• 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

1090 NIGHTIME PROBLEM

Night site on Mercer Island (do any rich liberals live there willing to give up land and view?); get 10mS/m w/ fresh water; cover more inland areas ::)
 
If I owned 1090 in Seattle, I would put it on an FM Translator on top of Cougar Mountain. Edgewater Broadcasting has one for sale licensed to 101.1 sitting in (or near) Kenmore... Could buy it for 30K and move it to Cougar...
 
I don't like that it will be on 101.1. No chance of CFMI, KUFO or any other distant channels if KPTK adds a translator there.

-crainbebo
 
FM translators for AM stations are limited. The FM 60 dBu contour must not exceed the AM 2mv daytime contour or a 25 mile radius from AM site, whichever is smaller. Wouldn't that be an issue with 1090 and Cougar Mountain?
 
Bongwater said:
HowardMBurgers said:
You can't move 1090. It's been looked at for years. And yes, I know because I worked there too. Give it up.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely correct. They can't move, but they can make other arrangements:

http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/finder?call=kptk&x=14&y=5&sr=Y&s=C
Click to expand...

These fellow tech guys aren't very helpful here telling people to give it up ad so forth! I'd never want to take field strength measurements for one of them!

They could at least be helpful and mention that the Radio-Locator link YOU posted shows the current 1090 pattern, and construction permit for daytime and nightime operations. There does not appear to be any change to the nightime pattern. I'd have to read the FCC files to see if there is. Probably not possible due to protecting Class A's in Little Rock and Mexico. Moving the directional array inland to for example the Kent Valley would increase coverage to the east of the towers at night (COMPARED to what it is NOW), however, would eliminate salt water ground conductivity that helps the signal essentially NW-NE and SW-SE - so the signal would be worse in Everett and Olympia than it is now (due to the horrible ground conductivity 1mS/m-2mS/m)!

AM 1300 KKOL is in an undesirable location being so far to the south. They would be better off in the Kent Valley or back w/ 5kW on Puget Sound.

1090 = Difficult when you have two Class A's on 1090 to protect. The FM Translators for both 1090 and 930 are the best suggestions so far, I think.
 
Bill Wolfenbarger said:
FM translators for AM stations are limited. The FM 60 dBu contour must not exceed the AM 2mv daytime contour or a 25 mile radius from AM site, whichever is smaller. Wouldn't that be an issue with 1090 and Cougar Mountain?
Click to expand...

What FCC rule is this? Please be SPECIFIC, and post the LINK.
 
KFNNradioFan said:
Bill Wolfenbarger said:
FM translators for AM stations are limited. The FM 60 dBu contour must not exceed the AM 2mv daytime contour or a 25 mile radius from AM site, whichever is smaller. Wouldn't that be an issue with 1090 and Cougar Mountain?
Click to expand...

What FCC rule is this? Please be SPECIFIC, and post the LINK.
Click to expand...

47CFR74.1201(g). The copy linked from the FCC website has not been updated since October 2008. You'll have to read the new wording on page 20 of the decision document:
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-09-59A1.doc (Word .doc)
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-09-59A1.pdf (PDF)

The regulation says in part:
The coverage contour of an FM translator rebroadcasting an AM radio broadcast station as its primary station must be contained within the lesser of the 2 mV/m daytime contour of the AM station and a 25-mile (40 km) radius centered at the AM transmitter site. The protected contour for an FM translator station is its predicted 1 mV/m contour.
Click to expand...

(the rest of paragraph (g) regards the allowable coverag contour of an FM translator rebroadcasting an FM station.)

The text is essentially duplicated in 74.1201(j) at the top of page 21.
 
And aside from the limitations of staying within the 2mv daytime contour and 25 mile radius, there's also the pesky little limit on FM translators of 250 watts.

FM translators can, in fact, extend actual range because one can hear an FM beyond the 60 dBu contour, and because FM doesn't suffer at night as AM does. Also, it's great for stations having a terrible night power and/or pattern, since the limitations are based on daytime contour.

On the other hand, translators are a secondary service, subject to interference from authorized FM stations.
 
Bill Wolfenbarger said:
And aside from the limitations of staying within the 2mv daytime contour and 25 mile radius, there's also the pesky little limit on FM translators of 250 watts.
Click to expand...

True, though to the best of my knowledge there is no limit on the antenna height of a translator, beyond what's necessary to avoid interference to other stations. (or to confine the translator's coverage to the 2mv daytime contour) At about 475m HAAT, a full Class A station is limited to 250 watts -- a 250-watt translator at or above that elevation would actually have greater coverage than a Class A. Such sites - with antennas above 475m - do exist in the Seattle area.

(Whether such sites are close enough to the 1090 transmitter site to confine their coverage to 1090's 2mv daytime contour, I don't know. Whether any frequency exists where such a facility wouldn't interfere with anything else, I also don't know.)

FM translators can, in fact, extend actual range because one can hear an FM beyond the 60 dBu contour, and because FM doesn't suffer at night as AM does. Also, it's great for stations having a terrible night power and/or pattern, since the limitations are based on daytime contour.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And even during the day, FM doesn't get clobbered by computers (and other Part 15 violators...) to anywhere near the extent AM does.
 
w9wi said:
At about 475m HAAT, a full Class A station is limited to 250 watts -- a 250-watt translator at or above that elevation would actually have greater coverage than a Class A. Such sites - with antennas above 475m - do exist in the Seattle area.
Click to expand...

The only problem with power that low is that you have a weak signal over a broad area. I was part of a decision to move an LA area Class A from a 570 watt location on a mountainside, to a 100 meter HAAT on a till at the bottom of the mountains; good signal over about 3 million people vs. bad signal over a wider area. Same format, ratings more than doubled.

Of course, something is better than nothing. And your point about computers is so very true. Let's not forget CFLs, dimmers and the whole array of microprocessor devices in homes and offices. I'd love to see a spectrum graph of our digital copier!
 
smedge2006 said:
What about acquiring KAAY, Little Rock and doing a KGA on them?
Click to expand...

KAAY has a very tight sqeezed figure 8 pattern... I am not so sure that anything short of silencing KAAY would help (which would make two Little Rock stations that died in the service of major matros.... 1010 died to help WINS in NY expand night coverage in Jersey). I think XEPRS in Rosarito, BC, Mexico, would be a major challenge.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom