WBOQ-FM 104.9 Application

[Laurence Glavin]

WBOQ-FM 104.9...COL Gloucester, MA, studio in Beverly...has filed a "minor" application with the FCC to move the transmitter slightly north and west along Route 1. The ERP will be an actual 6KW @ 98 meters, still with a directional antenna. If they're moving AWAY from Boston and Providence, why don't they just tell WRBB to get off the frequency and go NDA?

 

[aaronread]

WRBB is a Class D FM, secondary service. I don't know off the top of my head why WBOQ is a DA, but it's not because of WRBB.

 

[CTListener]

WRBB is a Class D FM, secondary service. I don't know off the top of my head why WBOQ is a DA, but it's not because of WRBB.

Protecting WWLI 105.1 in Providence?

 

[NHRadio]

Does WBOQ have to protect co-channel WLKZ Wolfeboro NH? WBOQ is older...does that matter?

 

[Eli Polonsky]

I think that WBOQ also has to protect the 104.7 on Cape Cod.

 

[DanStrassberg]

WBOQ-FM 104.9...COL Gloucester, MA, studio in Beverly...has filed a "minor" application with the FCC to move the transmitter slightly north and west along Route 1. The ERP will be an actual 6KW @ 98 meters, still with a directional antenna. If they're moving AWAY from Boston and Providence, why don't they just tell WRBB to get off the frequency and go NDA?

If you are correct that the new site is slightly north and west of the existing site, it seems odd that the new pattern shows a somewhat deeper minimum to the south-southwest (centered at 205 degrees true) than does the existing pattern, considering that the protections are to the south (Providence and Cape Cod). Also, 6 kW @ 98m AAT is just about equivalent to 3.2 kW @ 136m AAT. Because the new signal will have a higher ERP from a lower antenna than the existing signal, the signal strength may improve a bit inside the 60 dBu contour but the two should be equal at the 60 dBu and, outside the 60 dBu, the current signal should be better. WBOQ currently comes in quite nicely where I live but starts to get buried by WRBB not very far away (well under a mile, I'd say). Sounds as if I'm going to lose WBOQ, which is too bad for me.

This application has the flavor of a move being made for cost-cutting reasons--not to improve the signal or the coverage. Is the new tower an existing structure? Any cell towers in that area? Four or five years back, Garrett Wollman speculated that, by moving something like eight miles west and ever so slightly north of the existing site, WBOQ could have upgraded to a B1. I have no idea whether such a move might still be possible.

 

[reelyreal]

WBOQ has grandfathered short-spacing to WWLI Providence and WLKZ Wolfeboro, NH. Interference to these stations can't be increased, but it can be shifted.

Additionally, the spacing to WOCN Orleans is close, as is the spacing to WXLO Fitchburg.

The new site is a Verizon Wireless-owned tower in Topsfield, just a little under 11 1/2 miles to the west and slightly north (at a heading of around 286 degrees.) The app states the tower will need to be added onto slightly (probably just a mounting pole?)... it's currently 49 meters tall, and that's right where the antenna will be mounted (an ERI 3-bay full-wavelength spaced.) I'm not sure if the rent will be any cheaper than on the American Tower they're currently on, that'd be speculation.

The new 60 dBu pattern will cover more land and less water, so that's nice, right?

 

[Eli Polonsky]

The new 60 dBu pattern will cover more land and less water, so that's nice, right?

Perhaps so for listeners in the Merrimack Valley and the inland metro-north suburbs, plus parts of southern NH, but not necessarily for those of us trying to listen in and around metro-Boston, around (and/or despite) interference from WRBB.

Since the new tower will be farther inland, the Boston metro will not get the signal over open water anymore. Though FM doesn't benefit from salt water conductivity as AM does, FM does benefit from the fact that over water is open terrain, without hills and geographic obstructions.

From Topsfield, the signal would have to travel mainly over land down the Route 1 corridor toward Boston, which has a number of small hills and rises. I'm guessing that will compromise the signal compared to what we get now in metro-Boston over water from Gloucester.

It all may be more practical for them though, as WBOQ has never been in a position to market as a Boston station or pursue Boston sponsorships. Improving their signal in the inland NE MA area may help them solicit sponsors up there.

 

[DanStrassberg]

It all may be more practical for them though, as WBOQ has never been in a position to market as a Boston station or pursue Boston sponsorships. Improving their signal in the inland NE MA area may help them solicit sponsors up there.

Or maybe Tanger is trying to negotiate a more favorable lease with ATS. There wouldn't seem to be a more effective ploy than threatening to pull up stakes for a nominally better (or maybe a not significantly inferior) site--especially if the owner of the proposed site is offering a better deal than the owner of the existing site. Of course, the cost of the move has got to be factored into the calculation. My guess is that the move would cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $100k, which doesn't sound huge. Many stations don't have such a luxury.

 

[Uncle Kaimbridge]

The new site is a Verizon Wireless-owned tower in Topsfield, just a little under 11 1/2 miles to the west and slightly north (at a heading of around 286 degrees.)

Yup, just NE of the Rt.97-Rt.1 intersection.

 

[Laurence Glavin]

The new site is a Verizon Wireless-owned tower in Topsfield, just a little under 11 1/2 miles to the west and slightly north (at a heading of around 286 degrees.)

