There has been much discussion here as to whether WCRB can move its transmitter closer to Boston from its in Andover site. Two radio stations outside of N.Y. City, WCTZ and WFAS are moving to within 15km of second-adjacent FMs on the Empire State. WPLM is well over 15km from any of the usual transmitter sites FM stations use in the Boston area. Is WEAN the reason being first adjacent from Exeter, RI? Wouldn't WCRB be grandfathered? Could WCRB move to Zion Hill or WHUE's old site in Lexington? Maybe someone can explain how these moves work technically. Thanks.
-
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
Moving WCRB
- Thread starter wcozBoston
- Start date
wcozBoston said:
I am not an authoritative source on this, but I have been led to believe (or maybe I have led myself to believe) that a move to the 93.7 site in Peabody (at least I think it's in Peabody) might be possible. There is an I/F problem with WERS (99.5-10.7=88.8 ), but WERS is a B1 and is far enough from the Peabody tower that it would be OK. There is also a problem with WPLM-FM and here it is clear that the distance between WPLM and 93.7 IS too short (by a few miles) for two full Bs. BUT, although WPLM is a B (and not a lower class, such as B1), it really isn't a FULL B. It's a full 50 kW ERP but NOT at 150m (492'); WPLM's HAAT is somewhat less (442' or something like that, IIRC). Translated to what the power would be to obtain the same coverage if the antenna could be moved up to 150m (it can't; the tower isn't tall enough), the power would have to be reduced to something like 38 kW. So, does that count with the FCC? If WCRB were to move to Peabody and use the 93.7 tower, could it run as a true full B, which it is now, or would it have to either reduce power or use a directional antenna? Or would such a move not be allowed, period? I don't know the answers to any of those questions, but I'm pretty sure that several regular readers of this board know the answers. Another question, though, is whether they will tell us; I've asked before and received no answers.
I looked at this at great, great length a few years back, and have forgotten the details now. My recollection was that 99.5 would fit as a B1 from the center tower at the WRKO site, but not from the new 93.7 site. (Even though WPLM isn't a "full" B, it still has to be protected to full-B standards.)
I know the IF spacing to WERS was one concern. There was also a first-adjacent issue with 99.7 in Rhode Island, IIRC.
I even spent some time playing (hypothetically, of course) with ways to move WPLM-FM, but that part of the dial is so crowded in southern New England (98.7 in New London, 98.9 in Worcester, 99.3 on Block Island, etc.) that there's not much wiggle room.
I know the IF spacing to WERS was one concern. There was also a first-adjacent issue with 99.7 in Rhode Island, IIRC.
I even spent some time playing (hypothetically, of course) with ways to move WPLM-FM, but that part of the dial is so crowded in southern New England (98.7 in New London, 98.9 in Worcester, 99.3 on Block Island, etc.) that there's not much wiggle room.
The WMKK site is indeed in Peabody, on Lakeland Park Dr. right off Rt 1, I-95, and Rt 128
http://tinyurl.com/8awl9g
Where I work in N. Reading, WCRB comes in great. Only problem is, I don't like classical
music (Meanwhile I do like country, and WKLB comes in slightly fuzzy there)
http://tinyurl.com/8awl9g
Where I work in N. Reading, WCRB comes in great. Only problem is, I don't like classical
music (Meanwhile I do like country, and WKLB comes in slightly fuzzy there)
A
ActionJax
Guest
Wow I work at the dam place and Im confused with all this technical talk! haha
Scott Fybush said:
I realize that there is very little consistency among various FCC rules and probably even less among the way the FCC applies various rules, BUT isn't there a "use it or lose it" rule that covers Class C FMs? That is, IIRC Class Cs (at least in some geographic zones) used to be allowed 100 kW at 2000' AAT (2000' was probably changed to 600m long ago; 600m is about 1970'). My understanding is that any original Class C whose equivalent power and HAAT works out to less than 100 kW at 600m is subject to being downgraded to whichever of the lesser C subclasses (C0, C1, C2, C3) for which its facilities exceed the minimum, but in no case can the downgrade remove it from the lowest C subclass. I don't think the downgrades are automatic, however; that is, another station must apply for facilities that would be ungrantable if the first station retained its original class. Also, I don't know whether the downgrade is then to the higher of (a) the lowest class for which the first station's facilities comply or (b) the lowest class that makes the other station's proposed new operation grantable.
If there is such a use it or lose it rule for Class C FMs, why should there not be such a rule for Class Bs? Or is there such a rule but it would be of no help here because the next lower B subclass would not protect WPLM's existing facilities?
DanStrassberg said:
I believe the "use it or lose it" rule applies only to class Cs because it was implemented at the time the C0 class was created - and the C0 class was created because there were so many stations operating as nominal Cs that were not using maximum facilities, since the maximum facilities for a C are impressively expensive to build and operate.
The C/C0 classes are unique in having a minimum ERP - 100 kW (which is also the maximum ERP for both classes), so the only distinction between them is height.
There are many, many stations out there that were classified initially as full C - and protected accordingly - but were running from towers far shorter than 600 meters. Indeed, FAA rules more or less prohibit the construction of 600-meter-class towers in most of the east, so the only true full Cs are on mountaintops. Over the last few years, many - if not most - of the southeastern sub-Cs have been redesignated as C0s.
There was no similar gap in B territory - most Bs were already running at 50 kW and at or close to 150 meters by the time the B1 class was created, and even the "sub-Bs" like WPLM generally ran well above B1 levels and would not have been subject to downgrading.
L
Laurence Glavin
Guest
raccoonradio said:
Yikes...is somebody at work playing WCRB in the background? If so, it might be advisable to acquire noise-canceling headphones. WCRB is NOT representative of what classical music really is like, so that may be part of the reason you have taken a dim view of it. But millions of people exist without it, and that may be a good thing. I go to many, many performances of classical music throughout the year, and tickets can sometimes be hard to get. I don't need more acolytes competing with me for the good seats. (A good example is the thing that's happening at movie theaters offering HD telecasts of Metropolitan Opera performances,; even off-the-beaten-path productions are drawing big audiences.)
- Status