-
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
Big tower in Crystal Lake?
- Thread starter Link
- Start date
It is awfully hard to imagine someone building a 1,500-foot tower to service two Class A FM stations.
_________________________________________________
A quick scan suggests many Chicago TV stations could not use that site because of short-spacings. The most egregious would be WGN and WXFT, whose digital channels are shared with Madison, Wis. stations. There is no way WGN would be allowed to transmit from McHenry County. Other less serious (but equally disqualifying) short-spacings are likely to exist. A move up there would also be likely to result in a loss of OTA TV service to Northwest Indiana.
And there is no way the Rockford stations would accept this without a fight. WIth the Chicago O&Os putting a service-grade signal across Rockford, there ceases to be any reason for the networks to affiliate with WREX/WTVO/WIFR/WQRF. These stations' value would dry up.
_________________________________________________
And then there's FM.
The Chicago-licensed stations cannot use a tower in Crystal Lake. The 54dBu protected contour of the major Chicago stations doesn't reach this site -- so the protected contour of stations on the proposed tower wouldn't reach the Loop either. (and in fact, it would be required to not only reach the Loop, but cover all the Chicago city limits. Plus, 54dBu is not enough signal for prinicipal-community coverage. 70dBu is required.)
Even if that was waived, there would be a host of short-spacings to Wisconsin stations. WXRT vs. DeForest. 93.9 vs. Monroe 93.7. 95.5 vs. Rockford 95.3. 96.3 vs. Cross Plains. 97.9 vs. Madison 98.1. 98.7 vs. Freeport. 101.1 vs. Rockford 100.9. 105.9 vs. Evansville. 107.5 vs. Fort Atkinson 107.3. None of those Chicago stations would be allowed to use the new tower. There are probably more short-spacings I haven't thought of. In Rockford, WZOK would probably be the only station to consider using the tower -- but it would be short-spaced to Chicago 97.1 and 97.9. (probably also Milwaukee 97.3)
Closer in to this tower, are 94.3 Elgin (or has it moved to Glendale Heights yet?) and 104.9 Belvidere. Neither can move due to short-spacings -- to 94.5 Milwaukee and 94.1 Watertown, and to 105.1 Evanston, respectively.
_________________________________________________
Seems to me the only stations that could use a 1,500-foot tower in McHenry County would be the two FM stations *licensed to* McHenry County -- WZSR 105.5 and WZKL 91.7. Neither would have anything to gain - their existing towers are already in the area (isn't WZSR on one of the shorter existing towers on the same site?) and both stations would have to reduce power significantly to compensate for the higher elevation.
If it were two months later I'd say this was an April Fool's joke.
The northwest herald must have missed it with this story. http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2009/02/04/r_oqwzxll3qn_pdd4jwyacw/index.xml
"Oklahoma-based BMB Communication Management LLC wants to buy 3.6 acres of land on MCC’s Route 14 campus for the construction of the self-supporting tower, which would broadcast Chicago- and Rockford-based radio and TV signals."
There must be some other reason for the tower.
"Oklahoma-based BMB Communication Management LLC wants to buy 3.6 acres of land on MCC’s Route 14 campus for the construction of the self-supporting tower, which would broadcast Chicago- and Rockford-based radio and TV signals."
There must be some other reason for the tower.
Translators? But you wouldn't need 1,500 feet for a translator unless your intent was to plow the signal deep into Wisconsin. Because of affiliation contracts the only station I can imagine benefiting from this tower would be Me/MeToo/MeThree/This/That/Etc...
It could be for the companies that bought the UHF channels above 50. They likely don't have to hold the same contours and perhaps may not be able to get the space they need on the sears or hancock.
If the tower is used for wireless internet or portable tv like Mediaflo?, the towns will fight it because they like the cable franchise fees.
If the tower is used for wireless internet or portable tv like Mediaflo?, the towns will fight it because they like the cable franchise fees.
M
Mid West Clubber
Guest
HMMM Crystal lake is kinda out in the middle of nowhere compared to the closer Chicago Burbs,, Is Crystal Lake even a Chicago Burb.... I dont think any Chicago or rockfod station could use it.. The question is,,, are their any available frequencies for a new AM FM or DTV station???? If so,, they may want the big tower to blast into the CHI, Rockford, and Wisconsin..... I doubt their is any room for any more new stations aside from LPFM, and like one poster said, they wouldnt need that kinda of height?????? Really makes me wonder what they would use it for and for what purpose it would serve.. I also wonder if its near a housing Division, or bussiness district that would greatly fight having the tower nearbye for various reasons... RF Overload interference,,, Tower falling down???? and some freaks that think RF causes Cancer,, which I honestly think Cell phones possibly could, but not AM and FM.......
Mid West Clubber said:
Firstly, no frequencies are available for new stations in this area. Someone wishing to use this tower to blast into Chicago would have to somehow get a few other stations deleted. I suppose there *is* enough money on the planet to get a few Class B stations in Chicago and Milwaukee to surrender their licenses, but the chances of that happening are precisely zero.