Yup, just NE of the Rt.97-Rt.1 intersection.

This Bing map is clearer than the Google map at fcc.gov. What I usually do to find towers that are not on a Fybush, Necrat or Garrett Wohlman page, is to change to satellite view and close in as far as I can while using the N S E or W arrows to find the little red or blue colored exclamation point on Google, usually provided by the FCC or Radio-locator.

 

[WNTIRadio]

I would make the new TX site IBOC. Why? Put WRBB on the HD-2 and make an offer to shut down WRBB. It' silly that there's this class D sitting there where WBOQ can easily be heard. Is it outside the 60dBu? Yes. Does it make sense? No. Move it to 106.1 and let them deal with "Touch FM"

 

[jlehmann]

I would make the new TX site IBOC. Why? Put WRBB on the HD-2 and make an offer to shut down WRBB. It' silly that there's this class D sitting there where WBOQ can easily be heard. Is it outside the 60dBu? Yes. Does it make sense? No. Move it to 106.1 and let them deal with "Touch FM"

There is no way that IBOC from a class A in Topsfield, even at -10 levels, would be heard reliably at Northeastern's campus... possibly not at all with all of the RF from the Pru.

 

[WNTIRadio]

I really don't see what purpose that station serves as a class D. It isn't like it's on a relatively clear channel (not that kind!) and can get out more than 1/2 mile from campus. All it does is beat up WBOQ within a mile of the campus and get beat up by WBOQ everywhere else except under the antenna.

Seriously, how about moving it to 106.1. With the 3rd adjacent protection gone, I don't see why it wouldn't work. Haven't run the numbers on it, but it seems that the ratios for 105.7 and 106.7 would work at the power levels there. The interference would probably not even reach the ground if engineered properly.

 

[LA_Guy]

At the time I put WRBB on 104.9, it was the only frequency available for them. Also, the station was still WVCA, was still owned by Simon, was horizontal from the rooftop in downtown Gloucester, and was off the air most of the time. I agree that 102.9 or 106.1 makes a whole lot more sense today, both for them and WBRS. Personally, I'd put them on 96.3 at the WMBR site and bounce the translator (class Ds have priority over translators). They could run close to 20 watts from there non directionally.

Unfortunately for WBOQ, they can't move close enough to Boston that WRBB interferes with them and still maintain a city grade signal over their city of license. Isn't that amazing?
It's almost as if it was planned that way ;-)

 

[Eli Polonsky]

Personally, I'd put them on 96.3 at the WMBR site and bounce the translator (class Ds have priority over translators).

I'd rather not see that happen because it would deprive WMBR of a source of funding. WGBH pays rent for that tower space. Apparently, whoever the donor(s) is/are who adamantly want that repeater on the air donate enough to WGBH to more than cover the tower rental to WMBR. Also apparently, they were previously listening to WGBH for classical music, as they asked WGBH to change the translator feed to //WCRB when the WGBH format changed and they acquired WCRB a few years ago.

 

[mgpt6]

Would Greater media file against WRBB if they went to either 102.9 or 106.1. Granted Touch wouldnt be happy but pirates dont have any legal claims or rights.

 

[WNTIRadio]

That translator is designed to cover Beacon Hill. When classical was on WGBH proper, the hill would shadow the signal from Blue Hill.

Couldn't it go higher power too as a fill in translator?

 

[aaronread]

Couldn't it go higher power too as a fill in translator?

Maybe. WGBH had to get consent from WTKK (then WCDJ) to accept third-adjacent interference just to get W242AA on the air in the first place. I would think Greater Media would take a relatively dim view of any attempt to significantly improve the facility's signal. Plus it's shoehorned in pretty tight against WSRS 96.1, too...that might actually prevent, on contour-separation grounds, any attempt to increase ERP on the xlator.

Would Greater media file against WRBB if they went to either 102.9 or 106.1. Granted Touch wouldnt be happy but pirates dont have any legal claims or rights.

Probably they would. Third-adjacent has lots of examples of peaceful co-existence. Second-adjacent? Not so much.

But the FCC would never authorize it in the first place. Remember that for grandfathered Class D's and ONLY for grandfathered Class D's, the contour separation rules dictate that the Class D's 80dBu F(50,10) contour cannot overlap the other station's 60dBu F(50,50) service contour. (for everyone else, second-adjacent interfering contours use the 100dBu, same as third-adjacent) WRBB is well inside both 102.5's and 105.7's 60dBu so I don't think the FCC would allow it.

I don't think it would really matter much, though. While 104.9 is not a good frequency, WRBB's real problem is the Pru. The campus sits just next to (or slightly within) the Pru's blanketing contours, and no Class-D station on ANY frequency is gonna have the ERP to "punch thru" all that blanketing.

IIRC, didn't WRBB also start having problems a few years ago when Northeastern put up a new building that was roughly the same height as the existing WRBB tower? And they didn't move WRBB onto the new building?

 

[carmen]

my phone got 5 channels of Soca on Northeastern campus. same one that couldnt get any station way out at Speeds' (Newmarket Sqr) with its visual on the pru. a single building ought to do wrt cuttin down Pru to reasonable levels. at least a nice metal-clad one