WALR has applied to decrease its Class to C2 and move much closer to Atlanta. On the face of it, Atlanta should get a much better signal. Time will tell. https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS...?appn=101731777&qnum=5340©num=1&exhcnum=1
-
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
WALR-FM Moving Closer to Atlanta
- Thread starter semoochie
- Start date
I think the issue is that they can not increase height and preserve the spacing requirements in the area.
I'm puzzled as to why WALR wants to do this. In 2010, Cox had a CP to do something very similar and move to the tower that holds the antennas of 107.9 and 96.7 in Tyrone. WALR would have decreased its power but had better coverage of Atlanta. Concurrently WVFJ (93.3) proposed an upgrade from their current site to put a stronger signal over Atlanta. The FCC gave WALR 3 years to complete their move. Given the way the 104.1 and 93.3 frequencies affect each other, the FCC made WVFJ's upgrade dependent on WALR completing its move.
The word I heard from a reliable source was that the WALR move was planned by someone at Cox Corporate, and that Cox Atlanta CE Charles Kinney was against making it. What followed were several missteps by Cox. After 3 years, WVFJ petitioned to FCC to let them put the upgrade into effect although WALR hadn't made its move. The FCC agreed with WVFJ and also downgraded WALR from a C0 to a C1, resulting in WALR losing protection.
Cox went a little nuts as you can see from this letter from the FCC: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getimportletter_exh.cgi?import_letter_id=64809
The latest application is apparently a result of WALR losing its C0 protection, but I don't know what the thinking is. I'm going to call a chief engineer friend (not at Cox) on Tuesday and get his view.
The word I heard from a reliable source was that the WALR move was planned by someone at Cox Corporate, and that Cox Atlanta CE Charles Kinney was against making it. What followed were several missteps by Cox. After 3 years, WVFJ petitioned to FCC to let them put the upgrade into effect although WALR hadn't made its move. The FCC agreed with WVFJ and also downgraded WALR from a C0 to a C1, resulting in WALR losing protection.
Cox went a little nuts as you can see from this letter from the FCC: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getimportletter_exh.cgi?import_letter_id=64809
The latest application is apparently a result of WALR losing its C0 protection, but I don't know what the thinking is. I'm going to call a chief engineer friend (not at Cox) on Tuesday and get his view.
That wouldn't increase signal strength, since they're already at 100KW. This actually moves the contour to beyond Atlanta. The only signal loss should be away from Atlanta. Then, I would think it's just a matter of terrain.
I realize WALR lost its C0 protection, but based on their ratings, I doubt they really need to do anything with the signal.
You are forgetting the uncontrollable element in a site change: zoning and permits.
Could they get better building penetration on the NE side of ATL if they moved in even closer, having moved from a C0 to a C2? Or would it be a wash once the tower height and power are set (I'm assuming they'd have to drop one or the other or both). Maybe they're going for the land grab while they can.
I wonder how their C1 spacing looks in regards to The Fish (as a third-adjacent; isn't the FCC looking at doing away with third-adjacent spacing restrictions?) and that first-adjacent WZTR out of Dahlonega? WALR already drowns out WZTR in Gwinnett.
I received some FCC information from someone who knows more than I do. Because they lost their C0 status, WALR apparently will have to move. They have applied for an STA to remain at the current site with current 100KW power while they look for a new facility. The STA would require WALR to decrease to 88KW when WCLE (Calhoun, TN) starts transmitting from their new facility.
Wow, did Cox screw up on this one.
Wow, did Cox screw up on this one.
Yes, but however it happened, this should give them a city-grade signal in Atlanta, something they didn't have before. I can't see how that's a bad thing for them, assuming good line-of-sight.
City-grade is 70dbu, which is what I should have said. 60dbu is protected contour. There should be a marked improvement in many areas, all else being equal.
All of the move-ins have problems near the Richland site.
That might help them in their current Urban AC format because their target audience tends to live close in. But, wouldn't losing the outer coverage tremendously decrease the value of the facility?
My guess is they gain pop count with this move. Maybe someone could compare current versus CP populations and break them down demographically.
It is important to remember that the contours we're being shown are the FCC "50/50" contours. That mean 50 % of people will receive this signal intensity 50% of the time. I believe the receive antenna is also at 30 feet above ground which is totally unrealistic; most antennae are 6 feet, or less fom the ground.
Making changes because a consultant drew a circle is risky business; sometimes things work out...sometimes they don't. It will be interesting to see if Cox Engineering made the correct call on this one.
It is important to remember that the contours we're being shown are the FCC "50/50" contours. That mean 50 % of people will receive this signal intensity 50% of the time. I believe the receive antenna is also at 30 feet above ground which is totally unrealistic; most antennae are 6 feet, or less fom the ground.
Making changes because a consultant drew a circle is risky business; sometimes things work out...sometimes they don't. It will be interesting to see if Cox Engineering made the correct call on this one.
Last edited:
Cox engineering sometimes amazes me. (not in a good way). In the past few years they tried the intown "repeater" for 107.1. They have had this mess. Granted they are rolling with the Urban but what happens if the urban money slows down. Then someone in accounting has convinced them that the 97.1s signal and more importantly in the future the class C protection which really helps HD should be sacrificed rather than rebuilding their tower.
https://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/...&slat2=&NS=N&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&EW=W&size=9
Someday when HD is to analog FM as FM is to AM now, somebody will wonder why in the world did WSRV went C1 instead of rebuilding 97.1's tower, or going on the fish stick with 106.7 with a slightly directional pattern and retain full C protection for the HD channels.
Reminds me of the first station I worked at WDBL. They "traded" a 100 KW signal for a 3 KW signal to save on the electric bill. BTW they were (are) less than 40 miles from Nashville.
- Status