Secondly, even at the maximum power permissible for an FM station in Illinois (about 3,000 watts if you're on a 1,500-foot tower) a station at this site would only provide an interference-protected signal into the North Side. It wouldn't even reach the Loop. The South Side, southern suburbs, and Northwest Indiana would be way beyond the service contours. You could probably still get the station just fine down there on a car radio, but you wouldn't be listening in your office on the 4th floor of some office buidling in the Loop. And that's all assuming the FCC didn't authorize another station on the same frequency somewhere in Lake Co., Indiana.
An AM station would have nothing to gain from such a tall tower. 1,500 feet is almost exactly one wavelength at 670KHz, the lowest frequency Class A station in Chicago. There is some point to use of a half-wavelength tower but a full wavelength buys nothing.
DTV, it would not be useful for any existing stations. Maybe, *remote chance*, someone would get the FCC to allocate a channel to Elgin or add another channel in Rockford & it could go here. That's not going to happen in the next year, and if it *does* happen (and I doubt it will) it could take ten years before anyone gets a permit to *use* that channel.
w9wi said:
To be perfectly correct about it, your statement is incorrect BUT, as a practical matter, it's unclear to me whether or not it's correct. A 360-degree (180 over 180-degree) segemented (Franklin) antenna would be super efficient and would require no ground system! 180 over 180 degrees yields, IIRC, 519 mV/m/kW @ 1 km. The typical 200 (or so)-degree series-fed towers used mostly by Class A AMs produce efficiencies right around 400 mV/m/kW @ 1 km. So for an AM already using a 5/9-wavelength tower, moving to a Franklin would be equivalent increasing power to almost 85 kW and would produce a dramatic reduction in high-angle skywave, which limits groundwave coverage during critical hours and at night. HOWEVER, I don't know whether a self-supporting Franklin is technically feasible. All such antennas that I am aware of (and there are only a few remaining) are uniform in cross-section and guy supported. Franklins, though widely respected for their efficiency and the elegance of the concept, have not won many friends in the engineering community because of the maintenance headaches associated with insulating the top section from the bottom section and driving the two sections at the midpoint. Several well-known installations have been decomissioned in the last decade or so and were replaced by much shorter conventional base-insulated, series-fed radiators.
And there is another consideration. With the breakdown of the Class IA channels, there are probably full-time Class B stations on 670 that limit WSCR's nighttime signal strength to its current value of 2680 mV/m @ 1 km. So, were WSCR to upgrade to a super-efficient Franklin antenna, it would almost certainly have to reduce its power to maintain its current 10% skywave contours. However, we have here a catch 22: As a Class A AM, WSCR is REQUIRED to run 50 kW-U. So WSCR would be required to reduce its power (at least at night) and would also be prohibited from doing so;>
New article about this proposed tower in the daily herald. It still does not say who would use it.
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=274044
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=274044
Very likely the main user on the tower would be MediFLO. http://www.mediaflousa.com/
"The MediaFLO system will use frequency spectrum 716-722 MHz, which was previously allocated to UHF TV Channel 55."
"...FLO is transmitted by a network of high-power broadcast transmitters operating at powers as high as 50 kilowatts.
This allows for a coverage area of a transmitter to be as large as 30-40 km."
It appears that Verizon and AT&T offer the MediFLO service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaFLO
"The MediaFLO system will use frequency spectrum 716-722 MHz, which was previously allocated to UHF TV Channel 55."
"...FLO is transmitted by a network of high-power broadcast transmitters operating at powers as high as 50 kilowatts.
This allows for a coverage area of a transmitter to be as large as 30-40 km."
It appears that Verizon and AT&T offer the MediFLO service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaFLO
Several Class A's have been downgraded to Class B lately. Most notorious was WOWO down to jst under 10 kw, now KGA Spokane. KGA will end up barely covering Spokane at night with 12 kw and will have to protect all the others on 1510. Bothe were already directional at night. But WSCR would then have to go directional at night protecting all the others on 670.
850 KOA Denver runs full 50 kw out of the transmitter but dissipates a couple kw into a load. In 1959 they moved from a 475' self-supporting tower to a new 665' more efficient tower but the FCC wouldn't let them increase the field mV/m. Still technically 50 kw for Class A. Not sure this would fly with the FCC now.
850 KOA Denver runs full 50 kw out of the transmitter but dissipates a couple kw into a load. In 1959 they moved from a 475' self-supporting tower to a new 665' more efficient tower but the FCC wouldn't let them increase the field mV/m. Still technically 50 kw for Class A. Not sure this would fly with the FCC now.
D
ddybas
Guest
From The Northwest Herald
http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2009/02/04/r_oqwzxll3qn_pdd4jwyacw/index.xml
"CRYSTAL LAKE – McHenry County College could be home to a 1,500-foot-tall broadcast tower – taller than the roof of the Sears Tower – if a communication management company proposal gets approved.
