WWL "National" Coverage

[trusty]

While listening to WWL/New Orleans last night, the announcer stated, "We are now broadcasting nationally..."

I DXed other stations and didn't hear any rebroadcast of WWL. I can only conclude that their "national" coverage was streaming, satellite, or an undirectional signal under the special circumstances.

WWL/870 (50kw) is normally directional day & night. Does anyone have any knowledge about their "national" coverage?

Thanx.

 

[foreverchanges]

> While listening to WWL/New Orleans last night, the announcer
> stated, "We are now broadcasting nationally..."
>
> I DXed other stations and didn't hear any rebroadcast of
> WWL. I can only conclude that their "national" coverage was
> streaming, satellite, or an undirectional signal under the
> special circumstances.
>
> WWL/870 (50kw) is normally directional day & night. Does
> anyone have any knowledge about their "national" coverage?
>
> Thanx.
>

WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states at night".

That's pretty close to "national".

 

[davideduardo]

>
> WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on
> the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much
> signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday
> night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states
> at night".
>
> That's pretty close to "national".
>

I certainly do not want to demean the station that managed to remain operative after the storm, using emergency facilities and rkunning half power to conserve generator fuel.

However, today, to claim anything close to 42 state coverage is hyperbole of the first order. If they ever had that kind of coverage, it was only at night.

870 is not and has not since the 60's been on a relatively clear channel. While there are no US stations on 870 at night until you get to NV or NY or ME or MN or places at similar distances. The real issue is that all of the Caribbean and Latin America has big signals on 870. And this means that 870 is pretty useless beyond 500 to 600 miles from New Orleans. While that is a big base, it is not 42 states.

Add to that the fact that noise levels are very different from those of 4 to 5 decades ago, when the big stations could garner night audiences from across a dozen states or so, and the claim pales.

 

[trusty]

> > While listening to WWL/New Orleans last night, the
> announcer
> > stated, "We are now broadcasting nationally..."
> >
> > I DXed other stations and didn't hear any rebroadcast of
> > WWL. I can only conclude that their "national" coverage
> was
> > streaming, satellite, or an undirectional signal under the
>
> > special circumstances.
> >
> > WWL/870 (50kw) is normally directional day & night. Does
> > anyone have any knowledge about their "national" coverage?
>
> >
> > Thanx.
> >
>
> WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on
> the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much
> signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday
> night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states
> at night".
>
> That's pretty close to "national".
>

Yes. They said that tonight, too. It's just that the announcer was interviewing someone and made the comment, "For the last 7 minutes, we've been broadcasting nationally." So, I was wondering if special arrangements were made for special coverage or he was just referring to local sunset (?).

 

[My02AccordEx]

> >
> > WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on
> > the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much
> > signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday
> > night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states
>
> > at night".
> >
> > That's pretty close to "national".
> >
>
> I certainly do not want to demean the station that managed
> to remain operative after the storm, using emergency
> facilities and rkunning half power to conserve generator
> fuel.
>
> However, today, to claim anything close to 42 state coverage
> is hyperbole of the first order. If they ever had that kind
> of coverage, it was only at night.
>
> 870 is not and has not since the 60's been on a relatively
> clear channel. While there are no US stations on 870 at
> night until you get to NV or NY or ME or MN or places at
> similar distances. The real issue is that all of the
> Caribbean and Latin America has big signals on 870. And this
> means that 870 is pretty useless beyond 500 to 600 miles
> from New Orleans. While that is a big base, it is not 42
> states.
>
> Add to that the fact that noise levels are very different
> from those of 4 to 5 decades ago, when the big stations
> could garner night audiences from across a dozen states or
> so, and the claim pales.
>


When I ran out to the store around 1 am central time I was picking up 870 WWL loud and clear up here in Plainfield, IL about 40 mile Southwest of Chicago. This is not unusual because WWL I have picked up many times after dark on my car radio. So they must be broadcasting at 50,000 watts again you would think.

