• 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

Sound improvement at KHYI

Seems I misspoke, the height was raised back to it's original height as TG says all well within the letter of the law repairing damage that had happened sometime before I came on boards, so for me the height was raised. I did not intentionally mean to stir the pot nor did I intentionally mean to mislead, I just misunderstood. Sorry for any aggravation I may have caused with my previous post.
 
Texas Gentleman said:
The antenna modifications were all restored following multiple storm damage over time.
Click to expand...

Okay, so there have been no modification to the actual technical parameters; no actual "improvements" requiring FCC application or notification!

If I take you at literal, you claim restoration of the facility, and specifically the antenna, to restore the previously licensed parameters which were altered as the result of storm damage?

So where are the requisite STA's for deviation from licensed parameters and special operation due to storm damage?

Nothing was filed between the 2005 renewal application and the 2013 application filed last week.

I don't know, with every word, this just becomes more and more interesting.

(a) We increased our center of radiation?

(b) We arbitrarily added some bays to the antenna?

(c) We've done nothing more than restore our licensed operation from un-authorized temporary operation?

This has become so interesting, it might be worth taking a ride up just to look.

No one really cares about this facility from a competitive standpoint, and particularly if you did recently put up an 'optimized' antenna of some sort, but you should really play fair and permit any changes.
 
CTaylor said:
Seems I misspoke, the height was raised back to it's original height as TG says all well within the letter of the law repairing damage that had happened sometime before I came on boards, so for me the height was raised. I did not intentionally mean to stir the pot nor did I intentionally mean to mislead, I just misunderstood. Sorry for any aggravation I may have caused with my previous post.


=================================================

Chuck, what is the current actual output (in watts) of the transmitter of KHYI and what is the current allowed ERP (in watts) of the transmitter?

NOTE: for all the 'know it alls' out there, this question is directed specifically to Chuck.
I would like to hear a response from him, not others. Thank you!

=================================================
Click to expand...
 
I know the people who's land the KXEZ tower in Blue Ridge is sitting on,
They seemed pretty sure KHYI was broadcasting from there.

Maybe KHYI was temporarily broadcasting from the KXEZ tower?
 
LibertyNT said:
I know the people who's land the KXEZ tower in Blue Ridge is sitting on,
They seemed pretty sure KHYI was broadcasting from there.

Maybe KHYI was temporarily broadcasting from the KXEZ tower?
Click to expand...

That would be pretty brazen and amazin; those two stations' transmitters have a 35 mile separation distance between them.

Then again, when this licensee operated the FM in Terrell (107.1), he knowingly left the tower lights off (broken) for over than a month.

Talking to the licensee couldn't get the lights fixed. I had to personally notify the Commission's Dallas field office who then paid a visit and had no problem getting the tower lights repaired. Just like that.
 
JRZFM100 said:
Texas Gentleman said:
The antenna modifications were all restored following multiple storm damage over time.
Click to expand...

Okay, so there have been no modification to the actual technical parameters; no actual "improvements" requiring FCC application or notification!

If I take you at literal, you claim restoration of the facility, and specifically the antenna, to restore the previously licensed parameters which were altered as the result of storm damage?

So where are the requisite STA's for deviation from licensed parameters and special operation due to storm damage?

Nothing was filed between the 2005 renewal application and the 2013 application filed last week.

I don't know, with every word, this just becomes more and more interesting.

(a) We increased our center of radiation?

(b) We arbitrarily added some bays to the antenna?

(c) We've done nothing more than restore our licensed operation from un-authorized temporary operation?

This has become so interesting, it might be worth taking a ride up just to look.

No one really cares about this facility from a competitive standpoint, and particularly if you did recently put up an 'optimized' antenna of some sort, but you should really play fair and permit any changes.
Click to expand...

Oops!!! :eek:
If this is correct (no STA filed etc) it would be a case of "Open mouth insert both feet" :-[
If it was me I'd back away from the computer and stop before I dug a deeper hole ;)
I don't have a horse in this race so it really has no effect on me whatsoever ::)
I wish them good luck with the improvements, repairs, or whatever you call it... ???
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom