October 17, 2026.
 
Wonder if Polnet the previous owner or Rebel Radio ever looked into the potability of diplexing with WRTO 1200AM. The six tower configuration may not be ideal but probably warrants an engineering study to see if using the site is feasible. WRTO would need to be willing to take on a leasing tenant as well. WNWI 1080 AM is another possibility but only a four tower site.

Why not purchase WNDZ 750 AM from what was News Web now WNDZ LLC. WNDZ is not selling any brokered time slots any more and is not selling adds for the All Access Music that they are running. Much stronger signal with downside of being a day time only station but any night signal from a diplexed site would be limited in reach on AM 1300.
 
Wonder if Polnet the previous owner or Rebel Radio ever looked into the potability of diplexing with WRTO 1200AM. The six tower configuration may not be ideal but probably warrants an engineering study to see if using the site is feasible. WRTO would need to be willing to take on a leasing tenant as well. WNWI 1080 AM is another possibility but only a four tower site.

Why not purchase WNDZ 750 AM from what was News Web now WNDZ LLC. WNDZ is not selling any brokered time slots any more and is not selling adds for the All Access Music that they are running. Much stronger signal with downside of being a day time only station but any night signal from a diplexed site would be limited in reach on AM 1300.

You could diplex WRDZ with WRTO, technically, but that close in frequency, youd run the risk of hurting audio bandwith/quality
 
You could diplex WRDZ with WRTO, technically, but that close in frequency, youd run the risk of hurting audio bandwith/quality
The reason I brought up WRTO is the fact that there are very few options where a narrow northerly pattern can be produced over the Chicago area from an existing transmitter site for WRDZ. I doubt Rebel Radio is going to invest in land and design of a stand alone directional array in 2026.

The original WTAQ licensed for LaGrange, IL had its transmitter site about 3 miles south of LaGrange in Hodgkins, IL. This legacy site was a four tower in line array which was sold off in the late 80's for construction of a strip mall and theater complex. The newer six tower array in Alsip, IL was apparently constructed on leased land which remained in operation for a good 30 years or so under Disney ownership.

Rebel Radio is currently doing a STA with a wire antenna off of the original WXRT FM tower on the north side of Chicago. The STA signal is 800W with poor modulation resulting in poor audio quality. The STA signal produces a poor to marginal signal over Lagrange, IL which is the city of license. The night signal is pretty much non existent.
 
One thing I've observed about people asking about whether a station could diplex is that they rarely take the frequency or tower arrangement into consideration. WIND 560 might work for a station on the 1120 range by putting towers in between the existing ones, and WNTD 750 might work for a station in the 1500 range. Many wouldn't work for WRDZ 1300 because they can't send a signal much toward WOOD 1300 about 140 miles away.
 
One thing I've observed about people asking about whether a station could diplex is that they rarely take the frequency or tower arrangement into consideration.
I agree, but in many cases it isn't all that relevant. The licensee in a diplex situation often needs a tower that they can use to justify their translator, so 500 watts days and flea power at night would do the job. And just about any tower would work for that.

That may not be the case for WRDZ, since they don't have a translator. My comment is more general in nature.
 
I agree, but in many cases it isn't all that relevant. The licensee in a diplex situation often needs a tower that they can use to justify their translator, so 500 watts days and flea power at night would do the job. And just about any tower would work for that.

That may not be the case for WRDZ, since they don't have a translator. My comment is more general in nature.
if all they want is to justify a translator, they can do what we did… 10 watts from the riff of our studio
 
I agree, but in many cases it isn't all that relevant. The licensee in a diplex situation often needs a tower that they can use to justify their translator, so 500 watts days and flea power at night would do the job. And just about any tower would work for that.

That may not be the case for WRDZ, since they don't have a translator. My comment is more general in nature.
Translators in a high VHF RF environment like Chicago make for poor reception of most translators that are currently on air. With a crowded FM band, high intermod and HD radio digital whine, translators perform poorly within 3 to 5 miles of downtown Chicago.
 
Here's a photo of the Belmont Ave. tower that I took back in March. If you zoom in, you can see the antenna wires. I don't know which one belongs to WRDZ or WBBM-AUX or WSCR-AUX. I grew up near there and remember when the tower was erected. Still don't know how it got zoning approval. But hey, it's Chicago... :D
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2383.jpeg
    IMG_2383.jpeg
    112.7 KB · Views: 8


Back
Top Bottom