 

[k9ez]

> >
> > WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on
> > the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much
> > signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday
> > night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states
>
> > at night".
> >
> > That's pretty close to "national".
> >
>
> I certainly do not want to demean the station that managed
> to remain operative after the storm, using emergency
> facilities and rkunning half power to conserve generator
> fuel.
>
> However, today, to claim anything close to 42 state coverage
> is hyperbole of the first order. If they ever had that kind
> of coverage, it was only at night.
>
> 870 is not and has not since the 60's been on a relatively
> clear channel. While there are no US stations on 870 at
> night until you get to NV or NY or ME or MN or places at
> similar distances. The real issue is that all of the
> Caribbean and Latin America has big signals on 870. And this
> means that 870 is pretty useless beyond 500 to 600 miles
> from New Orleans. While that is a big base, it is not 42
> states.
>
> Add to that the fact that noise levels are very different
> from those of 4 to 5 decades ago, when the big stations
> could garner night audiences from across a dozen states or
> so, and the claim pales.
>

Sorry David, I need to disagree. I am over 1000 miles from WWL and they always blow in. Even at lower power they are solid.

THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the community. I know David you dont like to think that the signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and rather nicely thank you. And this is serving the community, even though a lot of the community is displaced.

 

[clichemoth]

> >
> > WWL is only directional because New Orleans is sitting on
> > the Gulf of Mexico, so there's no real reason for much
> > signal to go south. Before they went off the air Sunday
> > night the announcer said several times "we cover 42 states
>
> > at night".
> >
> > That's pretty close to "national".
> >
>
> I certainly do not want to demean the station that managed
> to remain operative after the storm, using emergency
> facilities and rkunning half power to conserve generator
> fuel.
>
> However, today, to claim anything close to 42 state coverage
> is hyperbole of the first order. If they ever had that kind
> of coverage, it was only at night.
>
> 870 is not and has not since the 60's been on a relatively
> clear channel. While there are no US stations on 870 at
> night until you get to NV or NY or ME or MN or places at
> similar distances. The real issue is that all of the
> Caribbean and Latin America has big signals on 870. And this
> means that 870 is pretty useless beyond 500 to 600 miles
> from New Orleans. While that is a big base, it is not 42
> states.
>
> Add to that the fact that noise levels are very different
> from those of 4 to 5 decades ago, when the big stations
> could garner night audiences from across a dozen states or
> so, and the claim pales.
>


WWL is directional to protect all those Caribbean and Latin American stations (I know Cuba has Reloj on 870 and there's another in Barranquilla, Colombia, but where are the others?) and puts the vast majority of its signal back into the US.

They probably have the second best skywave coverage of any A1, behind KOA.

42 states is still a stretch, though. Even KOA only claims 38.

 

[jcolletta275]

> Sorry David, I need to disagree. I am over 1000 miles from
> WWL and they always blow in. Even at lower power they are
> solid.

Same here. I'm exactly 890 miles from WWL, and I pick them up blasting away a local every night. It's a little difficult at reduced power, but they're still there, still listenable.

> THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still
> needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the
> community. I know David you dont like to think that the
> signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and rather
> nicely thank you. And this is serving the community, even
> though a lot of the community is displaced.

Exactly. This idea that radio stations only need enough power to cover their market in order to serve the community (notice the use of the word "the" in favor of "their" there) is crazy talk. And I hate to get slightly off topic on this, but this is also a perfect example of why IB(A)C on AM is an inherently stupid idea. If WWL were running IB(A)C right now, they wouldn't get anywhere near the coverage they are now due to the adjacent channel noise. Just an observation to make a point. Back on topic, though, I'm glad I can hear WWL to keep up with all that's going on. I think it's better to get the story from it's source than to have a local newsroom editor whittle it down to a sound byte.

Speaking of local radio, WWJ in Detroit was simulcasting WWL the night of the storm. Could other stations possibly be doing that now? Is that possibly what they mean about broadcasting nationally?

Post 889 dedicated to 88.9 WDNA, Miami's other jazz station.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>

 

[davideduardo]

>
>
> WWL is directional to protect all those Caribbean and Latin
> American stations (I know Cuba has Reloj on 870 and there's
> another in Barranquilla, Colombia, but where are the
> others?) and puts the vast majority of its signal back into
> the US.

No, WWL, like WBZ, is directional of their own volition, to put all its signal over land. There is no NARBA notification on 870, and the staitons in Mexico, onduras, guatemala, El salvador, Panama, Venezuela, Ecuador, etc., are all post-WWL commencing operations.

 

[davideduardo]

>
> THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still
> needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the
> community. I know David you dont like to think that the
> signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and rather
> nicely thank you. And this is serving the community, even
> though a lot of the community is displaced.
>

This is a case where satellite makes far more sense.

 

[davideduardo]

>
> When I ran out to the store around 1 am central time I was
> picking up 870 WWL loud and clear up here in Plainfield, IL
> about 40 mile Southwest of Chicago. This is not unusual
> because WWL I have picked up many times after dark on my car
> radio. So they must be broadcasting at 50,000 watts again
> you would think.
>

25 thousand. to conserve diesel at the generator. The difference will be minimal on skywave

 

[nd2023]

> >
> > When I ran out to the store around 1 am central time I was
>
> > picking up 870 WWL loud and clear up here in Plainfield,
> IL
> > about 40 mile Southwest of Chicago. This is not unusual
> > because WWL I have picked up many times after dark on my
> car
> > radio. So they must be broadcasting at 50,000 watts again
> > you would think.
> >
>
> 25 thousand. to conserve diesel at the generator. The
> difference will be minimal on skywave
>
The difference between 25 and 50 kW is only 3 dB. They could get away with only 12.5 kW at night.<P ID="signature">______________
17-year-old radio geek
Location: Princeton Junction, NJ
AIM: KewlDude471</P>

 

[jcolletta275]

> >
> > THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still
> > needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the
> > community. I know David you dont like to think that the
> > signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and rather
> > nicely thank you. And this is serving the community, even
>
> > though a lot of the community is displaced.
> >
>
> This is a case where satellite makes far more sense.

Ohh! *PUKE* That's just wrong!<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>

 

[radiolover78]

> > >
> > > THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still
> > > needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the
> > > community. I know David you dont like to think that the
>
> > > signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and
> rather
> > > nicely thank you. And this is serving the community,
> even
> >
> > > though a lot of the community is displaced.
> > >
> >
> > This is a case where satellite makes far more sense.
>
> Ohh! *PUKE* That's just wrong!
>

Is it hard for David to admit he was wrong? <P ID="signature">______________
Check my website www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
</P>

 

[radiolover78]

> > >
> > > When I ran out to the store around 1 am central time I
> was
> >
> > > picking up 870 WWL loud and clear up here in Plainfield,
>
> > IL
> > > about 40 mile Southwest of Chicago. This is not unusual
> > > because WWL I have picked up many times after dark on my
>
> > car
> > > radio. So they must be broadcasting at 50,000 watts
> again
> > > you would think.
> > >
> >
> > 25 thousand. to conserve diesel at the generator. The
> > difference will be minimal on skywave
> >
> The difference between 25 and 50 kW is only 3 dB. They
> could get away with only 12.5 kW at night.
>

Once I got WWL in New Jersey. That was at 50,000 watts, but that is still amazing.
<P ID="signature">______________
Check my website www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
</P>

 

[awj223]

> >
> > THIS EVENT is a PRIME example of why the 1As are still
> > needed. Not some much to sell spots, but to serve the
> > community. I know David you dont like to think that the
> > signal can carry beyond their DMA, but it does and rather
> > nicely thank you. And this is serving the community, even
>
> > though a lot of the community is displaced.
> >
>
> This is a case where satellite makes far more sense.

Because so many of those evacuees have access to satellite radios...also, who would run the terrestrial repeaters? Should each station have to maintain a nationwide network of terrestrial repeaters? If everyone is forced to share repeaters, who pays to maintain them?

David, what could be so wrong with keeping the class A channels clear? It has many benefits in a catastrophic even like this. Even if there are no benefits, it isn't hurting anything, is it? In that long thread over a year ago, you kept contradicting yourself.

First you argued that the clear channels should not be protected because under non-emergency situations, only a few people listen to skywave, with the benefit presumably being that not protecting them could free up channels for new stations to use to serve local areas. Okay, I highly disagree, but I see your point.

But then, when I argued that a new broadcast band should be opened up because broadcast frequencies are in such high demand, you insisted that the market cannot handle new stations because having new stations would reduce the value of existing ones, hurting retired people on fixed incomes who have invested their money in radio. How can you argue both for and against adding new stations to the market at the same time? Either there is a shortage, or there is not. Either the market can handle more stations than it has now, or it cannot.

The only benefit of adding stations in an existing broadcast band is that they can be picked up on existing receivers. However, you have also argued in favor of AM IBOC because it would supposedly enable niche music formats to exist on AM, but IB(A)C requires people to buy new receivers anyway. Well if you're going to have to buy a new receiver anyway, why not just add capabilities to pick up a new broadcast band to new receivers, like FM in the 1960s, and not destroy mediumwave in the process?

I just don't buy the argument that there is no spectrum for this. The entire AM band would fit in the space of just 8 FM channels. The entire FM band would fit in the space of just over 2 TV channels. XM has as much spectrum as about 2 TV stations, and using digital compression they've fit all their channels into only 1/3 of that space (they have 2 nonoverlapping satellite frequencies to avoid interference where signals from 2 satellites overlap, plus dedicated frequencies for terrestrial repeaters). We have a TV conversion going on that will free up more than that amount of spectrum in the VHF band, and our military hogging more spectrum than all broadcast services combined. There is plenty of spectrum that can be reallocated for this. In the meantime, let the displaced citizens of New Orleans benefit from WWL's skywave service to get updates about what's going on around their flooded homes.

 

[Phantom]

>
>
> WWL is directional to protect all those Caribbean and Latin
> American stations (I know Cuba has Reloj on 870 and there's
> another in Barranquilla, Colombia, but where are the
> others?) and puts the vast majority of its signal back into
> the US.
>
> They probably have the second best skywave coverage of any
> A1, behind KOA.
>
> 42 states is still a stretch, though. Even KOA only claims
> 38.
>

WBAO, 820 AM in Fort Worth, also claims 38 states I believe.

Perhaps over months and different days, each of those 38 states could pick up the signal.

But 38 states on any given night is silly.

WWL is powerful in Dallas. If you did not know better, most nights you would think it was local.

 

[artsutton]

I don't agree this is a reason we need 1A clear channels. I speak as a radio station owner who knows full well how the present AM inteference rules burden local AM stations which serve their communities. I'm also a lover of AM Clear Channel stations and their heritage.

Granted, it's nice to be able to listen at night, hundreds of miles away from New Orleans, to WWL but the truth is the information they are providing is for the most part..for local consumption, as it should be. Their daytime .5 mvm signal, for covers where most of the refugees are located. There are so many other sources of information in today's world....TV, cable TV, the internet, etc. that the "necessity" of 1A Clear Channel coverage hardly exists any more. Note I said necessity, not convenience for DXers.

Certainly if we had a national disaster that covered a huge swath of the country...the circumstances would be different but if such a situation occured, the federal government could take over a few stations to provide that coverage in such circumstances.

The realty of the world is such a situation as we have now in New Orleans, thank goodness, rarely occurs but stations in other places operating on 870 and the other Clear Channels are constantly denied the opportunity to serve their entire communities because they must protect a huge circle 750 or more miles from New Orleans. Even reducing that circle to their .5 or .1 mvm daytime contour would provide opportunities for service in other places which have far fewer alternatives for service or media that even provides information on the local community.

As to WWL's coverage, they may not cover 42 states but I bet it's pretty darn close even in 2005. As others have mentioned, they are directional by choice to send the signal over land but one should also note that the ground conductivity around New Orleans is pretty good and some theorize good ground conductivity also assists skywave not to mention that from a standpoint of magnetic polarization...the southern stations have better skywave than those located further north.

Do any of you remember when WWL announcers would always give "King Edward Cigar Time" and their slogan was "The Apple of Your Ear".

> > > >
> > > > When I ran out to the store around 1 am central time I
>
> > was
> > >
> > > > picking up 870 WWL loud and clear up here in
> Plainfield,
> >
> > > IL
> > > > about 40 mile Southwest of Chicago. This is not
> unusual
> > > > because WWL I have picked up many times after dark on
> my
> >
> > > car
> > > > radio. So they must be broadcasting at 50,000 watts
> > again
> > > > you would think.
> > > >
> > >
> > > 25 thousand. to conserve diesel at the generator. The
> > > difference will be minimal on skywave
> > >
> > The difference between 25 and 50 kW is only 3 dB. They
> > could get away with only 12.5 kW at night.
> >
>
> Once I got WWL in New Jersey. That was at 50,000 watts, but
> that is still amazing.
>

 

[gr8oldies]

Maybe a TV slot on one of the cable shows, but moe likely just it being after sunset..plus WWL was on lower power immediately after the hurricane.<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>

 

[awj223]

> WBAO, 820 AM in Fort Worth, also claims 38 states I believe.

You probably mean WBAP. KOA (850 AM, Denver) also has a huge coverage area. I've heard it nightly from San Francisco to Chicago. Something like WLW might cover more states, though. It's not KOA's fault that all the western states are so much larger than the eastern ones.