The tower, if built, would greatly improve TV and FM radio reception in the area and could help the college pay for future construction projects."
Something doesn't make sense here...there is no need for a 1500 ft tall tower in that area.
And if it's true... McHenry County should lease the land to them rather than sell it outright...more money to the county in the long term. That's years of College funding!
[EDIT-Link added by Radio-Info as a courtesy]
http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2009/02/04/r_oqwzxll3qn_pdd4jwyacw/index.xml
"CRYSTAL LAKE – McHenry County College could be home to a 1,500-foot-tall broadcast tower – taller than the roof of the Sears Tower – if a communication management company proposal gets approved.
The tower, if built, would greatly improve TV and FM radio reception in the area and could help the college pay for future construction projects."
Something doesn't make sense here...there is no need for a 1500 ft tall tower in that area.
And if it's true... McHenry County should lease the land to them rather than sell it outright...more money to the county in the long term. That's years of College funding!
[EDIT-Link added by Radio-Info as a courtesy]
By my calculations, KOA has to dissipate more than a few kW in a radiation-limiting resistor. Assuming that the 207-degree tower has an efficiency of 400 mV/m/kW@1 km (a conservative assumption), KOA has throw away 8 kW to limit radiation to the Class A minimum of 362.2 mV/m/kW (a value normally associated with a tower approximately 135' shorter than the present tower).boiseengineer said:
As for downgrading WSCR to a Class B, I can't believe CBS would seriously consider it. The result would be the loss of all protection to the station's skywave service. Regardless of the fact that the mythology says that nobody listens to AM skywave, station buyers still appear willing to pay substantial premiums for major-market Class A signals, so the result would be a significant reduction in the station's resale value and another multi-million-dollar hit to CBS's balance sheet.
More info on the proposed tower:
http://www.mchenrycountyblog.com/2009/02/mega-tower-details-presented-to-public.html
http://www.mchenrycountyblog.com/2009/02/mega-tower-details-presented-to-public.html
"Moved" excerpted parts of the AM tower discussion to the Engineering board, http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,121178.0.html
Not sure why anyone would think a 1500' tower would be used in the AM (Medium Wave) broadcast band. Kinda humorous. Tallest AM broadcast towers are generally 1/2 to 5/8 wavelength in height [180 to 225 degrees] (and usually only for Class A stations), so even at 540kHz, a 5/8 wave tower (225 degrees) would be approximately 1138 feet tall. And there would be enormous problems with ground and skywave cancellation at night and the so-called pre-sunset/post-sunrise "critical hours" 2 hour window. WLW at 700kHz in the 1930's had to reduce their tower height from 831 to 747 feet because of the ground and skywave cancellation problems out about 150 miles from their transmitter. Perhaps if Long Wave (150-400kHz) were allocated in North America, 1500' would make sense...
Not sure why anyone would think a 1500' tower would be used in the AM (Medium Wave) broadcast band. Kinda humorous. Tallest AM broadcast towers are generally 1/2 to 5/8 wavelength in height [180 to 225 degrees] (and usually only for Class A stations), so even at 540kHz, a 5/8 wave tower (225 degrees) would be approximately 1138 feet tall. And there would be enormous problems with ground and skywave cancellation at night and the so-called pre-sunset/post-sunrise "critical hours" 2 hour window. WLW at 700kHz in the 1930's had to reduce their tower height from 831 to 747 feet because of the ground and skywave cancellation problems out about 150 miles from their transmitter. Perhaps if Long Wave (150-400kHz) were allocated in North America, 1500' would make sense...
DanStrassberg said:
The prices for such signals are based on local groundwave coverage of the metro area, and things like the ability to penetrate buildings, etc. There is no real revenue from skywave coverage, and, in fact, not much revenue at night outside of sports.
You apparently missed my earlier posting on this topic in this thread. A 1500' tower would be approximately 360 degrees at 670, WSCR's frequency. That would be the correct height for a Franklin segmented radiator (180 degrees over 180 degrees). I discussed the merits and problems of these at some length in the post to which I referred. As I pointed out in that post, I am not at all sure that it is physically possible to construct a self-supporting Franklin, and even if it were possible, the tower would not be an unmmixed blessing. However, the efficiency (519 mV.m/kW @ 1 km) would be considerably better than that of a 225-degree tower of conventional design (440 mV/m/kW @ 1 km), the high-angle skywave would be much, much reduced, AND no ground system would be required.stormy01 said:
Maybe I'm missing something here, but why would WSCR even consider moving to a tower in McHenry county?
Their signal wouldn't be improved enough to justify the tremendous expense in this economy.
In fact if I'm reading Dan's comments correctly it would actually turn out to be detrimental to them.
Their signal wouldn't be improved enough to justify the tremendous expense in this economy.
In fact if I'm reading Dan's comments correctly it would actually turn out to be detrimental to them.
- Status